Bitcoin Forum
October 19, 2019, 11:36:44 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 [297] 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion  (Read 615660 times)
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 08:40:29 PM
Last edit: July 12, 2019, 08:52:00 PM by AnonymousCoder
 #5921

AE Global Insider identified


...
2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders.
...


Just for the record. When Gumbi refers to other posters as outsiders this implies that he is an insider.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
1571528204
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571528204

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571528204
Reply with quote  #2

1571528204
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1571528204
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571528204

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571528204
Reply with quote  #2

1571528204
Report to moderator
1571528204
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571528204

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571528204
Reply with quote  #2

1571528204
Report to moderator
1571528204
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571528204

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571528204
Reply with quote  #2

1571528204
Report to moderator
Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 09:20:10 PM
 #5922

AE Global Insider identified


...
2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders.
...

Just for the record. When Gumbi refers to other posters as outsiders this implies that he is an insider.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

Insider meaning someone who has been closely following his work don't make assumptions which is all you ever do.

if the Dow is making new highs going into Jan 18 2020 this will be a indication we move lower if we are retesting support this will  indicate new highs going into 2024 the same as it what happened in 2015.75.

The most likely reason you are not having any success is because you are not trading for the long term which is much easier to Forecast.



DanB1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 09:46:51 PM
 #5923

AE Global Insider identified


...
2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders.
...

Just for the record. When Gumbi refers to other posters as outsiders this implies that he is an insider.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

Insider meaning someone who has been closely following his work don't make assumptions which is all you ever do.

if the Dow is making new highs going into Jan 18 2020 this will be a indication we move lower if we are retesting support this will  indicate new highs going into 2024 the same as it what happened in 2015.75.

The most likely reason you are not having any success is because you are not trading for the long term which is much easier to Forecast.



Sorry Gumbi, but I had to reply as you are back on your chair again insulting people, but what have you showed us?

You had your change to prove us wrong on your trade as "Armstrong has stuck his neck out here and said we needed to close this week above 26951.82 to imply a further advance" (your words).
I feel sad for you. You really believe that the Socrates system works. There are almost 300 pages here with so many people who posted their experiences and all came to the same conclusion.
Yet you wanted to show that you could trade based on this, and on your very first trade you had the same problem everybody has when using the Socrates system.
Why I feel sad? Because you try to protect Socrates/Armstrong and say it's your own fault. But the truth is, following Socrates will only give you mediocre results. Sure, there will be some wins. But very often you will be on the sideline, waiting for something to happen so you can step in (long/short). And then after some time you realise you missed the trade.

Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 10:01:36 PM
 #5924

AE Global Insider identified


...
2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders.
...

Just for the record. When Gumbi refers to other posters as outsiders this implies that he is an insider.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

Insider meaning someone who has been closely following his work don't make assumptions which is all you ever do.

if the Dow is making new highs going into Jan 18 2020 this will be a indication we move lower if we are retesting support this will  indicate new highs going into 2024 the same as it what happened in 2015.75.

The most likely reason you are not having any success is because you are not trading for the long term which is much easier to Forecast.



Sorry Gumbi, but I had to reply as you are back on your chair again insulting people, but what have you showed us?

You had your change to prove us wrong on your trade as "Armstrong stuck his neck out" (your words).
I feel sad for you. You really believe that the Socrates system works. There are almost 300 pages here with so many people who posted their experiences and all came to the same conclusion.
Yet you wanted to show that you could trade based on this, and on your very first trade you had the same problem everybody has when using the Socrates system.
Why I feel sad? Because you try to protect Socrates and say it's your own fault. But the truth is, following Socrates will only give you mediocre results. Sure, there will be some wins. But very often you will be on the sideline, waiting for something to happen so you can step in (long/short). And then after some time you realise you missed the trade.




No I don't believe I know for a fact that it works. Belief is only for medicore minds
I am not perfect but that trade didn't make me a loss. Just trade on a elected basis the dow elected another daily bullish on the 11th And a weekly bullish today so it Looks like the dow is going to 28k will give you a few more long term trades this time. I really don't want you to miss the greatest trade of the century.

DanB1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 10:03:33 PM
 #5925

before I switch of my computer, this blog really made me laugh :

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/why-nobody-wants-to-forecast-the-business-cycle/

Haha...Read the question, looks like the questioner idolizes Armstrong!
I would really like to see who is behind this question. I think it's small guy with a beard.
Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 10:14:05 PM
 #5926

before I switch of my computer, this blog really made me laugh :

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/why-nobody-wants-to-forecast-the-business-cycle/

Haha...Read the question, looks like the questioner idolizes Armstrong!
I would really like to see who is behind this question. I think it's small guy with a beard.

