Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

Good Morning

Jester

Thank you for your efforts with FXCM UK.

I am now going to do a SCREENSHOT of your FXCM UK $50,000 US Funds Demo Account. Our GOAL is to teach you how to generate 5% Return on Investment monthly.

You have three months to learn how to fish so that you can fish for yourself for your professional Forex trading career.

Please communicate with me here on this thread all your questions and observations.

LET US DO IT !!!

after 42 days of Forex trading my Net Cash Balance is now $63,397.15 US Dollars starting with $50,000 US Dollars on February 27, 2018.

So... the $13,397.15 in 6 weeks works out to $2200.00 US Dollars a week. 4.5% a week or 22.5% monthly !!! Not bad. Would you like to just earn 5% a month ?

We can teach you with our methods. See you tomorrow.



Benjaminis

https://www.finviz.com/futures.ashx

Comments from Benjaminis: We can see by the above Finviz resource that we have RISK OFF at this moment. Look at the Futures on the Dow 30.

Gold is UP and the US Dollar index is down.

Here is the resource on Forex only.

https://www.finviz.com/forex.ashx

And MOST IMPORTANT as regards to the MONEY FLOW is the Bond Yields.
Have a look and please post your questions. Thank You.


Benjaminis

https://www.finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=BONDS&p=d1

Here is the 5 Minute Chart on the 10 Year US Treasury Bond.

https://www.finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=ZN&p=m5

You can see as the Bond moves up in value which MEANS that MONEY IS FLOWING into the BOND and "OUT OF THE STOCK MARKET" as the 10 Year Yield goes down inverse to the price of the bond.

Good Morning Forex Traders

I will take a break until 8:00 AM New York time and return so please check back in around then. Thank You.


Benjaminis

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/trum...r|breakingnews


FUNDAMENTAL FACT PLEASE READ

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/us-s...r|breakingnews

SNIPPET:
Dow set to drop nearly 300 points after Trump tells Russia to 'get ready' for missiles coming to Syria
Fred Imbert | Alexandra Gibbs


Published 1 Hour Ago Updated 6 Mins Ago

CNBC.com
Stock index futures dropped ahead of the open on Wednesday after President Donald Trump hinted at possible intervention in Syria.
Around 7:20 a.m. ET, Dow Jones industrial average futures fell 251 points, indicating a drop of 276 points at the open. Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 futures also indicated a negative start to Wednesday's session for their respective markets.

Trump said in a tweet: "Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and 'smart!' You shouldn't be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!"

COMMENTS FROM BENJAMINIS: What technical can tell you this ? NONE !!!

I just shorted 100 units of US 30 and 50 units of SPX500. My profit target is 1% a day for each of the 20 Forex trading days in the month.


Benjaminis

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2...c/#more-174180

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ops+to+zero%29

SNIPPET:
Without mentioning either the US or China by name, IMF head (and convicted criminal) Christine Lagarde warned about the dangers of the world being "sucked into a protectionist spiral" that would undermine global growth - the latest sign that the IMF's upcoming global growth projection might be somewhat less enthusiastic than the nearly 4% rate for this year and next forecast by the IMF in January.
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa....11lagarde.JPG


Trending Articles
On The Threshold Of War - Paul Craig Roberts

UPDATE: There is no longer any doubt that the criminally insane government in Washington is driving the world to the…

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/creat.../dslogo_sm.png


While her organization remains optimistic, Lagarde said Wednesday during a speech in Hong Kong ahead of the annual spring meeting of the IMF next week in Washington that the global economy is benefiting from surging investment, recovering trade and "favorable" financial conditions (low or negative interest rates) all of which are encouraging companies and households to spend more money.


The only problem is that as we have shown in recent weeks, this "coordinated recovery" is now over.
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...se%20index.jpg


Worse, growing protectionism could quickly reverse out all of this she said. "Yes, the current global picture is bright. But we can see darker clouds looming," she said.

