Gravestone doji

8/28/26:

This stuff never worked for me in my trading. Never. The only thing that seem like a lead-pipe cinch to be meaningful is a head-and-shoulders chart.

The Dow Jones showed one back in 2008, not long before the crash. I traded it, and made money off of it. Other than this, can't say that I've had any luck with Candlestick analysis.

As for the Dow having a Head and Shoulders chart, it wasn't a permanent decline. The Dow rallied into the stratosphere. Yep, I'd say that there's a risk in the markets about now.

There's a lot of rosy talk, too.

But on a serious note, the future isn't certain. As Yogi Berra once said: Predictions are hard, especially about the future. But here's another thought: Why bring this up now? There's an election. Somebody stands to gain if there's a stock market sell-off... I'm just saying it to put it out there....

12/16/14: The original post follows:

Japanese candlestick analysis is but one of many methods to read the financial tea leaves as a manner of speaking.  Just noticed a gravestone doji pattern in both the stock market and the gold market.

What does it mean?  Nothing good, I don't think.  Doji patterns indicate indecision---the market doesn't know what it's direction is to be.  In this pattern, it starts and ends at about the same price, but has a rally intraday.  Clearly, the rally will not hold, so this is not good.

Here's today's chart, courtesy Yahoo.  Note the rally and the opening and closing prices.

The Japanese Candlestick pattern for this would look like a horizontal line connecting the open and close, with a line going up to the high.  It looks like a gravestone, hence gravestone doji.

The fundamentals behind all of this is the FED.  If the FED attempts to normalize interest rates, the party is over and a bear market should ensue.

We'll see.

Update:

The gravestone doji analysis just died big time. What can I say?  These things are not science.

Update:

There's a press release from the FED which suggests that normalization of interest rates won't be happening soon.  That's what probably moved the markets yesterday.  It only proves that the markets are addicted to easy money.  The easy money has to end sometime.  Evidently, not now.

Jon Matonis on Bitcoin and crypto-currencies

8/12/26:

Here is an AI discussion of crypto-currency:

Discuss the history of "crypto" currency. Also describe what it actually is, please.

Cryptocurrency: What It Actually Is

At its core, cryptocurrency is digital money that operates without a central authority like a bank or government. Instead of relying on an institution to verify transactions, it uses cryptography and a blockchain — a decentralized, distributed public ledger.

Here's the breakdown of the key pieces:

- Blockchain: A continuously growing list of records ("blocks") linked and secured by cryptography. Each block contains transaction data, a timestamp, and a cryptographic hash of the previous block. This chain of hashes makes tampering practically impossible — alter one block and every subsequent block's hash breaks, alerting the entire network.

- Decentralization: Copies of the entire ledger are distributed across a network of computers ("nodes"). No single entity controls it or can censor transactions.

- Consensus mechanisms: The network agrees on the valid state of the ledger without a middleman. Two dominant models:

- Proof of Work (PoW) — Miners compete to solve computational puzzles to add blocks, consuming significant energy. This is what secures Bitcoin. It's slower but battle-tested.

- Proof of Stake (PoS) — Validators lock up ("stake") coins as collateral to propose and validate blocks. Much more energy-efficient, used by Ethereum and many newer networks.

- Supply control: The issuance of new coins is governed by protocol rules, not central banks. Bitcoin, for instance, is capped at 21 million coins — a feature designed to mimic digital scarcity.

- Currency properties: Cryptocurrencies are fungible (each unit is interchangeable), stored in digital wallets using public/private key cryptography, and can be transferred peer-to-peer nearly instantly and cheaply across borders.

Critically, cryptocurrency has no intrinsic value — it isn't backed by gold or government decree. Its price is determined purely by supply and demand, the quality of the underlying technology, and investor sentiment. As Schwab notes, it's a non-fiat medium of exchange that functions independently of government.

