No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India
This is an updated copy of the version on BadHistory. I plan to update it in accordance with the feedback I got. I'd like to thank two people who will remain anonymous for helping me greatly with this post (you know who you are) Three years ago a festschrift for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri was published by Shubhra Chakrabarti, a history teacher at the University of Delhi and Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist economist who taught at JNU until 2010. One of the essays in the festschirt by Utsa Patnaik was an attempt to quantify the "drain" undergone by India during British Rule. Her conclusion? Britain robbed India of $45 trillion (or £9.2 trillion) during their 200 or so years of rule. This figure was immensely popular, and got republished in several major news outlets (here, here, here, here (they get the number wrong) and more recently here), got a mention from the Minister of External Affairs & returns 29,100 results on Google. There's also plenty of references to it here on Reddit. Patnaik is not the first to calculate such a figure. Angus Maddison thought it was £100 million, Simon Digby said £1 billion, Javier Estaban said £40 million see Roy (2019). The huge range of figures should set off some alarm bells. So how did Patnaik calculate this (shockingly large) figure? Well, even though I don't have access to the festschrift, she conveniently has written an article detailing her methodology here. Let's have a look.
How exactly did the British manage to diddle us and drain our wealth’ ? was the question that Basudev Chatterjee (later editor of a volume in the Towards Freedom project) had posed to me 50 years ago when we were fellow-students abroad.
This is begging the question.
After decades of research I find that using India’s commodity export surplus as the measure and applying an interest rate of 5%, the total drain from 1765 to 1938, compounded up to 2016, comes to £9.2 trillion; since $4.86 exchanged for £1 those days, this sum equals about $45 trillion.
This is completely meaningless. To understand why it's meaningless consider India's annual coconut exports. These are almost certainly a surplus but the surplus in trade is countered by the other country buying the product (indeed, by definition, trade surpluses contribute to the GDP of a nation which hardly plays into intuitive conceptualisations of drain). Furthermore, Dewey (2019) critiques the 5% interest rate.
She [Patnaik] consistently adopts statistical assumptions (such as compound interest at a rate of 5% per annum over centuries) that exaggerate the magnitude of the drain
The exact mechanism of drain, or transfers from India to Britain was quite simple.
Drain theory possessed the political merit of being easily grasped by a nation of peasants. [...] No other idea could arouse people than the thought that they were being taxed so that others in far off lands might live in comfort. [...] It was, therefore, inevitable that the drain theory became the main staple of nationalist political agitation during the Gandhian era.
The key factor was Britain’s control over our taxation revenues combined with control over India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its booming commodity export surplus with the world. Simply put, Britain used locally raised rupee tax revenues to pay for its net import of goods, a highly abnormal use of budgetary funds not seen in any sovereign country.
The issue with figures like these is they all make certain methodological assumptions that are impossible to prove. From Roy in Frankema et al. (2019):
the "drain theory" of Indian poverty cannot be tested with evidence, for several reasons. First, it rests on the counterfactual that any money saved on account of factor payments abroad would translate into domestic investment, which can never be proved. Second, it rests on "the primitive notion that all payments to foreigners are "drain"", that is, on the assumption that these payments did not contribute to domestic national income to the equivalent extent (Kumar 1985, 384; see also Chaudhuri 1968). Again, this cannot be tested. [...] Fourth, while British officers serving India did receive salaries that were many times that of the average income in India, a paper using cross-country data shows that colonies with better paid officers were governed better (Jones 2013).
Indeed, drain theory rests on some very weak foundations. This, in of itself, should be enough to dismiss any of the other figures that get thrown out. Nonetheless, I felt it would be a useful exercise to continue exploring Patnaik's take on drain theory.
The East India Company from 1765 onwards allocated every year up to one-third of Indian budgetary revenues net of collection costs, to buy a large volume of goods for direct import into Britain, far in excess of that country’s own needs.
So what's going on here? Well Roy (2019) explains it better:
Colonial India ran an export surplus, which, together with foreign investment, was used to pay for services purchased from Britain. These payments included interest on public debt, salaries, and pensions paid to government offcers who had come from Britain, salaries of managers and engineers, guaranteed profts paid to railway companies, and repatriated business profts. How do we know that any of these payments involved paying too much? The answer is we do not.
So what was really happening is the government was paying its workers for services (as well as guaranteeing profits - to promote investment - something the GoI does today Dalal (2019), and promoting business in India), and those workers were remitting some of that money to Britain. This is hardly a drain (unless, of course, Indian diaspora around the world today are "draining" it). In some cases, the remittances would take the form of goods (as described) see Chaudhuri (1983):
It is obvious that these debit items were financed through the export surplus on merchandise account, and later, when railway construction started on a large scale in India, through capital import. Until 1833 the East India Company followed a cumbersome method in remitting the annual home charges. This was to purchase export commodities in India out of revenue, which were then shipped to London and the proceeds from their sale handed over to the home treasury.
While Roy's earlier point argues better paid officers governed better, it is honestly impossible to say what part of the repatriated export surplus was a drain, and what was not. However calling all of it a drain is definitely misguided. It's worth noting that Patnaik seems to make no attempt to quantify the benefits of the Raj either, Dewey (2019)'s 2nd criticism:
she [Patnaik] consistently ignores research that would tend to cut the economic impact of the drain down to size, such as the work on the sources of investment during the industrial revolution (which shows that industrialisation was financed by the ploughed-back profits of industrialists) or the costs of empire school (which stresses the high price of imperial defence)
Since tropical goods were highly prized in other cold temperate countries which could never produce them, in effect these free goods represented international purchasing power for Britain which kept a part for its own use and re-exported the balance to other countries in Europe and North America against import of food grains, iron and other goods in which it was deficient.
Re-exports necessarily adds value to goods when the goods are processed and when the goods are transported. The country with the largest navy at the time would presumably be in very good stead to do the latter.
The British historians Phyllis Deane and WA Cole presented an incorrect estimate of Britain’s 18th-19th century trade volume, by leaving out re-exports completely. I found that by 1800 Britain’s total trade was 62% higher than their estimate, on applying the correct definition of trade including re-exports, that is used by the United Nations and by all other international organisations.
While interesting, and certainly expected for such an old book, re-exporting necessarily adds value to goods.
When the Crown took over from the Company, from 1861 a clever system was developed under which all of India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its fast-rising commodity export surplus with the world, was intercepted and appropriated by Britain. As before up to a third of India’s rising budgetary revenues was not spent domestically but was set aside as ‘expenditure abroad’.
