XZC seen from the temporality of 1W we can see how the candle structure has formed a long descending wedge indicated in the chart above by the dark blue diagonals, we see how the price found support in the area of weekly demand located at 0.0004946 where the sail formed a hammer followed by a doji as a reversal signal, the last two sails have responded well to the signal, with the current sail struggling to close above the key level located at 0.0006102 indicated in the graph by the horizontal black color, if the candle manages to close above that level, it is very possible that we have a continuation of the current bullish momentum towards our first target which is the area of supply located at 0.0007786, we could even reach the second target located within the price range of 0.0008526 – 0.0009557, indicated on the chart by a light blue rectangle, if the price fails to close above the resistance of the key level, the odds of a correction move towards the weekly demand zone are very high.
XZC seen from the temporality of 1D we can observe more closely how the price is trying to get the level located at 0.0006102, the bullish candlestick series has held up very well after getting the break of the small pennant marked on the green triangle chart, the RSI indicator shows bullish divergence since the weekly candlestick found support, which supported the current move, However, it is still too early to clearly determine what will be the next price movement, in 1D the price has to close above the horizontal and give us a confirmation test to continue bullish, otherwise, the price could fall in search of the weekly demand zone.
In conclusion, the price at 1W, for now, continues to show us a very favorable price action to continue in search of higher profits, however, we can not be confident, we have to confirm the closing above 0.0006102 and confirmation, the bid zone is also an important level to take into account since the price could find much resistance at that point and go back; therefore, I recommend to follow very closely the price action at 1D and always use stop loss in all our operations to avoid losing capital by invalidations in the movement.
As I always say, you have to be aware of the movement, invalidations can occur, there is no 100% reliable analysis, take your own precautions when trading.
There is something about the cry of a child that adults immediately react to
No matter how civilised we like to think we are, humans are essentially still just cave people, albeit cave people with fancy clothing, table manners (some of us) and cellphones.
Our basic biological imperatives remain the same: take what is mine and I’ll hit you; seek physical and emotional security; kill that which threatens you – nothing changes. The cry of a child puts adults on edge, millennia of evolution have conditioned us to rush to the defence of a threatened child, it’s how we have survived. Men out there will be able to relate: the scream of a women in distress has the same spine-chilling effect that immediately mobilises you into action.
Our caveman inner-self is only ever a veneer of civilisation away, and all it takes to bring our animalistic proto-self to the fore is some pressure.
But this isn’t a post about biology, psychology and the evolution of humanity – it’s a post that’s making a point: that we are conditioned to react to a child in distress.
There is something about the cry of a child that adults immediately react to… …and there are those who would abuse that
So when little Greta Thunberg stands in front of the world and berates world leaders on the topic of climate change – ask yourself “What is really happening?”
This is not another pro-Greta/anti-Greta post, there are already FAR too many of those! Read on…
Back in 1990
Prior to the Gulf War, a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl stood up and testified in front of the United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus. Her name was Nayirah, and what she said came to be known as the “Nayirah Tesitmony”. You can watch it below if you like, but I’ll tell you the important parts.
Nayirah spoke of her time in Kuwait and what she had seen there. She spoke of her sister and her infant nephew and the harsh conditions they faced. She spoke of helping in a hospital, and then she ripped at the heartstrings of the world:
The child cried:
Nayirah testified as to what she had seen in the hospital: Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and leaving them to die on the ground.
*** ADULTS ON ALERT – DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS ENGAGED ***
She went on to speak about torture, anti-American sentiment and ended with a hint that Kuwait could be rebuilt.
Nariyah’s testimony went global. Remember, this was pre-global internet, we still relied on the mass media for information (as many still do today). Medialink sent footage of the testimony to over 700 US TV stations, including ABC and NBC. Her story reached tens of millions of Americans that night.
It was everything that Bush needed. Armed with collaborative information from the UK based Amnesty International, it provided the justification to push ahead with a large military response.
The child lied:
There was just one problem with what Nariyah said: it wasn’t true.
Nariyah’s testimony was prepared by PR company Hill & Knowlton who allegedly “provided witnesses, wrote testimony, and coached the witnesses for effectiveness.” 
Amnesty International later retracted their support, the Human Rights Watch denied that any babies had ever been removed from incubators, and while it was acknowledged that some babies in hospitals had died, it emerged that this was due to medical staff fleeing the area and leaving them behind – not nearly as effective a propaganda tool as stories of babies being taken from incubators by Iraqi soldiers.
