EURUSD

I'm still not happy that they won't allow me to change my odd nick which was chosen randomly and quickly so that's why I don't post much anymore.

But, to answer your question, I have an account at FXOpen. They have both types of accounts, market maker and ECN. And they have the Metatrader4 trading platform. They also allow you to trade 1/10 micro lots. I even noticed in the drop down meny lately that you could possibly trade even smaller than that. Trading with 1/10 micro lots has allowed me to do hundreds of trades in the past months. I'm also getting to a point, which I've probably said a hundred times that I'm finally getting close to being a profitable trader. This time I really think it's just a matter of time before I'm finally profitable. But I owe this to practice with trades using small amounts of money. Had I traded larger, I would have taken losses that maybe would have taken me out of the markets for good.

For anyone just starting out, just to give you an idea, I took $18 in losses in 6 months by trading 0.10 micro lots. Had that been full micro lots then the losses would have been $180 instead. With mini lots that would have been $1800. With standard lots, the losses would have been $18 000. It boggles my mind why regulators in the US would try to stop people from practicing with small amounts of money. I mean since last May, I think I probably only lost around $5.

I tried unsuccessfully at day trading at a prop firm named TitleTrading for 3 months and can tell you the Metatrader4 trading platform is more stable than the Sterling trading platform they use at various prop firms.

I used bank wire to transfer money to FXOpen though someone said here once he used AlertPay without a hitch. I don't know if AlertPay is still easy to use. I did cost me $30 CDN though to do it in a bank. Anyway, I'm just glad I had the chance to have this much practice because in the next few months, I think I'll finally be a profitable trader. It's kind of weird though to think that it would take that much practice just to organize all my ideas though. I mean how I want to organize my charts, which currency pairs I want to watch, whether I should only do trend following or throw in some contrarian trades in there ect. I've finally got all my ideas organized. I'm just glad the US government have not succeeded in shutting me out because I'm poor especially since I'm a Canadian.

Thank you

let me tell you something about cuba tonyo524, cuba is a beutifull country but we made a mistake of allowing a very smart and convincing guy to convince us that he was going to take all the land and the big corporations from all the greedy land lords that used to exploit the cuban population, and give it to the poor, (nonsense) and the people follow, the land was taken from the big guys and then give it to the people with the nationalization of the enterprises in 1959, but......in 1961 he created the first agrary reform where he told the people that they were not doing good with the land (people had no money to work the land) so he created the state and the state took control of the land and then he created the CDR's and the militians to wacht over the people don't take the land back, and the cuban's are being F$#% since then, no freedon of investing our money offshore, no freedom to go and come as you like without being scrutinise ( wacth over) and investigated truely, so I came here to scape from all that........

then I came to a country where you could do all this things, and all of the sudden a guy very smart and very convincing came and told me that I need social security obligated and healt care mandatory also, and gave money and facility to buy land, only to foreclosure them all later by the bancs and then nationalize the banks, and place cameras and military all over the country on a war on terror created by then (bush invading countrys for no reason, only to put BP and SHELL back to work, corporativism) that dosen't realy exist, only to control a over us, to have your money offshore he needs to know and to invest offshore you can't be american citizen, so the patern is repeating itself again, so is time for me to go some new place to start all over again...
I dislike control........

well Clambill I"m sorry about your nick name not being able to change it, but my problem with this regulations is that none of them will help the finacial industry and they are not responsible for what happen in the market, people should know bether at the moment to chose their risk, I trade with 400 to 1 leverage, because with 300 or 400 dollars you can make a couple of thousands in a few weeks, and the problem with the new regulations is that now to make that money I need to have 4 times the amount I needed before, but that is not the big problem, the big problem is that I scalp the market scaling in and some times I'm still short and I go long and I buy several lots or martingale in the direction of the trend and this new regulations don't allow me to do that no more so I have to change all my trading methodoly because this a$$hole deside to become a socialist, fascist m%$ther F^%$r

very good weekend articles from China.
they seem to know exactly what the FED is doing.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90...1/7165351.html

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90...8/7164048.html

Also interesting in WSJ

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Charles Evans said
"The U.S. economy is best described as being in a bona fide liquidity trap,"

Yet, "if you reach the conclusion that we are in a liquidity trap, or even near a perilous liquidity trap, more accommodation is not data-dependent or a close call," Mr. Evans said. "In this setting, even a moderate expansion without a double dip will not lead to appropriate labor market improvement."