So, what does this mean? Britain appropriated all of India's earnings, and then spent a third of it aboard? Not exactly. She is describing home charges see Roy (2019) again:
Some of the expenditures on defense and administration were made in sterling and went out of the country. This payment by the government was known as the Home Charges. For example, interest payment on loans raised to finance construction of railways and irrigation works, pensions paid to retired officers, and purchase of stores, were payments in sterling. [...] almost all money that the government paid abroad corresponded to the purchase of a service from abroad. [...] The balance of payments system that emerged after 1800 was based on standard business principles.India bought something and paid for it.State revenues were used to pay for wages of people hired abroad, pay for interest on loans raised abroad, and repatriation of profits on foreign investments coming into India. These were legitimate market transactions.
Indeed, if paying for what you buy is drain, then several billions of us are drained every day.
The Secretary of State for India in Council, based in London, invited foreign importers to deposit with him the payment (in gold, sterling and their own currencies) for their net imports from India, and these gold and forex payments disappeared into the yawning maw of the SoS’s account in the Bank of England.
It should be noted that India having two heads was beneficial, and encouraged investment per Roy (2019):
The fact that the India Office in London managed a part of the monetary system made India creditworthy, stabilized its currency, and encouraged foreign savers to put money into railways and private enterprise in India. Current research on the history of public debt shows that stable and large colonies found it easier to borrow abroad than independent economies because the investors trusted the guarantee of the colonist powers.
Against India’s net foreign earnings he issued bills, termed Council bills (CBs), to an equivalent rupee value. The rate (between gold-linked sterling and silver rupee) at which the bills were issued, was carefully adjusted to the last farthing, so that foreigners would never find it more profitable to ship financial gold as payment directly to Indians, compared to using the CB route. Foreign importers then sent the CBs by post or by telegraph to the export houses in India, that via the exchange banks were paid out of the budgeted provision of sums under ‘expenditure abroad’, and the exporters in turn paid the producers (peasants and artisans) from whom they sourced the goods.
Sunderland (2013) argues CBs had two main roles (and neither were part of a grand plot to keep gold out of India):
Council bills had two roles. They firstly promoted trade by handing the IO some control of the rate of exchange and allowing the exchange banks to remit funds to India and to hedge currency transaction risks. They also enabled the Indian government to transfer cash to England for the payment of its UK commitments.
The United Nations (1962) historical data for 1900 to 1960, show that for three decades up to 1928 (and very likely earlier too) India posted the second highest merchandise export surplus in the world, with USA in the first position. Not only were Indians deprived of every bit of the enormous international purchasing power they had earned over 175 years, even its rupee equivalent was not issued to them since not even the colonial government was credited with any part of India’s net gold and forex earnings against which it could issue rupees. The sleight-of-hand employed, namely ‘paying’ producers out of their own taxes, made India’s export surplus unrequited and constituted a tax-financed drain to the metropolis, as had been correctly pointed out by those highly insightful classical writers, Dadabhai Naoroji and RCDutt.
It doesn't appear that others appreciate their insight Roy (2019):
K. N. Chaudhuri rightly calls such practice ‘confused’ economics ‘coloured by political feelings’.
Surplus budgets to effect such heavy tax-financed transfers had a severe employment–reducing and income-deflating effect: mass consumption was squeezed in order to release export goods. Per capita annual foodgrains absorption in British India declined from 210 kg. during the period 1904-09, to 157 kg. during 1937-41, and to only 137 kg by 1946.
If even a part of its enormous foreign earnings had been credited to it and not entirely siphoned off, India could have imported modern technology to build up an industrial structure as Japan was doing.
This is, unfortunately, impossible to prove. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication that India would've united (this is arguably more plausible than the given counterfactual1). Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been nuked in WW2, much like Japan. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been invaded by lizard people, much like Japan. The list continues eternally. Nevertheless, I will charitably examine the given counterfactual anyway. Did pre-colonial India have industrial potential? The answer is a resounding no. From Gupta (1980):
This article starts from the premise that while economic categories - the extent of commodity production, wage labour, monetarisation of the economy, etc - should be the basis for any analysis of the production relations of pre-British India, it is the nature of class struggles arising out of particular class alignments that finally gives the decisive twist to social change. Arguing on this premise, and analysing the available evidence, this article concludes that there was little potential for industrial revolution before the British arrived in India because, whatever might have been the character of economic categories of that period,the class relations had not sufficiently matured to develop productive forces and the required class struggle for a 'revolution' to take place.
Yet all of this did not amount to an economic situation comparable to that of western Europe on the eve of the industrial revolution. Her technology - in agriculture as well as manufacturers - had by and large been stagnant for centuries. [...] The weakness of the Indian economy in the mid-eighteenth century, as compared to pre-industrial Europe was not simply a matter of technology and commercial and industrial organization. No scientific or geographical revolution formed part of the eighteenth-century Indian's historical experience. [...] Spontaneous movement towards industrialisation is unlikely in such a situation.
So now we've established India did not have industrial potential, was India similar to Japan just before the Meiji era? The answer, yet again, unsurprisingly, is no. Japan's economic situation was not comparable to India's, which allowed for Japan to finance its revolution. From Yasuba (1986):
All in all, the Japanese standard of living may not have been much below the English standard of living before industrialization, and both of them may have been considerably higher than the Indian standard of living. We can no longer say that Japan started from a pathetically low economic level and achieved a rapid or even "miraculous" economic growth. Japan's per capita income was almost as high as in Western Europe before industrialization, and it was possible for Japan to produce surplus in the Meiji Period to finance private and public capital formation.
The circumstances that led to Meiji Japan were extremely unique. See Tomlinson (1985):
Most modern comparisons between India and Japan, written by either Indianists or Japanese specialists, stress instead that industrial growth in Meiji Japan was the product of unique features that were not reproducible elsewhere. [...] it is undoubtably true that Japan's progress to industrialization has been unique and unrepeatable
So there you have it. Unsubstantiated statistical assumptions, calling any number you can a drain & assuming a counterfactual for no good reason gets you this $45 trillion number. Hopefully that's enough to bury it in the ground. 1. Several authors have affirmed that Indian identity is a colonial artefact. For example seeRajan 1969:
Perhaps the single greatest and most enduring impact of British rule over India is that it created an Indian nation, in the modern political sense. After centuries of rule by different dynasties overparts of the Indian sub-continent, and after about 100 years of British rule, Indians ceased to be merely Bengalis, Maharashtrians,or Tamils, linguistically and culturally.