A Brief History

The idea of "digital cash" predates Bitcoin by decades. The key milestones:

1. The Precursors (1980s–1990s): In 1983, American cryptographer David Chaum conceived of ecash, an early cryptographic electronic money. Over the following years, various attempts emerged (e-gold, b-money, bit gold), but all were centralized or flawed. The unsolved problem was the double-spend issue — how to stop someone from spending the same digital coin twice without a central authority.

2. Bitcoin and Satoshi Nakamoto (2008–2009): In October 2008, an anonymous individual or group under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto published the Bitcoin whitepaper. In January 2009, the Bitcoin network launched with its genesis block. This was the first successful solution to double-spending via a decentralized consensus mechanism (PoW). Nakamoto vanished from public view shortly after, leaving the network to run itself.

3. Altcoins and Early Exchanges (2011–2013): Rival coins (altcoins) like Litecoin emerged. Exchanges like Mt. Gox (which later collapsed due to theft) made trading possible. Bitcoin's price history became increasingly volatile.

4. Ethereum and Smart Contracts (2014–2015): Vitalik Buterin proposed Ethereum, which launched in 2015. It introduced smart contracts — self-executing code on the blockchain — and decentralized applications (dApps), massively expanding what blockchains could do beyond simple payments.

5. The ICO Boom and Bust (2017–2018): Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) let startups raise money by issuing tokens, driving a speculative frenzy and subsequent crash. This cycle established crypto's reputation for extreme volatility and scams.

6. DeFi and NFTs (2020–2021): Decentralized Finance (DeFi) applications — lending, borrowing, trading without intermediaries — exploded. Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) brought blockchain to digital art and collectibles. Institutional interest grew, and El Salvador made Bitcoin legal tender in 2021.

7. Crypto Winter and Mainstream Validation (2022–2024): 2022 saw the FTX collapse, wiping out billions and exposing rampant fraud. Markets crashed. However, 2024 marked a turning point — spot Bitcoin ETFs were approved in the US, giving mainstream investors a regulated, easy way to gain exposure. This was followed by ETH ETFs and increasing institutional adoption.

8. The Present (2025–2026): Crypto has moved firmly from fringe to mainstream finance. Regulatory frameworks are being built globally (including US state- level initiatives like Bitcoin reserve legislation in some states), and the technology itself — blockchain — is finding applications in supply chains, healthcare records, identity verification, and even voting systems.

The bottom line: Cryptocurrency is a genuinely new form of programmable, decentralized value transfer, born from a failure to trust central institutions. It's revolutionary in its architecture but carries real risks — extreme volatility, regulatory uncertainty, scams, and energy concerns (for PoW). It's not a get-rich-quick scheme, nor is it "fake money." It's a technology with a 15-year track record, evolving rapidly, and its ultimate role in the global financial system is still being written.

5/31/26:

Bitcoin didn't seem like a durable thing. A small investment back then may have appreciated a lot, so I may have missed an opportunity. What problem does Bitcoin (crypto) solve? Maybe the same ones that paper currency does. But it has the same problems that paper currency has. Perhaps even more problems. Security would seem to be a problem with crypto. I don't trust it.

4/4/13:

GoldMoneyNews


Quote:

Published on Mar 29, 2013

Subscribe to our newsletter at http://www.goldmoney.com/goldresearch. Episode 118: GoldMoney's Andy Duncan talks to Jon Matonis of the Bitcoin Foundation who is also a contributor to Forbes Magazine. They discuss Bitcoin's latest price spike and whether crypto-currencies are a credible alternative as a medium of exchange.

Comment:

GoldMoney is a gold vault operation, for want of a better term.  This is their communication, which is amongst the ways in which they communicate with the world.

You can buy and sell gold there, with what they call gold grams, which represent 1 gram of gold.  In comparison to an ounce, it takes about 30 grams to equal an ounce.  GoldMoney's vault is located in the Channel Island of Jersey, near England, if memory serves.  I traded with them there, on the internet, in 2007.  I stopped fairly quickly that year when the US government started interfering, to my displeasure.