Parroting an argument that has been made countless times since Trump unveiled his aluminum and steel tariffs, Lagarde said the rise in global trade reduced extreme poverty, reduced the cost of living and created millions of high-paying jobs.

"But that system of rules and shared responsibility is now in danger of being torn apart," she said. "This would be an inexcusable, collective policy failure."

Import restrictions, Lagarde said, hurt everybody - especially the poorest consumers.

"Increasing trade, removing barriers, encouraging this level playing field to which everybody should contribute has to be done collectively," she said. "It can’t be by exceptional measures. It can’t be by unilateral threat."

But instead of the biggest risk being to the overall growth picture, Lagarde said trade barriers risk "undermining confidence", which would in turn hurt investment.
Of course, the latest round of "conciliatory" rhetoric from both Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping would suggest China is considering a concession on auto imports that could placate the US and help stave off an all-out trade war - though it's unclear if this is another bluff.


Lagarde also appeared to take Xi at his word when he "renewed" his promise earlier this week to finally lower barriers for foreign firms to compete in China's banking and insurance sectors (a dangerous prospect for the Communist Party because they wouldn't be able to directly control the foreign firms).

Lagarde hailed his promises as "significant advances that we need to see delivered in the coming months" and "clearly an improvement to a situation that has evolved over time," she said.

"We need to be a little bit sensible about this talk about a trade war," she said. "There are threats and there are counter threats, there is an attempt to open a dialogue and I think we should support that dialogue attempt as much as we can, that is the way to progress the situation, not to let it snowball into something that would then lead to significant consequences."

Well, if the IMF is hanging its hopes for global growth on the promises of the newly crowned Chinese emperor, then good luck.


Meanwhile, in an implicit critique of President Trump's grumbling about the US trade deficit, Lagarde insisted that trade deficits are an "imbalance" driven by "the fact a country spends above its income" - not a sign of some injustice, or the predatory practices of a trading partner. And with global risks intensifying, Lagarde urged her audience to do more to widen the window of economic opportunity in the developed and developing worlds.


"The window of opportunity is open," she said. "Yet there is new urgency because uncertainties have significantly increased - from trade tensions, to rising financial and fiscal risks, to more uncertain geopolitics."


The IMF will release its next quarterly growth forecast on April 17; expect it to be far less optimistic than recent prior editions.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ops+to+zero%29

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...?itok=LY4e264-
by Tyler Durden


Wed, 04/11/2018 - 07:25

30Y treasury yields have tumbled back below 3.00% and US equity futures are down over 1% in the pre-market as overnight warnings of airstrikes have escalated into full-blown threats from President Trump. The Ruble is now down over 11% in the last 3 days...
US equity futures are dumping...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-13-57.jpg



Catching down to Treasury yields once again...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-17-30.jpg

As the 30Y Yield tumbles below 3.00%...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-22-35.jpg

And the Ruble continues its freefall...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-24-13.jpg




Tumbling to its lowest since Nov 2016...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-26-21.jpg


Russia's Peskov says that Russian market volatility is partly emotional, partly speculative and jawbones that the Russian economy has sufficient durability.
And as geopolitical chaos strikes, gold is bid back above $1350...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-29-19.jpg


And oil prices are surging...
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defa...11_4-33-24.jpg

COMMENTS FROM Benjaminis: It is the MONEY FLOW that gives you the EDGE. That is 100% factual.

LOOK AT THE CHARTS !!!

https://www.finviz.com/futures.ashx

FOREX

https://www.finviz.com/forex.ashx

LOOK AT the MONEY FLOW into the US Bonds.

https://www.finviz.com/futures_charts.ashx?t=ZN&p=m5

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2...r/#more-174167

SNIPPET:
Trump Builds Coalition for War Against Syrian Government (But Israel will not participate)


UN Security Council rejects motion to investigate before striking.
Jason Ditz Posted on April 10, 2018

President Trump is in the process of building a new coalition of allies to participate in a multi-nation “strike force” attack on the Syrian government. This talk of coalition action reflects the rapid escalation of plans since US officials embraced Saturday’s allegations of a chemical weapons strike.
https://news.antiwar.com/wp-content/...018/04/378.jpg

French President Emmanuel Macron, Donald Trump, and British PM Theresa May
Officials said as early as Sunday that the claimed Saturday attack would lead to a US military strike, and President Trump indicated this would happen “very soon.” Instead of a one-off strike, as with last April’s tomahawk missile bombardment of Syria, the US seems to be envisioning starting a whole new war over it.