It's true Dan we love Armstrong he has made us a fortune over the years. We can't thank him enough for his contribution to humanity nobody can take that away from him. The business cycle is one of the  most significant discoveries by Armstrong and will be remembered long after he has gone.

trulycoined
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 54
Merit: 5


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 10:28:54 PM
 #5927

2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders. any link posted to be taken seriously will have to come from his website. how can you post evidence from a website other than his blog ? this is absurd.

"We will have two years ahead of us and 2015.75 is just the BEGINNING – NOT THE END. This is a major change in trend of monumental proportion."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/understanding-cycles/debt-debt-more-debt-2015-75/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/2015-75-the-crash-in-government/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/peak-in-government-corruption-2015-75/

2015.75 was the peak in government
 the Dow was indeed crashing going into October 1st, thank you for providing the chart that show exactly that.  Who else was calling for new highs on September 29 2015?
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/stock-markets-crashing-into-the-2015-75/

belief truly is blind...

@Gumbi, you are surely trolling? This is a serious and impartial conversation about MA, not a comedian show.

The DOW did not "crash" into October 1st 2015 and nor is there a single news article at the time that reports such a thing. MA was wrong. Again.

Arguing against the chart I posted proves either lies or bad eyesight. The bigger "crash" was August 2015, and yet MA argues his model forecasts "to the day". So he was a good two months out and nor was it a crash, it was a correction. The decline in October was also less extreme than the decline mid November 2015, and nor did MA "forecast" that either.

You then, jokingly I presume, write:
any link posted to be taken seriously will have to come from his website. how can you post evidence from a website other than his blog ? this is absurd.

I can evidence real interviews with respected newspapers where MA, with words coming from his mouth, proves his forecasts were wrong and otherwise appears to be making the dates up. This here is an "official" MA blog post on his site that references that De Welt article:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/die-welt-the-construction-of-our-database/

Please do keep digging a hole for yourself.

And using your argument about his blog being the only "official" source of truth about MA, which is a brilliantly absurd paradox in itself, he explained his model forecast a US recession after 2015.75:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/back-to-the-future/

Wrong. Again.

Either you work for MA or you are MA, because no one would be this defensive and controverted in their arguments.
nattybear
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 33
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 12, 2019, 10:30:41 PM
 #5928

before I switch of my computer, this blog really made me laugh :

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/why-nobody-wants-to-forecast-the-business-cycle/

Haha...Read the question, looks like the questioner idolizes Armstrong!
I would really like to see who is behind this question. I think it's small guy with a beard.

It's true Dan we love Armstrong he has made us a fortune over the years. We can't thank him enough for his contribution to humanity nobody can take that away from him. The business cycle is one of the  most significant discoveries by Armstrong and will be remembered long after he has gone.


We 'love' Armstrong... You might want to back off on the kool-aid there. The issue is that you still can't account for all the times MA gets it wrong.

It's only once you can reconcile the incorrect predictions that he makes (which are captured in detail across blog) then you can claim his immortality.

His contribution to humanity? Spare me the bulls&#t...
bikefront
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 428
Merit: 21


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 01:12:07 AM
 #5929

If Armstrong said never to anticipate, then how is one to buy the high or sell the low? You can't, unless trading against the Reversals using the timing arrays, which don't work consistently. If Armstrong shorted major highs and bought major lows, then he is ANTICIPATING. And we know how often ANTICIPATING fails. We also know how often Cycle Inversions and other things crop up and make you lose money when you thought you had read everything right.

Please explain MAtalk's argument that Armstrong claims someone made a scooter that breaks the laws of thermodynamics. There is no such thing as perpetual motion machines. I myself tried making a few when I was a child.

We are just going around in circles, as usual. 2015.whateveryawanacallit might have been the beginning...of something which was probably the end of something too, and you can go back and try to make it connect with something else. You can even call it the peak in government if you want. If there is no ACTIONABLE ACTION taken at that point in time, it is completely irrelevant.

At this point, no one except noobs believe in Armstrong. Were it so simple and easy, we would have hordes of counterarguments. Maybe his technical analysis works, but I can easily do the same thing... Reversals are just breakouts of technical points, 1% rule is just support becomes resistance and vice versa.

