EURUSD | Page 34376 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Related Instruments

EUR/USD, GBP/USD, USD/CHF

Similar Threads

MT4: how to change "EURUSD" to "#EURUSD"? 3 replies

Re: EurUsd short term 15 replies

did oanda just drop its spread for eurusd to 1 pip? 11 replies

EA for multiple lot limit order for EURUSD 0 replies

NFP nice bump up on EURUSD 2 replies

Attachments: EURUSD
Exit Attachments

EURUSD

  • #687,501
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:41pm Sep 3, 2012 4:41pm
Should still go up to 2630 before it comes back down.
  • #687,502
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:47pm Sep 3, 2012 4:47pm
It was very hard to trade it for the past few days. It was basically chasing small pips to make small profit. I made to make enough which I am happy about it but it was hard. If it reaches 2630, which it should, it will drop another 100-200 pips and that is going to be time to make easy pips.
  • #687,503
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:49pm Sep 3, 2012 4:49pm
Quoting CapR
As i said, if Republicans had held their ground, we would not be over piling on more debt which would have to be paid with bigger interest rates. I never suggested i was a fan of Bush. And i never supported the Iraq. Government spend is government spending. If i can sum up my political beliefs in three words its this: Abolish the Fed.
Abolish the Fed so it results in dramatically less government so the government would have less capacity for corruption and abuse.
Again you do not understand the bond market, if there was $debt the govt would still be borrowing every month because it needs money to pay the bills (taxation does not arrive in a fixed sum every month) by messing with the ratings the idiots increased the rate of borrowing for no reason - not even political.
The richest have also had the most benefits for the past 15 years, their wealth has grown the most (lower taxes means more money to invest) and the tax on capital gains is less then income tax their money gives greater returns, their tax rates have been the lowest ever and govt has borrowed like crazy to make up the difference - remember the Iraq & Afghan wars added between $2-4Tillion to the current $14Tillion, why should unborn generations pay for our exuberance. From WW2 to 1980 the top bracket was 90%, there were still rich people and the country was at the very peak in every measure.
Anyway, once the debt burden is lowered so can taxes.
  • #687,504
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:53pm Sep 3, 2012 4:53pm
2560 would be nice for me...been short since 2600. My only trade so far this week.
  • #687,505
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:55pm Sep 3, 2012 4:55pm
Quoting rustyram
Abolish Fed Reserve

Form a real federal US Govt bank, which will be run my People elected person

This bank will be given control to print money

This bank will have branches in all states and cities to lend money to people and corporation.

The profit thru interest it makes, stays with the bank goes nowhere....
except for future loans, after a while they dont have to print money out of thin air.....

Let wall street operates on its own, if they make bad bets, let them fail

Let big banks fails, we dont need them anymore

Let corporations do their...
THIS!!! You couldn't say that better!
  • #687,506
  • Sep 3, 2012 4:56pm Sep 3, 2012 4:56pm
ROLLOVER CLOSE + OUTLOOK:

Based on 2012-09-03_23h00 - ZigZag + Pivot Survey

TABLE with ZIGZAG + PIVOT SURVEY for the EUR/USD pair:

2012-09-03_23h00 - ZigZag + Pivot Survey _ EURUSD _ Rollover _ W-36 # W15 - E31 (Text EN)

This is an advanced skills ZIGZAG + PIVOT SURVEY for experienced traders and user circles of strategy development who are concerned with suitable methods of successfully trading by the use of appropriate strategies.

(UPDATE 23h00) Ausblick:

"Additional explanation" ... Table with including text of anticipation from Sunday on a two days basis ...

Daily central pivot and mid-points is considered around aprox. 1.2588 / 86 / 80 area ...

I will write some more later ... wenn ich Lust dazu verspüre ...




