Money Flow Trading Method along with Risk Management

Hello Ladies and Gentleman

I spoke about this topic earlier as relates to Gold and Silver and NFP to be released on Friday, January 6, 2017 at 8:30 AM EST


http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1483462272.php

US Jobs Report: Key Driver For Gold


-- Published: Tuesday, 3 January 2017

Graceland Updates
By Stewart Thomson


1. While the December 31 selling in gold and gold stocks may have rattled gold bugs a bit, the fact is that gold begins 2017 in pretty good shape.
2. Big fundamental themes that weighed on the “ultimate asset” in 2016 appear ready to reverse and become supportive for higher price action.
3. Please click here now. For much of 2016, the size of the commercial trader net short position was a headwind for gold.
4. In recent weeks, that’s been reduced quite significantly.
5. Leveraged hedge funds have also reduced their long positions. That’s healthy action because the funds use too much leverage. As a result, modest selling by the commercial traders creates margin calls for the funds, and gold community investors can feel pain too.
6. The bottom line is that in terms of the overall positioning on the COMEX, the gold market is in a much healthier position now.
7. Please click here now. Top jewellers in Dubai are predicting that the gold jewellery demand cycle is bottoming, and 2017 will see both Indians and UAE residents buying with confidence. This is very good news.
8. Dubai is known as the “City of Gold”, and the Shanghai Gold Exchange is very active in building gold market infrastructure there. This partnership is likely to strengthen in 2017.
9. In the short term, gold has a rough general tendency to decline ahead of the US jobs report, and then rally after the report is released. The next report comes out this Friday.
10. Please click here now. Double-click to enlarge. In the world of fiat currencies, the price action of the US dollar versus the yen has tremendous influence on the gold price.
11. There’s a pennant-like pattern in play on this daily chart, and a run to the 125 area looks likely.
12. In the big picture, though, there’s a major bull non-confirmation taking place. The dollar is making intermediate trend highs against the USDX index, but not against gold or the yen.
13. Please click here now. The commercial traders are buying the safe haven yen aggressively, while the leveraged funds are shorting it.
14. For the funds, this is a very dangerous situation, and one that could produce a violent move higher in the gold price at a time when that seems impossible.
15. The inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20 could also coincide with a price of 125 on the dollar versus yen chart. If so, the rally in the gold price of the past few weeks could be set to accelerate then, in a very big way.
16. Please click here now. The franc is another safe haven currency, and its price action against the dollar has a high correlation with gold’s action against the dollar.
17. The commercial traders have an outstanding track record in both the gold and fiat currency markets. They are suddenly buying the Swiss franc against the dollar, and doing so very aggressively.
18. Gold bugs should pay attention to current commercial trader liquidity flows, which suggest that a major gold price rally is either imminent, or already underway!
19. Please click here now. Double-click to enlarge. Another important correlation for gold investors to follow is the T-bond chart priced in US dollars.
20. The T-bond appears to be basing, and commercial traders have also been buyers recently.
21. Please click here now. The commercial “smart money” traders are now net long the T-bond. Do they have information that other traders are missing? Perhaps they have some insight into what will happen after Donald Trump gets inaugurated?
22. Regardless, they are clearly strong buyers of safe haven francs, yen, T-bonds, and decent buyers of gold.
23. Please click here now. Double-click to enlarge this GDX chart.
24. I’ve been pretty emphatic that the $18 area is for buying GDX and $22 is for selling. From both a technical and fundamental perspective, it’s logical that gold stocks pause here ahead of the US jobs report. This pause will help them launch a second and more successful assault on the $22 - $22.50 resistance zone, after the report is released!

Thanks!
Cheers
St

Stewart Thomson
Graceland Updates


https://www.gracelandupdates.com
https://gracelandjuniors.com
www.guswinger.com


Email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]


Risks, Disclaimers, Legal

Stewart Thomson is no longer an investment advisor. The information provided by Stewart and Graceland Updates is for general information purposes only. Before taking any action on any investment, it is imperative that you consult with multiple properly licensed, experienced and qualified investment advisors and get numerous opinions before taking any action. Your minimum risk on any investment in the world is: 100% loss of all your money. You may be taking or preparing to take leveraged positions in investments and not know it, exposing yourself to unlimited risks.

This is highly concerning if you are an investor in any derivatives products. There is an approx $700 trillion OTC Derivatives Iceberg with a tiny portion written off officially. The bottom line:
Are You Prepared?

Comments from Benjaminis: We have great information here so I suggest that you print out this article. We should now also keep our EYE on USD/CHF which is on your platform. (Swiss Franc)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-in...nge-1483468681

You will need to register to read the article !!!

http://fxcharts.net/q1-outlook-eurus...eid=16d8768a52

Snippet:
A Q1 2017 Outlook for EURUSD

By Jim Langlands | January 3, 2017


As a longer term view of the direction of the Eur/Usd, I think that this week is likely to be pretty much a wait and see affair, with liquidity probably remaining quite thin as traders are unlikely to want to become too involved ahead of the US jobs data, due on Friday (exp 4.7%, +175K).


Beyond that, looking into the first quarter of 2017, the theme of selling into Euro strength seems likely to prevail. The Italian banking crisis is likely to continue and it is not just Italy that could be in trouble. Traders are currently focusing on the recapitalisation process at Monte dei Paschi, but even Deutsche Bank has not escaped scrutiny and could be set to face further issues down the track.