Again, I challenge anyone to consistently post live trades using Socrates.
DanB1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 10:13:15 AM
 #5930

before I switch of my computer, this blog really made me laugh :

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/ecm/why-nobody-wants-to-forecast-the-business-cycle/

Haha...Read the question, looks like the questioner idolizes Armstrong!
I would really like to see who is behind this question. I think it's small guy with a beard.

It's true Dan we love Armstrong he has made us a fortune over the years. We can't thank him enough for his contribution to humanity nobody can take that away from him. The business cycle is one of the  most significant discoveries by Armstrong and will be remembered long after he has gone.



Haha, it's very hard to believe now that we saw your first trade.
Sure, you might not have lost money. But if you did exactly the opposite of what you did (using the Socrates system) you would have made a profit.
But anyway, you can show us more although I think we will not see more trades coming.
Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 10:46:16 AM
 #5931

2015.75(October 1st) was just the beginning you are simply mistaken, this is a common misconception by many outsiders. any link posted to be taken seriously will have to come from his website. how can you post evidence from a website other than his blog ? this is absurd.

"We will have two years ahead of us and 2015.75 is just the BEGINNING – NOT THE END. This is a major change in trend of monumental proportion."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/understanding-cycles/debt-debt-more-debt-2015-75/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/history/ancient-economies/2015-75-the-crash-in-government/
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/peak-in-government-corruption-2015-75/

2015.75 was the peak in government
 the Dow was indeed crashing going into October 1st, thank you for providing the chart that show exactly that.  Who else was calling for new highs on September 29 2015?
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/future-forecasts/stock-markets-crashing-into-the-2015-75/

belief truly is blind...

@Gumbi, you are surely trolling? This is a serious and impartial conversation about MA, not a comedian show.

The DOW did not "crash" into October 1st 2015 and nor is there a single news article at the time that reports such a thing. MA was wrong. Again.

Arguing against the chart I posted proves either lies or bad eyesight. The bigger "crash" was August 2015, and yet MA argues his model forecasts "to the day". So he was a good two months out and nor was it a crash, it was a correction. The decline in October was also less extreme than the decline mid November 2015, and nor did MA "forecast" that either.

You then, jokingly I presume, write:
any link posted to be taken seriously will have to come from his website. how can you post evidence from a website other than his blog ? this is absurd.

I can evidence real interviews with respected newspapers where MA, with words coming from his mouth, proves his forecasts were wrong and otherwise appears to be making the dates up. This here is an "official" MA blog post on his site that references that De Welt article:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/die-welt-the-construction-of-our-database/

Please do keep digging a hole for yourself.
And using your argument about his blog being the only "official" source of truth about MA, which is a brilliantly absurd paradox in itself, he explained his model forecast a US recession after 2015.75:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/back-to-the-future/

Wrong. Again.

Either you work for MA or you are MA, because no one would be this defensive and controverted in their arguments.


The ECM is  a global economic cycle NOT a stock market model what makes you think the market has to bottom precisely in line with the ECM?. The Dow went down from its high over 2000 points into October 1st, the market was crashing going into the ECM date and this is what we can expect going into 2020 if we are going to see new highs into 2024.

2015.75 was the start of an economic decline not the end.
"The model is forecasting NOT a “recession” in the old terms, but an economic decline. "
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/the-gdp-decline-post-2015-75/

 post 2015.75 Armstrong never called for a stock market crash in fact he called for new highs. You don't need to be looking at anything other than the ECM target dates which will never change.

Are you suggesting that there is no business cycle and that all price movement is in fact random ?
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 11:23:12 AM
Last edit: July 13, 2019, 11:37:30 AM by AnonymousCoder
 #5932

It's true Dan we love Armstrong he has made us a fortune over the years. We can't thank him enough for his contribution to humanity nobody can take that away from him. The business cycle is one of the  most significant discoveries by Armstrong and will be remembered long after he has gone.

Martin Armstrong discovered the business cycle?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle

...
Are you suggesting that there is no business cycle and that all price movement is in fact random ?
...

Who suggested anything that could even be misunderstood as a statement that the business cycle does not exist by saying what?

Am I actually responding to a person or is this Socrates gone wild  Huh


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 12:40:46 PM
 #5933

It's true Dan we love Armstrong he has made us a fortune over the years. We can't thank him enough for his contribution to humanity nobody can take that away from him. The business cycle is one of the  most significant discoveries by Armstrong and will be remembered long after he has gone.

Martin Armstrong discovered the business cycle?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_cycle

...
Are you suggesting that there is no business cycle and that all price movement is in fact random ?
...