palim palim





;-|
2013-07-31 Today's Phrase of the Day: Hold off from any recycle bin experts
  • #687,507
  • Sep 3, 2012 5:13pm Sep 3, 2012 5:13pm
Quoting Mr.MaginCole
2560 would be nice for me...been short since 2600. My only trade so far this week.
hhehehee...relax, it will go there this 8 hours!
  • #687,508
  • Sep 3, 2012 5:16pm Sep 3, 2012 5:16pm
Quoting Mr.MaginCole
2560 would be nice for me...been short since 2600. My only trade so far this week.
Is possible
New voice message: Why are you calling me? If I need you, I'll call you!
  • #687,509
  • Sep 3, 2012 5:26pm Sep 3, 2012 5:26pm
Quoting Mr.MaginCole
2560 would be nice for me...been short since 2600. My only trade so far this week.
Same here as well but I have another one short from 588 as well
  • #687,510
  • Edited 6:22pm Sep 3, 2012 5:45pm | Edited 6:22pm
Quoting Xdir
... if there was $debt the govt would still be borrowing every month because it needs money to pay the bills
If the debt ceiling wasn't raised we would automatically cut spending down to the consistent revenue(foreign T-bond interest, estate tax, trade taxes on imports) which was at least 200 billion a month. I believe the interest on our debt was 20 billion. Government agencies are also largely self funded by charging fees for service, for example the Post Office is financed by selling postage stamps. The national park service charges entrance fees, camping fees and such to pay for operational costs. The FCC charges for commercial broadcast licenses, and auctions off spectrum. these are taxes under the law, so they have to be approved by congress and the proceeds go to the federal budget. The government also makes money from minerals, oil and gas that is produced on federal land. Companies bid for a lease to extract the resource, and pay a royalty on production.
Quote
...the idiots increased the rate of borrowing for no reason...not even political
Riiiiggghht, not even political as if your just elevated above it all. Your just being self righteous. I'm a Libertarian so i fall on the fiscal conservative side for being POLITICAL and at least i'm genuine about it. The "idiots" did not increase the borrowing rate(unfortunately) because bond rates went down price. This is because US bonds are perceived as a safe haven in contrast to Europe so interest has gone down. If bond rates would have gone up, the more concerned the nation would be about future debt and more apt to do something about it.
Quote
The richest have also had the most benefits for the past 15 years, their wealth has grown the most (lower taxes means more money to invest) and the tax on capital gains is less than income tax their money gives greater returns, their tax rates have been the lowest ever and govt has borrowed like crazy to make up the difference... ...
This is class warfare begrudgery is pathetic. If the rich have benefited the most then what has corresponded with it? Answer: more government intervention. Government has been borrowing like crazy because it SHOULDN'T BE SPENDING LIKE CRAZY. The only way you think that way is if you believe the premise that other people's property(income/labor) belonged to the government to begin with.
Quote
remember the Iraq & Afghan wars added between $2-4Tillion to the current $14Tillion,
Why are you making grandiose assumptions that i support all of these wars? Being fiscally conservative equates to bloated military spending? You're using straw man arguments.
Quote
Anyway, once the debt burden is lowered so can taxes.
Spoken on the same phoney zero sum game premise of raising taxes leads to more tax revenue. AGAIN, there is no fixed quantity of tax revenue. The private sector is not a river where you can divert 50% of it away so there's 50% leftover. Raising taxes raises the cost of doing business just like higher interest rates raise the cost of loans for doing business(which is the logic the government mandated Fed operates by). The rich didn't become rich by spending money like a drunken sailor. They became rich because they counted their pennies OR because they took advantage of some kind of government preferential treatment. But the latter is less as common. Its not a MATH issue. Its an production INCENTIVES issue. Again the top 10% pay 71% on federal income taxes. While the lower 45% pay nothing in federal income taxes except inflation taxes. Is this taxation by representation? Representation by taxation?
The trend is my friend? The world casino is my friend!
  • #687,511
  • Sep 3, 2012 6:02pm Sep 3, 2012 6:02pm
Quoting John Gray
Strong support. Good buying opportunity in my opinion.
closed 9.1 pips
Even the worst trade can close with profit. Just give it time.
  • #687,512
  • Sep 3, 2012 6:22pm Sep 3, 2012 6:22pm
The borrowing increase was not just one bond sale but every single one after, the fast reaction to the AA+ downgrade saved further downgrades that would have caused a default.
The last fiscally conservative person was GH Bush, modern day libertarians are kooks. Im sure you were arguing against the previous debt ceiling raises under GW Bush.
I did not make accuse you of supporting the wars but as a self proclaimed conservative you should accept the costs of the war and do what ever is necessary to pay for them ie raise tax.
The Iraq & Afghan Wars were paid for almost entirely by supplementary budgets so that their cost was not included in the annual budget deficits but through direct borrowing. Again I never heard Libertarians or Conservatives mentioning this obvious fact they all said stop the war but never said how the hell are we paying for this!!!
The rich became so by being fortunate enough to be in the country, they got their breaks under the stability provided by police, courts and even military. Try becoming rich in a laissez faire environment like somalia!!!
The social contract is you make it big, you give back big so that future generations have the same opportunity as you did.
I do not understand how raising taxes will not reduce the debt? at the very least it will reduce the amount borrowed every year so the savings will be in interest repayments alone. Btw the 2001 Bush tax cuts have added over $1Trillion to the national debt over the past 10 years and Obama's cowardice and congress' complicity will probably extend them - which means further borrowing to cover the shortfalls.
  • #687,513
  • Sep 3, 2012 6:37pm Sep 3, 2012 6:37pm
Quoting Xdir
The borrowing increase was not just one bond sale but every single one after, the fast reaction to the AA+ downgrade saved further downgrades that would have caused a default.
The last fiscally conservative person was GH Bush, modern day libertarians are kooks. Im sure you were arguing against the previous debt ceiling raises under GW Bush.
I did not make accuse you of supporting the wars but as a self proclaimed conservative you should accept the costs of the war and do what ever is necessary to pay for them ie raise tax.
The Iraq & Afghan Wars...
I don't know what else i can say on the other issues. I already answered your responses. The only thing i will say is GW Bush was NOT a fiscal conservative. The media narrative that he was is false. He signed No Child Left Behind, Medicare D, Homeland Security Act, etc. He also added some 60 thousand in regulations. He was progressive lite as compared to progressive heavy Obama. He lowered taxes and that pretty much it as far as fiscal conservatism goes. Tax revenues increased under Bush due to the economic growth from the tax cuts. This was until the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Federal Reserve, CRA crafted housing bubble happened.
The trend is my friend? The world casino is my friend!
  • #687,514
  • Edited 7:26pm Sep 3, 2012 7:16pm | Edited 7:26pm
Quoting CapR
Tax revenues increased under Bush due to the economic growth from the tax cuts.
Proof? At best the positive impact of the cuts is disputed. At worst (and this is the majority stance among economists) they were ineffective at stimulating the economy and expanding the tax base.

