Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

jperl

Trading with Market Statistics XI. HUP

Recommended Posts

I wonder if the fact that "The skewness of a random variable X is sometimes denoted Skew[X]. If Y is the sum of n independent random variables, all with the same distribution as X, then it can be shown that Skew[Y] = Skew[X] / √n." can be exploited to come up with a non iterative approach?

 

I am having trouble understanding this. Doesnt it mean that you can simply calculate the skew for the first element (which will be zero right?) and then extrapolate from that. I don't understand how that formula can be correct.

 

 

 

Its from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlowFish said:
I wonder if the fact that "The skewness of a random variable X is sometimes denoted Skew[X]. If Y is the sum of n independent random variables, all with the same distribution as X, then it can be shown that Skew[Y] = Skew[X] / √n." can be exploited to come up with a non iterative approach?

 

I am having trouble understanding this. Doesnt it mean that you can simply calculate the skew for the first element (which will be zero right?) and then extrapolate from that. I don't understand how that formula can be correct.

 

 

 

Its from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skewness

I don't think this shows some non-iterative approach. As I said I am not educated in statistics so I am merely guessing, but I think this random variable X is not a single number but actually a discretionary data set or a continous distribution function. So if you want to determine Skew[X] you need to iterate or integrate, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlowFish said:
Ondrej,

 

Would you mind posting the bit of code that calculates the Skew? I find it easier to understand algorithms than formulas on the whole. :)

I am not sure how familiar you are with AmiBroker Formula Language, but anyway, this is the iterative part of my code. Some parts within the iteration are ommited.

i cycle goes through bars, j cycles through price levels. This iteration computes Volume per price (VUcount), PVP, VWAP, Variance and the 3rd central moment (CentMom3). BoxesInRange is the number of price levels in the Volume Distribution function.

 

for(i = iStart; i < BarCount; i++)

{

SumPjVj = 0;

TotalVolume = TotalVolume + Volume;

if((BoxesInRange < BarCount))

for(j = 0; j < BoxesInRange; j++)

{

BoxPrice = Bot + j * TickSize;

if((Low <= (BoxPrice + TickSize/2)) AND (High >= (BoxPrice - TickSize/2)))

{

VUcount[j] = VUcount[j] + VolUnit;

MaxVUcount = Max(MaxVUcount, VUcount[j]);

}

SumPjVj = SumPjVj + (BoxPrice * VUcount[j]);

}

if((frac(i / CalcInt) == 0) OR (i == BarCount - 1))

{

VWAP = SumPjVj / TotalVolume;

for(j = 0; j < BoxesInRange; j++)

{

BoxPrice = Bot + j * TickSize;

Prob = VUcount[j] / TotalVolume;

if(MaxVUcount == VUcount[j])

PVP = BoxPrice;

Variance = Variance + (Prob * (BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP));

CentMom3 = CentMom3 + (Prob * ((BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP)));

}

}

}

}

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Head2k said:
I don't think this shows some non-iterative approach. As I said I am not educated in statistics so I am merely guessing, but I think this random variable X is not a single number but actually a discretionary data set or a continous distribution function. So if you want to determine Skew[X] you need to iterate or integrate, anyway.

 

The way I read this was if you know the skew of the set of variables you can determine the scew of any particular variable (like a newly arriving bar). I'd wager my stats are weaker than yours though!

 

Thanks for the algorithm by the way. I am not particularly familiar with ambibroker but syntax dosen't look too dificult :)

 

This might interest you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithms_for_calculating_variance this was what inspired me to look for non iterative approaches to VWAP and it's SD's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlowFish said:
The way I read this was if you know the skew of the set of variables you can determine the scew of any particular variable (like a newly arriving bar). I'd wager my stats are weaker than yours though!

 

Thanks for the algorithm by the way. I am not particularly familiar with ambibroker but syntax dosen't look too dificult :)

 

This might interest you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithms_for_calculating_variance this was what inspired me to look for non iterative approaches to VWAP and it's SD's

The way I read this is that if you know the skew of a variable X (variable meant as a function), you can somehow calculate the skew of a varaible Y (again meant as a function). But I don't understand why. Reading Wiki I was also a bit confused, then I realized that in statistics they often use whole functions as variables. I noticed that if a variable is a function it is usually marked with a capital letter, such as X or Y. If a variable is a number (a value of the function at some point) it is usually marked with a small letter, such as x or y.