This new US-led war in Syria doubtless suits much of the administration just fine. After all, this time last week US officials were trying to talk President Trump out of ending US military involvement in Syria. Now, they seem to have a pretext for an open-ended conflict.

This does make starting the war something of a scramble, despite officials still presenting themselves as not wholly decided. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has been invited to investigate the allegations, and with no concrete evidence the Saturday attack even took place, such a finding by the watchdog could easily derail the war. That, of course, means US officials are going to want to get it started before the OPCW has a chance to do anything.

They won’t have to worry about a direct UN Security Council investigation, however, as the US and their allies rejected a Russian resolution calling for such an inquiry. This was seen as retaliation for Russia rejecting a resolution that would just blame Syria for it without a proper inquiry.

This raises the risk of the US coalition getting into a conflict with Russia. Already, Russia has warned of consequences if the US attacks Syria over the allegation. President Trump has not only indicated Syria will “pay the price,” but that Russia is going to have to pay as well. If that happens, the war quickly expands from regional to global.

French President Emmanuel Macron has spoken out early and often about intervention in Syria, and has pointed to his nation, along with Britain, being committed to a “strong and joint response” with the US.

Macron, however, suggested he does “not want an escalation,” but rather that the strikes should be against Syrian chemical facilities. That’s always been considered unwise, even assuming Syria had any extent chemical facilities, as it risks leaking chemicals across the region.

But Syria disarmed their chemical program before the war really began, and dismantled all of those sites. This means there aren’t really operating facilities to be bombed in the first place. And despite Macron’s protests, escalation seems to be part of the point for many involved.

The US, France, and Britain will doubtless lead this new coalition, with Saudi Arabia expected to be drawn into the conflict. Turkey is potentially to be invited too, though Turkey’s recent military acrimony toward its NATO allies may make that complicated.

Israel, who is always attacking Syria at any rate, will likely not join such a coalition formally. They have, however, provided all indications that they will escalate their already frequent attacks. In fact, Israel launched their first salvo Sunday night.

https://news.goldcore.com/ie/gold-bl..._hsmi=62014899

It does not matter whether 10 Rod Rosensteins at the Department of Justice "signed off" on the sweeping FBI raids against President Trump's personal attorney; the protections of the Fourth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution are being taken away from the American President. The goal is to remove the President from office; and the immediate aim, and extreme danger, is war with Syria and Russia.


The United States Constitution is being set aside in order to seize foreign policy, and the Oval Office itself, from President Trump, and put the United States back on the "permanent war,"/"regime-change war" status of Bush and Obama. The American voters are being left to watch helplessly — unless they act now, in large numbers.


The entire escalation of this "legal assassination" of President Trump is the work of Special Counsel, and corrupt former FBI Director, Robert Mueller. Mueller has now gone far, far beyond his mandated investigation of the 2016 election, because that "Russiagate" investigation failed. His aim now is to charge the President with anything, to bring him down. Mueller merely referred the task of executing the raids against Trump attorney Michael Cohen, to the New York U.S. Attorney. That U.S. Attorney, a Trump appointee, has already been forced to recuse himself from the case — prosecution of Cohen is turned back over to Mueller, who will try to force the President's personal attorney of 25 years to turn against him.


If Donald Trump were a Saudi Prince, Robert Mueller would be protecting him. If he were CEO of Wells Fargo bank, Mueller would be negotiating a non-prosecution agreement with him. But he is President of the United States, and opposes the constant war policies of British geopoliticians.

