Posts by brightviper48

Bryan Jackson98 said:I’m not sure if this has been covered yet, but I’ve been wondering about this tendency people have to voluntarily subordinate themselves—essentially placing themselves in a lower tier because they assume someone else is more intelligent. It’s like they stop trying to hold onto their own convictions or become too terrified to push back. I have two specific scenarios playing out in my life. The first involves older generations; for context, I’m just hitting my late teens. They look at me differently the moment I mention I'm heading to an elite prep school, instantly labeling me as some kind of intellectual prodigy who exists on a plane above my peers.
Then there’s the second scenario: when I tell someone my age that I’ll be attending a top-tier academy, they seem to regress, acting even more foolish than before, which I find fascinating. In those moments, once they’ve convinced themselves that they sit at a lower intellectual level than I do, I could practically lead them anywhere; I could convince them that nine is actually less than seven—a banal example, obviously, but that’s the point. I could spout absolute nonsense, and they would nod along, refusing to even take a second to verify the truth. I’m curious about the root cause here. Is it driven by some deep-seated prejudice regarding prep school students and the prestige attached to them? I’m not saying I dislike having this advantage, but I’d love to understand the psychological mechanics behind why people surrender their agency like this.

It’s the exact same phenomenon with doctors, professors, and plenty of other professionals. It’s essentially the standard social reaction to someone who is "supposed" to be the authority figure.

Robert Hall7 said:Someone needs to stop this nonsense with small business grants. Once and for all. I’ve been dragged to meeting after meeting like some amateur, all because the Secretary promised us support. Fine, I showed up and listened. Buying new equipment. Non-refundable assets covered up to 35%. That was the pitch. Then, once everyone cleared out for lunch at the local diner, I asked the guy in charge what that actually meant. He looks me straight in the face and says: "Our budget is limited. If too many people apply, we’ll have to redistribute the funds." Which translates to this: they promised you 35%, but if the money runs out, you might get 30%, 25, 17, or maybe just 10%. For the rest, you're on your own. Give me a break. The machine I actually need costs $200 $0.00. And that’s the cheapest one available. Any thoughts? We aren't buying anything. Linic is just talking nonsense and playing games with the public.

So, they'll just take money from one group to hand out to you farmers, but they're claiming they didn't take enough from others to give to you? Interesting logic...

quiettrucker12 said:That's just trend following.

Not necessarily. About half of the technical tools out there actually generate counter-trend signals.

Otherwise, "the trend" is such a loose, broad, and fickle concept...

Melissa Sanchez17 said:Hey, can I pick your brain for a second about all this Fibonacci stuff and the wave theory you’re talking about? I’m pretty much clueless when it comes to this technical side, but I'm genuinely curious. Like, how many people out there are staring at charts right now thinking exactly what you are? And if a massive crowd of traders uses the exact same tools and lands on the same conclusions, how do you even play that? Do you just go against the grain and trade the opposite of whatever the "consensus" says?😕

Not the opposite—it’s moving right along with the signal... because that way, it actually fulfills its own purpose.

If everyone assumes a price will climb to 100 before it finally breaks—and then begins to slide—they’ll all rush to sell at that exact mark... effectively triggering the very crash they predicted. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, really.

dustyheron5 said:Post the chart so we can see if it's actually worth it...

I’ll be sketching out some wave patterns on the chart tonight—then I'll post them here...

Is gold currently undergoing Elliott corrective waves over these last few months? Perhaps it might be wise to ride that C wave once it actually kicks in...

dustyheron5 said:It reminds me of that famous summit where everyone pledged to ramp up exports to bail themselves out of the crisis... only for a minister from Singapore to take the podium and ask the room one simple question: who's actually going to buy all this stuff? 😂😂😂

At current rates, gold could hit $1580—provided Ben doesn't pull the trigger on Quantitative Easing 3 or OT2. 🤣

Americans will! They can't possibly produce enough to match what we’ll be importing!

ironstag8 said:The core issue here—something we really need to grasp—is the distinction between money and commodities, services, and so on...
Silver and gold represent money, whereas everything else simply doesn't. Historically speaking, whenever currencies have decoupled from money, things have gone south fast.
If a crowd of sheep convinces themselves that real estate, tulip bulbs, stocks, or some Facebook nonsense can hold value, then greed can drive those prices into unrealistic, illogical territory—which is how you get a bubble. On the flip side, gold and silver don't "inflate" in that sense; they *are* money. They serve as a medium of exchange with intrinsic value derived from properties that nothing else possesses (that’s why they matter). For something to truly qualify as money, it
:
it has to be liquid, easily portable, durable, fungible (which is precisely why diamonds or real estate fail this test and can't be considered money), divisible into smaller units without losing value, and difficult to counterfeit.