Worst of all, Nariyah, the poor Kuwaiti girl who had so far only ever been identified by her first name, was found to be Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ, the daughter of Saud Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United States.
The adults had played the child, so that the child could play the adults.
Both were successful.
Enter Stage Left: Greta Thunberg
How many of you were asked to address the UN at age 16?
I wasn’t. Bit Brain is Bit Brain, I was just as smart at 16 as what I am now; less experienced, but no less intelligent. Nobody ever asked me to address them – ever. But hey, let’s play fair, I wasn’t exactly asking for attention either. But others were…
I had other kids in my class, more outgoing than I was, more environmentally concerned, more experienced in public speaking. They DID ask! For example: one girl started an environmental club from scratch, she was a particularly industrious individual, charismatic and with no lack of brain power of her own. She did her best and her club had minor successes, but not in her wildest dreams would she ever have considered addressing the UN – such things simply don’t happen to 16-year-olds.
…unless somebody powerful makes it happen.
*POOF* in a puff of smoke Greta Thunberg appears before the world. The child cries, and adults react.
And react some more.
Some stop and ask “why?”, “how?” – an attempt at seeing the truth, but an anticipated attempt – and one which plays into the hands of the manipulators.
And suddenly social media is awash with Greta stories and the whole world hops on an eco-conscious high horse. Climate change moves to the fore and people literally take to the streets in support of Greta. On the flip-side of the coin, staunch capitalists reject what Great has to say, grabbing the testimony of anti-climate change scientists and pointing out all the other evils of the world where money could be better spent (committing a variety of logical fallacy transgressions as they do so).
The debate RAGES!
The environmentalists know they are right. They know that global warming is real. They know about pollution, CO2, the loss of rain-forests and the extinction of animals. They know we can’t eat money and that the world is growing more and more toxic by the day – as is plain for anyone with half a brain cell to see if they look at the difference between now and 200 years ago.
The anti-environmentalists know they are right. They know that Greta is somebody’s pawn. They know that 16-year-olds don’t address the UN unless somebody has something to gain. They know that CO2 helps plants grow and that for people to survive they need money, and to make money you need to develop your economy.
Both groups are right.
Wait, let me rephrase that…
Both groups are WRONG!
The effect of Greta’s argument has been this: it’s polarised society. People are either strongly for her or strongly against her, the middle ground is practically non-existent. I know, I’m standing on that middle ground, and it’s a very small and very lonely patch of Earth!
It’s human nature
Back to our caveman selves: the human brain grabs what it likes and rejects that which it doesn’t. So while either of the two groups may start out right, they soon lose the plot and grab onto anything which seems to foster their own argument, rejecting that which does not. If I see another person deny that CO2 levels have risen remarkably since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, then I fear that I may have to beat them over the head with their own arm – freshly ripped from their body by an angry Bit Brain. If I see one more fool confuse natural climate cycles with sudden man-made global warming, then I am going to force the aforementioned arm down their throats. The same applies to the Greta supporters who don’t even bother to ask themselves the uncomfortable question: “How the hell did an unknown kid grab the kind of international attention that not even celebrities or presidents can usually attain?”
Whether you are for Greta or against her, here is the truth, here is what I observe from the middle ground:
YOU ARE BEING PLAYED
Do you know what a distraction is? You should, because by engaging in this “debate”, you are part of one.
Greta, and the whole debate around her, is a smokescreen. She is there to bring climate change to the fore, she is there to make people angry, she is there to raise emotions and to create a little chaos. And you’re all playing your assigned parts beautifully!
Right or wrong?
I don’t wish to go into the climate debate now, any more than what I wish to go into the invasion of Iraq. Let me say this: climate change IS real, but don’t for a moment think that those “leaders” who oppose it are doing so for any reason other than for personal gain.
Same story as in Iraq: there was good reason to stop Hussein, the tens of thousands of murdered Kurds lying in mass graves being just one. But the real reason the US went in there was because of oil. Had Kuwait been know for its production of apples instead of oil, it’s doubtful that the US would have reacted as it did. In order to get the public in the required anti-Iraqi frame of mind, Nariyah was used, and non-existent WMDs (remember those?), and a non-existent Iraqi “Super-Gun” (remember that?) etc. It’s all a matter of propaganda. (See the links at the end of the article.)
There is merit to the arguments of both sides, but to get lost in those arguments is to miss the point.
