Down goes the Dow

“An equivalent question for you might be to look at what happened between March 23rd and June 8th. We went from 2237 to 3232, a 44.5% increase over 54 trading days. That's sharper than any previous rebound in the record (if we look at 1950 to 2017); previous biggest over 54 trading days was 35%. Unless I've done the math wrong, which is possible...“

I would reply that it had zero to do with any fundamental financial reason. It is speculation that spending $Trillions in a somewhat disorganized way can have a positive effect on one of the greatest social and financial events of our lifetime. A speculative frenzy that increases fragility.

the idiot wrote:

And I realize I'm conflating terminology also, which likely isn't helpful. A probability distribution, say the normal distribution, can also be a mathematical construct (rather than reality), rigorously defined, or it can represent the observed distribution of observations (which is the sense I was using), which is not a mathematical construct, but is rather a look at reality (subject to uncertainties). So we can attempt to fit the distribution of observations with a probability distribution. Apologies if terminology is getting in the way of concepts. I prefer not to write with academic precision outside academia, and this too may explain part of our communications disconnect. I'm trying to convey concepts with lay language.

How about you just describe the model you have and the methodology and we'll go from there?

agip wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

You totally forget how you felt two months ago. The market needed $Trillions to get here and you think it is OK.

By the way, Stephen Roach was positive on China before you were in the business.

I did not forget how I felt - I still feel that. I'm very bearish. But I don't trust my ability to predict market swings so I am still in the market, albeit less so.

And a whole heck of a lot of investors were quite bullish on something even before I was born. Doesn't mean I should listen to them after say their 20th consecutive bearish year.

Looks like we're in for a real number today. Also an interesting article in WSJ about gold. The amount of gold in vaults within 150 miles of NYC has tripled just in the past 3 months.

Oh, snap! wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

Why don't you let them decide how their time is best spent? If you want to do those things, likewise, you should do them!

Oh, snap!

Because I have an opinion. My opinion is their time would be better spent doing something that results in real change rather than faux symbolism. That is why decades later we have gone backwards rather than forwards and has little to do with the police.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:I would reply that it had zero to do with any fundamental financial reason. It is speculation that spending $Trillions in a somewhat disorganized way can have a positive effect on one of the greatest social and financial events of our lifetime. A speculative frenzy that increases fragility.

I don't disagree with you Igy.

Racket wrote:How about you just describe the model you have ...

I've said nothing about a "model." I've presented some data in various ways, and some naive interpretations that have been made from the most basic statistical analysis. I have made no attempt to model anything, nor ever hinted that I was.

I feel you haven't read anything I've written, at least not carefully, but have somehow formed impressions about what I've been trying to say. And that's OK.

“Igy, I sense others, like me, get irritated when you bring up irrelevant past events like this. The markets have been lower than today on almost 100% of all preceding days; March 23rd isn't particularly different than any of those when viewed through the lens of what happened today and what will happen in the future, except to show that wild swings are possible (and will happen again).”

Good thing you have me to balance wildly speculative commentary. Consider me the good angel, telling what some don’t want to hear. It is not surprising you and others get irritated. :-)

Ghost of Igloi wrote:Good thing you have me to balance wildly speculative commentary.

I'm not sure I remember reading much of that. Most of the speculative commentary is, I think, your bearish input. If we were to count up the speculative posts, that is, I think yours would outnumber the rest. Maybe I'm wrong...

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Oh, snap! wrote:

Oh, snap!

Because I have an opinion. My opinion is their time would be better spent doing something that results in real change rather than faux symbolism. That is why decades later we have gone backwards rather than forwards and has little to do with the police.

Protesting is at the heart of American democracy. This “faux symbolism” has led to many positive changes throughout the country’s history and is apparently doing so again. It has, and continues to, move the country forward. Any backwards movements that you observe have more to do with the fool in the WH that you voted for than anything else.

Small caps down 9% since Monday. A break in the market fever perhaps, but testing of market lows requires a hit to mega caps. I believe that will come between now and the election.

Uncle Sam wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Because I have an opinion. My opinion is their time would be better spent doing something that results in real change rather than faux symbolism. That is why decades later we have gone backwards rather than forwards and has little to do with the police.

Protesting is at the heart of American democracy. This “faux symbolism” has led to many positive changes throughout the country’s history and is apparently doing so again. It has, and continues to, move the country forward. Any backwards movements that you observe have more to do with the fool in the WH that you voted for than anything else.

I challenge the premise of many positive changes. There may be a fool in the White House, but Democrats have used minorities as voting tools for decades, throwing money their way as payment. Republicans have used the same as cheap labor and consumers of the product of corporate welfare. Meanwhile most of the representative cities are far less desirable places to live than decades ago, and the minority resident’s quality of life is down on a variety of measures. Really don’t see how marching in the streets changes any of this, in fact it just promotes more of the same.

the idiot wrote:

Racket wrote:How about you just describe the model you have ...

I've said nothing about a "model." I've presented some data in various ways, and some naive interpretations that have been made from the most basic statistical analysis.

Yeah, those are usually called models but what do I know right?

Anyways, it's not really clear what you're saying. PDFs aren't the same as "probability distributions," presentation or description of data. I don't really know what you have going on, but there are ways to model stock price movement for various scenarios that would induce varying degrees of drift and volatility. It's not unlike signal processing in many ways.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Uncle Sam wrote:

Protesting is at the heart of American democracy. This “faux symbolism” has led to many positive changes throughout the country’s history and is apparently doing so again. It has, and continues to, move the country forward. Any backwards movements that you observe have more to do with the fool in the WH that you voted for than anything else.

I challenge the premise of many positive changes.

OK boomer

Racket wrote:... what do I know right? ... Anyways, it's not really clear what you're saying. ... I don't really know what you have going on, ...

I'm quite sure I can't help you, sorry.

Racket wrote:... there are ways to model stock price movement for various scenarios that would induce varying degrees of drift and volatility. It's not unlike signal processing in many ways.

You keep teasing us with promises... "put up or shut up," they say. I hear a lot of noise, but see no accompanying action.

SP500 crashing down to 3100, 1500, here we come! :-)

Racket wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

I challenge the premise of many positive changes.

OK boomer

What I find interesting is many here criticize inequities in the economy, but cheer a market that creates more of the same. You want it both ways. Hate an administration that pumps up the speculation, love the Fed that does the same. As long as its good for your pocket book is really all you care about. Somewhat amoral don’t you think?

the idiot wrote:

SP500 crashing down to 3100, 1500, here we come! :-)

Are you having a bad day? :-)

Ghost of Igloi wrote:Are you having a bad day? :-)

No not so much. Just making idle banter. I think the day will finish in the black. And you can quote me on that. :-)