shortonoil wrote:...but it freaking does.

We shall await Bahamas graph.

When the Maximum Affordability Function failed in 2017, I found that by adjusting the function's start date from Jan 1, 1900 by a few months the function's output returned to normal against the data. Since there was no theoretical justification for doing it, I dropped it. Of course, a graphical solution is often possible for most mathematical problems. When using something like a currency, that has no fundamental physical bases, it may be the best approach. The stock market thrives on technical analysis for some indeterminable reason outside of the fact that people relate to simple straight line representations.

It's amazing. Pretty much everything you write is just nonsense, re economics or investment. And given your lack of credible citations, it's not like you have to justify anything. Great writing style, IF you can get away with it, again and again.

Technical analysis is a blatant fail, re objective, useful apriori advice. Once the trading costs are factored in, over time, you can't make money on it vs. simple buy and hold in efficient broad based mutual funds.

A whole group of books on Index fund investing by folks like Jack Bogle, Larry Swedroe, and comments (like in the BRK annual reports) by wise investors like the venerated Warren Buffett clearly show this.

Or you can go straight to the track records by the clowns who claim to be able to predict markets by looking at charts. With the famous Robert Prechter, a long time Elliot Wave analysis adherent being at the bottom of the pack with a roughly 20% accuracy track record -- one has to ignore a LOT of data to claim technical analysis is worthwhile.

https://www.cxoadvisory.com/gurus/For the umpteenth time, it's physical "basis", not bases. If you have no clue what you're talking about, why even discuss a fundamental basis? To sound clued in?

What do you even MEAN, "a graphical solution is possible for most mathematical problems"? That's total nonsense. One can construct a graph for nearly any equation. All a graph does is visually show a mathematical relationship. That doesn't imply any sort of mathematical problem is "solved", or there is even a hint of a solution. When you say things like that it makes me think your mathematical pedigree is either low quality mail order, or in your imagination, because it implies very little understanding of mathematical problems in general.

You live in the real world. If your theoretical musings are useless, perhaps you should stop dispensing financial advice based on them, especially for pay (like your ETP paper), especially when you're advocating people invest based on them. Though OTOH, that would be consistent with the morality of your welshing on an oil price bet, and then lying about whether the bet took place.