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.

jonbig04

Jonbig04's Log

Recommended Posts

Opinions Needed!

 

So here's the deal. I'm going to start scaling. I know, I've talked so much smack about scaling here and elsewhere, BUT I have good reasons. Also, it's my opinion that scaling, all in/out, trailing etc are all just the fine tuning of a strategy. I don't think they make or break a good strategy, but that's my opinion.

 

First off, in my opinion and in my trading, all in/out has been more profitable. That's why I've done it for so long. Obviously, it's tough psychologically to see those big winners come back to BE and to have an equity curve that looks like the results of a polygraph test, but to me that was appealing. I wanted to prove to myself that I had the mental fortitude and discipline to follow a plan that I knew was more profitable, no matter how much it hurt. I feel like I have done that.

 

Now that I'm starting to increase size I realize that peace of mind is worth something, and if I have to sacrifice SOME profit for it, then that's ok. Let's face it, when your goal is 20ES a month and you see a +11 go to BE, it's no fun. But I am hoping that my scaling will be just as, if not more profitable than my all in/out. Here's how:

 

I'm not sure if I'm going to be scaling out in 1/3rds or 1/4ths or what yet, but just for explanations sake, let's call it thirds. What I do now is basically move my stop to BE after +5 or so (when ever price reaches an intraday s/r level that may cause it to come back on me) and hold on for a 9-12ES target.

 

What happens is that I move to BE, get taken out BE (where as if I kept my initial stop, the trade would have survived) before price proceeds to my target. Seems to happen all the damn time actually. So I've decided that if I'm going to move to BE, I'm going to have to take some profit off at the same time. There's just no way that BE will ever pay for itself when it's costing me a full target, especially a 1:7 R/R target, unless I book some profit when I move the stop.

 

I will take a 1/3rd or 1/4th or whatever off around +4 to +6 depending on the intraday S/R, and move my stop to BE (or close to BE) on the rest. That will give me around 1:3 R/R on that scale. The next scaling area will be my original target around 9-10ES, or around 1:6 R/R. Then I will have another new target around +15ES or so, a real runner. Depending on the trade (whether I'm with the anchor trend etc) this runner could be really far off, maybe even around 20ES. Once again, it will depend on the charts.

 

With that plan I'm really hoping to net more than all in/out. I could backtest, but I HATE backtesting and the results never seem to mean squat for me anyway.

 

Anyway, tell me what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Given the original stop is protected by PA, and possibly by some important level.

Wouldnt you be better off in the long run taking the profit on the 1/3 and leaving original stop and targets in place?

 

Regardless if the stop is moved or not, i guess with scaling win-% goes up and average RR down. Overall maybe a little reduced expectancy. But maybe give a smoother equity curve and allow for bigger bets and maybe calmer trading:)

Edited by nikke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thoughts - I am having the same process I am running through myself. I have to differentiate between scalling in and scaling out.

 

Conclusion - same as you - there is no right or wrong answer but a series of trade offs between monetary PandL and mental ability not to deviate from the strategy - If you find that you make less money scaling in and out, but its mentally easier, then go with that.

 

The biggest issue I am personally finding mentally challenging is reentry after scaling out.

eg; sell 3, TakeProfit on 1, TP on 1, = net short 1, then sell 3 more as a new short, TP on 1, TP on 1 = net short 2.

 

I say this as I keep asking myself, why am I taking profits, when I am willing to short again? It might feel good, but also can cause me stuff up what I am trying to achieve. (again a trade off)

As someone pointed out to me - if you like the trade and its going your way, trade more, dont take the profits off. (this is tough to do, its possibly not really suitable to day trading in which you should take profits as you are looking for lots of small opportunities.)

Edited by DugDug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  nikke said:
Given the original stop is protected by PA, and possibly by some important level.

Wouldnt you be better off in the long run taking the profit on the 1/3 and leaving original stop and targets in place?

This. If you're at the place where you couldn't bear to have price retrace back to your entry, you need to pull some out, AND there's no logical place to move your stop up to, then might as well pull some out to make it a profitable trade, and then leave your original stop.

 

A couple additions. First, realize that in this situation, you're taking away from a winning trade (where the s/r seemed to work in your favor), while still keeping a full size on your losing trades (when it stops you out immediately). Second, usually, by the time it gets painful enough to let it retrace back at you, there's usually a spot you can move the stop to further up (such as outside a new swing). This gives you a profitable trade, and leaves everything in.

