LG,
LOL. If you are calling me "mental" because either:
a) I won't let you run away and cower; and/or,
b) I challenge the assertion that security pricing in the financial markets are primarily the result of manipulation by a grand conspiratorial effort; and/or,
c) you assume that if I've read much of what someone says, that it is somehow unbelievable, or inconceivable, that I wouldn't agree with all of it; then,
...you need to redefine "mental," in and of itself a juvenile term to describe someone that causes you discomfort and fear.
I have nothing to say about Tony; your mentioning him indicates a feeling of inadequacy in being able to back-up your spewed nonsense. I have read his posts, think a lot of him, and I agree with much - in fact, most - of what he says. But not all of it.
But when it comes to conspiracy theories, it may be that you, like many, need a belief to cling to - the more outrageous, the better. I've met people who aren't happy unless they are cast in the role of victim, the focus of some plot - whether actual or (far more often) invented. From this perspective, they can blame their inadequacies or shortfalls on those parties, such as many retail investors & traders do with losing trades and market participants.
Alternately, one can appoint themself the savior, the bringer of truth. You certainly don't fit that mold: it takes knowledge, courage, and a degree of competence that, not knowing the difference between auction and dealer markets, you certainly can't live up to.
Mayne you've spent far too much unchallenged in your ridiculous assertions by sychophants and lapdogs. Or, you find comfort in severe, kneejerk assertions when, in fact, moderation and sensibility typically win the day.
Either way, again. Lest anyone reading this message miss my position, as this exchange drags on:
I don't doubt - in fact, I'm certain - that manipulation occurs in the stock, bond, options markets, etc. I have not denied such in any of my messages. Instead, what is ridiculous is your suggestion that such manipulation is either (a) the primary force in the markets, or that (b) there is some conspiratorial syndicate of financial market participants at work, actively collaborating at all levels to perpetuate some immense financial crime against the society at large.
It's not so much ridiculous as it is delusional.
You of course did not address my letting you know (and, it must have been painful) that merely having access to a Level II screen doesn't give you clairvoyance enough to see what is going on in the many departments of a firm. To see the dealing desk ("market making") is not to see the sales trading, arbitrage, proprietary, and other departments of the firm, all of which contribute to a particular firm's bias in an issue.
If the upshot of your message is that with
1) a Level II screen, and
2) having read message board posts,
...you've somehow not only developed into a securities industry professional but have also learned to read the intentions and behind the scene action of the only face that they'll show you - and which, incidentally, they know people are watching...you're pitiful.
Your saying that I'm not worth [your] time is consistent with your unwillingness to answer George Cole, your posting a message to me after you banned me trying to put the issue to rest, and now trying again to get it to go away.
I say again: your statements are absurd, and you are a coward.
LPS5 |
