Tradewinds

Here is some interesting information about Wampum as money. Wampum: Introduction Wampum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Interestingly, because Wampum started to be used as a way to trade with the Native American Indians, people started to manufacture Wampum, which eventually resulted in an oversupply.

I did not know that, but it makes sense to me. Is there a place I can find more info about this?

The video correctly pointed out, that there is a finite amount of gold in the world. Because there is a finite amount of gold in the world, and the population is very large and getting larger, how will there be enough gold to back the needed money supply? What would governments do? Would they ration money if the physical supply of gold wasn't enough to support a big enough money supply? For the current population, how much money does there need to be in circulation, and is there enough gold in the world to back it? Consider this: Let's say that every once of gold in the entire world had been mined, and was being used to back the currencies of the world. No gold wedding rings. No gold jewelry, it all has to sit in a warehouse to back the currencies of the world. Then let's say, that even with all the gold in the entire world, it still wasn't enough to back all the money needed in order to keep the economies running. Then what do you do? If an employer paid $1,000 a week, but they could not physically obtain $1,000 dollars, what would they do? There needs to be enough paper bills in circulation to meet demand. Think of it this way. Let's say that there was an ink shortage, and the printing presses, and the U.S. government couldn't print money for a year. A lot of the paper currency would wear out, get torn and destroyed. The population is growing, so the demand for money gets bigger and bigger. What if there was a physical shortage of actual, real bills. Would money need to be rationed? How would people exchange goods and services? Yes, yes they could use checks and debit and credit cards as an alternative. So does electronic money need to be backed by gold? Money is: A medium of exchange A counting tool in an accounting system We can't have 100% gold backed money, because there isn't enough gold, and even if there was, it would be such a massive undertaking to store, and protect that gold, that it would be an incredible burden. It wouldn't be worth it. So we won't have 100% gold backed money. So what is the percent of gold backing needed? 50%, 20%, 10% percent? 2% percent? Once you start getting down to the really small percentages, when everyone wants to exchange their paper currency for gold, then you can't do it. So then what good is it? If I have 100 dollars, and the currency becomes useless, and I get 2 dollars worth of gold for it, then I've still lost 98% of my currency value. That's not a real answer. That doesn't solve the problem. Even if we had 20% gold backed currency, it would be a massive cost and a burden to store and guard that gold. It's not practical. And with 20% gold backed currency, you are still looking at an 80% loss. And then, after everyone exchanges their worthless money for gold, what do they do with it? I guess they have to sell it back to the government, because the government would need gold to back the new currency. It doesn't make any sense. If the government hands out gold because the currency is now worthless, then they don't have any gold backing for the new currency. Then what do you do? Your right back to a currency with no gold backing. I'll tell you what would happen, no one would get any gold, the government would keep it all, and the gold backing would be totally meaningless. That's what would happen. So if you think about what would really happen when a currency gets devalued or worthless, then the gold backing is totally useless. Think it through. Think about what would actually happen. These are real scenarios that need good answers. Gold backed currency is not the answer. We need a good answer, but gold backed currency is not the answer.

Actually, now that you talk about data streams, I just had an idea. Hi=high[3] of data2; The question is, what data is the strategy using? If it's using the underlying data instead of data2 then I guess it wouldn't work. I wonder if you could "print to file" the trades, and then process the stats in a spreadsheet. Or find a platform that can do what you want.

I am evil. The whole world is doomed. :rofl: But seriously, the world needs great leaders, and for the collective majority to understand and do what is good.

I'm not sure what this means? Do you want to collaborate with other people, and share ideas? What if you have all the good ideas and the person who wants to be your friend doesn't have any good ideas at all? How would this friendship work?