But then, it would be anachronistic to condemn eighteenth-century Indians, who served the British, as collaborators, when the notion of 'democratic' nationalism or of an Indian 'nation' did not then exist.[...]Indians who fought for them, differed from the Europeans in having a primary attachment to a non-belligerent religion, family and local chief, which was stronger than any identity they might have with a more remote prince or 'nation'.
Chakrabarti, Shubra & Patnaik, Utsa (2018). Agrarian and other histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri. Colombia University Press Hickel, Jason (2018). How the British stole $45 trillion from India. The Guardian Bhuyan, Aroonim & Sharma, Krishan (2019). The Great Loot: How the British stole $45 trillion from India. Indiapost Monbiot, George (2020). English Landowners have stolen our rights. It is time to reclaim them. The Guardian Tsjeng, Zing (2020). How Britain Stole $45 trillion from India with trains | Empires of Dirt. Vice Chaudhury, Dipanjan (2019). British looted $45 trillion from India in today’s value: Jaishankar. The Economic Times Roy, Tirthankar (2019). How British rule changed India's economy: The Paradox of the Raj. Palgrave Macmillan Patnaik, Utsa (2018). How the British impoverished India. Hindustan Times Tuovila, Alicia (2019). Expenditure method. Investopedia Dewey, Clive (2019). Changing the guard: The dissolution of the nationalist–Marxist orthodoxy in the agrarian and agricultural history of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review Chandra, Bipan et al. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence, 1857-1947. Penguin Books Frankema, Ewout & Booth, Anne (2019). Fiscal Capacity and the Colonial State in Asia and Africa, c. 1850-1960. Cambridge University Press Dalal, Sucheta (2019). IL&FS Controversy: Centre is Paying Up on Sovereign Guarantees to ADB, KfW for Group's Loan. TheWire Chaudhuri, K.N. (1983). X - Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments (1757–1947). Cambridge University Press Sunderland, David (2013). Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940. Boydell Press Dewey, Clive (1978). Patwari and Chaukidar: Subordinate officials and the reliability of India’s agricultural statistics. Athlone Press Smith, Lisa (2015). The great Indian calorie debate: Explaining rising undernourishment during India’s rapid economic growth. Food Policy Duh, Josephine & Spears, Dean (2016). Health and Hunger: Disease, Energy Needs, and the Indian Calorie Consumption Puzzle. The Economic Journal Vankatesh, P. et al. (2016). Relationship between Food Production and Consumption Diversity in India – Empirical Evidences from Cross Section Analysis. Agricultural Economics Research Review Gupta, Shaibal (1980). Potential of Industrial Revolution in Pre-British India. Economic and Political Weekly Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1983). I - The mid-eighteenth-century background. Cambridge University Press Yasuba, Yasukichi (1986). Standard of Living in Japan Before Industrialization: From what Level did Japan Begin? A Comment. The Journal of Economic History Tomblinson, B.R. (1985). Writing History Sideways: Lessons for Indian Economic Historians from Meiji Japan. Cambridge University Press Rajan, M.S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History Bryant, G.J. (2000). Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750-1800. War in History
Universal Bypass will now change its extension tab titles to reflect how many seconds are left on internal timers, i.e. if you've set "Take me to destinations after 5 seconds." the "You're almost at your destination." page will be called "(5) You're almost at your destination." and count down with the timer on the page.
Improved the way the version number is shown in the options to make it more apparent that bypass definitions are separate from the extension version
Fixed "Instantly take me to destinations of trackers" not working in Chromium-based browsers
Fixed cases of Universal Bypass being detected and improved the Linkvertise preflight bypass to allow for auto-updating of anti-detection rules
Added bypasses for: 4shared.com (download without login), cloudgallery.net, curimovie.com
Universal Bypass' built-in updating system for the injection script now also includes rules for preflight bypasses. Collectively, this is now called "bypass definitions."
Fixed "Close tab containing the crowd-sourced destination after x seconds of visiting it" still not always working on Firefox, and this solution doesn't even need the "Access browser tabs" permission anymore.
Changed default values of options with seconds and removed hint that "0" means instant because I think that's obvious.
Fixed "Close tab containing the crowd-sourced destination after x seconds of visiting it" not working on Firefox by adding the "Access browser tabs" permission. On Chromium-based browsers, this permission isn't needed, and Universal Bypass on Firefox doesn't do anything else with it.
Fixed instant navigation causing Google's "clever" code to break some bypasses
Added a timer to the "You're almost at your destination" page if the destination would detect Universal Bypass if you would navigate too quickly.
Improved shon.xyz bypass
Added filesupload.org bypass
Improved katmoviehd.nl bypass
Removed the option to disable the info box. The info box was added to prevent getting reports for websites which are bypassed by crowd bypass, but we still do. I believe people disable the option — maybe because "Show informational messages on some sites" sounds scary, maybe because they never encountered one — and then when they encounter a crowd-bypassed site, they have no indication of that, and report it. As always, I'd like to get some feedback on this, especially from other perspectives.
Custom bypass developers: You can now use "safelyAssign(...)" instead of "location.href = ..." or "location.assign(...)" which will assert that the URL is good before actually assigning, returns false if not. Note that you should only use this for instant redirects, for everything else "safelyNavigate(...)" is still recommended.
Added majidzhacker.com bypass to replace tinyurl.majidzhacker.com bypass
Improved the look of highlighted options in dark mode
Replaced "Automatically open crowd-sourced destinations in a new tab" option with "Open crowd-sourced destinations in a new tab after x second(s)" so it is in line with the new "Take me to destinations after x seconds" option added in 11.0. Again, I'd like to hear your feedback on these new, rather drastic changes.
Fixed firstrun page being opened in a new window on Firefox
Restyled options slightly to better fit custom bypasses
Some general code improvements
11.0 — The Timed Update
Replaced "Instantly take me to destinations" option with "Take me to destinations after x seconds" option which can be used to get the same effects as with the old option with the added feature of having a timer to automatically take you to the destination which I'm personally not a super fan of but I see the request from time to time and this seemed to be the best solution. I'd definitely like to hear your feedback on this.