 

That specifically assumes you're taking cars off at a set tick target. Consider making your scaleouts in logical places (a smaller range extreme, potential climax, trendline break, etc). At least then, there's a price action reason to exit, verses just taking some out because it's +4-6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  nikke said:
Hi,

 

Given the original stop is protected by PA, and possibly by some important level.

Wouldnt you be better off in the long run taking the profit on the 1/3 and leaving original stop and targets in place?

 

Regardless if the stop is moved or not, i guess with scaling win-% goes up and average RR down. Overall maybe a little reduced expectancy. But maybe give a smoother equity curve and allow for bigger bets and maybe calmer trading:)

 

Yea I can see how you could make that argument. I'm not sure if you could conclusively say I would be better off in the long run, it's tough to tell.

 

  DugDug said:
thoughts - I am having the same process I am running through myself. I have to differentiate between scalling in and scaling out.

 

Conclusion - same as you - there is no right or wrong answer but a series of trade offs between monetary PandL and mental ability not to deviate from the strategy - If you find that you make less money scaling in and out, but its mentally easier, then go with that.

 

The biggest issue I am personally finding mentally challenging is reentry after scaling out.

eg; sell 3, TakeProfit on 1, TP on 1, = net short 1, then sell 3 more as a new short, TP on 1, TP on 1 = net short 2.

 

I say this as I keep asking myself, why am I taking profits, when I am willing to short again? It might feel good, but also can cause me stuff up what I am trying to achieve. (again a trade off)

As someone pointed out to me - if you like the trade and its going your way, trade more, dont take the profits off. (this is tough to do, its possibly not really suitable to day trading in which you should take profits as you are looking for lots of small opportunities.)

 

 

Scaling in make a lot of sense to me, it's just not something I want to tackle in my trading just yet. One of my main reasons for allin/out was that I could focus on the trade itself and leave the management for another day. Like I mentioned before, IMO whether you scale in or out or not shouldn't make or break you're trading, but more of a fine tuning kinda thing.

 

  atto said:
This. If you're at the place where you couldn't bear to have price retrace back to your entry, you need to pull some out, AND there's no logical place to move your stop up to, then might as well pull some out to make it a profitable trade, and then leave your original stop.

 

A couple additions. First, realize that in this situation, you're taking away from a winning trade (where the s/r seemed to work in your favor), while still keeping a full size on your losing trades (when it stops you out immediately). Second, usually, by the time it gets painful enough to let it retrace back at you, there's usually a spot you can move the stop to further up (such as outside a new swing). This gives you a profitable trade, and leaves everything in.

 

That specifically assumes you're taking cars off at a set tick target. Consider making your scaleouts in logical places (a smaller range extreme, potential climax, trendline break, etc). At least then, there's a price action reason to exit, verses just taking some out because it's +4-6.

 

That's of course the worst thing about scaling, your stops are still full size. But then you have to take into account all the times you could have scaled and didn't. I think that usually not scaling is more profitable, all things being equal, but I don't think it's a massive difference. However, in this case all things wouldn't be equal. Even though I'm taking profit where I usually wouldn't, I'm also letting the same amount run where I usually wouldn't. That alone should take care of the expectancy.

 

Instead of being all out at +10, it will ideally be something like +5, +10, +15-which of course averages out the same as the +10 all out, only with a smoother curve and less pain and suffering between haha.

 

About the arbitrary number, like I said, they will be based on intraday s/r, or better s/r if I can get it. For example, the first scale would be at the nearest swing from me, the next scale would probably be a major R point (as that place will be the same as my all out target is now) the next place will be some other swing point I can find. I just used the number for explanations sake. Like that last trade I was in I moved my stop to .75 above the entry, which to me is BE. If I can risk only a few ticks and stay above a swing, why not do it? So the numbers all all approximates.

 

The other thing is that I very rarely take a full stop. It's almost always BE. This month (which is shaping up to be one of my worst months ever ha) I've only had 1 full stop and it was to the tick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This subject can be debated forever and its going to be a different answer for different trading methods. The only way to really know which is better and how it is best to manage is to test it out on your past trade data. In every auto system (a couple dozen systems) I have ever tested out, scaling out definitely smooths the curve and lowers RoR. In my discretionary trading, this is no different. Do the work, then you will know for certain.