The US$ actually seems set to outperform on most fronts, and not just against the Euro. With the Fed projecting 3 rate hikes in 2017, citing the fact that inflation expectations have increased considerably, while also suggesting that the labor market is tightening, the dollar does look to remain underpinned. At the same time, the EU growth outlook is much more subdued. The ECB decided to extend its quantitative easing (QE) program by nine months at its December meeting, although at a reduced rate of monthly asset purchases. The move was designed to shore up price pressures and avoid tightening financial conditions while economic momentum remains modest, at best.

Aside from the macro economic outlook we have the Trump factor to consider and who knows what that will mean? We will discover more after his inauguration on Jan 20, but if he does as he has hinted to reduce taxes and invest in infrastructure, amounting to a substantial fiscal stimulus analysts suggest that we could be in for a considerable boost to US economic growth, bringing higher interest rates and inflation, as well as a new set of potential risks, including international trade wars. We shall have to wait and see how it all plays out on that side of the pond.

Meanwhile, back in the EU, aside from the banking crisis the 2017 focus will be on elections. We have elections, of varying importance, in each of:
Holland (General Election) (15 Mar)
Serbia (Presidential) (9 April)
France (Presidential) (Round 1: 23 April; Runoff/Final result: 7 May)
UK (Local) (4 May)
Norway (Parliamentary) (Sept 11)
Germany ( Presidential) (Latest possible date: 22 Oct)
Czech Republic (Legislative) (Oct)
Slovenia (Presidential) (Dec)
Hungary (Presidential) (Not yet announced)
Portugal (Local) (Not yet announced)
Slovenia (Presidential) (Dec).


On top of all that, Italy is never more than a few months away from the next election and could well see another one in 2017, although the incumbent, Paolo Gentiloni, has only been in office since December 11 following the No vote in the recent constitutional referendum. Even so, the next Italian general election is due to be held no later than 23 May 2018. Plenty of room for a crisis before then!


In the current environment a swing to the extremist parties is quite possible, and if Donald Trump does a half-decent job in his first few months of office it could well encourage voters in the EU to go with the more populist parties as they look for an alternative to the old guard, who will take much of the blame for the predicament that the EU finds itself in.


This could influence the Q1 elections of France (23 April) and Holland (15 March) in particular, and could eventually lead to deeper cracks within the EU itself. Angela Merkel will also not have an easy ride in Germany, although the election there is not due until September/ October

From a technical perspective, the longer time-frame charts do not look all that healthy for the Euro.

The longer term momentum indicators hint at lower levels ahead and therefore, selling into rallies still appears to be the plan. The weeklies are pointing south and the monthlies, while not looking quite so negative, still seem to suggest that the Euro is going to have a tough time of it in 2017.
We are going to see the odd bounce, and selling between 1.0650/1.0700 would seem to be the plan for the position takers, although we should actually leave some room for a possible bounce to the December high of 1.0873.

Targets? Well, the current trend low is at 1.0351. Under there, decent Fibo support lies at 1.0058 (76.4% of 0.8225/1.6019), below which it will be a pretty quick rush to 1.0000. Further out, as seen in the monthly chart below, I have a head and shoulder target at around 0.7870, which would be an all time low. I would be very doubtful of seeing that in 2017, but if France votes for the Far-Right in the April election, it could be where we are heading as the break-up of the EU/Euro, becomes more of a possibility.

If you wish to comment or have an alternative view, go to http://fxcharts.net/forums/topic/q1-...utlook-eurusd/

Comments from Benjaminis: That is my work for today. I probably will come back in about 4 hours or 11 PM EST and post The Wrap Up - Nightly.

The Wrap Up - Nightly

I will do it now using this GREAT REVIEW OF GOLD - Good Night !!! - I need a break !!!

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4033...igniter-widget

Summary
Net speculative gold positions dropped for the seventh straight week.

Gold ETFs finally added to physical gold holdings after 33 days of sales which Bloomberg data says was the longest streak since 2004.

Negative sentiment abounds in the speculative gold market, thus for investors that see value in gold, now makes a good contrarian time to buy.

After starting the year with a bang, the last Commitment of Traders (COT) report shows gold ends 2016 with a muffle, as for a seventh straight week, speculative traders lowered their gold positions. But despite the trader negativity, gold rose on the week, which is not unheard of - but it usually portends a short-term turnaround for the metal.

Also, we saw something else very interesting last week as gold ETF holdings broke its 33-day losing streak, the longest since 2004, as ETFs finally increased physical gold holdings.

We will give our view and will get a little more into some of these details, but before that let us give investors a quick overview into the COT report for those who are not familiar with it.

About the COT Report
The COT report is issued by the CFTC every Friday to provide market participants a breakdown of each Tuesday's open interest for markets in which 20 or more traders hold positions equal to or above the reporting levels established by the CFTC. In plain English, this is a report that shows what positions major traders are taking in a number of financial and commodity markets.

Though there is never one report or tool that can give you certainty about where prices are headed in the future, the COT report does allow the small investors a way to see what larger traders are doing and to possibly position their positions accordingly. For example, if there is a large managed money short interest in gold, that is often an indicator that a rally may be coming because the market is overly pessimistic and saturated with shorts - so you may want to take a long position.

The big disadvantage to the COT report is that it is issued on Friday but only contains Tuesday's data - so there is a three-day lag between the report and the actual positioning of traders. This is an eternity by short-term investing standards, and by the time the new report is issued, it has already missed a large amount of trading activity.

There are many different ways to read the COT report, and there are many analysts that focus specifically on this report (we are not one of them) so we won't claim to be the experts on it. What we focus on in this report is the "Managed Money" positions and total open interest as it gives us an idea of how much interest there is in the gold market and how the short-term players are positioned.