Guide to Stock Market (Trading in General) Mentoring/Mentorship Programs in the philippines
Hi, may nakikita akong questions about investing/trading and some about trading mentors/gurus societies etc. This is my opinion depende na sa inyo kung susundin nyo. ZFT - Zeefreaks tribe, First, i do respect "Zee" as a trader,his "tribe" teaches or mentors their students using their system to become their own. Generally, Darvas Box, MAs 20 50 100 and RSI are their weapons but mainly its the Price Action and RSI ang parang laman talaga ng System nila and you can only get better through time as with other systems in general. I think they are good, but yun na nga, just good. Problem: They charge you with a hefty sum na i don't think na ma jujustify nila, because at the end of the day more or less its you ( along with practice) and your psychology that can help you along the way. Okay, may Trading psych coach daw sila , si Ma'am Celeste (Zee's Gf) pero overtime you will learn about yourself in the process naman. Zee is justifying the hefty fee because sabi nya before if im not mistaken na the clients are not paying the mentoring alone pero along with it yung "CULTURE" ng ZFT. I say, bullshit. Di nga nya alam na may mga ZFT "mentors" na that are mentoring other people without his knowledge and charging them less but still a very hefty fee. hehe Akala nya wala na pero meron pa, magaling lang talaga magtago. KIDLAT- hmm , same with ZFT since dun din naman sya nanggaling, Habits you know. T3 ( The Tattooed Trader)- well, this guy is LEGIT. He trades international markets too not just PSEI. Reasonable Fee. Good guy,prangka din. He doesnt tolerate Bullshit. He wont try to impose his system sayo but instead encourages you to go with the process. That's it. Gandah Koh ( Trader's Lounge) - He/She provides free content daw. Yes, FREE content pero at the same time sinasabi nya that he/she is just an average trader. Kicks people who patronizes paid mentorship / who belong sa paid mentorship or kahit magtanong ka man lang ng about paid mentorship rage mode na agad tapos kick na agad. Yung mga followers nya ayaw lang talaga gumastos to learn premium content. Biruin nyo? gusto maging free yung investa? lol. Ironic, why? kasi sabi nya average trader lang daw sya but he/she shuts off people who would want to learn from those who are better than her. To all hehis followers, Eto po tanong ko.
may member ba sa Trader's lounge na consistently profitable na? with rising equity curve?
Do you think the best traders out there did not spend any cent to boost their career to the top?
Simple lang yan. isip isipin nyo. :D BOH- Superb! yung mga quant models nila ay one of the best if not the best. Very technical and systematic yung BOH and their team ay may credentials to back it up. Yung Fee ay affordable, kayang kaya ng ordinary working people. Oakbridge (DAVAO)- not much information about them kasi tahimik lang sila ,but what i know is that bigatin yung mentors dun but apart from that i don't know much kaya i can't say anything more. Bigote (bigote trading financial advocacy) - Eto yung free content na LEGIT. One of the best people i know, he is a caylum trading institute alumni. Eto, you use his system plus master price action. Open journal by Javi Medina, Matt flores, Ken Arcano - If you dig Elliot wave then they are the guys you want to learn from, the information they provide are all backtested, no guess works just pure juicy contents day in and day out. Trivia: They manage funds from various big time clients. Tomatrader, Jet mojica(from BOH), Joanne (from investa), Bearyo ( from investa) and etc Joined Open Journal. Javi Medina - ranked 1st the 2020 US investing competition, also he was an investacup champion. Ken Arcano - top 5 in investacup. Matt Flores- i dont know much about him though, silent kind of guy. OJ's system can be used in trading crypto, Forex , commodities, US stocks and other indices. Caylum Trading Institute - i think di na kailangan e describe pa yung caylum eh. *wink* So there you go. It's your choice kung how you will take my opinion, you can bash me or what i really don't care. At the end of the day, choice nyo pa rin yon. Kung ako lang, id go with
Read the trading code by jason cam.
Download any price action videos/books . Ex. Steve nison books
Try out Bigote's framework or enroll with any one of those services , but i would recommend open journal, BOH, T3 or caylum. If you want ZFT or kidlat then go for it.
At the end of the day, stick with one system , be patient, dont shortcut the process, master one setup at a time and improve your trading psychology. I dont want to spread hate, just spitting out my opinion. You can share this in fb, twitter or any socmed you like or not share this, do whatever you want. That's all. Stay home to help the frontliners.
The Next Crypto Wave: The Rise of Stablecoins and its Entry to the U.S. Dollar Market
Author: Christian Hsieh, CEO of Tokenomy This paper examines some explanations for the continual global market demand for the U.S. dollar, the rise of stablecoins, and the utility and opportunities that crypto dollars can offer to both the cryptocurrency and traditional markets. The U.S. dollar, dominant in world trade since the establishment of the 1944 Bretton Woods System, is unequivocally the world’s most demanded reserve currency. Today, more than 61% of foreign bank reserves and nearly 40% of the entire world’s debt is denominated in U.S. dollars1. However, there is a massive supply and demand imbalance in the U.S. dollar market. On the supply side, central banks throughout the world have implemented more than a decade-long accommodative monetary policy since the 2008 global financial crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated the need for central banks to provide necessary liquidity and keep staggering economies moving. While the Federal Reserve leads the effort of “money printing” and stimulus programs, the current money supply still cannot meet the constant high demand for the U.S. dollar2. Let us review some of the reasons for this constant dollar demand from a few economic fundamentals.