The new attack on the President and Constitution followed his attempt, 10 days ago, to order the National Security Council and Joint Chiefs of Staff to withdraw the United States military from Syria. Mueller's attack is linked directly to the hoax of a chemical weapons attack in Syria, by the British-run "White Helmets" so-called first responders organization, who collaborate with the jihadi terrorists in Syria.


In March 2017 when President Trump said "regime change in Syria is not our mission," the staged chemical weapons attack on children in the city of Khan Sheikhoun occurred to change his mind, and the British Defense Secretary convinced Defense Secretary James Mattis to attack Syria with cruise missiles. Mattis admitted recently there was no evidence. Now when President Trump says, "We're leaving Syria, soon," the White Helmets stage another chemical attack, and Britain and France demand war on Syria.


Anyone can see this could lead — for no purpose — to a new world war, which will be unsurvivable.

This is the war policy which is the aim for which the "legal assassin" Mueller has been deployed against the President and the Constitution. Congressional leaders like Senators Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell have reacted by defending Mueller's actions. Any Member of Congress who does this should be thrown out.


The LaRouche Political Action Committee is mobilizing to stop Mueller, and the war drive, with an urgent national broadside. It says, "In 2013, when Obama threatened war with Russia over Syria, the American people intervened, raised the roof of Congress, and stopped it. That is what is needed now.... Stop the drive to war and shut down Robert Mueller now."


One of those American people who intervened loudly in 2013 to stop war with Russia over Syria, was Donald J. Trump.

https://dollarcollapse.com/precious-...istance-again/

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...ops+to+zero%29

https://www.themaven.net/mishtalk/ec...E-uyLh5P4ae6Q/

Gold's Brick Wall
https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...E0OZRTSrsDksUw
https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...%3Fversion%3D0
byMike Mish Shedlock



For the past four years, every time gold hit the 1350-1370 level or so, it is turned down sharply.


Yesterday, gold surged nearly $24 intraday. John Rubino at Dollar Collapse noted Gold Tests Resistance - Again, posting a similar chart.
A monthly gold chart provides much needed context.


Gold Monthly
https://imageproxy.themaven.net/http...5k64Tvu-3kB-Cg
What Have You Done For Me Lately?
As an asset class that has performed quite well since 2000, it's interesting that gold is so despised.


The popular games at the moment are "momo", TINA, and passive index investing. In reality, it's all the same game. Eight stocks in the nasdaq make up 48% of the index.


If you are in the Nasdaq index and think you are not hugely involved with high-price momo-darlings, you are mistaken. The S&P 500 has a 41% technology weighting.
TINA says There Is No Alternative, not even gold.


The Herd
The Herd is right until it's massively wrong, just as happened in 2000 and 2007.


Technically Speaking
Technically speaking the longer gold is bottled up beneath this resistance, the faster the move once it does break out.


Fundamentally Speaking
Passive investment, TINA, and MOMO strategies will get crushed (timeline unknown), the late-stage economy will hit recession, and the Fed will respond with cuts.


It's a mistake to assume stocks will respond the same way next time as they did the last three times the Fed pulled a QE rabbit out of its hat.


It's not too hard to envision a scenario in which gold is the beneficiary the next time central banks attempt to inflate. And that is what I believe will happen.


Mike "Mish" Shedlock

https://constitution.solari.com/the-...-organization/

I. Introduction
The Federal Reserve is one of the most influential organizations in the U.S. when it comes to economic policy. It is also one of the least well understood elements of the government–especially in that it is not really truly a government organization. Its top level officials are a government agency of the Executive branch. However the Federal Reserve, and especially its 12 Federal Reserve District Banks, occupy a strange twilight zone between government agency and private banking organization.