Thanks for the link, but my indicator for AmiBroker works fast enough to be used in real time on 15sec database for 1 day. I am a newbie and I need to learn a lot so my priorities lie elsewhere. By the way, that condition in the code "if ( frac( i / CalcInt == 0) ... ) sets an interval of calculation (frac is fractional part). When I recalculate VWAP and everything only once per four 15sec intervals, the speed of the indicator almost doubles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slowly trying to get my tiny mind round this. Do you Divide this value CentMom3 by SD^3? I see you add it to VWAP and multiply by the SD for plotting.

 

CentMom3 = CentMom3 + (Prob * ((BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP)));

 

Seems like you should to me. I finally had one moment of clarity (if you pardon the pun) still lots that's hazy. Anyone know of a better place than Wiki to properly learn this stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlowFish said:
Slowly trying to get my tiny mind round this. Do you Divide this value CentMom3 by SD^3? I see you add it to VWAP and multiply by the SD for plotting.

 

CentMom3 = CentMom3 + (Prob * ((BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP) * (BoxPrice - VWAP)));

 

Seems like you should to me. I finally had one moment of clarity (if you pardon the pun) still lots that's hazy. Anyone know of a better place than Wiki to properly learn this stuff?

Yes I do sqrt(Variance) to calculate SD and I do CentMom3 / SD^3 to calculate Skew(3CM). But these operations I do not do within the iteration loop, because AmiBroker AFL is primarily an array processing language. So I do these computations on arrays outside of the iterative loop I posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Head2k said:
Yes I do sqrt(Variance) to calculate SD and I do CentMom3 / SD^3 to calculate Skew(3CM). But these operations I do not do within the iteration loop, because AmiBroker AFL is primarily an array processing language. So I do these computations on arrays outside of the iterative loop I posted.

 

Gotcha, thanks. From what I hear AmiBrokers script language is pretty efficient in execution so I guess thats a plus too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlowFish said:
Gotcha, thanks. From what I hear AmiBrokers script language is pretty efficient in execution so I guess thats a plus too.
Today I improved my code so when it updates VUcount (volume per price) the j-loop doesnt go through all prices seeking where is the actual bar, but first I find the bar borders and then the loop goes only within the bar. With this improvement I can compute the indicator on sevreal days of data without any noticable slowdown, so now it is fully usable for real time even for longer periods of high detailed data.

I dont know if AFL is slow or fast compared to other softwares, because I am a beginner and AmiBroker is the first charting software I use :) But I find it very flexible, so far I could program everything I wanted there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it sounds like you are doing great with it. Good job! Funnily enough that was exactly the improvement that I made to DBtina's code for PVP. Getting stuff out of loops (or eliminating them altogether) is one of the arts of efficient code. The code I have for VWAP SD and PVP does not have a single loop in it (except to initialise arrays to zero on bar 0).

 

I am now pretty certain that this can be done in a non-iterative manner its just a bit beyond me from the maths/stats end of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have made some progress by completely changing my variance algorithm and basing the 3rd central moment stuff on that. Ondrej could you post the odd chart with the whole days action squashed up? I guess really I am going to have to do a long hand algorithm to test against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this post of mine

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/6/trading-with-market-statistics-xi-hup-2735-7.html#post43133

there is the Skew Line displayed for ES 9:30 - 16:15 in the first two of the three attachments. Filenames show dates.

If you need more, just give me a symbol, date and times (from to) and I will make a screenshot. The date should be within the last two months.

 

However, I observed the Skew Line a bit more and I recognize that sometimes PVP to VWAP relationship is better for description of the price action. Sure the Skew(3CM) is the real statistical skew, yet one has to think about what the skew is and what it means.

