#HDFC #Weekly
Looking considerably weak to me as long as it stays below 2350
Weekly RSI & MACD are quite bearish
#Nifty #Stocks #StockMarket #NBFC #HFC
Not trading call, academic post
More from Techno Prince
More from Hdfc
IF #Nifty to go to 18850-19713 & more, heavy weights such as
#Hdfc (3190++)
#Hdfcbank (1724++)
#Reliance (2834++)
#ITC (274++) these are "just min. targets"
& many more would move up significantly
@rlnarayanan https://t.co/iVYE1F7l6v
#Hdfc (3190++)
#Hdfcbank (1724++)
#Reliance (2834++)
#ITC (274++) these are "just min. targets"
& many more would move up significantly
@rlnarayanan https://t.co/iVYE1F7l6v
#Nifty 3rd is sub-dividing as in chart:
— Van Ilango (JustNifty) (@JustNifty) October 13, 2021
[1]st: 16396 - 17793 = 1397
[2]nd: 17793-17948-17453 - Irregular flat
[3]rd: 17453+1397=18850 OR
: 17453+1928=19381 OR
: 17453+2096=19549 OR
: 17453+2260=19713 OR
Nothing wrong in projecting till holds "17990"
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