Here is what is happening behind the scenes:
Forget the arguments. You WISH there was a simple right/wrong answer to something like climate change! The fact is that it’s an interrelated web of economics/population growth/politics/wealth distribution/technology/ecology and you can’t simply create a one-solution-fits-all-scenarios solution to it! Such a solution can not exist!
Somebody has to win, and somebody has to lose.
…which is why we now see Greta.
The pro-Greta point-of-view is the easier one to understand: we need to stop polluting because we are killing the environment and leaving nothing for the future. Okay. Fine. Stop polluting. Got it.
The anti-Greta point-of-view is trickier. I think that the majority of the anti-Greta camp don’t really understand what they are being misdirected towards. Greta is a Western phenomenon: a Western kid trending on Western media. A Western world problem sold to the West by Western media. The ire of the anti-Greta camp is not being drummed up to oppose pollution in Western states, it’s been stimulated in order to use as a weapon against the East…
Demonising the enemy
Demonising the enemy is an age old tactic in warfare, it’s used in practically every major conflict. No sane soldier likes to kill people, in fact, a soldier feels good when he (or she) can protect people from harm. That is why soldiers are led to believe that their adversaries are less than human: it’s why (to Americans) Vietnamese soldiers were not men and women, but “gooks”, it’s why (in World War II) Jews were not citizens, but big-nosed devils seeking to plunder the fatherland.
Obviously it’s okay to kill a devil who started a war and who sits upon the skeletons of those he conquered while counting his money, you’re only defending yourself against him! Hell, better kill his kids while you’re at it, they’ll grow up to be just like him! And so we justify the atrocities we commit against one another – because our humanity can simply be switched off by our “leaders” when they choose to do so.
And as with the Greta saga, most people won’t even question this logic.
The target in this case, the demon, is the East. Specifically: it’s China.
This is to be expected. A major trade war at the moment indicates just where Western interests currently lie and the lengths they are prepared to go to to foster their own agendas. Actually, that doesn’t even begin to start to explain the lengths to which they will go, which is where Greta comes in.
The Greta debate/smokescreen is generating anger and hostility. These negative feelings need an outlet – a target – and one is being presented to them. The pro-Greta movement need emissions reduced and the environment to be saved. The anti-Greta movement need to shift the blame to somebody other than themselves. The two movements find common ground when China becomes the enemy…
But meanwhile, the debate rages so furiously that few see the demonisation of China even taking place. Hey, who cares if a billion rural Chinese have no access to power, as long as the environment is safe, right? I wonder how long it will be before they just become “gooks” as well…
The US is losing ground to China. While communism is often (and rightly) vilified, it has allowed the Chinese government to make and implement plans over a period of decades, as opposed to the short-term five-year max planning of the Western world (the typical period between elections). Sure I hate communism, but I damn well hate representative democracies too! (See the links to “Give me Liberty, or give me Death!” and “Decentralised Victories” at the end of this article for an explanation as to why I say that.)
Feeling the upper hand slowly slip from its grasp, the US (and its Western allies – specifically the EU) needs to try to repress Chinese advancement and restore its unchallenged position at the top of global economics. (Spoiler alert: it won’t succeed.)
It’s latest weapon in the war of economics is climate change: with a 16-year-old Swedish girl being the pawn who is (unknowingly) firing the shots.
But won’t the US be shooting itself in the foot too?
No. Because (as the anti-Greta movement will very quickly point out), US carbon emissions are in decline, while China’s are growing. In fact (as they will also point out) China now produces considerably more carbon emission than the US does.
Bad China! Good USA!
Because, as I said earlier, there is no single solution that applies to all cases.
The US is a developed country, its citizens enjoy one of the highest living standards on Earth. The average US resident is “rich” compared to the global norm. The US can afford the luxury of investing extensively in expensive renewable and environmentally friendly energy. China can’t.
China is a country that is still growing. It has a lot of wealth, but it also has about 20% of the world’s population – most of whom are extremely poor. Despite Western reports to the contrary, China does invest extensively in renewable and environmentally friendly energy sources, but it is in no position to turn away from coal and other pollutants – not without starving about one billion people!
Put in simple terms: The US can afford to become far more environmentally friendly than what China can, and it’s using this to make China look like the “bad guy”.
It has no right to do so.
I don’t like the fact that China pollutes so much, I hate it! I don’t like that it’s let its population explode to such a degree. But like it or not, that is the current situation, and we have to deal with it as it is now.
But while the US points fingers, those who are so quick to jump on the anti-China bandwagon would do well to see that they are begin played – again!