I don't need to hear tha unemployment is not going to get bether from Mr. Evan, DMA nothing is going to get fix unless we trow all this thiefs from goverment, and put some responsible people up there like Ron Paul or some one like that, sugestions?

If this level holds, maybe 4310 is a nice target.
just a pattern i found..

Another pattern i found.
Don't know what it means though.

Sounds like both countries are one of the same!

So do Cubans REALLY like Che Guevara? What I know of him...he was a thug.

this has been talked about as well as leverage for 4 years that i am aware of.

What Bernanke Didn't Say

The dollar? Someone else's problem.

Amid the dollar rout of the 1970s, Treasury Secretary John Connally famously told a group of fretting Europeans that the greenback "is our currency, but your problem." If you read between the lines, that's also more or less what Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said yesterday as he made the case for further Fed monetary easing.

Mr. Bernanke broke no new ground in explaining why he believes inflation at less than 2% is too low and why the Fed must encourage greater inflation to reduce the 9.6% jobless rate. "Inflation is running at rates that are too low [his emphasis] relative to the levels that the [Fed Open Market] Committee judges to be most consistent with the Federal Reserve's dual mandate in the longer run," he said. That dual mandate is to maintain stable prices and low unemployment, and Mr. Bernanke's message couldn't be clearer that cutting the U.S. jobless rate is now Job One at the Fed.

We were more struck by what Mr. Bernanke didn't say. In a nearly 4,000-word speech about inflation, the Fed chief never once mentioned the value of the dollar. He never mentioned exchange rates, despite the turmoil in world currency markets as the dollar has fallen in anticipation of further Fed easing. He never mentioned rising commodity prices or soaring gold, and his only reference to the recent increase in the price of oil was by way of dismissing it in the context of overall low inflation.

The chairman's message is that the Fed is focused entirely on the domestic U.S. economy and will print as many dollars as it takes to reflate it. The rest of the world is on its own and can adjust its policies as various countries see fit. If other currencies soar in relation to the dollar, that's someone else's problem. For the sake of the U.S. and world economy, we hope this turns out better for Mr. Bernanke's reputation than it did for John Connally's.

correct me, if wrong.. but didn't he tell you this, before he was elected?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...pinion_LEADTop

I'm still not happy they won't let me use my username.

Anyway, I cannot use bugmenot dot com with the Wall Street Journal website so I can't see the article.

Yes , they can be many at the same time ! at this top may not be thoracic vertebrae bu cirvical well fit with advanced spondilitis due degeneration & random bony projections and malaligned spines , very painfull not doubt !

another way it can be taken as half of a hill or a graph while the mirror image still to develop !
anyway this not the end of the history with what visible with naked eyes.

Morning to you all .


One thing just add here , I read what tell Mr. Bernanke told before but not understand anything from it & just forgot about it but today morning when I woke up just come into my mind automatically that actually seems he told nothing about any good & simply telling his country for readying for impending continued & profund recession very likely may be soon .

some of his words seeing now as :
"for the first time in many decades, had to take seriously the possibility that inflation can be too low as well as too high" though inflation under his 2% remains at 1% but too uncertain if it can't be under controll next , too high or too low to zero or even deflation .

"low inflation generally implies low nominal interest rates, which increase the potential relevance for policymaking of the zero lower bound on interest rates. Because the short-term policy interest rate cannot be reduced below zero" inflation already low but interest already near zero but can't be below zero & so it were little higher than this present low interest rate there would be further cut to adjust with and though rate near zero but still not zero may again hints for further cut if possible when more trouble or if unable to do that to take any consequences arise with non-standard policies.a clear tone of failure , at least no chance to increase the rate in future , enough for market to grab.