 

Skew is "missing expected data" compared to normal distribution. For the skew(3CM) the base of the distribution is formed with whole price range for the examined period (e.g. daily range). In this range we expect normal distribution and skew tells us the deviation from normal. Yet one has to ask if the chosen examination interval is relevant. I attached a chart for ES from the last Friday (08/01). Apparently the opening price at 9:30 was quickly rejected and the market never returned to that area again. This action created missing volme in the top of the daily range and thus a skewed distribution. Notice the thin light blue line (the Skew Line = VWAP + Skew(3CM) * SD) wrapped around the 1st SD for the whole day. Looking back one can recognize that setting the start of the examined interval after the opening price rejection would provide a better insight.

 

On the other hand you can notice that the PVP to VWAP relationship described the real situation much better. Thats because skew(PVP) is not so dependent on the daily range, it smooths low volume excesses. It is only as sensitive to daily range as VWAP is.

 

So each Skew tells you a bit different kind of information.

 

EDIT: Also notice the thick violet line showing the daily range middle. Range middle is mostly a good approximation of the skew line.

ES080801.thumb.jpg.7fd0446836e67be17f34eeb904051f43.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks,

 

I do think the PVP presents some problems also, I'll discuss them later. I am really pleased with the new algorithm as it does not seem prone to numerical instability and overflow errors even when cumulating ^3's. Having said that the skew calculation looks like it needs a tweak compared to yours. I enclose my chart for the same day. I'm really not quite sure what needs doing to be honest.

 

Edit: Didn't Pearson suggest 3*(mean-median)/SD? I wonder if VWAP + 3(mean-median) might be useful?

Vwap7.thumb.png.2f031236ab822070049874c4203ee63b.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your Skew Line is the blue one you have it wrong. I will recap the procedure.

 

Asume you have an i-loop going through all bars since the start of the examination period.

 

For each i you need to do the following:

 

1. You need to determine Volume per price (the volume distribution function). Lets say you will have an array VD, where VD[j] will be volume per j-th price. This VD array will change for every bar (every i).

 

2. You need to go through this array in a j-loop and calculate the following:

 

a) Probability of j-th price: Prob[j] = VD[j] / TotalVolume. TotalVolume is the cumulative volume since the start of the examination period.

 

b) You need to calculate the 3rd central moment for every bar (every i). You again need to do it in a j-loop.

CM3 = sum( (Price[j] - VWAP)^3 ). The sum goes through all j's.

 

c) You calculate the Skew = CM3 / SD^3. This you dont have to do in a j-loop.

 

The j-loops dont have to be separate, you can do everything in two. I use three j-loops for every i. In the first one I determine the VD. I do this in a separate loop because I dont go through all j's but only through those representing the actual bar. To VD array I add volume cumulatively from the start of the examination, so I dont need to recalculate it whole every bar, I need only to add the current bar volume to it.

The second loop I use for VWAP calculation and in this one I need to go through all prices.

The third j-loop I use for Prob and CM3 calculation and in this one I need to go through all prices. For this calculation I must know VWAP, so I cannot integrate the first and second loop. But if your software calculates VWAP for you and you dont need to calculate VWAP yourself, you can use only 2 loops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chart for today until present time.

 

EDIT: Btw it was an awful creepy movement today before FOMC, I am glad that after 2hrs of wtching this I decided not to trade at all today.

ES080805.thumb.jpg.59332eb339063ad2184b2cbca1506898.jpg

Edited by Head2k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your continued dialogue! Yeah its wrong :( It is a continuous algorithm though so it doesn't use loops at all. It is based on an algorithm by West the weighted incremental algorithm here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithms_for_calculating_variance. I think its real close now but something is a wee bit out. It will run on months of ES tick data though! Its a pretty neat and not too difficult to understand. I think the logic is pretty good as everything is OK except the skew. My hunch is that its the last bit where I divide (n-1) * sumweights. Not sure why though :(

 

n = 0

foreach x in the data:

if n=0 then

n = 1

mean = x

S = 0

C=0

sumweight = weight

else

n = n + 1

temp = weight + sumweight

S = S + sumweight*weight*(x-mean)^2 / temp // sum of weighted ^2's

C = C + sumweight*weight*(x-mean)^3 / temp // sum of weighted ^3's

mean = mean + (x-mean)*weight / temp

sumweight = temp

end if

end for

 

Variance = S * n / ((n-1) * sumweight) // if n = 1, omit n/(n-1)

SD = Sqrt(Variance)

Skew = C * n/((n-1) * sumweight) / cube (SD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a programmer. To programe in AmiBroker I needed to read a manual first. So I am afraid understaning your code would cost me too much effort. Anyway, if C is the sum of weighted ^3's, why don't you calculate the skew just as Skew = C / cube(SD) ?