This Week's Gold COT Report
https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fas...4490234375.png
This week's report showed a drop in speculative gold positions for a seventh straight week, as longs decreased their positions by a chunky 6,017 contracts on the week. On the other side, speculative shorts increased their own positions by 6,647 contracts on the week.

Moving on, the net position of all gold traders can be seen below:
https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fas...4658176372.png
Source: GoldChartsRUS
The red line represents the net speculative gold positions of money managers (the biggest category of speculative trader), and as investors can see, the decline in speculative traders continues.

As we said last week, we are now at some of the lowest speculative levels of the past decade, though we haven't yet hit the lows we saw at the end of 2015 before gold's spectacular rise earlier this year. Sentiment wise, speculators want nothing to do with gold and are stampeding out. Money managers are only net long 41,000 contracts, while producers and merchants are steadily increasing their positions.

As for silver, the week's action looked like the following:
https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fas...4789770503.png
Source: GoldChartsRUS
The red line, which represents the net speculative positions of money managers, showed a drop in speculative positions for the week which should be no surprise since silver tends to track gold.

Silver speculative positions remain relatively high compared to gold speculative positions while producers/merchants have not been increasing their own positions nearly as much as those same entities on the gold side. This suggests to us that, at least per the COT report, gold remains much more oversold than silver. We still like silver for other reasons, but silver speculative trader positions remain relatively high compared to their gold counterparts.

Gold ETF Holdings Finally Rise
For more than a month, ETF gold holdings have been sold off, and according to Bloomberg, experienced their longest gold disbursement streak since 2004.
https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fas...4955444338.png
Source: Bloomberg
Our data is a bit more inclusive than Bloomberg's as we include mutual funds and gold repositories, but it shows the same massive decline in gold holdings.
https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fas...5506820404.png
Source: GoldChartsRUS
The correlation with gold ETF holdings is very clear from the chart above, and even though it is not a major increase over the last week, it is something for gold bulls to monitor as transparent gold holdings increased.


Our Take and What This Means for Investors
We are working on our "Gold Looking Forward" piece to detail why we think gold is an excellent investment as we close 2016, but strictly based on the COT report gold looks extremely oversold after seven consecutive weeks of speculative traders lowering their net long position. With speculative traders holding a little over 41,000 net long gold contracts, we are at some of our lowest levels since early February - gold has truly retraced most of its 2016 gains. Additionally, when compared to the net speculative position over the last 10 years, we are close to some of the lowest net speculative long levels that we have seen in gold.

This makes it simple when it comes to gold because if you are an investor who believes that any of the following could occur in 2017:

1. Rising interest rates could cause a crisis with over-levered governments, companies, or individuals.
2. Donald Trump's policies may not pan out as optimistically predicted by stock markets.
3. The reversal of globalization continues as per populist political rhetoric and nations enact protectionist policies that hurt global trade.
4. The European Union begins to fall apart as the UK, Italy, France, or others elect anti-EU parties.
5. The rift between the US and China grows and causes China to continue to sell US Treasury holdings.
6. The rift between the US and Saudi Arabia grows and causes Saudi Arabia to sell US Treasury holdings.
7. The market turns its attention to the US fiscal picture and realizes that with $1 trillion of new debt accumulated in 2016 and trillions more of entitlements moving forward, the picture does not look good.
8. All the quantitative easing enacted by global central banks reignites inflation.

Then now makes an excellent time to buy gold as speculators are at some of their lowest net long levels over the past decade.


We believe much of these are not priced in by markets, and if one or more of these things occur, then gold should have another good year in 2017. Thus, based on the extremely negative sentiment by gold speculators, this makes it a very good time to buy gold strictly based on it unpopularity. Contrarian investors should seek to accumulate gold and the ETFs such as the SPDR Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA:GLD), the ETFS Physical Swiss Gold Trust ETF (NYSEARCA:SGOL), the iShares Silver Trust (NYSEARCA:SLV), and quality precious metals miners and explorers.


Disclosure: I am/we are long SGOL, SIVR.
I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

http://stockcharts.com/articles/comm...-for-2017.html

Snippet:
2016 marked a breakout on the $USD above a 2 year consolidation. But the big picture on the $USD is probably the most important at this level at this time of year. Lets walk through some charts.

On the chart below, which is monthly, there are a lot of $USD reversals in direction around the first of the year.
1985, 1988, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994,1995,1997,1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2016 all have a reversal within a few weeks either side of the new year. 21 out of 32 years is a high expectancy.

Another factor for the Dollar is the current set up is eerily reminiscent of the 1999 mid year top around 104.50 where the blue arrow is. After working hard to get through the 100 level, the dollar pulled back in late 1998. Then it surged up, breaking out by a couple of cents above the 102 level, only to roll over, go back and retest the support on the breakout. The dollar fell almost 7 points before reversing at 97 and making a spectacular 2-year run to 121. As you can see, the charts are set up extremely similar from 1987-1997 and 2004 to 2014. Even the price action on the Percentage Price Oscillator (PPO) is quite similar. So if the $USD were to pull back 5 - 7 points to get back under the 100 and check for support one more time, this would still keep the same set up intact. All that to suggest, we may have seen this movie in the dollar before.
http://d.stockcharts.com/img/article...2012020170.png