Who suggested anything that could even be misunderstood as a statement that the business cycle does not exist by saying what?

Am I actually responding to a person or is this Socrates gone wild  Huh


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud



he discovered the 8.615 year cycle. The total number of days within an 8.6-year business cycle is 3141 which is equal to Pi x 1000 the perfect cycle. So you agree with Armstrong that there is a cycle to every market? If so then random price movement simply does not exist

I think most people including you believe that market  price movement is completely random therefore cycles simply cannot exist in any given market.

AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 02:18:42 PM
Last edit: July 13, 2019, 06:19:21 PM by AnonymousCoder
 #5934

...
he discovered the 8.615 year cycle. The total number of days within an 8.6-year business cycle is 3141 which is equal to Pi x 1000 the perfect cycle.
...

So it must be perfect right? The most grotesque and unscientific conclusion from a random coincidence seen in a pair of numbers I have ever seen. He discovered it for himself. Nobody else is using it.

Taking the result from this brain dead arithmetic further and make predictions based on it indicates that Martin Armstrong suffers from delusion of grandeur. The proof is in the high number of failed predictions he made based on that number. He keeps doing it again and again without realizing that the fundamental assumption is not only wrong, it is stupid.

He does not take the catastrophic result of his scheme as feedback to refine or fix it. Forecast arrays are not the solution.

...
I think most people including you believe that market  price movement is completely random therefore cycles simply cannot exist in any given market.
...

Bad thinking. Can you read other people's minds? Do you have a crystal ball? Thank you for writing this. The more you write like this, the more people, even the most retarded people, can see YOUR type of thinking Kiss

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
bikefront
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 428
Merit: 21


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 02:27:38 PM
 #5935

There is an utter lack of objectivity in defining 'peak in government', 'start of an economic decline' etc. Additionally, these were not defined before the dates, except when proven to be wrong when actually defined. We've already been over this before. Anyone can pick a bunch of random dates in the future and I guarantee that they can later be connected to something else...IN HINDSIGHT. This is simply a variation of a psychic stage magician. Remember he had some major date and staged his WEC to align with it and then nothing happened except some kind of minor thing in Malaysia which he tried to hype up, and was never heard of again. Give hard NUMBERS and hard dates. Without that, it belongs in the clown pile along with Nostradamus and crazy witch ladies.

Also Armstrong believes that the laws of thermodynamics can be broken because of nonexistent perpetual motion machines. What say you?

Socrates is just a technical analyst. It fails in everything else. Also, if the arrays timing fails often, whats to say the ECM won't fail too? It is just ANTICIPATION.

Science requires objectivity. Socrates is not objective. Armstrong is not objective. Therefore, the methods employed by Armstrong & Co. are not scientific.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/goldman-sachs-going-down-on-the-pi-target/ GS forecast. So far, it has not 'going down hard' in 2019, although there is still time.
psp777
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 73
Merit: 5


View Profile
July 13, 2019, 07:01:54 PM
 #5936

So MA has been calling for a pullback since the January to test the December lows. Then he changed his tune to say there would be a July high and a pullback.
So, MA stated that Technical resistance for the DOW was 27,296. We blew right past that and closed at 27,332. He also stated that this level needed to be exceeded for the "channel move"...so is it time? Or, will this be a temp high? LOL more noise than anything. Should of held my corse position longs when I stepped out in Feb.

PennyWiseUK
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 14, 2019, 10:36:43 AM
 #5937

There was that one Canadian guy online here who apparently uses Socrates to trade. https://www.mininginteractive.com/ Does anyone know his performance?

..And these guys; https://integratedwealthmanagement.ca/learned-martin-armstrongs-orlando-conference/

'..1) Socrates is NOT supposed to be used as a day-trading platform

2) Socrates should be used in tandem with an existing disciplined framework, including proper diversification, disciplined trade execution, moderate trading frequency, and with very disciplined risk management in place

3) Our managers will utilize Socrates to make sure Client portfolios:

Are on the right side of every major currency move
Are over-weighted in asset classes that have the best risk : reward potential
Avoid major losses from high-risk asset classes, and possibly benefit by shorting these asset classes..'


i'm not a trader in any sense.  But I use Armstrong as a macro road map and i'm in the green because of it.
If i'd listened to someone like Jim Rickards who wrote The Death of the Dollar years ago and pushes gold all the time, I'd be in the red for sure.

Kiwibird- great spot, thanks. They REALLY like Martin Armstrong. They say they use Socrates amongst other things but that is quite a bold statement for a financial advisor to make. Maybe they are the company that MA refers to when he says he wants to licence Socrates, but in any event a public relationship exists there currently.

