just another level.
just another day.
crossed handsomely.
A C&H on INFY.
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) March 31, 2021
Once it crosses a horizontal previous High, it hasn't even retested the same level again. So far from 2020 Lows. #Fractal pic.twitter.com/Gw6TXjNqXy
More from Piyush Chaudhry
#APOLLOHOSP @ 2110 - Long Term Chart.
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) November 12, 2020
I see a fair possibility of the stock rising to 3500-5000 zone over next few years and an open possibility of the next zone of 5000-7500 as well.
Invalidation on break below Blue TL. pic.twitter.com/QJ5aY4eTT8
New All Time High.
#HINDUNILVR

EW
Long Term Chart of the Month. #HINDUNILVR
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) December 9, 2020
Sometime in the next decade I see a fair possibility of stock reaching 7000 odd.
Invalidation below Blue Trendline. #ElliottWave pic.twitter.com/uxQrzt1mbj
as per relative strength
One question that I often get is which of the two: #HINDUNILVR or #ITC would be a better Investment bet. While their individual charts are clear themselves, another approach is ratio chart. IMHO Lever should outperform ITC for several years going forward.https://t.co/3AFqm6FJ1Q pic.twitter.com/rLuIm8xyVw
— Piyush Chaudhry (@piyushchaudhry) December 30, 2020
You May Also Like
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