Before moving onto the weekly time frame for the $USD, I think it is important to look back at the 1998-2000 period for the dollar more closely and compare it to today. The end of the 1999 calendar year had the $SPX closing close to all time highs, the 10 Year treasury yield had just violated a 16-year downtrend line, and Gold had a remarkable run that broke above a 4-year downtrend. While all of that matches the current story, the recent surge in 10-year Yields has been more vertical than the move back in 1999. However, we have also seen the yield curve surge above a trend line in 1994, 1999, 2006, and 2016.

http://d.stockcharts.com/img/article...1721090366.pngThere are a lot of similarities to 1999 right now with the current chart shape of the $USD. While thousands of brokers maybe right saying there are no bubbles out there currently, this is a good time to review the $SPX relative to the $USD back in 1999-2000. If I am wrong, that's fine, but if it plays out the same, it won't surprise us in 2017. I've put the Dark blue arrow where things seem to match the $USD to now. Obviously calendar wise, it would be closer if it was the light blue arrow at year end. What appears to have happened is as the $USD climbed, the US larg cap stocks had more trouble internationally and the market stalled for the entire year. As the dollar continued to move up, the $SPX got weaker and yields dropped, meaning bond prices were rising. So let's throw that on the table as a potential scenario for 2017.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...ops+to+zero%29

Snippet:
In China, announcing new (and ever more ineffective) capital controls has become a daily thing.

Last week, Beijing unveiled its latest set of capital controls according to which Chinese banks would be required to report all yuan-denominated cash transactions exceeding 50,000 yuan (around 7,100 US dollars) to the People's Bank of China (PBOC), down from the current level of 200,000 yuan. Cross-border transfers more than 200,000 yuan by individuals would also be subject to the report process.

Then, overnight, China's currency regulator, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) added its own round of capital control limitations, when it announced it wanted to close loopholes exploited for purposes such as money laundering and illegally channeling money into overseas property. As a result, while the regulator kept existing quotas of $50,000 of foreign currency per person a year, citizens faced draconian new currency exchange disclosure requirements, requiring foreign currency buyers to indicate how they plan to use the money and when they plan to spend it. Additionally, mainlanders would be restricted from using the FX proceeds to buy overseas property, securities, life insurance or other investment-style insurance products. In fact, among the list of approved uses of funds are tourism, schooling, business travel and medical care. Which means any offshore asset purchases have been effectively limited.
What made the above capital controls especially amusing is that as Xinhua reported over the weekend, "the policy stoked worries that the government is trying to impose capital control in a disguised form." And since the official admission of capital controls would only lead to even more panicked outflows, PBOC economist Ma Jun intervened, saying that the new cash transaction rules, i.e. capital controls, are "not capital control at all."

We leave it up to readers to decide what that means.

Then, fast forward two days when China, no longer bothering with euphemisms, admitted that it has "studied possible scenarios of yuan exchange rate and capital outflows in 2017 based on models, stress tests and field research, and is preparing contingency plans", Bloomberg reported citing people familiar with the matter.

Among the "contingency plans" are proposals recently suggested by such banana countries as Turkey and Venezuela, which include China's government asking state-owned enterprises to temporarily convert some foreign-currency holdings into yuan, said Bloomberg's sources, who are clearly mostly interested in the market's response to this particular Bloomberg-mediated trial balloon

Bloomberg adds that financial regulators have already encouraged some SOEs to sell FX under current account.

But most troubling is the admission that "China may further cut U.S. Treasury holdings in 2017 if needed to keep exchange rate stable; size of reduction depends on capital outflows and FX market intervention," or in other words, the worst-case scenario which so many serious "economists" have said can not conceivably happen.

Well, China is now actively considering it, which means that should the Yuan continues to slide, Beijing is close to implementing it.
Not unexpectedly, as a result of this latest daily escalation in China's capital controls, the offshore Yuan is now surging, and is back under 6.95, up nearly 200 pips on the session so far.

https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016...his-one-thing/

Snippet:
Last April I wrote a post about the specific trading style that has made guys like Stan Druckenmiller, Jim Rogers and George Soros so successful. That post focused on a single quote from Druck which I found particularly compelling because it goes against what most investment pundits would tell you is the right way to invest.

But Druck made an even more poignant and timely point in that speech a year ago. He singled out specifically what he believes to be the most important factor behind the returns in risk assets, namely the stock market:

Earnings dont move the overall market; its the Federal Reserve Board focus on the central banks and focus on the movement of liquidity most people in the market are looking for earnings and conventional measures. Its liquidity that moves markets.

Interestingly, his further point in this regard was not the popular, dont fight the Fed. In fact, it was just the opposite:
80% of the big, big money we made was in bear markets and equities because crazy things were going on in response to what I would call central bank mistakes during that 30-year period.

He goes on to cite a specific time when the Fed made perhaps its most egregious error which led to some of the greatest profit opportunities of his career:
Probably in my mind the poster child for a central bank mistake was actually the U.S. Federal Reserve in 2003 and 2004 we had great conviction that the Federal Reserve was making a mistake with way too loose monetary policy.

And Too loose monetary policy has severe repercussions:
The problem with this is when you have zero money for so long, the marginal benefits you get through consumption greatly diminish, but theres one thing that doesnt diminish, which is unintended consequences.

Whats more, he says its happening again today:
So thats why, if you look at today Im experiencing a very strong sense of deja vu If you look to me at the real root cause of the financial crisis, were doubling down. Our monetary policy is so much more reckless and so much more aggressively pushing the people in this room and everybody else out the risk curve that were doubling down on the same policy that really put us there and enabled those bad actors to do what they do.