My contribution to the thoughts on this matter on the video is that since BitCoin is peer-to-peer, and a value is needed to establish what a BitCoin is actually is worth, then all is needed is some agreement amongst the BitCoin community as what that value of a BitCoin actually is.  Now, if BitCoin is pegged amongst the community that it is worth so many gold grams, then you have achieved an objective value of a BitCoin, in my opinion.

Real currencies are set up by governments.  A government is a group of people who exert authority and operate according to some kind of mutual agreement amongst them.  In comparison, you would need to have a way to police a system, amongst the participants in that system.   Now, a group of people can set this up and run it according to a charter they agreed upon.  It can govern the system.

The video doesn't cover this, by the way.  It is my own thought on the matter.

Anyway, here's the video

SpaceX IPO

Starts at $150, and trading higher.

Already a $ 2 Trillion market cap. Not much OPPO there, if you ax me.

You didn't ax me? Well, bless my soul.

Buy low and sell high. This is a bit rich, even if SPCX may be siting on the most fabulous wealth creator in the history wealth creation.

Could it ever rise 100 fold? If it did, imagine what valuation that would be. Insane. It is already insane. They haven't proven the system yet.

A few words about Gold

6/10/26:

A golden oldie! Quite literally, in fact...

Yours truly made lots of money off gold rush of yesteryears, not that that matters anymore. If you think of it as a loss in buying power, then selling your gold for profit really isn't profit. No way I could've held what I had because of you know what.

Nevertheless, nearly $5k for one ounce of gold seemed rather pricey. It may have topped out for now. A pullback seems to be in progress. How long will that last? I have no crystal ball. Don't follow the markets anymore anyhow.

Update later the same day:





Apr 5, 2011:

I write about this from time to time, and I guess it is a good time to do it again.  I was reading an essay on Kitco, by the Aden sisters , and I saw this chart

Let me point out a few things here.  Look at where the trend begins, just after Bush was inaugurated.  To be even more accurate, it began when the previous top was exceeded, and when the previous low was higher.  The higher low was just after the inauguration in 2001; when the higher high took place was early in 2003.  It so happens that Fed policy became very accomodative at that exact moment in time.  Just a coincidence?  I think not.

What I get out of this is that the 911 event has put a strain on our finances and that the Fed and the government is financing it by inflationary policies.   The war in Iraq began in March 2003.  By that time, gold was not in a big uptrend yet.   It broke above 500 in 2006.  Guess what happened that year?  The Democrats came into power in Congress.  Actually, they won the election and took power the next year.  The war in Iraq had been dragging on and the government was losing control.  By the time 2008 was rolling around, the price of gold was clearly reaching historical heights.

Democrats couldn't force us out of Iraq, and were favorably inclined to spend more.  No control over spending, neither for domestic spending nor for the war spending.

Recession occurred and the only response that the government had was to increase its spending even more.  But that's what got us into this mess in the first place.  Turning to bigger government is like drinking from the same well that is making us sick.  Time to stop drinking from that well before they poison us all with national bankruptcy.

Why Wall Street was spooked yesterday

 This is an experimental post. Let's see how it works before I write something about it. Looks like it failed! Ok, let's do this:

Viral Doomsday Report Lays Bare Wall Street’s Deep Anxiety About AI

After a lot of scrambling, I managed to get the post to show something useful. It's a dumb way to be for the people who are running that website, I tell you...

The content of the post is interesting in its own right, but what interested me more is the possibility of an embed. But they pretty much have it locked up so that you can't do that, or is too complicated for me to figure out at this time.

Write the experiment off as a joke. Something else to embed:

The Three Stooges: "Trapped like rats! Speak for yourself!"

What a ripoff

2/10/26:

One thing I don't have is the Midas Touch. This one went south big time. Instead of getting out with a small loss, I took it on the chin. The ripoff was complete.