Bikefront - yes I used to read Nick Nicolaas blog at Mining Interactive as he posts a lot about Socrates, and in fact says: "Outside of the people directly working directly with Martin Armstrong, I am probably the best person in the world interpreting his work." He even sells his notes at the WECs.

I am quite happy to take NN at his word (he says he used to get MA faxes in the 1990s), but he said in one of his own public blog snippets of WEC notes that he nearly fell off his chair when MA said in 2017 (I think) that Gold was not going below $1k per ounce when NN had been forecasting this constantly, no doubt based on his interpretation of MA.

So I concluded if this long time devotee of MA cannot fathom Socrates, a non-trader like me has no chance. I was interested in the basic investor service on the 2016 version but was out off by constant updates essentially saying it is not ready; it’s like buying a half built car. Steering might work but what if has no brakes….

I take Anonymous Coder’s point that financial firms might stay away from a licensed version of Socrates but those guys at Integrated Wealth Management have made me consider the point once more. If ANY mutual fund firm put out a Socrates fund that in itself would be an endorsement as it would have had to be scrutinised before the point of launch.

Would I put money into such a fund? Sure I would but I would not give it any more money than some of my other funds. And I might even wait until it has a three-year track record like all my other funds. I would not give money to any wealth firm using Socrates because there is no public track record like you have with mutual funds for peer comparison and risk/reward assessment. However even if such a fund were launched in the US it is unlikely to make its way to the UK so perhaps it is wishful thinking but I would follow it with interest.

Gumbi / Strike Eagle - thanks for your insights. As you both appear to be close to MA. Can you expand on the possibility of a licensed version of Socrates?

Thanks again to ALL posters on their experiences, insights and comments. MA is fascinating. Today’s post about the UFOs. Brilliant!
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
July 14, 2019, 12:43:43 PM
Last edit: July 14, 2019, 01:13:46 PM by AnonymousCoder
 #5938

...
Today’s post about the UFOs. Brilliant!

What is brilliant about it? What to do with it? Any new insight?

Did not someone predict  that he would report on UFOs next?

Con man meets con man

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/fake-new-silence-any-new-achievement/

Martin Armstrong fails to tell us what he did with the scooter man.

Actually I think he just made this up - never happened.

It can't get any lower than this. What's next? UFOs?
...

And reporting on UFOs he did.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/opinion/senate-briefed-on-ufo-rash-of-recent-sightings/

He even saw one himself  Cheesy



Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 14, 2019, 02:29:18 PM
Last edit: July 14, 2019, 02:43:24 PM by Gumbi
 #5939

If Armstrong said never to anticipate, then how is one to buy the high or sell the low? You can't, unless trading against the Reversals using the timing arrays, which don't work consistently. If Armstrong shorted major highs and bought major lows, then he is ANTICIPATING. And we know how often ANTICIPATING fails. We also know how often Cycle Inversions and other things crop up and make you lose money when you thought you had read everything right.

Please explain MAtalk's argument that Armstrong claims someone made a scooter that breaks the laws of thermodynamics. There is no such thing as perpetual motion machines. I myself tried making a few when I was a child.

We are just going around in circles, as usual. 2015.whateveryawanacallit might have been the beginning...of something which was probably the end of something too, and you can go back and try to make it connect with something else. You can even call it the peak in government if you want. If there is no ACTIONABLE ACTION taken at that point in time, it is completely irrelevant.

At this point, no one except noobs believe in Armstrong. Were it so simple and easy, we would have hordes of counterarguments. Maybe his technical analysis works, but I can easily do the same thing... Reversals are just breakouts of technical points, 1% rule is just support becomes resistance and vice versa.

Again, I challenge anyone to consistently post live trades using Socrates.

"Goldman Sachs’ share price is going down hard INTO 2019. The 159 level will be critical on a closing basis for the year. If that is breached, then we could see very major implications for the firm whereby it may no longer survive."

"not in 2019" but GOING INTO 2019 you can't make such a mistake like that and we never closed below 159 for the year 2018.
This call was essential made at least on his public blog on Nov 13, 2018 where a bearish reversal had already been elected https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/goldman-sachs-preparing-for-waterfall-event/
"
Goldman Sachs elected a Monthly Bearish Reversal. Now a monthly closing BELOW 215 will signal a Waterfall is unfolding with a drop back to 185 for starters. "


 
The anticipation point is correct but first the market has to PROVE ITS DIRECTION that is the difference.