The trouble is we only discover the consequences once its too late for the Fed to really do anything about it:
I feel more like it was in 04 where every bone in my body said this is a bad risk reward, but I cant figure out how its going to end. I just know its going to end badly and a year and a half later we figure out it was housing and subprime. I feel the same way now.

It could be even worse this time because the policies are that much more aggressive than they were back then:
This is the first time in 102 years, A, the central bank bought bonds and, B, that weve had zero interest rates and weve had them for five or six years To me its incredible.

More aggressive policy creates even bigger potential problems:
There are early signs In 2006 and 2007, which I think most of us would agree was not a down period in terms of speculation, corporations issued $700 billion in debt over that two-year period. In 2013 and 2014 theyve already issued $1.1 trillion in debt. 50% more than they did in the 06, 07 period over the same time period. But more disturbing to me if you look at the debt that is being issued in the last two years back in 06, 07 28% of that debt was B rated. Today 71% of the debt thats been issued in the last 2 years is B rated. So, not only have we issued a lot more debt, were doing so at much less standards.



As a reminder, these are the words of the greatest money manager alive today. Since he gave this speech almost a year ago the corporate bond market has deteriorated significantly. And Im fairly certain he doesnt see the junk rout as being contained.


So how is Druck positioning himself to deal with the consequences of another central bank mistake? He recently made a massive bet on gold.

Hello Benjamin and all other traders!

This topic is very interesting. May I join your club?

Hi All

Hope everyone is doing well.

10-Year US Treasury Note and GOLD. 100% correlation. Benjaminis, any graphics we still need them?
< That post focused on a single quote from Druck which I found particularly compelling because it goes against what most investment pundits would tell you is the right way to invest.> < He recently made a massive bet on gold .> BenjaminIs, I think it is necessary to put a pending order for gold, which is in the area of 1194.00 it would be?

Good day vladimir8686

You are welcome to open a FXCM UK $50,000 US Funds Demo Account in order to learn the method of Forex trading shared here. Please follow the instructions and if you have any questions then post them here. Thank You.


Benjaminis

Good Morning KeepCalmfx

I thank you for putting up the charts. By examining them we have a snapshot of where we are at the moment as we reach 6 AM EST in North America.

Have a good Forex trading day. We need to decide later today if we have Risk On or Risk Off. There are information releases today already scheduled that could set the tone for Risk Off or Risk On.


Benjaminis

Good Morning wayfarer

I start by thanking you and congratulating you both at the same time. I will explain to you and everyone else why I say that. As many who post here regularly know and are part of our program to learn new ways to trade Forex can see everyday since December 3, 2016 when I started this thread that there is very many different points of view shared here. Eventually the truth is exposed and we deal with REALITY not FICTION. Later this morning as part of my morning thoughts I will link an article that I read the first thing this morning by Paul Craig Roberts.

When I spend hours and hours reading and researching and understanding and YES also learning myself when I come across a very important and FACTUAL post that our friend and responsible Forex trader wayfarer has not only read and understood then it is a big help to him and all of us here on this thread.

The IMPORTANCE of the CORRELATION of Gold to the US 10 Year Bonds (Treasuries) is the KEY to Money Flow and many many other things. My thank you is for not only reading the information that I research and share here it is to understand it enough to have taken the initiative to post the IMPORTANT CORRELATION CHART. We should post that chart everyday and also follow it in different time frames on the Charts to assist us in watching and CORRELATING the Money Flow.

I will shortly link the Paul Craig Roberts article in the full and everyone should read it and then post your brief feedback here to share with all of us.


Benjaminis

Morning Thoughts - Daily

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2...7/#more-139985

PLEASE READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE AND THEN SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS BRIEFLY ON WHAT YOU HAVE CONCLUDED. THANK YOU. Benjaminis Benjamin.

Can Trump Fix The Economy In 2017?
Guest Post by Paul Craig Roberts
The Western world and that part of the world that partakes of Western explanations live in a fictional world. We see this everywhere we looking the alleged machinations of Russia to elect Donald Trump president of the US, in claims that Saddam Hussein and his (nonexistent) weapons of mass destruction were a threat to the United States (a mushroom cloud over American cities), that Assad of Syria used chemical weapons against his own people, that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, that a few Saudi Arabians outwitted the entirety of the US, EU, and Israeli intelligence services and delivered the greatest humiliation to the worlds only superpower in the history of mankind, that Russia invaded Ukraine and could at any moment invade the Baltic's and Poland, that the US rate of unemployment is 4.6%, that China's trade surplus with the US is due to Chinese currency manipulation, and so on and on.

Allegedly we live in a scientific era of information, but what good can come from faulty orchestrated information? As long as fake news delivered by prostitutes serves powerful private and governmental interests, how can we know the truth about anything?

For example, consider the claim found everywhere in US government and US media statements that the massive US trade deficit with China is the result of Chinese currency manipulation, keeping the yuan under priced relative to the US dollar.


This false claim, which is widely accepted as truth even by Russian writers on Russian websites ( http://www.strategic-culture.org/new...trade-war.html ), is nonsense. China's currency is pegged to the US dollar. It moves with the dollar. China pegged its currency to the US dollar in order to create confidence in the Chinese currency. Over the past decade China has adjusted the peg of its currency to the dollar and permitted a rise in the value of the Chinese currency from 8.1 yuan to 6.9 yuan to the US dollar. (The yuan reached a strength of 6 to the dollar, but a rising dollar was pulling up the yuan, causing China to widen the float in order to avoid undue appreciation because of the US dollars rise to other Asian and European currencies.) How is a rising yuan currency manipulation? Dont expect an answer from the "presstitute" financial media or the junk economists who comprise the neoliberal economics profession.