This status has come up in court cases, where the district banks of the Federal Reserve have argued successfully that that they are not a government agency–instead being classified as “federally created instrumentalities.” (Scott v. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, No. 04-2357 (8th Circ. Ct of App, 2005)(available at http://media.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/04/042357P.pdf)). A cynical person might say that they are part of the Federal government where advantageous and separate when it is not. However, it is enough to say that the Federal Reserve has an complex, hybrid structure to it.


The Federal Reserve itself has quite a bit of involvement in creating the monetary policy of the U.S. The most commonly discussed ways it influences the economy include acting as a last resort lender to member banks, regulating private banking, and–perhaps above all–setting the discount rate on loans to solve temporary liquidity issues for private banks across the county.


As the bank of the U.S. Federal Government, there is obviously great concern and interest in the financial goings on of the Federal Reserve. This has led to multiple attempts to audit the Federal Reserve–usually with Congress turning to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The GAO is a Congressional agency which investigates federal spending. As we’ve discussed in previous articles, these duties are accomplished with varying levels of success by topic. ( see The U.S. Statutes Creating Modern Constitutional Financial Management and Reporting Requirements and the Government’s Failure to Follow Them, available at https://constitution.solari.com/the-...o-follow-them/)

Congress has requested studies as to the lengths to which the GAO can investigate the financial goings on of the Federal Reserve. (see eg. Federal Reserve System Audits: Restrictions of GAO’s Access, available at https://www.gao.gov/products/T-GGD-94-44). In 1978, the Federal Banking Agency Audit Act placed the Federal Reserve under the audit authority of the GAO–reversing the 1933 Banking Act provisions that originally removed this authority. (31 USCA §714, available at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/714.html).. Since this change, there have been dozens of GAO audits of the Federal Reserve. These audits have led to suggestions from the GAO on everything from check clearing policies to larger regulatory reforms. (see id.) This being said, there are some notable exceptions to the areas the GAO can look into, including:
“
(1) transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization; (2) deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, open market operations;(3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or (4) a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board of Governors and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to items.” (id.)
These are substantial exemptions. In order to understand just how substantial, it’s necessary to more fully understand the structure and role of the Federal Reserve. It’s worth noting that there have been multiple attempts in Congress to implement a more thorough audit nearly every year–including last year. (see eg. H.R. 24, Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2017, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...7%22%5D%7D&r=4).

These attempts have never succeeded. In past articles, we have discussed the problematic lack of transparency in government spending–especially in certain executive agencies. The Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development have over $21T unaccounted for–approximately the same amount as our current national debt. (see eg. The Missing Money, available at http://missingmoney.solari.com). There is an obvious need for greater financial transparency and regulatory compliance in the government, and the Federal Reserve handles the government’s accounts, funds, security transactions, and implements monetary policy (mainly through the New York Federal Reserve Bank, discussed below).


In order to understand the role and issues of the Federal Reserve System, this series intends to take a look at the inner workings and functions of the Federal Reserve. To do a true deep dive on this issue can and has taken volumes to properly explore every avenue. Our goal with this series is to instead give a strong overview of the Federal Reserve, its functions, and its issues. Later articles will discuss the Federal Reserve Act in more depth (as well as the twilight-zone legal classification of a “federally created instrumentality”), the lending practices of the Federal Reserve, and some of the problems inherent to the most powerful banking organization in the U.S. and potentially the world.

However, in order to give the best understanding of the Federal Reserve itself, we will start by looking at the history and structure of the Federal Reserve–the what and why of the United States’ most powerful bank.

II. History and Creation of the Federal Reserve
The Federal Reserve was first signed into existence by then-President Woodrow Wilson over a century ago on December 23, 1913. (see Federal Reserve Act, Ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251, enacted December 23, 1913, 12 U.S.C. §§ 221 to 522, available at http://legisworks.org/sal/38/stats/S...-38-Pg251a.pdf). The Federal Reserve Act created the Federal Reserve System and a centralized banking system for the U.S. It also granted this newly minted Federal Reserve System, among many other things we will discuss below, the power to issue Federal Reserve Notes. (see id.)