The brokerage sold off, and forced me into a sale to pay for holding fees. Like I said, a rip-off.

The update was intended to let ya'll know what happened with this stock. It was the last thing I had on that account, and so the account was closed. When? Man, it wasn't that long ago, but it could've been around 2019 or so.

2/4/16:

Starting on my taxes recently.  As I have written before, I've got an ETF "short" position in stocks.  That is to say, the stock is a derivative that gets its value from the stock market.  It is supposed to go up when stocks go down, and vice versa.

On a trade like this in 2007-2009, I made a good profit on such a trade, but not this time.  I figured that the market would go down back in 2013, but it didn't.  It kept going up, but by not all that much.  However, since it magnifies the movement, the slight movement up exaggerated  the fall of my ETF, so that it lost a lot of value.

I sort of forgot about it.  It so happens that a few changes have occurred since that time to this, and now the stock has reversed split.  Because of that event, it required that I make an adjustment in my holding so as to allow the stock to split evenly, because without that adjustment, I'd have a partial share.  Can't allow that.  Since I didn't attend to it, it resulted in a forced sale.  I have to now account for it in my taxes.  It is a loss, but since I didn't buy much, it didn't lose that much.

But while doing this, I noticed how the price action has gone on the dow since I bought it and now.  Instead of being near break-even, as I think it should be, I'm still way down.

I've probably written about this before.  I don't know how they figure that I'm down, since I bought the ETF when the dow was just about 15k.  Now it is around 16k, which isn't that big of a rise, yet I am still way down.  I guess it is the "new math".  Or maybe it is "democrat math".  Heads I win, tails you lose type of math.  Donald Trump math.  Let's do it over type of math, cuz I've been schlonged.

I figure that the thing might make a profit if stocks fall below 10k, which is quite a bit below where I bought it.  Good work if you can find it. /sarc

Let's see how that all works out.  Right now, it looks like a big ripoff.  Or maybe not that big.  I didn't bet the ranch on it.  I figured small risk, big potential gain.  It now looks like big risk, small potential gain.  Just the opposite.

This is a crock, as usual

  The funding of the government, and deficit spending, does not necessarily cause inflation.

  That isn't my opinion, it is the opinion of the late Milton Friedman. The article mentioned on Free Republic conflates government spending with inflation and it just isn't so, according to Friedman.   According to Friedman, inflation is a monetary phenomenon.   Consequently, there could be inflation when the gold supply increases and the country is on the gold standard.

  Deficit spending climbed faster during the Reagan years, but inflation WENT DOWN from double digits to single digits.  So, there is no connection to deficit spending.

  What makes deficit spending so bad is that the government finances spending with DEBT.   There is no need to finance government with so much DEBT.  But that is how it is done, and the deficits are being aggravated by the high cost of debt.

  Stop giving excuses for hating on Trump.  Let him do the job he was elected to do, and wait until something happens before you start complaining about it.  Inflation didn't go up because of tariffs, either.  These people...

War Stories

  1/30/26:

  You know, the deeper I read into this post, the more painful it is.  Oh, well.

  It says down below, and is a true story; that I wrote software to assist in my trading.  It may be hard to prove, and memories may not be as accurate as I'd wish it to be, but in the sense of the software working or not; I darned near made a fortune off of one attempted trade.

  I put in a limit order for a stock called Broadvision, and I was attempting to buy it at its low in a cycle.  This trade came VERY close to executing, and then took off on a major rally.  You can always say "if", but "if" that one hit, I'd have had a nice little stake to set me up for future trades.

  Did my software help me find the fish that got away?  I'd like to think so.  As for JDS Uniphase, or whatever it was,  I could've bought that one based upon my software.  The trouble is that I waited too long.  Market timing ain't easy, don't ya know.

  Come to think of it, it's more like a casino.