Real estate and tulip bulbs lack these specific traits—they aren't even permanent—so they shouldn't be compared to money. You can compare the value of a house or a bulb to another good or service, but you shouldn't compare them to a medium of exchange (in the sense that they are the same thing as money) used to trade those goods and services. If some fool decides a house is worth, say, $5,000 or 4 ounces of gold, and another fool believes him, all that does is inflate a bubble; eventually, unsold properties rot, plenty of idiots lose their shirts, and gold just stays right where it was.

If you try to measure the value of gold or silver using something like a fiat currency—which essentially holds no inherent value—you start to see just how warped this entire financial system is. It’s no wonder the whole thing is such a massive mess. Every single time people tried to play games with money by attempting to turn things that aren't money into money, the masses ended up broke and sheared like sheep. This system is rigged to benefit a tiny few at the expense of everyone else. The "beauty" of it for that elite group is that the majority of people will fight tooth and nail to defend and maintain this very system. That continues right up until the moment the structure starts cracking—and that's been happening for a while now (though if you ask me, the cracks started appearing the day Nixon signed his name to it).

And one last thing. You *can* compare real estate or tulip bulbs to fiat currency because both are subject to bubbles, which is exactly what we're seeing right now. Why is that possible? Because fiat currency isn't actually money.

And what, exactly, is the actual utility of gold? What can one truly accomplish with it? You cannot eat it—certainly not—you cannot use it to warm your home, you cannot grow crops upon it, nor can you live inside it... it serves no practical purpose in any meaningful sense.

Gold, much like any other currency, possesses value only insofar as the rest of society agrees that it does...

Beyond that, it simply fails to generate any tangible value—on a farm, you can plant crops to sell; in the woods, you can harvest timber for profit; but with gold, you’re left doing nothing but waiting for some sucker willing to pay an even higher price...

Anthony Evans78 said:I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: you can’t fit physical gold inside a bubble.
Since the days of fiat currency, they've pushed prices up as much as humanly possible through constant manipulation.
If we actually had a pure, untainted market setting the price, gold would probably be sitting somewhere with four or five zeros after the first digit.

Does that imply physical real estate can't be part of a bubble either... or perhaps even physical Lukovica tulip bulbs?

Melissa Sanchez17 said:I’m not so sure about that, honestly. How many people do you actually know who think gold is the move, or who have actually put their cash into it? I mean, personally, I don't know a single soul (not even my own family or friends) who's doing it.

And what exactly are we talking about when you say "low returns"? Give me a real number here.

Most people in my circle aren't going to touch anything beyond real estate, a new car, or a standard savings account at a big bank like Chase. Of those who might actually venture into investing one day, a significant portion tends to lean toward gold appreciation.

An average of 5-10%.

Anthony Evans78 said:A brilliant argument for why gold is priced where it is.
If you ask me, gold—and especially silver—is ridiculously cheap. Why? Just look back at my previous posts.
What kind of returns are we talking about? You buy gold to protect what you have, not necessarily to strike it rich, even if that happens once in a while.

Well, preserving wealth is, in itself, a return.

Assuming we're all still around to see it, we'll find out how the gold market plays out in the coming years—best of luck to you all 🙂

Walter Barrett8 said:So, does that mean the silver bugs were right all along, seeing as silver is sitting barely at $30?😍

Silver is a better play than gold in any scenario—though even that feels overpriced right now.

Melissa Sanchez17 said:I'm with you there. Honestly, this feels like the perfect window to scoop up some Apple stock. 😍

I know I'll probably end up kicking myself later, but what's the logic behind calling it overpriced right now? Are you betting that the Euro might hit some major turbulence—thinking that if things go south there, the Dollar climbs and drags gold down with it?

Apple is overpriced too.

Anthony Evans78 said:Here’s another one shouting into the void and still breathing.🙂
If you're such an expert, why don't you enlighten us and explain why it's so pricey?

Because even the most clueless amateur knows gold is where the money is made these days. For prices to keep climbing, you need fresh buyers—and those people are running thin...

Gold will likely be higher ten years from now, sure, but the actual returns will probably be underwhelming. Forget about seeing gains of several dozen or even hundreds of percent at these levels.

Gold would have been a solid play at $1,000. At current levels, though—it’s just too expensive.

Michael Ross39 said:Hey there.
Does anyone here have any experience using DraftKings?
I've been placing some bets there and playing in Las Vegas.
How are they regarding payouts?
If I actually manage to turn a profit, I’d like to withdraw maybe $200-$300 directly to my bank account—so I'm wondering if they cause any issues or anything like that...

If you're looking to withdraw winnings, just forget about the casino portion entirely. 🙂