Maybe I missed something...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well another day another algorithm this one based on Terriberry's paper 'Computing Higher Order Moments Online". This one is realy neat but I don't fully understand how to weight it properly.

 

I wonder if you would mind posting todays ES Ondrej? This is what I have but I know (well am pretty sure) the 3CM isn't weighted correctly. Its the magenta line. At least its the right shape now (I think).

 

Cheers,

Nick.

Vwap10.thumb.png.526c6bc9b35ac33991793c36cc85743c.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so far away from what I have.

 

As a side note, this discussion merely belongs to the Skew thread, not this one. I posted my first post here as a reaction on a post when the 3rd central moment was first mentioned. But now we spent several pages discussing skew in a HUP thread... Maybe some moderator could move it, if it is not too difficult?

ES080806.thumb.jpg.8f40f206b6883382a10281664b410f0f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Head2k said:
Not so far away from what I have.

 

As a side note, this discussion merely belongs to the Skew thread, not this one. I posted my first post here as a reaction on a post when the 3rd central moment was first mentioned. But now we spent several pages discussing skew in a HUP thread... Maybe some moderator could move it, if it is not too difficult?

 

Yes I was thinking the same thing if a mod wouldn't mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jerry,

Thanks for the great threads!

 

I was thinking about two things you mentioned in the treads:

1. Risk tolerance vs. Stop-Loss: If I am using risk-tolerance of 2% of account of 100K (i.e. my risk tolerance is 2K) and I am trading a specific market (e.g. YM), then actually the risk tolerance can be translated to 2K/5 = 400 points for every trade.

Do you enter a trade with default SL of 400 points away?

 

2. After examining the VWAP/PVP/SDs and their relationship you decide to enter a trade Long. Your risk tolerance is still far away, but the market conditions changed (e.g. vwap and price are now below PVP) - would you exit the trade? Stay in the game till your risk-tolerance is hit?

 

Thanks,

 

moon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  moon said:
Hi Jerry,

Thanks for the great threads!

 

I was thinking about two things you mentioned in the treads:

1. Risk tolerance vs. Stop-Loss: If I am using risk-tolerance of 2% of account of 100K (i.e. my risk tolerance is 2K) and I am trading a specific market (e.g. YM), then actually the risk tolerance can be translated to 2K/5 = 400 points for every trade.

Do you enter a trade with default SL of 400 points away?

 

2. After examining the VWAP/PVP/SDs and their relationship you decide to enter a trade Long. Your risk tolerance is still far away, but the market conditions changed (e.g. vwap and price are now below PVP) - would you exit the trade? Stay in the game till your risk-tolerance is hit?

 

Thanks,

 

moon.

 

Moon, your calculation is correct for YM. This does not mean that you simply enter a trade without managing it. If, as you point out the price action is such that the trade no longer makes sense to you, then you simply exit it or reverse it. The point about using risk tolerance, is that you are not locked in to a course of action which takes you out of the market too early because a stop was hit. Rather, it gives you the opportunity to adjust the trade by either adding size to it or reversing it without the fear that a pre-set stoploss creates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jerry

Thanks a lot for your answer.

 

Main reason for my previous question comes from what you wrote few pages back at this thread (as an answer to Trader333)

 

“Also think about what you would have done if the trade at the VWAP had not gone your way. Would you have exited the trade at the PVP or done something else?”

 

Trader333 answered:

I would have exited at either the PVP line or 1st Standard Deviation away from entry whichever was nearer at the time.

 

And you wrote:

That is what most traders would do and in my opinion leads to a slow bleed of your capital

 

By this answer I assume you would have stayed in the trade although market conditions changed. (?)

Can you please advise what would you have done?

 

Thanks!

 

moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.