In the technical analysis world there are two types of people one elliotists and other non-elliotists. Elliotist clan is again divided into the castes of Prechter and Glen Neely.
And every time, the debate rages barbs are thrown at Prechterists highlighting the long awaited crash has not taken place at all. I remain quiet, a quiet word is of no use in a heated debate. The Peter Schiff article contained something that is pretty much what I have believed - Prechter is correct.
First Peter Schiff "consider that the record high for the Dow in 1929 of approximately 380 also equated to 19 ounces of gold. So despite all of the hoopla and a thirty-fold increase in stock prices, the Dow has actually gained no real value during the past eighty years. The entire rise from 360 to 13,000 has been an illusion made possible by the magic of inflation."
Allow me a little explanation. When you start a game of say football you start off with specific rules and the set goal posts. Simple. But, if the rules of the game is changed mid-way through the game and only for one team, how relevant is the result? Prechter has always made it clear the prediction for his Elliot wave counts date back to 19th century. The Super cycle and the Grand super cycle is what was considered for forcasts.
To put simply, the forcasts are based on the prices of era of 'gold standard'. There was no inflation other than which can directly be attributed to gold demand/supply. But rules of the game changed in 1971. Gold leash was broken and non-gold backed currency was let to run amok. That was the cause of the increase in the prices and Prechter's forcast failed to take its 'visible' effect. But, looking with the original rules of the game Prechter is correct. Dow has risen but has fallen against gold. Schiff gives the details. Inflation has not helped in any more wealth creation but has created an illusion. Productivity has protected us from the direct effects of inflation. But for how long is a nervous question.
:) Falkor
And every time, the debate rages barbs are thrown at Prechterists highlighting the long awaited crash has not taken place at all. I remain quiet, a quiet word is of no use in a heated debate. The Peter Schiff article contained something that is pretty much what I have believed - Prechter is correct.
First Peter Schiff "consider that the record high for the Dow in 1929 of approximately 380 also equated to 19 ounces of gold. So despite all of the hoopla and a thirty-fold increase in stock prices, the Dow has actually gained no real value during the past eighty years. The entire rise from 360 to 13,000 has been an illusion made possible by the magic of inflation."
Allow me a little explanation. When you start a game of say football you start off with specific rules and the set goal posts. Simple. But, if the rules of the game is changed mid-way through the game and only for one team, how relevant is the result? Prechter has always made it clear the prediction for his Elliot wave counts date back to 19th century. The Super cycle and the Grand super cycle is what was considered for forcasts.
To put simply, the forcasts are based on the prices of era of 'gold standard'. There was no inflation other than which can directly be attributed to gold demand/supply. But rules of the game changed in 1971. Gold leash was broken and non-gold backed currency was let to run amok. That was the cause of the increase in the prices and Prechter's forcast failed to take its 'visible' effect. But, looking with the original rules of the game Prechter is correct. Dow has risen but has fallen against gold. Schiff gives the details. Inflation has not helped in any more wealth creation but has created an illusion. Productivity has protected us from the direct effects of inflation. But for how long is a nervous question.
:) Falkor
Comments
Post a Comment