Demand for U.S. Dollars
Firstly, most of the world’s trade is denominated in U.S. dollars. Chief Economist of the IMF, Gita Gopinath, has compiled data reflecting that the U.S. dollar’s share of invoicing was 4.7 times larger than America’s share of the value of imports, and 3.1 times its share of world exports3. The U.S. dollar is the dominant “invoicing currency” in most developing countries4. https://preview.redd.it/d4xalwdyz8p51.png?width=535&format=png&auto=webp&s=9f0556c6aa6b29016c9b135f3279e8337dfee2a6 https://preview.redd.it/wucg40kzz8p51.png?width=653&format=png&auto=webp&s=71257fec29b43e0fc0df1bf04363717e3b52478f This U.S. dollar preference also directly impacts the world’s debt. According to the Bank of International Settlements, there is over $67 trillion in U.S. dollar denominated debt globally, and borrowing outside of the U.S. accounted for $12.5 trillion in Q1 20205. There is an immense demand for U.S. dollars every year just to service these dollar debts. The annual U.S. dollar buying demand is easily over $1 trillion assuming the borrowing cost is at 1.5% (1 year LIBOR + 1%) per year, a conservative estimate. https://preview.redd.it/6956j6f109p51.png?width=487&format=png&auto=webp&s=ccea257a4e9524c11df25737cac961308b542b69 Secondly, since the U.S. has a much stronger economy compared to its global peers, a higher return on investments draws U.S. dollar demand from everywhere in the world, to invest in companies both in the public and private markets. The U.S. hosts the largest stock markets in the world with more than $33 trillion in public market capitalization (combined both NYSE and NASDAQ)6. For the private market, North America’s total share is well over 60% of the $6.5 trillion global assets under management across private equity, real assets, and private debt investments7. The demand for higher quality investments extends to the fixed income market as well. As countries like Japan and Switzerland currently have negative-yielding interest rates8, fixed income investors’ quest for yield in the developed economies leads them back to the U.S. debt market. As of July 2020, there are $15 trillion worth of negative-yielding debt securities globally (see chart). In comparison, the positive, low-yielding U.S. debt remains a sound fixed income strategy for conservative investors in uncertain market conditions. Source: Bloomberg Last, but not least, there are many developing economies experiencing failing monetary policies, where hyperinflation has become a real national disaster. A classic example is Venezuela, where the currency Bolivar became practically worthless as the inflation rate skyrocketed to 10,000,000% in 20199. The recent Beirut port explosion in Lebanon caused a sudden economic meltdown and compounded its already troubled financial market, where inflation has soared to over 112% year on year10. For citizens living in unstable regions such as these, the only reliable store of value is the U.S. dollar. According to the Chainalysis 2020 Geography of Cryptocurrency Report, Venezuela has become one of the most active cryptocurrency trading countries11. The demand for cryptocurrency surges as a flight to safety mentality drives Venezuelans to acquire U.S. dollars to preserve savings that they might otherwise lose. The growth for cryptocurrency activities in those regions is fueled by these desperate citizens using cryptocurrencies as rails to access the U.S. dollar, on top of acquiring actual Bitcoin or other underlying crypto assets.
The Rise of Crypto Dollars
Due to the highly volatile nature of cryptocurrencies, USD stablecoin, a crypto-powered blockchain token that pegs its value to the U.S. dollar, was introduced to provide stable dollar exposure in the crypto trading sphere. Tether is the first of its kind. Issued in 2014 on the bitcoin blockchain (Omni layer protocol), under the token symbol USDT, it attempts to provide crypto traders with a stable settlement currency while they trade in and out of various crypto assets. The reason behind the stablecoin creation was to address the inefficient and burdensome aspects of having to move fiat U.S. dollars between the legacy banking system and crypto exchanges. Because one USDT is theoretically backed by one U.S. dollar, traders can use USDT to trade and settle to fiat dollars. It was not until 2017 that the majority of traders seemed to realize Tether’s intended utility and started using it widely. As of April 2019, USDT trading volume started exceeding the trading volume of bitcoina12, and it now dominates the crypto trading sphere with over $50 billion average daily trading volume13. https://preview.redd.it/3vq7v1jg09p51.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=46f11b5f5245a8c335ccc60432873e9bad2eb1e1 An interesting aspect of USDT is that although the claimed 1:1 backing with U.S. dollar collateral is in question, and the Tether company is in reality running fractional reserves through a loose offshore corporate structure, Tether’s trading volume and adoption continues to grow rapidly14. Perhaps in comparison to fiat U.S. dollars, which is not really backed by anything, Tether still has cash equivalents in reserves and crypto traders favor its liquidity and convenience over its lack of legitimacy. For those who are concerned about Tether’s solvency, they can now purchase credit default swaps for downside protection15. On the other hand, USDC, the more compliant contender, takes a distant second spot with total coin circulation of $1.8 billion, versus USDT at $14.5 billion (at the time of publication). It is still too early to tell who is the ultimate leader in the stablecoin arena, as more and more stablecoins are launching to offer various functions and supporting mechanisms. There are three main categories of stablecoin: fiat-backed, crypto-collateralized, and non-collateralized algorithm based stablecoins. Most of these are still at an experimental phase, and readers can learn more about them here. With the continuous innovation of stablecoin development, the utility stablecoins provide in the overall crypto market will become more apparent.
In addition to trade settlement, stablecoins can be applied in many other areas. Cross-border payments and remittances is an inefficient market that desperately needs innovation. In 2020, the average cost of sending money across the world is around 7%16, and it takes days to settle. The World Bank aims to reduce remittance fees to 3% by 2030. With the implementation of blockchain technology, this cost could be further reduced close to zero. J.P. Morgan, the largest bank in the U.S., has created an Interbank Information Network (IIN) with 416 global Institutions to transform the speed of payment flows through its own JPM Coin, another type of crypto dollar17. Although people argue that JPM Coin is not considered a cryptocurrency as it cannot trade openly on a public blockchain, it is by far the largest scale experiment with all the institutional participants trading within the “permissioned” blockchain. It might be more accurate to refer to it as the use of distributed ledger technology (DLT) instead of “blockchain” in this context. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that as J.P. Morgan currently moves $6 trillion U.S. dollars per day18, the scale of this experiment would create a considerable impact in the international payment and remittance market if it were successful. Potentially the day will come when regulated crypto exchanges become participants of IIN, and the link between public and private crypto assets can be instantly connected, unlocking greater possibilities in blockchain applications. Many central banks are also in talks about developing their own central bank digital currency (CBDC). Although this idea was not new, the discussion was brought to the forefront due to Facebook’s aggressive Libra project announcement in June 2019 and the public attention that followed. As of July 2020, at least 36 central banks have published some sort of CBDC framework. While each nation has a slightly different motivation behind its currency digitization initiative, ranging from payment safety, transaction efficiency, easy monetary implementation, or financial inclusion, these central banks are committed to deploying a new digital payment infrastructure. When it comes to the technical architectures, research from BIS indicates that most of the current proofs-of-concept tend to be based upon distributed ledger technology (permissioned blockchain)19. https://preview.redd.it/lgb1f2rw19p51.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=040bb0deed0499df6bf08a072fd7c4a442a826a0 These institutional experiments are laying an essential foundation for an improved global payment infrastructure, where instant and frictionless cross-border settlements can take place with minimal costs. Of course, the interoperability of private DLT tokens and public blockchain stablecoins has yet to be explored, but the innovation with both public and private blockchain efforts could eventually merge. This was highlighted recently by the Governor of the Bank of England who stated that “stablecoins and CBDC could sit alongside each other20”. One thing for certain is that crypto dollars (or other fiat-linked digital currencies) are going to play a significant role in our future economy.