You see, when comparing apples, make sure that you compare them with other apples! The first thing that you will never see the anti-China movement mention is that per capita carbon dioxide emission statistics put the US in a position FAR WORSE than China! According to these 2017 statistics, the US produces 15.7 tons of CO2 per person per year, compared to China’s 7.7, that’s more than double! No, the finger pointers will stick to total emissions, which play in their favour.
But they’re only in their favour because the US is an already developed country. Is it fair to suddenly tell all the undeveloped and developing countries that they must conform to First-World emission norms when they haven’t had the chance to grow their own economies yet? Sure, technology is available today, but it comes at a price! Were the global distribution of wealth to be more equitable, then the Western powers would have an argument, but it isn’t – so they don’t. Instead, the wealth lies firmly in the grasp of the already developed countries: those who already developed, already polluted, already made their money. How can they now say to the others: “we’re fine now, we’re going green, you guys are not allowed to develop at the cost of the environment as we once did”?
Once again I remind you: I’m not speaking in favour of anyone here, I’m merely showing you how the finger-pointing happens.
The graph below is one you will typically see the anti-China group use: the accompanying text being something along the lines of: “look how the US and Europe are reducing emissions while China is increasing theirs to record levels!”
Looking at the graph you can see that that is true; but what else can you see? Well for starters, let’s remember that China has about four times as many people as the US does, that already throws the “bad China” theory out the window. Then we remember that China is still developing, then we remember how much damage the US and Europe have already done in their time.
Put into perspective, this is the total CO2 produced by China thus far:
And here is what the US has produced:
Compare the size of the shaded areas. Compare the countries respective population sizes. Who is the “bad guy” now? Don’t forget the EU in all of this: sure, 100 million tons of carbon is nothing by today’s standards, but when you were producing that in 1865, while the rest of the world combined were virtually on “0”, then you an appreciate how the EU got such a massive head start back in the low population world. Should other people be denied that opportunity now?
The fact that we now see Greta in front of the UN tells us that there is political will to put her there, which in turn tells us that big money wants her to be seen there. That in turn tells us that big money stands to profit from a move towards green technology, which then tells us that big money now owns solar companies, hydroelectric equipment suppliers, wind turbine manufacture plants etc. If big money didn’t stand to gain from this, then you wouldn’t see Greta. Evidently it is now the plan of the West to move towards clean energy, a drive been made possible thanks to a newly concerned public who are been sheeped into that direction (probably far too late to actually save the Earth!). You can bet your bottom dollar that renewable energy is going to be ballooning into (and is already becoming) the next multi-trillion dollar industry.
If it wasn’t, then a 16-year-old kid would never have made it to the UN on her own merits. The cry of the child would not have been heard.
Greta is there to stir up attention, to cause the ecology debate to hit centre stage on the global agenda. Her supporters ensure that.
The opposition to Greta is there to direct the focus, to shift the responsibility of climate change and pollution off the West, and onto the East.
This is done is an attempt to suppress Eastern development, and therefore competition, as the Western world continues to lose ground to the likes of China, India and Russia. This is also done to make a few very rich people even richer – with taxpayer money – as Western governments invest in green energy. The big money scores double – and all it cost them was a little PR effort for a 16-year-old kid.
The environment is in danger, REAL danger. Unfortunately, no matter what we do at this stage, people will suffer. Ignoring environmental consequences sets up a nightmare scenario for future generations: for Greta, her children and their children. For undeveloped countries to attempt to go fully green now they will be forced to neglect and starve many of their current citizens – cue rioting, international condemnation, instability etc. I tell you again, there is no quick and easy fix.
The fact is simply that the world is overpopulated – grossly so. As long as the caveman breeding instinct continues to triumph over common sense and forward planning, our children will be doomed to suffer a life on a planet with increasingly limited resources.
I honestly don’t know if the green revolution can come in time to save this planet. It can’t happen all at once, for reasons already stated above. It also can’t stem the tide of humans breeding like flies, that too needs to stop if we are to survive as a species. What I do know is this: people now seek to make money from green energy. The West seeks to put the blame for climate change on the East. Greta is just a very visible part of that process. You’re being manipulated. You’re being played.
There is something about the cry of a child that adults immediately react to.