  I'm not too sure that the market is really on the up and up. Well, that's a revelation. /sarc

9/28/25:

As can be seen in the post below this update, once upon a time, I was thinking of marketing my own software. As a matter of fact, I did do that before. It wasn't profitable, so it couldn't last. It would be nice to make some money off those programming skills. Yep, I'm thinking about that as a way to make money. Money-making isn't the goal of this blog anymore. It was in the beginning, but not now.

The blog could be used to practice some html skills. Updating my skill sets and then trying to make money again may be in the cards. But that kind of thing is very time-consuming. It takes a commitment of sorts. For example, I am committed to this blog. If I wanted to scale back on that, I could. I am also commmitted to making something out of my off-grid project. That has been on hold for years now. I still have the land. If I had more money to spend, I could do more on that. Right now, it is out of the question. Hence the idea to make some money.

2/29/24 : Update to Sept 22, 2012 post:

This is interesting in light of what I wrote yesterday about the random walk theory. I'm sure that I had heard about the random walk theory back then, but did not read up on it. I dived into the markets with the idea to beat the markets because I thought I could. My methods didn't work out, but it seemed like I came close. You can only beat the markets if you find an inefficiency in it.  I was using a home grown software package that I also intended to market if it ever worked.   Of course, it didn't.

But what if the markets are rigged? You can get that impression. Indeed, there is crooked shit in the markets, and you can definitely get burned. I know that from first hand experience. Never did a comprehensive tally of my winnings and losses in the markets, but I'd say I lost more money that I gained.

What about the markets today? I am still of the opinion I had when I tried going short in 2009. The markets are bound to crash at some point, but as with all things, it is very, very hard to judge the timing of it.

end update, the original post from 2012 follows directly below:

The stock market is a bit nuts right now, so I'm not in it.  But it may be useful to go back and tell a few of my investments and why some worked and others didn't.  Or, to put it more accurately, why I think it happened the way it did.

I thought about getting into the markets back in 1987.  I talked to a guy about a stock broker job and it seemed like he wanted to hire me, but I got wet feet.  Not too long afterward, the market crashed.  It seemed like a good decision.

By 1998 though, I decided to get in.  Online trading made it easy for anyone and the market was going gangbusters, so I was in.  But I got creamed.  One of the first stocks I tried was Computer Horizons.  This was a Y2K stock, and by 1998, it had seen its better days.  But this was not obvious, at least to me at the time.  But there was a pretty strong hint.  It is called a head and shoulders type chart.  By the time I started trading, I knew what a head and shoulders chart was, and I saw it for Computer Horizons.  The trouble is that I didn't believe it.  So, I invested anyway and got my head handed to me.

To make matters worse, I did what you shouldn't do.  I averaged down.  I knew this was against good practice, but I did it anyway.  It only added to my losses.  Being stubborn when you are wrong only makes matters worse, you know.  You have to be able to admit to yourself when you are wrong.  Did I learn this lesson?  No, because a couple years later, I did it again.

By 2001, the bull market was over and I decided to stay bullish.  Big mistake.  I bought a stock called JDS Uniphase.  As with Computer Horizons, it became obvious that was a loser, but I didn't want to believe it.  So, I averaged down and only added to my losses.  The fate of that stock is hardly any better than Computer Horizons.  While Computer Horizons has gone out of business, the last time I checked, JDS is still kicking.  But that investment would never have paid off.  There are times when I look back and think that it might have if I waited a little longer, but time muddies the waters a bit.  Closer examination showed that it was a loser and the loss could never be regained.

In both of these cases, I really didn't know what I was doing.  That's why I lost so badly.  So, I stopped speculating in stocks and tried some other stuff.  Stock picking ain't my game.  But what game could I play and win?  I tried currency trading and precious metals.  Currency trading didn't work.  There was a reason why it didn't work.  Currency trading is highly leveraged.  If you time it wrong, you can be wiped out and wiped out fast.  It was too hard.  Precious metals did work.  I think it worked because the risk was limited.  Your investment can never be completely wiped out.  It will always retain some value, so if your timing is right, you can make money.  If your timing is wrong, you can get back most of your money.  Yes, and this did work for me.  I regained most of my losses from before, plus a small profit.

