Hi Mike,
You can't be one argument behind, inasmuch as this isn't an argument. At least not by SI standards and practices. <gg>
Re: Richard Schabacker: "If one group of operators makes a living out of trading, then some other group must provide those profits."
I marvel at the encyclopedic grasp of market lore. Quite a delight to find a fellow market participant who actually thinks about the history of this particular insane asylum.
Schabacker is someone I'm not familiar with, but I immediately was reminded of the words of a famous man of an earlier generation, Honore de Balzac: "Behind every great fortune, there is a great crime."
Respectfully, I find some of your views of "trading" to be quaintly pollyannish. Without understanding the technical analysis you employ, I must reflect on certain basic characteristics of the market that we on the outside face. That is to say, there is an inside market, including broker/dealers, corporate cheiftains, money center banks, investment bankers and hedge funds with access to privileged information. That inside market exists for one purpose. To make money. Not to make the customers of the afformentioned institions money. Which gets us back to Schabacker's key premise. I would submit to you that the "group (that) must provide the profit) would be folks like the typical denizen of SI, who is getting his/her information second hand, late, and incomplete. This information assymetry between the "houses" and the individual punter is a hurdle that has completely frustrated me for the past 18 months. Knowing and accepting that Wall Street is lying whenever it provides "information" leaves little wiggle room for the individual speculator to participate, except to fulfill his role as victim of the chicanery.
This is what troubles me today. Just a minor rant, but thought for no good reason you might be interested in this alternative point of view.
Bon Chance, Ray |