 

With kind regards,

MK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worst month ever, finishing at -6.5ES. The bulk of that came from that crude breakdown that I kept screwing up and shoulda taken sim until I knew what I was doing. Stupid decision.

 

I've already gone through the whole "I'm a piece of crap trader. I know nothing. I'm a failure" stage, and have moved on to the more productive "what can I do better" stage. I'll post about that later on in the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crude is a beast. I love it and hate it at the same time. Anyway I got knocked out BE on that last short. This AM I took a full stop on a long for -14ticks. But then the breakout setup happened again. Hmmm it would be great to take it live I thought. But I maintained discipline and took the trade in sim. The breakout happened nicely and I was able to get a pretty good exit for +105. Figures.

 

I used a stop market order though and I'm wondering how realistic my fill was. I know experience that 10 ticks slippage is possible, so it does make me wonder.

 

20100301-mn4cfe4iikkbbki1xirqhes43r.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  jonbig04 said:
Crude is a beast. I love it and hate it at the same time.

 

The more time I spend with crude the harder it is for me to trade other futures. That breakdown gave a number of big indications it was going to occur...volume, S/R, trendline break, "123". I unfortunately, quit my SIM trading for the day before it occured so I couldn't take it. Nice trade Jon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Dinerotrader said:
The more time I spend with crude the harder it is for me to trade other futures. That breakdown gave a number of big indications it was going to occur...volume, S/R, trendline break, "123". I unfortunately, quit my SIM trading for the day before it occured so I couldn't take it. Nice trade Jon.

 

Haha I feel you. Trading crude and then going back to ES is like switching from a Michael Bay movie to a Jane Austin novel.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really starting to dig CL. Mainly because I feel like my biggest weakness is low number of times I can take my setups. CL can cure that lol. I'm not focusing on 6E so much because I'm so anxious to get a foot hold on CL. I'm thinking my setups happen 2 or 3 times as often on CL as ES. It's great! But I want to make sure I get used to it before I jump in for real.

 

20100303-q6246ear8ywm8mmxxh7riu1315.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

 

The first is a long from last night. I had the order placed, but decided to cancel it because the swing was only 10 ticks. During the day I want to play swings that are larger when entering to avoid getting whipped around. But I took a note on the chart because I think during those hours, with the volatility less, I can take swings that are a little smaller. That suspicion is reinforced now, and I likely won't miss one like this again. This trade is the first green box on the chart above. Here's a zoomed in view.

 

20100303-js6yg6aghwjk69bi27rm8n2m7r.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

 

It's not a coulda-shoulda-woulda because at the time I wasn't taking swings that small no matter what time of day. I was following my rules.

 

The second green box represents where I was trying to get long, but we never have a significant enough pull back swing for me to trade. Bugs me too b/c we had a massive vol spike and I really wanted in. I wanted to see it pull back to at least 80.60. Oh well though. Still a nice flip though.

 

20100303-x3j9q3fuxs5ssn5ax1yutjnhcr.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick note:

 

I a now adding double top/bottom w/ hump retests to my plan. I used to trade them all the time, but took them out so I could focus on the other setups. This has happened 2 times on es in the last month or so. Both times I didn't take them for no other reason than the fact that they weren't a part of my current plan. They are too easy and reliable not to take advantage of. Today I even had the short in, but canceled it because technically it would be a lapse in discipline if I did something that wasn't in the plan. That's a psychological Rubicon that I don't want to cross.

 

This setup doesn't happen a lot, so this isn't a big change. I'm sure every dang trader caught this except for me. But no more!

 

20100304-8ya169suxbe5ptek2c8sgska2h.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon - double tops and bottoms - I wrote in my notes some while back that I thought double tops and bottoms were just a hindsighted version of an ABC (or 123). Its only on looking back do you realise they actually formed a double top or bottom.

Do you think there are any particular characteristics that separate a DT or DB from an ABC that makes them more or less tradeable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  DugDug said:
Jon - double tops and bottoms - I wrote in my notes some while back that I thought double tops and bottoms were just a hindsighted version of an ABC (or 123). Its only on looking back do you realise they actually formed a double top or bottom.