Additional reading: If you are looking for more information in this regard, or if you are having difficulty relating to what I have written, or feel that more evidence is required to support what I have said today, then ensure that you read these too:
Propaganda and Patriotism: (very relevant when kids are used as media pawns)
Yours in crypto (which can hopefully help a little with this mess)
 The Global Public Relations Handbook, Revised and Expanded Edition: Theory, Research, and Practice ~ Sriramesh Krishnamurthy & Vercic Dejan; Taylor & Francis, 2009
Featured image from Wikimedia Commons
Footnote: I considered breaking this article into two or three parts, but decided not to split it and break the logical flow. I realised that if somebody was not going to make it all the way through, then they probably weren’t the kind of person who was going to make it halfway through anyway.
“The secret to success: find out where people are going and get there first”
~ Mark Twain
“Crypto does not require institutional investment to succeed; institutions require crypto investments to remain successful”
September 30, 2019
(updated September 30, 2019)
Published by desmond41
When you check the table of Epl you will notice that they is full of surprises in the table. When you compare them to the previous seasons, you will see that this season is different. There is no small team this season. But during the previous team you can choose to tell that, this will be the top 5 teams which will qualify for the Champions league and Europa league. But now things has Change the big team you thing will qualify for the Champions league or Europa League that will be the team which wont qualify. Also Liverpool still dont want to give up on the first position on the epl table. Manchester City on the other hand are also doing all their best to catch up to the first position and this is where the fun part will start from. When we get to the middle of the season that is where we will see that the strongest will survive or not. But for now they have or are on their peek so let them enjoy the road. Thank you for your time have a great day.
September 30, 2019
(updated September 30, 2019)
Published by desmond41
Hello everyone good morning, hope we are all doing great. People will ask why that headline. Manchester United will be playing Arsenal the Gunners today and this is a tough match for them to play. Looking at the previous matches and the kind of teams they played with and how they struggled to win and sometimes how they lost the match. This match is a headache for them. If they dont win the match they are out from the first top 5 teams of the epl on the table and also they won be part of top 10 teams. So this game is a game of Full win for them. No matter how the case is they have to try their maximum best to win. Also most of our players are done on injury, I havent check the latest news on Manchester United yet this weekend so I dont know whether they are up and fit but I heard about Pogba being back on his feet but might miss this match. And if Pogba miss this match then I guess we will lose the game because we dont have a master mind player in the midfield who will do all the passing work very well. So today is today let us all wait patiently for the time and then see what happens
Instead of looking at financial markets or asset classes on an individual basis, intermarket analysis looks at several strongly correlated markets or asset classes, such as stocks, bonds and commodities. This type of analysis expands on simply looking at each individual market or asset in isolation by also looking at other markets or assets that have a strong relationship to the market or asset being considered.
The US economy is still the largest in the world and the US dollar is still the most powerful currency in the world. Over half of all foreign currency reserves in the world are in US dollars. Thus, the asset classes relative strength will be compared to the US Dollar.
30 Yr Bond
Based on the moving averages and the last daily closing price, relative to the moving averages,
the asset classes’ relative strength, relative to the US Dollar are the following:
Two Weeks Ago
This post is my personal opinion. I’m not a financial advisor, this isn’t financial advise. Do your own research before making investment decisions.
I know that title seems a bit backwards, but there are lower price supports I’d love to buy some more at.
Oversold and Overstretched
After the recent dump, which had an intraday low of 7,712 (on coinbase) price has rumbled around the past couple days and is now pushing lower.
Many people are looking for it to hit 7,500 and have buy orders in at that price. It very well could get there today or tomorrow, but if it does then price will be extremely stretched from the 10 period moving average.
If you look at the chart you can see the blue line for the 10 period moving average. See how far price is pulled away from it. The past two day bounce, as modest as it was began to let it catch up but with price moving down today things are getting extremely stretched again.
I would love a quick spike toward 7,500 as buying when things are overstretched is never a bad thing. Doesn’t mean price will bounce but I’d rather buy after intense selling as opposed to buying right before.
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand has already cut interests rate three times this year with the most recent cut being in August. Back in August the Bank of New Zealand cut rates by 50 basis points. The drastic cut shocked the Markets because the Markets were only a 25 basis point reduction. At that time, Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr hinted at further easing by any means necessary in order to hit their inflation rate targets.
Fast forward to this past Thurs and the Bank of New Zealand shocked the Markets again. But this time New Zealand’s central bank on Wednesday held the official cash rate (OCR) at a record-low 1.0%.
NOTE: This was bullish for the New Zealand Kiwi
Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) Governor Adrian Orr said on Thursday that it was unlikely the central bank would need to use unconventional monetary policy tools, although it would be negligent not to be prepared for such a scenario.