"consumer spending has been inhibited by the painfully slow recovery in the labor market, which has restrained growth in wage income and has raised uncertainty about job security and employment prospects" "Household finances and attitudes also have an important influence on the housing market, which has remained depressed, notwithstanding reduced house prices and record-low mortgage rates. The overhang of foreclosed properties and vacant homes remains a significant drag on house prices and residential investment."
"
The decline in underlying inflation importantly reflects the extent to which cost pressures have been restrained by substantial slack in the utilization of productive resources. Notably, the unemployment rate remains fairly close to last fall's peak and is currently about 5 percentage points above the rates that prevailed just before the onset of the financial crisis. "

"previous post-World-War-II recessions do not seem to have resulted in higher structural unemployment, which many economists attribute to the relative flexibility of the U.S. labor market. Overall, my assessment is that the bulk of the increase in unemployment since the recession began is attributable to the sharp contraction in economic activity that occurred in the wake of the financial crisis and the continuing shortfall of aggregate demand since then, rather than to structural factors.3 "
all related with results of unemployments which is totally uncertain & uncontrollable so far.

About nonconventional policies such as providing additional monetary stimulus ,Federal Reserve's purchases of longer-term securities, "but nonconventional policies have costs and limitations that must be taken into account in judging whether and how aggressively they should be used. " " we have much less experience in judging the economic effects "
FOMC proceed with some caution in deciding whether to engage in further purchases of longer-term securities. "substantial further expansion of the balance sheet could reduce public confidence "reduction in confidence might lead to an undesired increase in inflation expectations"
anyway this quantative easing comes when no conventinals to work further , usd continues to down at the lowest level to tolerance perghaps before devastating consequences beyound action & knowledge & can be one last step & not without substancial risks of further decline .

all lead to only down though endeavours continues to improve , as always & by every one by nature & not to loose heart.

Just from intuition write something not related to ever.
justify oneself who ever read this .

From chart whatever happened , usdx at buy zone & likely to bounce few times fron tl or even very strong changes may happen before even if breaks down without any fed or any Mr. Bernanke's action or better says easing it down.
fontu

Currency Chaos: Where Do We Go From Here?

'The most important initiative you could take to improve the world economy would be to stabilize the dollar-euro rate.'

