Laurus Labs - ⭕️⭕️⭕️
still no selling whatsoever. A strong point to accumulate further as the risk is minimum. at 20 EMA. Selling candles have fewer volumes.
More from Steve Nison
Laurus Labs - Double top buy will be activated above closing of 690. Target still active: 895 (1%*3 box size and reversal)
✅✅ https://t.co/MtJOLfpzYj
✅✅ https://t.co/MtJOLfpzYj
Laurus Labs - I am waiting till 3:15 PM to get confirmation of closing above 700 to add more of it in my portfolio. \u2705\u2705 pic.twitter.com/UxZCuxhuIX
— Steve Nison (@nison_steve) August 9, 2021
Reminded me of my Borosil renewables chart of last year in July.
AWL - look at the ranges of contraction on the chart https://t.co/2XMhqZQu8X
AWL - look at the ranges of contraction on the chart https://t.co/2XMhqZQu8X
Borosil Renewables - Patterns like these must be looked at carefully and must be kept on the radar. Herein price is contracting which generally signifies shifting of hands (from weak to strong). If you go wrong, the risk is limited in these. pic.twitter.com/iqyoeslZjy
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@charts_zone) July 12, 2021
More from Lauruslabs
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