The stated goal of President Wilson and Congress was to promote economic stability through the uniformity and certainty of a central banking system which would promote and handle much of the monetary policy of the U.S. The move was almost without question the most substantial reform in U.S. financial law in the history of the county. (see 1913 Federal Reserve Act, available at https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f...eserve-act.asp)


The enormous financial reform bill came to President Wilson with the support of many Democrats of the time and the respective chairmen of the House and Senate Banking and Currency committees (see id.). However, the law was not prepared to make such a titanic change permanent just yet. The initial 1913 act limited the grant of power to twenty years, requiring renewal in or before 1933. (see The Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. §§ 221 to 522). However, Congress moved to renew the Act and make it permanent well before this deadline. In February of 1927 the Act was amended to perpetuate the Federal Reserve “until dissolved by Act of Congress or until forfeiture of franchise for violation of law.” (see 44 Stat. 1234). This move to make the Federal Reserve System permanent by renewing the Federal Reserve Act was far from a certainty during this time period. History buffs out there will certainly have noticed something about the timing of this renewal–it falls just before the beginning of the Great Depression. (see 1913 Federal Reserve Act, available at https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f...eserve-act.asp).

The Federal Reserve, and most financial institutions of the time, were not particularly popular with the public. As the years progressed, and the Great Depression deepened, this opinion would only get worse. It’s also worth mentioning that the Bureau of Internal Revenue (later the IRS) was formed at the same time as the Federal Reserve in 1913. This came shortly after the 16th Amendment allowed for constitutional federal income tax after 50 years of creating and repealing income tax as a concept. During World War I the income tax spiked substantially–as high as 77%–it only came back down to around 24% by 1929 but continued to rise throughout the Great Depression. (see Brief History of the IRS, available at https://www.irs.gov/about-irs/brief-history-of-irs. This just exacerbated the extremely poor public opinion of financial institutions at the time. It’s very possible that had the renewal come in 1933 as planned there might be no Federal Reserve system today. (see 1913 Federal Reserve Act, available at https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f...eserve-act.asp).


However, even in the throes of the Great Depression, the recently strengthened Federal Reserve saw some changes to its structure and purpose. The Banking Act of 1933 further amended the Federal Reserve Act in a number of ways. (see Pub. L. 73-66 available at https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/scribd...ubliclaw66.pdf). The Banking Act of 1933 created the Federal Open Market Committee (or “FOMC”) — a 12 member committee of top level officials from the Federal Reserve which we will discuss at length later in this article. This created a committee remains one of the most powerful and influential arbiters of financial policy decisions in the U.S. to this day. The Act gave the FOMC power over essentially all open-market operations of the member banks of the Federal Reserve. (see id.). It additionally added a requirement that the FOMC meet at least four times per year. (see Pub. L. 73-66.) Today, they generally meet double that number, about eight times in a year. (see 1913 Federal Reserve Act, available at https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f...eserve-act.asp).


However, as we will discuss in a later article, these meetings are not open to the public, although they do publish edited and redacted meeting minutes and transcripts.

Since the creation of the FOMC, the Federal Reserve Act has seen well over 200 amendments. (see id.) However, it continues to be at the center of U.S. financial policy. As of November 16, 1977, the Federal Reserve Act was amended to provide the FOMC and the Federal Reserve a clear goal: “to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.” (The Federal Reserve Act, Section 2A, available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/about.../section2a.htm). This amendment also required the FOMC Chairman to appear before Congress at semi-annual hearings and report on their current and future steps towards achieving these goals. Congress wanted testimony to make sure the Federal Reserve was operating as intended.

http://traderfeed.blogspot.ca/2018/0...-becoming.html

THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 2018
Preventing Trading Stress From Becoming Trading Distress
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-KD_ouytnx...320/Stress.jpg


All true performance activities bring stress. That is because true performers care about winning. There may be external pressures to win, but for the best, there are always internal pressures. Elite performance demands that we push the envelope and attempt to perform at our best. That demand--that stress--can be a great motivator.