Despite all the failures, I wouldn't condemn trading.  There were plenty of opportunities to make a killing, but it didn't happen.  I just ran out of time.

For instance, just before the market started on its last upward blowoff top in 2000, I put in an order for Broadvision.  The order nearly completed when the rally began.  That meant I missed the boat by 3/8, which is about 38 cents per share.  If that order filled, the potential would have been a 20 to 1 return on my investment.  Of course, I would have had to had played it right to get that, but the opportunity was there.  There are many stories like this that I could tell.  But it never did happen.  I had to understand what a blowoff top is and why it was a blowoff top.  I had to understand how doggone hard it is to judge a bottom perfectly and buy at the bottom.   It is also doggone hard to judge a top too.  But this is possible, just not possible to do with great precision.

By 2006, I still wanted to trade stocks so I bought a stock called Altair Nano.  They made batteries intended for automobiles.  But in 2007, things started going south for the economy.  Fortunately, I saw and remembered that you don't want to be long in the markets when the economy tanked.  I sold and went short the entire market.  That play worked like gangbusters.

Going short is high risk though.  It worked for me because I was right.  But if you're wrong, your losses can be unlimited.

By 2009, I was absolutely convinced that current economic policy was nuts.  I tried going short, but I got my butt kicked.  I've been out ever since.  Sure, I could have gone long and made big bucks, but I have no confidence in the markets.  For I've learned that when the market turns against you, losses can mount very fast.  I wouldn't touch these markets with a ten foot pole.

That's a short history of my doings in the market.  Basically, it all boils down to learning from the school of hard knocks.  You learn what works and what doesn't.  Besides that, you learn about yourself.  For example, some people can tolerate risk better.  I'm not one of those people.  A high risk play is probably not for me.  You have to know these things if you want to have any hope of success.  Another thing is that you can make plenty of money if you are right.  Likewise you can lose your butt if you are wrong.  So you better be right.  The opportunities are there as long as the market is sane and working properly.  I don't think it is right now.

An Acceleration in Gold has Begun

11/19/25:

One thing to keep in mind, the move during the time period mentioned below, started in the early 2000's.  That's when the price was $300 or thereabouts.  A lot of money could be made then, and was.  That's cuz I done it myself.  (forgive the grammar)

The percentage move from the previous high of 1900ish is about a factor of two.  If the moves are accelerating, and they may well be, the top is going to go much higher than what it is now.

That is very speculative of me to say, though.  I haven't studied this stuff for a long, long time.

8/9/11:

by Jordan Roy-Byrne and  Kitco

That's the source for this chart, which I reproduce (with slight alterations) below:

Inverse head and shoulders develops in 2008-2009, breakout in late 2009 @ $1000 oz.

The head and shoulders chart is a well known bearish chart pattern. Since this one is inverted, it should come to nobody's surprise that it is bullish. But many were denying this and still are. Just goes to show you how people can see and still not understand.

If you look at this chart long enough, you might notice something else.  As in 2009, there was a breakout of the $1250 ish oz resistance in late 2010, a year later.  I even wrote about it in one of my early posts.  This time though, there was no real pullback as the price just continues to keep going up.  The market isn't waiting until the fall to move up, it is moving right now.

The article mentions an acceleration:

Sentiment has become more bullish but that is only a reflection of an acceleration in a raging bull market. 

All of monetary policy is "magic money"

 

The Federal Reserve regulates the monetary supply through debt. The only difference between that and printing greenbacks is you have to pay money for the debt, and the greenbacks cost almost nothing. It's magic money in any case. The "full faith and credit" of the USA backs it up, and the world takes the dollars gladly. But that may be changing, because Congress won't control the pork.

Elon Musk just exposed what he calls a massive Federal Reserve scam—accusing the U.S. government of creating "magic money" out of thin air.