Do you have criteria defined for price moving in a certain direction? For example: 4 higher highs 4 out of 6 higher closes MA moving up for "X" bars MA moving up for "X" bars with no close under (High + Low)/2 price moving up for 5 bars

Remove "Variable:" And fix the name of the input "EntryBarTime" inputs: LongOrShort( 1 ), { pass 1 to buy long, 2 to sell short } Quantity( 10 ), EntryBarTime_HHMM( 1300 ) ; { for intraday chart, pass in time of bar at which entry should occur, 24 hr format; entry will occur at the OPEN of the specified bar; for daily chart, time is ignored, can pass in 0 } if Time next bar = EntryBarTime_HHMM and ( BarType = 2 or ( BarType = 1 and Time next bar = EntryBarTime_HHMM ) ) then if LongOrShort = 1 then Buy Quantity shares next bar at market else Sell Short Quantity shares next bar at market ;

I don't think you can delay the data, you can set a plot backwards "in time". I don't know if you can do that with a Buy or Sell in a strategy.

Instead of using a negative index to try to reference "future" data, you can delay the plot. You can set the plot backwards. var: test(False); test=high>High[1]; If test then begin plot1[1](high, "test"); // Set to points and large weight plot2(low, "test 2"); // Set to points and large weight end;

I think that making the effort to visualize and imagine positive possibilities has merit, in that it trains your mind, and our mind has great influence on us. I know that I'm to negative. There needs to be a balance. I'm not going to visualize my self flying, and then climb up on the roof and jump off. :rofl: I'm just using that as an extreme example to make a point.

I'm not saying I have the answer, but consider if someone asked two different questions: What is your attitude towards XYZ? What is your belief about XYZ? When I try to get a sense of the implications of those two questions, it feels like an attitude is more of a "gut feeling", without much, if any time or effort spent to gather facts, assemble them, and use some logic. Attitude and belief could be applied to a few different things. Trading as a profession The investment industry Which instrument to trade Time frames Strategy Your personal ability Your ability to improve Brokers What the price is going to do. There are plenty of times a trader may guess at what the price is going to do. There will always be a degree of uncertainty, but there can be different degrees of substance and preparation to a trading decision. So when it comes to the difference between attitude and belief, I think it is important to consider, "Matters of Degree". I think Attitudes have a lower threshold of proof, and deal more with intuition, and very little conscious effort. So I guess I'd say that attitude and belief are sort of the same thing, but different matters of degree. I can tell myself that I really think that the price is going to turn and go up, but not really consciously be able to tell you why or give you any real reason. To me, that would be my "attitude".

I want to state that I'm not suggesting censorship. If people want to be rude, impolite, arrogant, divisive, argumentative or any other negative thing you can think of, fine, let them be that way. As long as it is within the TL agreement for the guidelines, they are free to be however they want to be. Actually, I would like to ask the TL people what I can and can not do. Can I open a thread titled: Tradewinds Peer Review. And ask people to make comments on what they think of me personally? Can I include an open, ongoing poll, that includes choices of: Tradewinds is well behaved Tradewinds is fairly well behaved Tradewinds needs improvement Tradewinds behavior is unacceptable If that is okay, I'd like to do that. People can take the poll, and also make comments about me. As long as it's within guidelines, then it's simply a free and open way for me to express myself. If I start a thread inviting everyone to express what they think of me, can I suggest to other members that they open their own thread and ask the TL community what everyone thinks of them? I won't open a thread asking to review someone else, but can I suggest to anyone that they do what I did, and we'll find out what everyone thinks of them? It would be purely voluntary. If I can not do the above things, then am I being censored?

Some members have an air of conflict to them. It's not uncommon. Other than replying to someone's post and telling them what you think of them, there's not a good way to rate people's behavior on the site. The threads that degrade into people bashing each other doesn't help anyone. I'd like to see a way for members to be subject to a peer review concerning the way they behave on the site. Have a system where if 3 or more members express concern over another members behavior, they would be subject to a peer review. I would gladly submit myself to a peer review. It's a matter of being willing to be held accountable. It's a character issue. Rebuke a fool and he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

If you are almost broke, then you don't have much time left. How close are you to perfecting your trading strategy? Do you have a way to measure the potential of your trading strategy? E.g. backtesting. Do you want to learn someone else's trading strategy? This brings up an interesting issue. I would love to see Trader's Laboratory have a section on the site that rated different people's strategies. The rules would be that a member could only review another members trading strategy if they actually used it, and could post some trading history to indicate that they tried it. The peer review would be voluntary, but for those who wanted to subject themselves to other people's review, it would provide a source for people to decide whether they wanted to follow another person's thread/strategy or not. Of course there is the thread rating, which is also a good indicator.

