#IRCTC-6375
4.618%(6406) Sustain rise above this
level upside #Fibonacci extension
6.857% 9135
#Probability
#IRCTC -2351
— Waves_Perception(Dinesh Patel) \u092e\u0948\u0902Schedule Tribes) (@idineshptl) July 16, 2021
Now above 1.272% (2325)
Next 1.618%
Than 2.618% ...
Near term Base case 1987.#Probability pic.twitter.com/MJad8gnmWz
More from Waves_Perception(Dinesh Patel) मैंSchedule Tribes)
Either entry only above 1600 or let it
correct towards 987...
#Update
#CDSL -1050
— MaRkET WaVES (DINESH PATEL ) Stock Market FARMER (@idineshptl) July 9, 2021
Now above 2.618% and objective is to move higher towards 3.618%
4.236% and 4.618%....
What will Drag lower this stock price \U0001f602 ?
Only if you can sell your holding
Means Verticle rise ?
Than why it decline from (486-180.)#Observation #Perspective pic.twitter.com/evxYOjH8Qv
Objective is to move higher towards
3.618% - 4.236% and 4.618%
#Probability
#IEX
— MaRkET WaVES (DINESH PATEL ) Stock Market FARMER (@idineshptl) April 20, 2021
On sustain rise above 347 upside shown in chart up to 4.618%(521)
And 6.857%(718).
View valid till 233 not violated. @UdayJad39389920 pic.twitter.com/I2MoPlwXRW
More from Irctc
1. Still 200/400 point movement left as per Ascending Triangle Pattern.
2. Stock perfectly moved according to the classic pattern.
3. Next level to watch now 3500-4000
4. Support near 2600-2800 https://t.co/VrUhS85Rml
NSE:IRCTC 1775 +2.78%
— Mr. Chartist (@Mr_Chartist) February 26, 2021
-Cup and Handle breakout
-Support at 1600/1650
-Next levels at 1900/2000/2100++#TA pic.twitter.com/LxpPTI0rB6
Runaway Gaps are traded like flag & pennant patterns. The price move before the gap is projected upwards for the price target. Here the target comes out to be 3230. https://t.co/QuKrekfHG3
IRCTC - A perfect pullback on low volumes after a high volume breakout. Low-risk setup. Weak below 2015 pic.twitter.com/jSHBlEhkE0
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@nison_steve) June 9, 2021
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