" In Tokyo, a man came to me with a magnetic engine. He wanted me to help him and take it public. He left me a scooter and told me to test it out. You plugged it in once and thereafter it self-generated power and did not need to be plugged in again. I was sceptical at first. I asked him why he was coming to me? He said he had been to all the top auto manufacturers and everyone wanted to buy it. He was offered $50 million and turned it down not because he wanted more, but because they wanted to shelve it so it would not see the light of day. That was another project they ensured was killed in my affair."
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/fake-new-silence-any-new-achievement/

"it self-generated power and did not need to be plugged in again" really you cannot conceive this being possible in the future?

 Who said it was breaking the laws of laws of thermodynamics you have no idea how the technology works? Many things we can do today was thought impossible not too long ago. 100 years from now the technology that will exist you would say today is impossible and will never happen. You have to accept there are certain very disruptive technologies that are being suppressed by special interests and many innovations made by people are simply paid off just be shelved.

Gumbi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 72
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 14, 2019, 02:42:10 PM
 #5940

There was that one Canadian guy online here who apparently uses Socrates to trade. https://www.mininginteractive.com/ Does anyone know his performance?

..And these guys; https://integratedwealthmanagement.ca/learned-martin-armstrongs-orlando-conference/

'..1) Socrates is NOT supposed to be used as a day-trading platform

2) Socrates should be used in tandem with an existing disciplined framework, including proper diversification, disciplined trade execution, moderate trading frequency, and with very disciplined risk management in place

3) Our managers will utilize Socrates to make sure Client portfolios:

Are on the right side of every major currency move
Are over-weighted in asset classes that have the best risk : reward potential
Avoid major losses from high-risk asset classes, and possibly benefit by shorting these asset classes..'


i'm not a trader in any sense.  But I use Armstrong as a macro road map and i'm in the green because of it.
If i'd listened to someone like Jim Rickards who wrote The Death of the Dollar years ago and pushes gold all the time, I'd be in the red for sure.

Kiwibird- great spot, thanks. They REALLY like Martin Armstrong. They say they use Socrates amongst other things but that is quite a bold statement for a financial advisor to make. Maybe they are the company that MA refers to when he says he wants to licence Socrates, but in any event a public relationship exists there currently.

Bikefront - yes I used to read Nick Nicolaas blog at Mining Interactive as he posts a lot about Socrates, and in fact says: "Outside of the people directly working directly with Martin Armstrong, I am probably the best person in the world interpreting his work." He even sells his notes at the WECs.

I am quite happy to take NN at his word (he says he used to get MA faxes in the 1990s), but he said in one of his own public blog snippets of WEC notes that he nearly fell off his chair when MA said in 2017 (I think) that Gold was not going below $1k per ounce when NN had been forecasting this constantly, no doubt based on his interpretation of MA.

So I concluded if this long time devotee of MA cannot fathom Socrates, a non-trader like me has no chance. I was interested in the basic investor service on the 2016 version but was out off by constant updates essentially saying it is not ready; it’s like buying a half built car. Steering might work but what if has no brakes….

I take Anonymous Coder’s point that financial firms might stay away from a licensed version of Socrates but those guys at Integrated Wealth Management have made me consider the point once more. If ANY mutual fund firm put out a Socrates fund that in itself would be an endorsement as it would have had to be scrutinised before the point of launch.

Would I put money into such a fund? Sure I would but I would not give it any more money than some of my other funds. And I might even wait until it has a three-year track record like all my other funds. I would not give money to any wealth firm using Socrates because there is no public track record like you have with mutual funds for peer comparison and risk/reward assessment. However even if such a fund were launched in the US it is unlikely to make its way to the UK so perhaps it is wishful thinking but I would follow it with interest.

Gumbi / Strike Eagle - thanks for your insights. As you both appear to be close to MA. Can you expand on the possibility of a licensed version of Socrates?

Thanks again to ALL posters on their experiences, insights and comments. MA is fascinating. Today’s post about the UFOs. Brilliant!



He has mentioned this before  "We are in the process of licensing Socrates for a public fund being created by a Sovereign Government who is seeking to expand its Sovereign Wealth Fund services who has attended our World Economic Conferences since 1985. "
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/socrates/warning-about-funds-management-claiming-to-be-using-socrates/


@AnonymousCoder

You have to be very naive or stupid to think the government has not created secret technology that the public does not know about. This is the most logical explanation for all the sightings of UFO's
Pages: « 1 ... 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 [297] 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!