There is never a dull moment in the crypto sector. The industry narratives constantly shift as innovation continues to evolve. Twelve years since its inception, Bitcoin has evolved from an abstract subject to a familiar concept. Its role as a secured, scarce, decentralized digital store of value has continued to gain acceptance, and it is well on its way to becoming an investable asset class as a portfolio hedge against asset price inflation and fiat currency depreciation.Stablecoins have proven to be useful as proxy dollars in the crypto world, similar to how dollars are essential in the traditional world. It is only a matter of time before stablecoins or private digital tokens dominate the cross-border payments and global remittances industry. There are no shortages of hypes and experiments that draw new participants into the crypto space, such as smart contracts, new blockchains, ICOs, tokenization of things, or the most recent trends on DeFi tokens. These projects highlight the possibilities for a much more robust digital future, but the market also needs time to test and adopt. A reliable digital payment infrastructure must be built first in order to allow these experiments to flourish. In this paper we examined the historical background and economic reasons for the U.S. dollar’s dominance in the world, and the probable conclusion is that the demand for U.S. dollars will likely continue, especially in the middle of a global pandemic, accompanied by a worldwide economic slowdown. The current monetary system is far from perfect, but there are no better alternatives for replacement at least in the near term. Incremental improvements are being made in both the public and private sectors, and stablecoins have a definite role to play in both the traditional and the new crypto world. Thank you. Reference:  How the US dollar became the world’s reserve currency, Investopedia  The dollar is in high demand, prone to dangerous appreciation, The Economist  Dollar dominance in trade and finance, Gita Gopinath  Global trades dependence on dollars, The Economist & IMF working papers  Total credit to non-bank borrowers by currency of denomination, BIS  Biggest stock exchanges in the world, Business Insider  McKinsey Global Private Market Review 2020, McKinsey & Company  Central banks current interest rates, Global Rates  Venezuela hyperinflation hits 10 million percent, CNBC  Lebanon inflation crisis, Reuters  Venezuela cryptocurrency market, Chainalysis  The most used cryptocurrency isn’t Bitcoin, Bloomberg  Trading volume of all crypto assets, coinmarketcap.com  Tether US dollar peg is no longer credible, Forbes  New crypto derivatives let you bet on (or against) Tether’s solvency, Coindesk  Remittance Price Worldwide, The World Bank  Interbank Information Network, J.P. Morgan  Jamie Dimon interview, CBS News  Rise of the central bank digital currency, BIS  Speech by Andrew Bailey, 3 September 2020, Bank of England
Sup retards, back at it with the DD/macro. scroll to the rain man stuff after the crayons if you don't care about the why or how. TLDR: June 19 $250 SPY puts May 20 $4 USO puts SPY under 150 by January next year. So I was going about my business, trying to not $ROPE myself as my sweet tendies I made during the waterfall of March have evaporated, however, I heard that the fed was adding another $2.3T in monopoly money to the bankers pile specifically to help facilitate these loan programs being rolled out. In short, they are backing these dumb-ass, zero recourse, federally mandated, loans with printing press money. But cumguzzler OP, your title is about inflation and guage simp--try, why are you talking about the fed #ban. Well, when you print money it is an inflationary action in theory. Let me explain.
What is inflation? Inflation is the sustained increase in the price level in goods and services. Inflation is derived from a general price index, and in the US, from the consumer price index. Knowing that inflation is an outcome, not a set policy is very important. Inflation is a measurement after the fact, much like your technical astrology indicators. (**ps, use order flow in your TA you wizards**) HOWEVER, the actual act of buying bundles of these loans does not directly impact inflation. Now what is Gauge symmetry? Gauge symmetry is a function of math and theoretical physics that can be applied to finance models. What a gauge is, is a measurement. Gauge symmetry is when the underlying variable of something changes, however, we do not observe that variable change. A great example of this is if you and a friend are moving, and your friend is holding a box of tendies. The box is a cube, equal on all sides. If you turn away for a moment and she rotates the cube 90 degrees while you are not looking, and you look back - you would have no idea the cube was rotated. There was a very real change in the position of the cube in relation to space-time. Your friend acted on it. But you didn't measure it, in fact it would be impossible for you to determine if the box was changed at all if you weren't observing it. That movement of the box where you didn't observe it, is called gauge transformation and happens literally more then JPow fucks my mom in quantum physics. The object observably exactly the same even though it is not physically the same. The act of it existing as an observably the same box is gauge symmetry - it is by observation symmetrical. Why this is important, is that fiat money doesn't have any absolute meaning. The value of $1 is arbitrary. furthermore, Inflation is a Guage symmetry. Inflation has no real impact on the real value of the underlying goods and services, but rather serves as a metric to measure the shift of value across a timeline. When JPow starts pluggin' your mom along with all these balance sheets, there is a gauge symmetry event happening. The money he is printing is entering the system (gauge transformation), this isn't an issue if all pricing against the USD get shifted equally, however, the market is not accounting for this money because we don't have real-time data on what is being applied where, we only get a slow drip in terms of weekly and monthly reports. WE HAVE OUR EYES CLOSED. This is a gauge symmetry event. When this happens in real terms, the market becomes dislocated from its real value price. Well how do we know there is a dislocation? "YoU JuSt SaId tHe UnDeRlYiNg VaLuE iZ AbStRaCkKt HuRr QE aNd MaRkEtS Iz ComPlEx ReAd A TeXtBuK AbOuT FrAcTiOnAl ReSErVe BanKiNg YoU NeRd." - **anyone rationalizing the bull run** We can look at Forex you fish. USD lives in a bubble. The Yen is in a bubble, the RMB is in a bubble, and we exchange with each other. the Jap central bank has little effect on the CPI index (cost of goods and services) of the US. If the Yen prints a gazillion dollars, the USD is not effected EXCEPT in its exchange rate. YEN:USD would see a sizeable differential the more Yen is printed and vise-versa. So NOW instead of JPow getting away with plowing your girlfriend, we can catch the bitch. Instead of looking at the gauge transformation at face value and then giving up because it is symmetrical output, we can look and see if this gauge symmetry carries over to the foreign exchange market. Well guess what happens when you look at the value of the USD against foreign currencies. Consistent uncertainty during the fed operations. Meaning the market of banks that partake in FX swaps don't know where to spot the USD. Generally a very very bad thing. Value of the USD to Euro 2017-2020, notice the slow decline, then the chaos at the end Above is the value of the USD to Euro, notice the sloping decline. The dollar has been growing weaker since 2017. At the end you see our present issues, lets #ENHANCE USD to Euro, January 2020 to Present When you see those spikes, those are days in between Fed action. The value of the US goes up when the fed doesn't print because people aren't spending. Non-spending is a deflationary event and has a direct impact on the CPI. However, each drop when you line up the dates, was a date of Fed spending. Lets look outside of the Eurozone. This is the RMB to USD. Yes China manipulates, but look at the end of the graph China manipulated rates early in 2018 however you can see the steady incline upward towards the of 2018. More specifically, lets look at it since December. RMB value against USD, January to Now You Can see the Chinese RMB has been gaining steam since December, even with Chinese production falling off a cliff all through this pandemic.