Global monetary relations are in disarray. Exchange rates fluctuate wildly among the world's major trade partners, spawning talk of protectionism and a currency war. Gold is soaring as the dollar slides, and economists debate whether the biggest threat to U.S. recovery is deflation or inflation.
We need a giant of economics to help explain all this and recommend a remedy. Where in the world is Robert Mundell when you need him?
As it turns out, Mr. Mundell—the Columbia University professor who advocated the hard-money, low-tax policy mix that broke stagflation in the early 1980s, and who received the Nobel Prize in 1999 for his work on exchange rates—happened to be in New York this week. It's a lucky break. When he's not at his 500-year-old castle in Italy, the "father of the euro" is usually en route to his next lecture somewhere in the world.
"What is wrong with the global economy today?" I ask him. "How do we fix this monetary mess?"
We are sitting on a comfortably worn sofa in the parlor of his apartment near campus, drinking tea. Plush fabrics drape the walls, along with Baroque paintings in ornately-gilded frames. And there are piles of books in the adjoining rooms. Really. Thick piles of books are stacked in corners, heaped against walls, balanced on short wooden tables.
"The problem started before World War I," Mr. Mundell commences. "The gold standard was working fairly well. But it broke down because of the war and what happened in the 1920s. And then the U.S. started to become so dominant in the world, with the dollar becoming the central currency after the 1930s, the whole world economy shifted.
"Think of it like the solar system: It started with gold at the center, as the sun, but then Jupiter got bigger and bigger until all the planets started circulating Jupiter instead."
"And the U.S. is Jupiter?" I deduce.
"Yes," he affirms, "and the spread of the dollar was just miraculous as it became the anchor for the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system after World War II. The price of gold was fixed at $35 an ounce in 1934, but by the time the U.S. got through the Korean War, the Vietnam war, with all the associated secular inflation, the price level had gone up nearly three times.
"Gold became very undervalued; European countries traded in dollars for gold until the U.S. lost more than half its stock. The U.S. went off gold in 1971, under Nixon, and nobody else has gone on it again."
Mr. Mundell, 77, is clearly in his element as he traces the monetary history of the last century. Like his apartment, he radiates a charmingly disheveled elegance, jaunty in jeans and an open-necked cream shirt.
"So our problems today," I posit, "are related to the fact that the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange-rates linked to gold broke down?"
"The system broke down," he hastens to explain, "not because of fixed rates. Fixed exchange rates operate between California and New York . . . the system broke down because there was no mechanism to keep the world price level in line with the price of gold."
Atop the closest mound of books is a volume titled: "Shaping the Post-War World: The Clearing Union." It features the collected writings of John Maynard Keynes from 1940-1944, when the famous British economist was helping to design a new international monetary order to provide a stable foundation for a world economy devastated by war.
"Are you thinking," I venture, "that maybe it's time to start figuring out the design for a new international monetary order? Should the U.S. offer new proposals regarding exchange rates and monetary policy?"
Mr. Mundell, who is Canadian, looks troubled. "I don't think the U.S. has any ideas, they don't have strong leadership on the international economic side," he replies. "There hasn't been anyone in the administration for a long time who really knows much about the international monetary system."
He elaborates that it would not be possible today to forge a monetary system with the dollar as the key reserve currency, as President Franklin Roosevelt and Treasury Secretary Henry Morganthau did in the 1940s. "To be fair, America's position is not nearly as strong now," he concedes. "But what has disappointed me is the reluctance of the U.S. to take into account this big movement in the rest of the world to do something about restoring stability to the international monetary system." He frowns. "They ignore it, as if the dollar's exchange rate is a mere domestic matter."
I take a sip of tea. "Do you think it has to do with our relationship with China?" The U.S. is threatening to impose tariffs on Chinese goods if Beijing doesn't make them more expensive by revaluing its currency.
"The U.S. berates China for its exchange rate policy, which Washington doesn't like," Mr. Mundell says, noting that discriminatory tariffs against China might not be legal under the treaty provisions of the World Trade Organization. "But one-sided pressure on China to change its exchange rate is misplaced."
Shaking his head, Mr. Mundell asserts: "The issue should not be treated as a bilateral dispute between the U.S. and China. It's a multilateral issue because the U.S. deficit itself is a multilateral issue that is connected with the international role of the dollar."
He goes on to explain that the dollar bloc includes China and other Asian countries—except Japan—but that the euro now constitutes the rest of the world. "The euro today is the counter-dollar," he says. "The most important initiative you could take to improve the world economy would be to stabilize the dollar-euro rate."
He thinks the European Central Bank, along with the Federal Reserve, should intervene in currency markets to limit movement in the world's single most important exchange rate, pointing out that the dollar and euro together represent 40% of the world economy.
"If the U.S. demurs, are we headed toward a global currency war?" I ask.

