Thread: Introducing $JAX.v $JXMNF Jaxon Mining, who’s 100% owned 466 square km Hazelton property in the Skeena Arch will prove that this mineral-rich region rivals that of the Golden Triangle. Recent chip samples in multiple surface grabs show grades of up to 5300 g/t Ag

Why do we track institutional footprints? 🐘 (Thread)

Large institutions like mutual funds, hedge funds, banks, insurance companies, trusts, etc. amount for over 75% of all volume. These institutions move the market, not you and I.

It makes sense that if these guys are moving the markets, we would ideally want to buy the same stocks they are buying, but before they buy them? Right?

So, let’s get a clear understanding of how and why this is so important and what this might look like behind the scenes.

For starters, let’s discuss what we mean by a large institution. In this case, we are referring to the many funds, pensions, trusts, etc. that are responsible for managing tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars.

Hence, they easily attract and can afford to retain the planet’s top talent, not to mention, their research budgets are enormous.

They have access to information and resources that the retail crowd simply does not, and if they did, it would likely be extremely unaffordable.

Diminishing Marginal Returns

The productivity of our debt is collapsing and that is creating a major problem.

The problem is here now, and not in the future.

Here is why:

1)

Charted below is the increase in total debt and the increase in nominal GDP in the 8 quarters before each of the last six recessions.

In other words, how much did debt increase, and how much did GDP increase in the final two years of each economic expansion?

2)

As the chart shows, it is taking a larger amount of debt to increase GDP.

3)

Graphed another way, leading up to the 1980 recession it took about 1.94 dollars of debt to boost GDP by 1 dollar.

Leading up to the COVID recession saw debt increase nearly 6 dollars for each 1 dollar of GDP growth.

4)

Flipping the ratio shows the decline in the utility of debt.

We are only generating about 15-20 cents of growth for each dollar of debt.

This becomes a larger problem when we think about "growth rates" instead of nominal dollars.

5)

A thread on an interesting report by Goldman Sachs' Peter Oppenheimer, the bank's chief global equity strategist. He points out that Goldman's "Bear Market Risk Indicator" is looking ominous.

There are three factors that suggest that the recent stability could evaporate and that equities are "about to enter a sustained bear market", Oppenheimer says.

First is the fact that growth, inflation and interest rate outlook is unfriendly for equities.

Second is that greater volatility, such as multiple corrections and new peaks (which we've seen in 2018) tend to presage a full bear market.

Here is Goldman's data showing how falls and bounces tend to come ahead of "the dramatic final fall".

THREAD - (Short term Options)

Many of the messages I get regarding options are referencing outside the money (OTM) calls w/ expirations a week or two out (or less)

It's no wonder these traders are often very concerned (even frantic) about the outcome of their trades.

Unless you are an expert technician, and/or have serious market knowledge and intuitive skills, I recommend buying *at least* a month or two of time, and not holding through an earnings report unless you've trimmed your position at a significant profit, or are playing LEAPS.

(LEAPS = Long-term Equity Anticipation Securities
a.k.a. Long term options typically w/ an expiration of longer than a year)

While playing OTM weekly options has the potential for huge returns, & will undoubtedly get your adrenaline pumping, it's also an easy way to lose your💰

*IF* you insist on playing OTM weeklies, be very cognizant of your position sizing.

Each trade should be a *very* small percentage of your account, and you should assume that every trade you make is going to zero.

However, you don't need to play short-term options to make *serious* money over time...

You can still make massive returns on options that have expirations that are 2+ months, even 2+ years out without taking on so much immediate risk.

@Lol_0fficial @HoodieMorr @shoe0nhead Oh my goodness. Economic interests -absolutely- tie into this. You need to think about 1) that there are different factions involved & 2) people see economic interest more broadly than just govt spending. On the first point, evangelicals have been part of the Republican base B1/X

@HoodieMorr @shoe0nhead since the party became identical with movement conservatism, but movement conservatism only became significant as an ideology because of coalition building. Movement conservatism brought together the hawks, laissez faire economics, and cultural conservatives. B2/X

@HoodieMorr @shoe0nhead Evangelicals have always been the best organized element of the cultural conservative faction. Trump's coalition is a new one and it includes cultural conservatives, but that is the only element that is unchanged - and really even it is somewhat different.
B3/X

@HoodieMorr @shoe0nhead A minor difference is accepting Obergefell (which has made it possible for openly gay people to be highly visible members of the new coalition), but the main difference is that social conservatives no longer make a priority of the politician as an individual
B4/X

@HoodieMorr @shoe0nhead as opposed to focusing on politicians merely as conduits through which government is affected. The foreign policy contingent changed completely. The hawks are just gone from Trump's coalition. Instead there's a deep skepticism of interventionism, but without the desire B5/x