According to Musk, the government operates "magic money computers" that generate cash from nothing and distribute it at will.

These… pic.twitter.com/GBUhe1jlJy

— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) March 17, 2025

Despite what you may be thinking, this could work

The only difference between Abe Lincoln greenbacks and the way we do it now is that the greenbacks didn't require debt. We get nothing for the borrowing, and we spend the interest money for no reason whatever except to make some other folks rich.

 

Big: Treasury Posts Unexpected Surplus for June, Thanks to Tariffs https://t.co/aXdCegudPw --- If greenbacks ( like Abe Lincoln did ) were used to pay off ALL DEBT, America could save $1.2 trillion in useless expenditures. With DOGE cuts, yields balanced budget. Dream on.🤣

— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) July 11, 2025

P.S.

Constitutional Amendment to go with the Greenback idea. It will keep Congress in check so that they won't sell off all of our assets to pay for their pork. No debt may issue unless it is to keep banks solvent as per the original intent of the Federal Reserve. Repeal Humphrey-Hawkins, as the Fed must not manage the economy. Let elected officialdom "manage" it. Congress would be lucky if they could manage a bowel movement.

Yes, but he should include a mandatory federal balanced budget.

— Peter Williams (@petevwilliams) July 12, 2025

Going soft on the commies, are we?

 

The addiction to papered over imaginary profits and imaginary wealth continues. The Dow Jones industrial average boomed today because Trump announced some trade deals are near. Also in the news is a write-up in supposedly conservative news outlets that suggests to me that it isn't just the pinkos who love to play pretend games.

How is it possible that "trillions of dollars" are won and lost just because of what some traders are doing in the stock exchanges? It's Alice in Wonderland time. Well, I pretty much would've given up on the markets if I hadn't gone broke because of the health situation going to hell. Just as well that I got forced out of that phony existence. We live in a dream world after all.

So, what will be gained from Trump's foray into America First trade policies? I don't want to be negative, but why do we even need to trade with communist China and a wanna-be commie bunch in the European Union?

If the stock market came crashing down to Earth again, it wouldn't be a bad thing. How committed is Trump to actually accomplishing something, or is all of this just for show? Don't want to be negative, but what exactly is the payoff for the USA?

I don't want to tinker around the margins, but that appears to be the way it will be. Trump's playing footsie with him enemies. He should be pushing harder. I note that his approval rating is going down a bit. Elon Musk is wimping out because of the terrorism against him. Does he realize that he's only giving them heart? This won't appease them, it will only get worse.

Yep, and Jamie Raskin is licking his chops for that time the country will foolishly put the commies back into power. Nobody is ever going to learn.

Cease fire in the trade war, sort of

 

Looks like Trump is pausing the tariffs. The stock market is rising a bunch.

But China may not be included in the 90 day pause. I saw the markets were up 6%, and I checked Yahoo Finance to find that Trump had paused the tariffs. Maybe nobody has to jump from a high place just yet.

Recession, recession---blah, blah, blah

 

This seems to be the topic du jour these days. Might as well keep posting on it.

The thing I watch is the Fed Funds rate as opposed to bonds. I'm all out of practice since I stopped trading a long time ago. I went broke when my health went to hell.

The Fed Funds rate is set at 4.25 to 4.5. The 30 year bond yield may have dropped below it, which means an inverted yield curve. President Trump is calling for rate cuts. Yes, I would think so. Just trying to confirm this inverted yield curve thing.

Here's Leo AI about the Fed Funds rate:

The Fed Funds rate is the interest rate at which banks and other depository institutions lend and borrow money from each other overnight. It is a crucial indicator of the overall direction of monetary policy and has a significant impact on the economy.

**Key points about the Fed Funds rate:**

* It is set by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the policymaking body of the Federal Reserve System.

* The FOMC sets a target range for the Fed Funds rate, which is currently between 4-1/4 to 4-1/2 percent.