Mr. Mundell looks tentative. "I don't think it will come to a currency war," he says. "The U.S. is still very powerful; it would be an unequal battle. But it's important to have a high-level conference to explore opinions for reforming the world monetary system. The Europeans should be involved, as well as emerging countries." He mentions that French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently spoke about the need to bring experts together for an intellectual discussion on the issue, perhaps in China.
"So you think a fixed exchange-rate system is more conducive to global free trade and global economic recovery than floating rates?" I ask.
Mr. Mundell registers surprise that I would even inquire. "The whole idea of having a free trade area when you have gyrating exchange rates doesn't make sense at all. It just spoils the effect of any kind of free trade agreement."
Coming from the man who helped design Europe's single currency, it makes perfect sense. Since its introduction in 1999, the euro has eliminated exchange-rate fluctuations among the 16 trade partners who have adopted it. In just over a decade, the euro has become the world's second largest reserve currency after the dollar, and the second most-traded currency in foreign-exchange markets.
Which brings to mind another question. "What do you think about the rise in currency trading by banks, with some $4 trillion now turning over daily in global currency markets?"
Mr. Mundell thrusts out his arms. "It's part of the sickness of the system! These currencies should be fixed, as they were under Bretton Woods or the gold standard. All this unnecessary noise, unnecessary uncertainty; it just confuses the ability to evaluate market prices."
Mr. Mundell has a knack for boiling things down to simple terms. He grew up on a four-acre farm in Ontario, went on to earn a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and would ultimately challenge the renowned Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago during the late 1960s. Both economists were strong proponents of free markets, but Mr. Mundell disagreed with Mr. Friedman's advocacy of floating exchange rates.
The sound of a buzzer indicates lunch has arrived. Mr. Mundell suggests that we continue our discussion at the table and politely invites his assistant Ivy Ng, who has been taking careful notes, to join us.
"We've been talking about the possibility of global monetary reform," I continue, deciding to switch gears. "Let's talk a bit about domestic monetary policy. What do you think the Federal Reserve should be doing right now?"
It's a seamless transition for Mr. Mundell. "The Fed is making a big mistake by ignoring movements in the price of the dollar, movements in the price of gold, in favor of inflation-targeting, which is a bad idea. The Fed has always had the wrong view about the dollar exchange rate; they think the exchange rate doesn't matter. They don't say that publicly, but that is their view."
"Well," I counter, not particularly savoring the role of devil's advocate, "I suppose Fed officials would argue that their mandate is to try to achieve stable prices and maximum levels of employment."
Mr. Mundell looks annoyed. "Well, it's stupid. It's just stupid." He tries to walk it back somewhat. "I don't mean Fed officials are stupid; it's just this idea they have that exchange-rate effects will eventually be taken into account through the inflation-targeting approach. In the long run, it's not incorrect—it takes about a year. But why ignore the instant barometer that something is happening? The exchange rate is the immediate reaction to pending inflation. Look what happened a couple weeks ago: The Fed started to say, we've got to print more money, inflate the economy a little bit. The dollar plummeted! You won't get a change in the inflation index for months, but a falling exchange rate—that's the first signal."
Clearly on a roll, I press a bit. "You mentioned gold?"
'The price of gold is an index of inflation expectations," Mr. Mundell says without hesitation. "The rising price of gold shows that people see huge amounts of debt being accumulated and they expect more money to be pumped out." He purses his lips. "They might not necessarily be right; gold could be overvalued right now."
Sensing that the soup is getting cold, I decide to cut to the chase: "What would be your winning formula today? What advice would you give to Washington that would help turn around our moribund economy?"
He pauses to think, but only for a moment. "Pro-growth tax policies, stable exchange rates."
And then, with his spoon poised over his own bowl, he smiles sweetly and beckons for us to begin. "Buon appetito."

because according to all moves in eu we have never crossed the 30% ma pa.. and the only time it was touched was in 2008 at 1.6038. in 2008 near the eu top oil was at 147.. if you recall goldmen saches was screaming 200 pb... Friday missed my target of 84.67... but hit eu target.. i have posted lately to forget about gold and worry more about oil. gold is not a pimple on the usd's ass. atm along with the other usdx support lines crap... watch oil.. it is vulnerable atm. when it went below 81.65 it may be a ceiling now.. it has dipped below 81.04 but recovered.. its the next support... 80.41 is next support using another method and getting below the 77.48 with a upper mofu at 75.54.. and another support at 76.43 and 76.85... eurx next support i care about is 109.76... gold is a different beast.. but this one is few weeks old. but candles are current.
1361.11 and 1350.11 using one method.. ... math targets small bears at 1339.48 and 1308. close to some supports on the chart. i highlighted the hits.. older post #302248

finally booked profits here

eurusd looks as if it has reached the top for now.

1.2700 to 1.4100 is a good haul for some pocket money

Thanks for the article. It's interesting even though they're talking about what they COULD do, not what they are doing.