Stress in itself is not a negative. It is an inherent part of any activity in which near-term outcomes truly matter.

Sometimes it is important in life to minimize stress, particularly in areas that aren't central our most important life activities and goals. For example, when I fly for work or vacations, I select the flights that have the best on-time percentage to their destinations. That greatly minimizes the probability of delayed or canceled flights. Margie and I recently found a two-year certificate of deposit with a yield very close to the yield on 10-year Treasuries. For our savings, that's good enough. We don't want to have to be concerned with price movement for that portion of our money.

Reducing sources of stress in more peripheral areas of life helps us stay focused on the most central areas of life.

It is in the central areas that we experience the need to do well and the demands of performance. That is why it can be stressful to be a parent, a trader, or an entrepreneur. Many retired people lose those central areas of life and experience few performance demands. That is not necessarily a blissful life. Happiness--doing fun things--is not enough for many people. We also need fulfillment, and challenge is one important source of fulfillment.

How we handle stress determines whether it will be a motivator or a source of dis-stress.

A great way to turn stress into distress is to make performance activities our only or main source of fulfillment. Then we have much more than PnL on the line. Our entire sense of self can feel jeopardized. Often, it's not the trading that is stressing us out. It's our investing our sense of worth in our trading results. If you can experience yourself as a successful, fulfilled person even when your PnL is not moving higher, you know you are well diversified emotionally. If you can't experience yourself positively during times of drawdown or flat performance, no tweaking of your trading will address that underlying vulnerability.

We can perform well when trading is important to us and when that importance pushes us to continually learn, adapt, and improve. We can perform quite poorly when trading is all-important and outcomes control our sense of self. A great way of reducing trading stress is to improve fulfillment outside of trading.
Further Readings:

Spirituality, Meaning, and Purpose in Trading

TraderFeed Home Page and Index
.Posted by Brett Steenbarger, Ph.D.at 7:15 AM

http://thesaker.is/on-the-threshold-...craig-roberts/

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2...s-it-good-for/

http://www.24hgold.com/english/news-...w+Radomski+CFA

SNIPPET:
Everyone focuses now on the chemical attack in Syria. Meanwhile, the most important turnover in the world remains mostly unnoticed. But we’re on guard. Let’s read our analysis of the key revolution of 2018 and find out the implications for the gold market.


Hawks Take Over the Fed
Are we going to write about Syria? North Korea? China? No. You already know everything you should about these geopolitical threats. The media bomb you with news about bombings, trade wars, nuclear trials, etc. But the key upheaval is taking place in silence, in the cool marble rooms of the Federal Reserve Banks. ‘The Hawkish Revolution’ – this is how the future historians will call it.


What is going on? We will tell you – but first read the key paragraph of the minutes from the recent FOMC meeting the Fed published yesterday.
Some participants suggested that, at some point, it might become necessary to revise statement language to acknowledge that, in pursuit of the Committee's statutory mandate and consistent with the median of participants' policy rate projections in the SEP, monetary policy eventually would likely gradually move from an accommodative stance to being a neutral or restraining factor for economic activity.


What does it mean? The FOMC members have started to consider the end of its accommodative stance. This is a real revolution, as the U.S. central bank has been supporting growth since the outbreak of the financial crisis. Now, for the first time since the Great Recession ended a decade ago, the Fed is talking about adopting a neutral or even tight stance. The possible consequences are enormous. More interest rate hikes are up ahead. Gold investors, be prepared!


Before we discuss the conclusions for gold, let’s analyze the rest of the latest minutes. Generally speaking, even without the remarks about possibly dropping the accommodative bias, the minutes had a hawkish tone. Why? Well, the FOMC members agreed that the nation’s economic outlook had recently strengthened:
All participants agreed that the outlook for the economy beyond the current quarter had strengthened in recent months. In addition, all participants expected inflation on a 12-month basis to move up in coming months.