* The Fed Funds rate influences the overall level of interest rates in the economy and has a significant impact on borrowing costs, economic growth, and inflation.

* It is a key indicator of the Federal Reserve's monetary policy stance and is widely followed by economists, investors, and policymakers.

The ^TYX index indicates a rate slightly above it. 4.48% This is a moving target as it was a quote.

All the other bond yields are lower, so it is mostly inverted. One possible good thing about this current kerfuffle is that the massive 36 trillion dollar public debt needs about 9 trillion in refinancing. We'd want to do this at a lower interest rate, thank you very much. Otherwise, the interest rates will be baked in at unacceptably high rates, which will tacked on to the Federal debt. Currently, the debt service is much, much too high.

FUD, and it isn't in the form of Elmer J. Fudd

4/4/25:

 

2:14 PM:

 

Trump's tanking the markets on purpose?

 

If you ax me, I don't know how this will be received, you know what I mean, Vern?

 

11:52 AM:

 

This could be ungood. I asked Grok ( X's AI ) if the tariffs were actually reciprocal.

 

https://t.co/Wy53z1M1ek --- There does appear to be a discrepancy.

— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) April 4, 2025

 

 

11:28 AM:

 

There's a claim out there that the tariffs are not reciprocal, as advertised. If that's true, then my support for it is suspended until further review. All of the tariffs and the corresponding tariffs being imposed on American goods needs to be reviewed.

 

If Trump has done what he is accused of, they will have a real issue for a change. He'd better reconsider if that's the case. Otherwise, the financial beating will backfire in a bad way, and rather bigly.

 

 

4/3/25:

 

The Democratic plan is to generate a lot of FUD--- an acronym for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

Of course the stock market fall is designed for that. Let's spread tons and tons of fear because of a falling market. Let's stoke up the fears of job losses and recession. The uncertainty is needed in order to paralyze the political class into not doing anything, and continuing more of the same.

A restructuring is needed. How can it be in the interest of the people of this country to let other countries continue massive tariff structures against American goods?

Nobody should be surprised that a restructuring should cause some near-term dislocations. Adjustments have to be made.

 

Let's see where we are when the mid-terms come around. If the Dems could freeze Trump into inaction, which they are doing with their lawfare, they can make him look ineffective. The doubts about Trump could put Trump out of the game for good.

 

Anyway, that is a short discussion of what I think where some of the political strategies are. It shouldn't be a surprise.

 

 

Starlink may do an IPO

They're raking in the cash.

Pre-Determined Scenario?

Are They Positioning Themselves For A Pre-Determined Scenario In Which There Will Be A Massive Stock Market Crash? https://t.co/0cZOxzlu5t --- I suspect that that this is getting ginned up for a collapse. The market has been way overpriced for years. It's ripe for plucking.

— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) February 3, 2025

Could be true... There is a concerted effort to bring us down, on that count, I am very, very confident. The only thing that the political left hasn't tried yet against Trump is a coup. ( Unless you count January 6th 2021 In that case, it would have been a stealth coup. The next one will be in your face. ).

The political left is very confident that they can engineer a crash. Check out what they are saying NOW. We may be on the front edge of a vast upheaval. Get ready. For some folks, "getting ready" could be going short! What a cluster bungle. So, what do you do? I think the best thing is to not to counsel fear. These people need you to be afraid.

Always the best option

Because when the wheels come off, you are going nowhere fast.

https://t.co/NUEii07wpm --Keep the Wheels on the Cart on Zero Hedge, by Death, Taxes and QE. If you've been on the shelf or under a rock these last several years ( like me), this might be worthwhile reading in order to catch up and maybe even get out in front of the changes.

— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) February 2, 2025

Double Top at highest Market Cap to GDP in American history - 200%

Much higher than the dot-com bubble



It's a casino.

Better off than 4 years ago?

According to this, the answer is clearly "no".

pic.twitter.com/X3wPPR7pu9

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 5, 2024