“Our current view is that we are unlikely to need ‘unconventional’ monetary policy tools. But we would be remiss not to be prepared,” Orr said in a speech in New Zealand that was released by the bank.
The New Zealand Dollar jumped after the comments, rising 0.3% to $0.6292.
Brexit chaos, a US president facing impeachment, a squeeze on repo markets, and a dive in crypto valuations, interesting times indeed! While all this is certainly fascinating – try to keep your eye on the ball. If you’re a trader these are great conditions. If a Bitcoin investor – give it a few quarters before you come to any conclusions.
Picks of the Week
This highly reasoned breakdown of why Hedera Hashgraph’s price isn’t likely to recover anytime soon. Another highlight is this Forbes article on the current state of the US repo market.
A balanced take on Bakkt now that it is live in the wild:
The always interesting/compelling Anton Antonopoulos on Banks as tools of surveillance (highly recommended):
A pessimistic assessment of the sustainability of the current financial system:
Time to bone up on Repo Markets – dates to 2009 but the information remains current:
A case study in economic stagnation (of particular note – interest rate policy) Well worth reading the comments for more context such as Japan’s debt being mostly internal and therefore less subject to default:
Just for a dash of context – the Forex market comes in at over $6 trillion daily:
While price action this week certainly hasn’t been stellar for crypto investors, the space continues to expand. Try to enjoy the ride, keep your emotions in check, and learn as much as possible along the way.
Note on Sources:
Twitter & Reddit (cryptos current meta-brains) / Medium / Trybe / Hackernoon / Whaleshares / TIMM and so on/ YouTube / various podcasts and whatever else I stumble upon. The aim is a useful weekly aggregator of ideas rather than news. Though I try to keep the sources current – I’ll reference these articles and podcasts etc. as I encounter them – they may have been published just a couple of days ago or in some cases quite a bit earlier.
September 28, 2019
(updated September 28, 2019)
Published by desmond41
Today is another day for the sports guys, the lovers of football. Liverpool has successfully obtained their 3 points and now leading the table with 21 points. It wasn’t easy for them tho because during the first half of the game it was draw and when they came back from the pep talk that talks really did it job. So Liverpool performed their magic again and lead by 1-0 till the end of the match. It wasn’t easy for them tho. The newly promoted teams that just joined the epl is really making the senior teams finds it difficult to score them. They are proving stubborn. I will end my talk with a joke that is trending. Barca and Chelsea. When you look at the last 4 matches of Barcelona and Chelsea they are almost the same. When Barcelona play draw Chelsea also plays draw, when Barcelona lose Chelsea also lose and when Barcelona win Chelsea also win. I will show you a picture of how it looks like. Have a great weekend.
I wrote about UnitedHealth Group earlier this year. UnitedHealth Group is one of the largest health-insurance providers services roughly 50 million people with revenue of $226.2 billion last year. It also operates physician practices, sells consulting and data services, and administers drug benefits.
One of the major themes going into the 2020 presidential, at least by the Democrats will be the “Medicare for All” proposals. For example, earlier this year, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is calling for government-run health care as a way of covering more people. He’s even singled out UnitedHealth saying their greed would soon end.
But the chart suggested to go long UnitedHealth at the weekly demand at $210.
Price did eventually react to the weekly demand at $210, hit the target at weekly supply zone at $270. But because the $270 was a level that contained a stack of unfilled sell orders, that level the chart also suggested to short price gain with the target being at the weekly demand at $210 again.
In mid-Sept, the “Medicare for All” theme went front and center when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled her bill that would allow the federal government to negotiate the prices of up to 250 brand-name drugs in Medicare that do not have competitors and the negotiated prices would be available to all purchasers, not just Medicare beneficiaries. In addition, the bill would also cap seniors’ out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $2,000 a year. And all though Nancy is trying to impeach Trump, Trump actually supports Nancy’s bill. So if Trump gets impeached which he won’t and if the Democrats win next year’s election, which they won’t, UnitedHealth current business model isn’t set up for a more regulated environment. And that’s why the stock fell 3% today and that’s why price is testing the weekly demand at $210 again.
But this time could be a different story. The SPDR Healthcare Sector ETF, XLV still lags behind the S&P 500 ETF, SPY.
and relative to all the other SPY sectors, XLV is dead list.
Thus, the chart is suggesting the weekly demand at $210 won’t hold again, will be breached the zone in the near future and that price will move down to the weekly demand at $183.
This post is my personal opinion. I’m not a financial advisor, this isn’t financial advise. Do your own research before making investment decisions.