Specifically, I'm looking for proof that the tax cuts were responsible for income tax revenue growth, not other factors.

So far, all the figures I'm able to gather reflect that the cuts in truth had a net effect of costing trillions of dollars of lost tax revenue over the years they've been in effect (i.e. the government would have had that much more had they not existed).
Offering $1.50 (21%)/RTL Commission Discounts at IC Markets & Global Prime
  • #687,515
  • Sep 3, 2012 7:33pm Sep 3, 2012 7:33pm
Quoting Layzars
Proof? At best the positive impact of the cuts is disputed. At worst (and this is the majority stance among economists) they were ineffective at stimulating the economy and expanding the tax base.

Specifically, I'm looking for proof that the tax cuts were responsible for income tax revenue growth, not other factors.

So far, all the figures I'm able to gather reflect that the cuts in truth had a net effect of costing trillions of dollars of lost tax revenue over the years they've been in effect (i.e. the government would have had that much...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/...lly-increased/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...deral-revenue/
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...-bush-tax-cuts
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.ph...licy+Digest%29
The trend is my friend? The world casino is my friend!
  • #687,516
  • Sep 3, 2012 7:46pm Sep 3, 2012 7:46pm
Quoting Layzars
Raising general income taxes is fine so long as you ........
Interesting how a Brit and a Canadian seems to think they have the answers to our problems.

I wouldn't begin to think I would know what their governments should do.
  • #687,517
  • Sep 3, 2012 7:52pm Sep 3, 2012 7:52pm
Quoting SunTrader
Interesting how a Brit and a Canadian seems to think they have the answers to our problems.

I wouldn't begin to think I would know what their governments should do.
I used to think that as well , Suntrader. But I often can spot how other people's problems can easily be remedied ...most likely because I am not part of that equation.

Its a good debate regardless, and I welcome the outside views.
  • #687,518
  • Edited 8:13pm Sep 3, 2012 7:54pm | Edited 8:13pm
First, they do not show that the cuts were specifically responsible for either revenue or GDP growth; correlation is not causation.

Second, all of them have a strong and obvious anti-tax bias.

Do you have any apolitical and objective sourcings? Perhaps even a Liberal/otherwise politically opposed source that nonetheless admits the efficacy of the tax cuts?

Academic papers, not op-eds are best.



Here's a pretty good source affirming my case:

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Column...elp.aspx#page1

Feel free to ignore the opinion components (I did). It's the collection of links to studies throughout the article that are relevant.

That said, you should also note that it, if anything, has a pro-fiscal conservative/libertarian, anti-liberal/progressive bias.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts#Debate on the effect of the cuts:

"Statements by Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist that these tax cuts effectively "paid for themselves" have been disputed by the CBPP,[6] the U.S. Treasury Department and the CBO.[7][8][9][10]"

Sourcings:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/69xx/doc6...centTaxCut.pdf
http://www.economics.harvard.edu/fac...ng_05-1212.pdf
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010501801.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...051400806.html



Quoting SunTrader
Interesting how a Brit and a Canadian seems to think they have the answers to our problems.

I wouldn't begin to think I would know what their governments should do.
We have a better Human Development Index rating/standard of living and greater economic and political freedom. Clearly our higher taxes and socialist policies are getting something right.
Offering $1.50 (21%)/RTL Commission Discounts at IC Markets & Global Prime
  • #687,519
  • Sep 3, 2012 8:15pm Sep 3, 2012 8:15pm
Quoting Layzars
.... are getting something right.
You have a pro oil drilling policy and all the revenue that flows from it.

As I said previously, I wouldn't know what your govmint, or any other besides my own, is doing right or wrong.

But also comparing one country's pluses and minuses to another's is fruitless. Too many factors to adjust for.
  • #687,520
  • Sep 3, 2012 8:18pm Sep 3, 2012 8:18pm
Here ya go. Straight from the US Treasury itself.

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center...es/js3048.aspx

AND

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center...ts/yearend.pdf

AND an indirect article based on a CBO report.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...s_opinion_main

It ain't rocket science. It really is self-evident. If more of your EARNED money is confiscated, why would you work harder if you're punished for it? CHECKMATE. I'm done.
The trend is my friend? The world casino is my friend!
320 traders viewing now