Do you have any programing skills, and/or a way to backtest your strategy? I'm not saying that backtests are "the" answer, but they can show you things that you didn't realize or expect. I've studied charts, thought that I saw some kind of cause and effect relationship, only to find out that it's almost a purely random occurrence. Unless you have the computer process through at least some amount of data, and tabulate the results, then it's very difficult to get an objective perspective doing it all manually.

I originally stated that entries where 80% of trading and exits 20% percent. I would now like to retract that statement. :rofl: I think I have sinned against the trading gods, and need to confess that I am a fool. What if your exit is your entry? Or your entry is also your exit? Then one is not more important than the other. I've now decided that entries and exits should be given equal rights. As I get more and more precise in my trading strategy, I realize that the two are just two sides of the same coin. I should state however, that my trading strategy is fairly close to an "always in" strategy. That may be a key point in my perspective.

The consolidation zones are not predetermined by a price level, but you have predetermined that you will wait for those as a condition. Isn't that predetermined? Mentally predetermined? You haven't predetermined a price target, buy you have predetermined a condition. nakachalet was probably talking about set price levels? Which is quite different.

Good analogy. I've thought of trading as driving a vehicle, and suddenly all the traffic turns and starts going the other direction against you. Then you have a choice to make, are you going to play "Chicken" and see if they turn back before there is a head on collision, or are you going to turn and go in the direction everyone else is going.

Let's consider some possible statements: I used to have a good attitude towards my strategy, now I don't. I have a really good attitude about this trading system that I know is terrible. I believe in my strategy, but I just can't seem to trust it. "I have a really good attitude about this trading system that I know is terrible": This statement seems strange. Something doesn't seem right. The statement mixes good attitude with a belief that the strategy is terrible. It would also seem strange to have a bad attitude towards a strategy that you believed was good. You could have a belief that a strategy is good, but a pessimistic attitude towards your ability to implement the strategy. To me belief can be mental or emotional. I can believe something mentally, but emotionally not trust it. With trading, you can become suspicious, hesitant and mistrustful after failures.

I look at NYSE Up Volume and Down Volume as a indicator to the ES, but not ES volume. I'd like to break up the ES volume into Up and Down volume, but couldn't do that on my old platform. Haven't looked into it with TradeStation. But as far as just the typical volume bars go, I think they are absolutely useless. I have never seen any correlation between a typical volume bar and price. I'm sure that volume plays a big role, but it probably needs to be processed down further than your typical volume bars. My observation of the ES compared to the internals are that the NYSE $TICK leads, the Advancers/Decliners confirm, the Up Vol / Down Vol reacts LAST. That is not always the case, sometimes the Volume takes control, but that isn't the "norm".

No way! Roller coasters and screaming are the way to go! :rofl: (There's good screaming and bad screaming)

I like the mental picture of your system being the vehicle. If the system works, it will carry you to your destination.

I'm a firm believer in these also, but I don't apply trends to price. I apply trends to market internals. The trend of the market internals determines what I think the price will do. The other thing I would add is momentum. Without a way to determine the momentum and the strength of underlying price influences, I feel, that I would be trading "blind". The nice, easy, predictable trends aren't the problem. The problems are: Reversal Failure Failure to Trend Those two things are what cause the problems. I have defined what my indicators MUST do when I expect a reversal, and I need to see those requirement happen within a minute, two at the most, or I'm out. I need confirmation very, very soon. Otherwise, I assume that the market pressures are just not ready to turn the price around. And that happens quite often.

Same old story. Practice trade forever. But I'm starting to become almost robotic in my trading. So that's good. Good in the sense that I'm making decisions consistently the same. Following my rules. I catch myself doubting that I made the right decision, then review the indicators, and tell myself that it's worked before and those are my rules, so be patient and wait. And then the price comes to me, and the order works. Not always, but I must trade the rules that I know work and not let the doubt sabotage my effort. $3,141 Profit after commissions, trading 4 contracts. It may not be realistic, but if I can make half that in real trading, I'll be doing well.