United Spirits - I love the stocks moving slowly than making a lot of noise and attracting too short-term noise traders.
A clean and clear chart posted in August.
Updated chart. https://t.co/HCnRuWvIpO
United Spirits Ltd - Monthly Log Scale \U0001f37b pic.twitter.com/kj7jXr8moE
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@nison_steve) August 18, 2021
More from The_Chartist 📈
I believe 5-10 stocks are enough for a retail investor to achieve super performance. And with small capital, there is no point in buying 20/30 names which doesn't even get appropriate initial capital.
Stock: CDSL
— Steve Nison (@nison_steve) December 16, 2020
CMP - 516.95. Low risk setup. Weak below 500. Target open. Stock retesting the ascending triangle BO line. Kindly check please. @nishkumar1977 @Rishikesh_ADX @VijayThk @kuttrapali @Thekalal @PAVLeader pic.twitter.com/PlcpOMsdnz
Russell 2000
It is better if you spend considerable time learning these concepts. https://t.co/caBHOO4Owa
TRAPS? In a false breakout, the price breaks out of the range & comes back within the range. A trap is one step ahead, price not only comes back within the range but breaks down in the opposite direction. It traps the initial longs who didn't close their positions
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@charts_zone) January 22, 2022
Russell 2000 pic.twitter.com/txzjdnStzc
ITC - how beautifully the price patterns work. All of a sudden an increased momentum right from the support of the channel boundary. Has a minor resistance to nail down in the middle.
— The_Chartist \U0001f4c8 (@charts_zone) March 18, 2022
Anyone observing it would have gone aggressive at lower end for a swing move pic.twitter.com/YqxkdFlJXQ
More from Mcdowell
#USL #Unitedspirits #DIAGEO Shared daily chart for reference \U0001f447
— Pranay Prasun (@PranayPrasun) May 27, 2022
Here breakout candle is supported by volume https://t.co/MXsPJMNHDF pic.twitter.com/rTLQhfCXfg
You May Also Like
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?