The function of the myth of Chinese currency manipulation is to hide from view the fact that the massive US trade deficit with China is due to US corporations offshoring their production for US markets to China. When US corporations bring goods and services produced offshore back to the US for sale, they enter as imports, thus swelling the trade deficit. The myth about currency manipulation shifts the blame from US corporations to China, while in fact it is the return of offshored production, such as Apple computers, for sale to Americans that swells the US trade deficit.

US corporations produce offshore because the much lower labor costs result in higher profits, higher stock prices for shareholders, and in performance bonuses for executives. One of the main causes for the high Dow Jones averages and the worsened income and wealth distribution in the US is the offshoring of jobs. In 2016 the richest people added $237 billion to their wealth, while the rise in student loan, auto loan, and credit card debt combined with stagnant or declining income left ordinary Americans poorer. During the 21st century, household indebtedness has risen from about 70% of GDP to about 80%. Personal income has not risen in keeping with personal debt.

The offshoring of jobs benefits only a small number of shareholders and executives, and it imposes massive external costs on American society. Former prosperous manufacturing states are in long term depression. Median real family incomes have fallen. Real estate values in abandoned manufacturing areas have fallen. The tax base has eroded. State and local government pension systems cannot meet their obligations. The social safety net is unraveling.
To get an idea of the external costs that offshoring imposes on the American population, go online and look at the pictures of decrepit Detroit, formerly an industrial powerhouse. Schools and libraries are abandoned. Public buildings are abandoned. Factories are abandoned. Homes are abandoned. Churches are abandoned. Here is one 4 minute video:



And it is not only Detroit. In my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism (Clarity Press, 2013), I report the 2010 US Census data. The population of Detroit, formerly Americas fourth largest city, declined by 25 percent in the first decade of the 21st century. Gary, Indiana, lost 22 percent of its population. Flint, Michigan, lost 18 percent. Cleveland, Ohio lost 17 percent. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania lost 7 percent. South Bend lost 6 percent. Rochester, New York, lost 4 percent. St. Louis, Missouri, lost 20 percent. these cities were once the home of American manufacturing and industrial might.


Instead of telling the truth, the "presstitute" financial media and the corrupt US economics profession have hidden the massive social and external costs of jobs offshoring under the totally false claim that offshoring is good for the economy. In my book, I take to task corporate shills such as Dartmouth's Matthew Slaughter and Harvard's Michael Porter, who produced through incompetence or complicity erroneous reports of the great benefits to Americans of having their jobs given to Chinese and American cities left in ruins.


Throughout its history the US has suffered from public lies, but not until the Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes did lies become so ubiquitous that truth disappeared.


Consider the November jobs report. We were told that the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.6% and that 178,000 new US jobs were created in November. The recovery is on course, etc. But what are the real facts?

The unemployment rate does not include discouraged workers who have been unable to find employment and have ceased job hunting, which is expensive, exhausting and demoralizing. In other words, unemployed people are being pushed into the discouraged category faster than they can find jobs. That is the explanation for the low official unemployment rate. Moreover, this reported low rate of unemployment is inconsistent with the declining labor force participation rate. When jobs are available, people enter the work force in order to take advantage of the employment opportunities, and the labor force participation rate rises.


The reporting by the financial presstitutes adds to the deception. We are given the number of 178,000 new jobs in November. And that is it. However, the data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows many problematic aspects of the data. For example, only 9,000 of the claimed 178,000 jobs are full time jobs (defined as 35 hours or more per week). October saw a loss of 103,000 full time jobs from September, and September had 5,000 fewer full time jobs than August. No one explains how an economy losing full time jobs is in recovery.


The age distribution of the November new jobs is disturbing. 77,000 of the jobs went to those 55 and over. Only 4,000 jobs went to the household forming ages of 25-34.


The marital status distribution of the jobs is also troubling. In November there were 95,000 fewer employed married men with spouse present and 74,000 fewer employed married women with spouse present than in October. In October there were 331,000 fewer married men and 87,000 fewer married women employed than in September.

One can conclude from these large differences month to month that the official statistics are not good, which might well be the case. For example, as I have stressed in my reports on the monthly payroll employment releases, there is always a large number of new jobs for waitresses and bartenders. Yet restaurant traffic has declined for 9 consecutive months. Why do restaurants hire more employees as traffic declines?

As John Williams (shadowstats.com) has informed us, the monthly payroll jobs claims might consist entirely of add-ons from estimates from a flawed birth/death model and manipulations of seasonal adjustments. In other words, the reported new jobs might only be statistical illusions.

John Williams also emphasizes that the claimed real GDP growth numbers might be entirely the products of the under-measurement of inflation. Some years ago the inflation measures were reformed in order to cheat those on Social Security out of cost-of-living adjustments. In place of a weighted index that calculated the cost of a constant standard of living, substitution was introduced. In the reformed index, if the price of an item in the index rises, a lower-priced item is substituted in its place, thus negating the inflationary impact of the price rise. Also, price rises are defined away as quality improvements. Clearly, this is an index designed to under report rising prices.

The bottom line is that the recovery allegedly underway since June 2009 might be a statistical illusion produced by a flawed measure of inflation.
What can Americans expect from the economy in 2017? First, some perspective. The defeat of stagflation by President Reagan's supply-side policy gave the Clinton regime a good economy. The improved US economy was not entirely a good thing, because it masked the adverse consequences of jobs offshoring that began in earnest after the Soviet collapse in 1991.