Have you noticed something interesting? Look carefully. “All” – isn’t this a rare show of unity? We are all hawks now. Indeed:
Most participants commented that the stronger economic outlook and the somewhat higher inflation readings in recent months had increased the likelihood of progress toward the Committee's 2 percent inflation objective.

And another hawkish strike:
A number of participants indicated that the stronger outlook for economic activity, along with their increased confidence that inflation would return to 2 percent over the medium term, implied that the appropriate path for the federal funds rate over the next few years would likely be slightly steeper than they had previously expected.

Brace yourself for further hikes.

Fed Comments Trade Wars
Interestingly, the FOMC members discussed the potential impact of Trump’s trade wars. Although they downplayed the importance of U.S. tariffs, the central bankers worried about retaliatory trade actions:
A number of participants reported concern among their business contacts about the possible ramifications of the recent imposition of tariffs on imported steel and aluminum. Participants did not see the steel and aluminum tariffs, by themselves, as likely to have a significant effect on the national economic outlook, but a strong majority of participants viewed the prospect of retaliatory trade actions by other countries, as well as other issues and uncertainties associated with trade policies, as downside risks for the U.S. economy.

The Fed officials were also uncertain about the impact of the American fiscal policy. Generally, they believed that it should boost growth, but some question marks remained.

Tax changes enacted late last year and the recent federal budget agreement, taken together, were expected to provide a significant boost to output over the next few years. However, participants generally regarded the magnitude and timing of the economic effects of the fiscal policy changes as uncertain, partly because there have been few historical examples of expansionary fiscal policy being implemented when the economy was operating at a high level of resource utilization. A number of participants also suggested that uncertainty about whether all elements of the tax cuts would be made permanent, or about the implications of higher budget deficits for fiscal sustainability and real interest rates, represented sources of downside risk to the economic outlook.


Implications for Gold
Is gold doomed after the hawkish revolution? Well, the price of gold has indeed declined after the minutes were released, as one can see in the chart below.
Chart 1: Gold prices from April 9 to April 11, 2018.
http://www.24hgold.com/24hpmdata/art...-04-12-001.gif

It makes sense, as higher interest rates are bearish for gold, which doesn’t bear any yield. The hawkish revolution would lead to the normalization of monetary policy– which is bad for gold. The yellow metal shines the brightest during crazy times and irresponsible policies, not during normal periods and a neutral policy stance.

However, usually when the Fed presses the brakes as it fears overheating, it triggers recession after some time. Revolutions often lead to crises. The current gradual approach reduces such a risk – but it doesn’t eliminate it. Gold should shine in the recessionary scenario.

And monetary policy is only one part of the equation. The fiscal and trade policies are the other – and they are likely to lift gold prices. Another issue is that a more hawkish Fed has been already priced in, at least partially. Last but not least, the elevated anxiety about a military conflict about Syria could provide a short-term – let’s emphasize it: short-term – support for the price of gold. So, the ongoing coup d’état at the Fed may shake the gold market, but its impact will be neutralized by other factors. Always take a broader perspective – and stay tuned!

If you enjoyed the above analysis, we invite you to check out our other services. We focus on fundamental analysis in our monthly Market Overview reports and we provide daily Gold & Silver Trading Alerts with clear buy and sell signals. If you’re not ready to subscribe yet and are not on our gold mailing list yet, we urge you to sign up. It’s free and if you don’t like it, you can easily unsubscribe. Sign me up!


Disclaimer: Please note that the aim of the above analysis is to discuss the likely long-term impact of the featured phenomenon on the price of gold and this analysis does not indicate (nor does it aim to do so) whether gold is likely to move higher or lower in the short- or medium term. In order to determine the latter, many additional factors need to be considered (i.e. sentiment, chart patterns, cycles, indicators, ratios, self-similar patterns and more) and we are taking them into account (and discussing the short- and medium-term outlook) in our trading alerts.


Thank you.