What this rain man level autism means for the economy.
Looking across the board at Forex we can see the USD having a schizo panic attack jumping up and down like me at a mathematics lecture. But what does all this gauge BDSM and shit have to do with the markets? Well it shows 1 of 3 things are occuring.
The fed is printing money to offset deflationary pressures of the economy being fuk for the past month, and therefore all this printing is offset by the loss of liquidity throughout the system and we are all retared. (SECRET: THIS IS WHAT ALL THE INSTITUTIONS THINK IS HAPPENING AND WE WILL ALL BE FINE.)
The deflationary event is overplayed, and JPow just is nailing his coffin together. This would result in long term hyperinflation similiar to the Weimar republic. The only hedge against this is to load up on strong currency that do not manipulate and have enough distance from US markets that they can have some safety (ironically the Ruble is the safest currency. Low link to the USD and not influenced by China, and on discount rn)
The gauge transformation is actually not as severe as they are blurting out, the fed does not pass go, does not actually print 10 Trillion dollars, and this was all a marketing ploy to not get Trump involved and prop markets. In this case, the real deflationary event is real, the USD red rockets harder then my cock and we end up market-wise at a very high asset price in relation to real value. This one is most dangerous because it increases the real value of debt and has mass dislocation between real value and market cap. You took debt at a fixed interest rate and a fixed principal, this would cause the biggest GUH in history when all of a sudden you are $100 million in debt and your revenue was $50 million a year ago, but now is only $25 million. That $100 million in debt is still $100 million and now you have a credit crisis because past values of money were inflated. This spirals into a large scale solvency crisis of any company utilizing current growth methodology (levering up to your tits in debt)
In only 1 of these 3 scenarios do we see any sort of "good" outcome? That would be the offset of deflationary pressures. It is very important to understand that inflation is only a measurement, and itself does not denote value of real goods and services. Option 1 of a print fiesta that works (something similar to 1981-82) seems possible. A similar environment and reaction occured in the early 80s when the government brute-forced a bull run using these same offset theorems but in that situation, Volker at the fed had interest rates at 21.5% and had 20% to come down to stimulate the inflationary reaction. Long term this would just lever up more debt and expanded the real wealth gap over time because we kicked the can down the road another 15 years. If that happens again socioeconomically I don't see capitalism surviving (yeah Im on my high horse get over it). This is the option that many fiscal policymakers and talking heads abide by and the reason why the markets are green. However, it is really just kicking it down the road and expanding real wealth inequality. You think Bernie Sanders is bad, wait until homes cost $3million dollars in Kentucky and AOC Jr comes around. If we get option 2, we see hyperinflation and we turn into Zimbabwe, which is great, I've always wanted to see Africa. Long term we could push interest rate back to 1980 Volker levels and slowly revalue the US against real value commodities already pegged to the USD like oil. This would be a short term shock but because of international reliance on the USD system, we could slowly de-lever this inflation over 2-3 years and be back to normal capacity although the markets would blow their O-ring. Recession yes, but no long term depression. If we get option 3, the worst long term option in my opinion, basically any company with any revolver line drawn down when that hits is going to go under, private equity won't touch it with a 20ft stick because cashflows couldn't possibly handle the debt on the end of the lever, and we see mass long term unemployment. The only way out of the spiral of option three is inflationary pressure from the fed+government, but because we are already so far down the rabbit hole at the current moment there's no fucking way we could print another 10 trillion. USD treasuries couldn't handle the guh and we would essentially be functionally forced into a long term (7-10 year) depression because nothing anyone could do would delever the value of the dollar. This would result in the long term collapse of the United States as a world power and would render us like Russia in 1991. Thank you for coming to my ted talk.
[Discussion] Future of Global Telehealth: Automated Real-time Payments Without All the Admin
In the previous article, we discussed the challenges of cross-border telemedicine and how Solve.Care overcomes them with Global Telehealth Exchange. But the benefits of GTHE go even further to offer solutions to a number of challenges that currently plague the healthcare industry today. One of the main, ongoing, challenges in healthcare is the issue of collecting payments. Collections, write-offs and billing admin, while considering specific laws and regulations, is stressful, costly, and an extremely time-consuming process. Simply stated, payments can take months to clear and not always in the full amount charged for services rendered. These payment issues are real and problematic, which no medical practitioner wants to deal with, but is forced to. Unless a provider has accounting and legal training, and the time it takes to perform this responsibility, they’ll have to hire and manage support staff such as; a retained lawyer and/or administrative assistants. To collect payments, providers must do a series of steps such as: complete forms, issue invoices, and then wait for the funds to come in. And as stated earlier, there is the concern of not receiving the full amount they charged for the consultation. When it comes to telehealth, there are many payment challenges. Now imagine throwing in cross-border care into the mix. These payment problems are even more compounded. In addition to all the problems associated with payments, you now have bank fees, variable foreign exchange rates and other unforeseen issues to consider. It is highly unlikely, that as a provider, you will receive the exact amount you quoted for your professional fees. Global Telehealth Exchange makes getting paid simple and instant without all the bureaucratic paperwork and long waits Solve.Care’s Global Telehealth Exchange is the world’s first global telehealth solution. It is designed to connect physicians and patients no matter where they are in the world. Moreover, consultation payments are instant and without restrictions such as; bank fees, transfer time delays and exchange rate variables. GTHE allows providers to practice medicine without worrying about a delayed payment or receiving a fraction of the fee charged. As soon as the consultation ends, payment is automatically sent to the provider in the form of SOLVE tokens. SOLVE is the digital currency used in GTHE and can then be exchanged into local currencies. Using SOLVE makes forex fees and bank commissions redundant. When a provider signs up to Solve.Care’s GTHE, they are assigned a GTHE ID. The GTHE ID acts as an avatar for the provider and performs most administrative functions such as credentials, accept appointments, and payments, to name a few. It’s automated to interact with various parties and handles the majority of transactions on behalf of the provider, according to the rules they set. In short, the GTHE ID acts as an automated administrative assistant that providers must either employ or do themselves. GTHE’s payment system uses the GTHE ID as a provider’s personal payment gateway, so there’s no need for bank account details or physical address. It is a permanent identifier on the blockchain that providers receive after registering on Global Telehealth Exchange. GTHE offers no billing, collection or write-offs with instant real-time payments, in full. This system takes care of all accounting tasks so that the provider can focus more on patient care. The benefits of telehealth and global telehealth solutions are obvious. But when it comes to immediate payments in full for services rendered, none can compare to GTHE. Visit our website for more information on how Solve.Care and Global Telehealth Exchange can provide global patient access to your practice.