The Soviet collapse encouraged the change in attitude of the Indian and Chinese governments toward foreign capital. Wall Street and big box retailers such as Walmart forced the relocation of much of US manufacturing to China, to be followed after the rise of the high speed Internet by offshoring professional skill jobs such as software engineering to India. These relocation's of US economic activity to foreign locations hollowed out the US economy and reduced the job opportunities for Americans.

The growth of real median family income ceased. Without increases in consumer spending to drive the economy, the Federal Reserve substituted a growth in consumer debt for the missing growth in real median family income. But the growth of consumer debt is limited by the lack of growth in consumer income. Thus, an economy dependent on debt expansion is limited in its ability to expand. Unlike the federal government, the American people cannot print money with which to pay their bills.

Alone among those contending for political office, president-elect Trump has fingered jobs offshoring as a blow to the American people and the US economy. It remains to be seen what he can do about it, as jobs offshoring serves the interests of the global corporations and their shareholders.

For many years now the monthly payroll jobs reports show the US descending into Third World status, with the vast bulk of the claimed new jobs in lowly paid, non-trade-able domestic services. The BLS 10-year job projections show few new jobs that require a university degree. If high value-added, high productivity middle class jobs cannot be brought back to the US, the American economic future is one of continuing decline into Third World status.

Considering the constraints on the consumer, a large share of corporate profits has come from labor cost savings from jobs offshoring. For corporations such as Apple, whose products are almost entirely produced in Chinese factories, there are no more profits to be secured from jobs offshoring. To keep the profits flowing, Apple plans to replace the inexpensive Chinese labor with robots, which do not have to be paid any wage. What better shows the disconnect between capital and labor than to robotize Chinese factories in the face of an excess supply of labor?

Paul Samuelson's economic textbook taught the fallacy of composition, what is good for the individual might not be good for the group. The Keynesian economists applied this to savings. Saving is good for the individual, but if aggregate saving exceeds investment, aggregate demand falls, pulling down income, employment, and saving.

This is the case with jobs offshoring. It can increase profits for the firm, but in the aggregate it decreases aggregate income of the population and limits sales growth. What jobs offshoring does in this respect will be done in spades by robotics.


When I read economists and financial presstitutes glorifying the cost savings of robotics, I wonder where their mind is or if they have one. Robots dont purchase housing, home furnishings and appliances, cars, food, clothing, vacations, entertainment. When robots have the jobs, where do humans get the incomes with which to purchase the products produced by robots?

This examined question has extraordinary implications for property rights and the social organization of society. Ralph Gomory told me a few years ago that a handful of people hold the robotic patents. Therefore, in a robotized world, the distribution of income and wealth would be concentrated in the hands of a few dozen people. Indeed, would there be any income or wealth of any magnitude? The only way humans could survive would be to again become self-sufficient farmers with no monetary income to purchase products made by robots. As few would be able to purchase products made by robots, there would be no source for income and wealth for the patent holders.


I am convinced that if robotics is going to supplant human labor, the patents will have to be socialized, and income distributed on a relatively equal basis throughout society.

So, can Trump fix the economy in 2017?

There can be no fix unless the ladders of upward mobility that made the US an opportunity society can be put back in place. This will require bringing home the off shored middle class jobs or, assuming that new high value-added jobs could somehow be created, preventing the new jobs from being moved offshore.
There is a way to do this: Base the corporate tax rate on the geographical location where corporations add value to their product. If corporations add value domestically with US labor, the tax rate would be low. If the value is added abroad, the tax rate would be high. The tax rate can be adjusted to offset the benefits of lower costs abroad.

Despite the propaganda about globalism and free trade, the US economy was built on protection, and its strength was the domestic market. US prosperity was never dependent on exports. And as the US dollar is the world reserve currency, the US doesnt need exports in order to pay for its imports. This is why the US can tolerate the trade deficits caused by jobs offshoring.

Globalism is a concoction by the neoliberal junk economists in complicity with the big banks, Wall Street, and multinational corporations. Globalism is a disguise for the exploitation of the many in behalf of the few. The alleged benefits of globalism were used to justify the offshoring of jobs and to enrich corporate executives and shareholders.


It is the domestic economy that is important, not the global economy. The suffering population in flyover America finally learned this lesson and elected Trump.
Can Trump script The Escape From Globalism? He could lose the fight. Globalism has been institutionalized. The large corporations that have off-shored their production for US markets would oppose moves against jobs offshoring. So would all their shills in the economics profession and financial media.

I do NOT know the extent to which globalism has taken root in peoples minds in Asia, Africa, and South America, but in European some in Putin's Russia people are brainwashed in the belief that they cant exit globalism without paying a large economic price.



Consider, for example, the Greeks. For the sake of the balance sheets of a handful of northern European (and perhaps US) banks, the Greek and Portuguese peoples have been forced into extreme austerity, resulting in such high unemployment and plummeting living standards that women have been forced into prostitution in order to survive. This totally unnecessary outcome has occurred because the Greek and Portuguese peoples and governments are so brainwashed that they believe they cannot survive as independent countries without globalism and the entry to globalism provided by EU membership. In the UK 45% of the population suffers from the same misconception.


Globalism is the latest technique by which capitalism loots and destroys. In the Western world it is the working and middle classes that are looted of their jobs and careers. In Asia, Africa, and Latin America self-sufficient farming communities are looted of their land and forced into mono-culture as laborers who produce an export crop. Countries formerly self-sufficient in food become dependent on food imports, and their currency, which carries that burden, is subject to endless speculation and manipulation.