Do you think there are any particular characteristics that separate a DT or DB from an ABC that makes them more or less tradeable?

 

I think, though I may be wrong, that Jon enters on the re-test rather than the break. In other words, rather than trading the break of the "2" point, he waits for the break to occur, and then he enters on a limit order placed near the break point, looking to sell on the re-test. If so, then that makes it very easy to see these opportunities. I sometimes enter the same way if I missed the break up or break down.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Thales

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  DugDug said:
Jon - double tops and bottoms - I wrote in my notes some while back that I thought double tops and bottoms were just a hindsighted version of an ABC (or 123). Its only on looking back do you realise they actually formed a double top or bottom.

Do you think there are any particular characteristics that separate a DT or DB from an ABC that makes them more or less tradeable?

 

 

They pretty much are the same kinda thing, only that in the case of a double top you aren't looking for a LH because the peaks are equal. But same concept really. Double tops as I see them don't happen very often, but I'm picky when defining them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  thalestrader said:
I think, though I may be wrong, that Jon enters on the re-test rather than the break. In other words, rather than trading the break of the "2" point, he waits for the break to occur, and then he enters on a limit order placed near the break point, looking to sell on the re-test. If so, then that makes it very easy to see these opportunities. I sometimes enter the same way if I missed the break up or break down.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Thales

 

For the double top/bottoms that's correct, I wait and enter on the retest of the "hump". For my other trades though I try to get in on the breakdown like you do, but sometimes I miss fill and have to wait for the retest haha.

 

Side not, I actually started using that method of entry for breakouts. Basically (assuming downside BO) I switch to the 5 sec and wait for the first sure of volume (low), then watch as price slowly ticks back upwards. If it's just a probe I'm thinking that price will never come back to that low. If it does come back I'm thinking it will probably break out. I enter just before it gets there and, hopefully, breaks out. If you recall I botched that CL breakout last month. I think I'm starting to get a handle on it now though.

 

Quick note:

 

I a now adding double top/bottom w/ hump retests to my plan. I used to trade them all the time, but took them out so I could focus on the other setups. This has happened 2 times on es in the last month or so. Both times I didn't take them for no other reason than the fact that they weren't a part of my current plan. They are too easy and reliable not to take advantage of. Today I even had the short in, but canceled it because technically it would be a lapse in discipline if I did something that wasn't in the plan. That's a psychological Rubicon that I don't want to cross.

 

This setup doesn't happen a lot, so this isn't a big change. I'm sure every dang trader caught this except for me. But no more!

 

20100304-xjfu114ecimnwe4bm2c94xtu4b.preview.jpgClick for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Dinerotrader said:
Quick question Jon,

Why do you use this weird picture upload thing instead of the forum upload?

 

I use skitch for annotating the charts (it's free) and all I have to do is click "copy to forum" and then paste it right into the body. It's just a lot faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No trades today, but I was up late last night with ES and I made some decisions I was proud of.

 

20100305-fhgr893mmxwh26kg1irfb4wmdq.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

 

As you can see, technically it was within my rules to enter a short there. I didn't because the swing was too small. I learned my lesson from last month and really wanted to see a nice bounce from deeper into the support zone below. Then if THAT broke down I could enter. I got the bounce, but price never came back to break that S and continued upwards. I saved myself a stop. No big deal but I'm happy that I was able to draw some decent conclusions from price and not repeat last month's mistake.

 

I wanted to get in a long on the flip test of 1125.75, but price never pulled back for me :(

 

Looks like there is a short sequence at EOD. I feel kind of weird because I maybe entering this short right when the market opens on Sunday night. But I guess price is price right?

 

20100305-dyi7sh41k7s1dii6qfn15nduju.preview.jpg

Click for full size - Uploaded with plasq's Skitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We reached a major level on the S&P today, even on the daily chart.

 

I'm keeping on eye out for what could be a monster breakout above 1148 (1150 cash index).

 

I bought the HOD and got out for -0.75 when it became clear the BO wasn't happening. I then was able to get a short in and reach PT 1. The rest were stopped out BE when price came back up to retest.

 

I would like to get long down here, but there's been too much chop and my levels are unclear.

 

Once again though, I really think that a BO above 1148 could be monstrous.

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

    • 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/ 
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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