Forex Trading System with a smart and reliable indicator of the trend lines True Trendline. MA TrendLine is highly accurate trend following forex strategy. The system gives you clear signals which will definitely help you to make best trades. Forex MA TrendLine hasn’t used any indicators that are hard to understand and that is confusing ... Before I show you The Forex Decimus system, I want to teach you the basics on what it’s about. We will be talking Forex Decimus bars. Exclusively to scalping, or dividing little chunks of price movement in a wider trend. As a scalper, I try to make sure that scalping settings are not mixed up with long term settings. In short, I’m interested in momentum and, more specifically, price action ... Binary forex Hunter With iq option fully automate system Manual and fully Automate system All Time Frame 100% NON-REPAINT! Win rate 78-80% MT 4... Thanks a lot Petemech for this wonderful sharing.This is really an excellent forex trading software.I have successfully installed it. Shakeel Murad, 09 Dec 2019 #65. adisheri Member Credit Hunter. Equity $9.29 Eq Credit $99.16 Cr Ref Point P 0.00 Rf. Shakeel Murad said: ↑ Thanks a lot Petemech for this wonderful sharing.This is really an excellent forex trading software.I have successfully ... Wenn du dein Forex Trading System entwickelst ist es sehr wichtig, dass du dein Risiko definierst. Frage dich, wie viel du bei jedem Trade verlieren kannst, ohne dein Depot nach 5-10 Fehltrades zu gefährden. Kein Trader verliert gerne, aber Verluste gehören zum Trading einfach dazu (unbedingt merken!). Ein guter Trader denkt im ersten Schritt darüber nach , wieviel Geld er durch den ... Ein Forex RSI System liefert mit geringem Aufwand ein sinnvolles Indiz über die Verfassung des Marktes und kann mit geeigneten Parametereinstellungen als alleiniges oder kombiniertes Handelssignal sowie als Filter und Frühindikator verwendet werden. Der Relative Strength Index nimmt im Forex Oscillator Trading deshalb eine besondere Rolle ein. Der Indikator wurde in den 1970er Jahren ... Belly FX Advanced system free Download belly system forex, belly system software or belly system indicator. This is a system that will help you trade forex better. belly system mt4. The belly system you will download below, works with MT4. belly system zip download. Follow my instructions below to download belly system for free. Discussion board about forex trading, trading systems, expert advisors, indicators, forex brokers, economy, fundamentals, mql programming, trading platforms, trading ... Der Abokurs Forex-Freiheits-System gehört Jürgen Wechsler mit Sitz in Nürnberg. Als Ex-Top-Investmentbanker in führender Position, Fondsmanager, Experte im Währungsbereich, Coach und Berater von Finanzdienstleistern und Investmentgesellschaften und mit mehr als 20 Jahren Erfahrung am FOREX Markt hilft Jürgen Menschen, egal ob Anfängern, Fortgeschrittenen oder Profis mehr finanzielle ... Can anybody share this Nicola Delic 10X forex system? Click to expand... Send me your e-address & i will send it to you ( F.O.C) -BUT not video,s as they are VERY large. + quite honestly of very little use : ) Petemech, 28 Nov 2019 #6. Exel Tha New Member. Equity $0.25 Eq Credit $3.31 Cr Ref Point P 0.00 Rf. Please share me too, [email protected] Exel Tha, 28 Nov 2019 #7. Mustagh New Member ...
EUR/USD USD/CAD trade Best Forex Trading System 17 OCT 2019 Review -forex trading systems that work - Duration: 4:17. 200 Forex Pips 444 views ENJOY THE VIDEO PLEASE LIKE SHARE COMMENT SUBSCRIBE TO DOWNLOAD https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1zYOkePVcccnE97vvP_lHA0NtyBVolTQW Inner Light by Kevin Mac... Enjoy Forex Trading with the ChinEtti Pip Collector Extremely Powerful and Profitable Forex System with BUY/SELL Alerts! Get it here https://www.chinettif... I am giving you a Forex Trading System worth Thousands of Dollars for FREE! YOU MUST WATCH IT UNTIL THE END, its very important. This is a very versatile sys... Free Training: 3 - Part Reversal Series - https://goo.gl/QKaxzV EAP Training Program - https://eaptrainingprogram.com/video-sales-page - More videos about pr... The 4 forex strategies that every trader should know ! 🚨🚨Trading Performance 🚨🚨 Improve Your Trading Performance at our Fundamental Trading Academy https://w... $ 294 367. Two powerful MT4 Forex EA settings Robots should have to make money in the Forex Market - Duration: 11:53. Expert4x 110,772 views An explanation video about how to use divergence to filtering trend reversal or trend continuation. Very simple to do and will make your analysis more accurate. Watch till finish to fully ... ENJOY THE VIDEO PLEASE LIKE SHARE COMMENT SUBSCRIBE TO DOWNLOAD https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1LUkmpSP2gv8494MuI3D3FQBQ6THIbsiZ EDM Detection Mode by Ke... ENJOY THE VIDEO PLEASE LIKE SHARE COMMENT SUBSCRIBE TO DOWNLOAD https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B0_2xIiDQUWLUEgxaXRsWDhHTDg Inner Light by Kevin MacLeod ...