Was it universal ignorance or bribes that compelled governments everywhere to ransom their populations to globalism?


Front line journalists, such as Chris Hedges, who have seen and reported a lot, have concluded that the fate of the world is in such few hands that act only in their narrow self-interests that only revolution can correct the imbalance between the interest of a handful of oligarchs and the mass of humanity. Hedges position is not an easy one with which to argue.


Trump descending into the snake pit that is Washington, D.C., needs to remember what happened to President Jimmy Carter. In fact, the best thing Trump can do for his presidency is to go spend some time with Carter prior to taking office.


Carter was an outsider, a principled person, and the Washington establishment did not want him. They reduced his effectiveness by framing up his budget director and chief of staff. The same thing can happen to Trump, assuming he is able to get his appointees confirmed by the Senate, members of which are allied with the CIA against Trump.


"Reaganites" had a similar experience in the Reagan administration. Reagan had political experience as governor of California, the largest state, but he was an outsider to the Republican establishment, whose candidate for the presidential nomination was George H.W. Bush.


Reagan defeated Bush for the nomination, but was advised by Republicans, who remembered the Goldwater wipe out when the Rockefeller forces turned on Goldwater for not choosing the defeated Rockefeller as his VP running mate, costing Goldwater the election, to select Bush as VP. Otherwise, Reagan would find himself, like Goldwater, running against both the Democratic and Republican establishments.


Reagan's first term took place with George H.W. Bush's main operative as chief of staff of the White House. This confronted me with problems as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy where I was the point man for Reagan's supply-side economic policy.


Both political party establishments are more interested in controlling the party than in doing well for the country. During President Carters four years, the main concern of the Democratic establishment was in regaining control of the party from the forces that had sent an outsider to the White House. During Reagan's eight years, the main concern of the Republican establishment was in regaining control of the Republican party from Reaganites.


It is likely that Trump will now experience in spades what presidents Carter and Reagan experienced. The effort will be made to force him into compromises and to neuter his agenda. Ironically, this determined attack on Trump is being aided by the left wing, progressive forces that stand to gain by Trumps standing up for the working and middle classes and for peace with Russia. Many of the liberal, progressive, left wing websites are already soliciting donations in order to fight against Trump.


So, even when we get a president who might try to represent the interests of the American people, those who claim to speak in behalf of the people join in the oligarchs attack on Trump. The left side of the spectrum seems always, like the extreme right wing side, to defer to their hatreds: Trump is a billionaire = hatred. Trump appointed an energy magnate = hatred. Trump appointed two 3-star generals = warmonger and more hatred.


The liberal, progressive, left wing cannot get beyond their bogeymen. Of course, they might be correct. However, as I have emphasized, Trump has chosen mavericks who have gone against the establishment. Moreover, these are strong men, like Trump, which is what it takes to bring change from above. The Exxon CEO wants energy deals, not war, with Russia. Gen. Flynn is the one who exposed on TV Obama's use of ISIS to overthrow Syria against the recommendation of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Gen. Mattis is the one who challenged the effectiveness of torture.


Trumps main appointments are people who have challenged the Establishment. The usual assortment of establishment-approved appointees cannot bring change to Washington.


The liberal, progressive, left-wing should be happy at the prospect of a government on the outs with the Establishment. Instead, the liberal, progressive, left has aligned with the Establishment in opposition to Trump.


Every day I receive a half dozen requests for donations to help us fight Donald Trump. What are these people thinking? Why do they want to fight someone that the entire US political establishment opposes? What they should first try is to gain Trumps confidence and win him to their agenda, as General Mattis did.


I cannot assure you that Trump is not another fake like Obama. But it is a mistake to begin with this assumption. Why write off in advance the only person with the courage to put his life on the line and take on the corrupt and evil Washington establishment?


Why help the Establishment defeat Trump? If Trump sells out Americans, we can turn on him then, or we can decide whether Chris Hedges is correct that only revolution can rectify the situation.

Comments from Benjaminis

Good Morning , KeepCalmfx and dttsomh

Since the both of you were the first to read this excellent and informing article you will also notice that I just finished reading every word myself and proof reading the article and correcting spelling errors and adding spacing to it as well. Why would I take my time this morning to do that ? First of all, I intend to copy this article by Paul Craig Roberts and send it to family , friends and associates and acquaintances.

The IMPORTANCE of this article is clearly evident to me and that is why I have linked it here and done what I have just explained.

Now I will continue on with my day.


Benjaminis

Dow Jones and USATN-10

Good Day

I have logged on to your FXCM UK $50,000 US Dollars Demo Account and placed the 18 symbols that we use in three rows of six. I have arranged the currency pairs in the proper order. Please post here when you have logged on and reviewed what you see and post any questions that you have here on our thread.

Your FXCM UK User Number is as you know 50785188. Only yourself and myself have the password.

Thank you for following my instructions.


Benjaminis

Hello vladimir8686

I see you online here on our thread so now you can see the instructions that I have given mbleska and please proceed to open your FXCM UK Demo Account. Thank You.


Benjaminis

Signal hidden divergence. When the price crosses the blue line will SELL.

Benjamin, I have opened a demo acc and sent my password to you via pm. My User Number: D102751444001
But unfortunately cant log in into it right now to check it, I have get the error while trying to connect to the web platform of FXCM. It looks like a firewall at my job blocks it, will try it tomorrow when get home. Will read the posts here for the time being. Also want to warn you that my English is so so, so pls disregard any mistakes. Thank you