I’ve been pointing out how the “legends” in trading that we’ve been made to adore have had their statuses created for a reason, in my opinion. Now why have I come to this conclusion? Well I only observe what I observe and logically conclude certain things in my head which make logical sense to me. Then I sit back and watch the behaviours of the so called financial geniuses and then let their behaviours and actions either confirm or deny my suspicions.
I’ve pointed out things regarding Bill Ackman, Ray Dalio and Warren Buffet to name a few and today I am spotting something peculiar with none other than Carl Icahn.
Remember what we’ve been learning, how certain investors were given the ability to invest large sums of money on “sure things” in order to make massive profits and then in turn use those profits to start organizations that in turn perform certain task that push forward certain agendas. You only need to look as far as the career of George Soros. I don’t believe that he shorted the $GBPUSD - by practically going all in and profiting a billion dollars - was all his own doing. No rational investor would do such a thing but time after time we come across these investors with nerves of steel that somehow manage to time the “impossible to time” markets.
What makes these fortunes that were made so suspicious is how these investors end up pushing the agendas we see so clearly being peddled on the media and through certain world leaders.
For instance – I found it very interesting – this interview with Carl Icahn and the ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) agenda that is being pushed. At surface level it seems completely reasonable until you dig deeper and find out its nefarious purpose. Then there is something that stuck for me, something that I thought was very bizarre and just didn’t make sense. Carl was referring to the interest rate increases that Jerome has been pushing through and he was mentioning how critics are suggesting Jerome needs to “pivot” because of the negative impact it is having on the economy.
Now my suspicion is that Carl knows very well the effect of raising rates and he also knows very well the cause of the inflation to begin with. So when he refers to the critics encouraging Powell to pivot on rates identical to telling a drug addict that they “took enough” and they should stop – in my eyes and mind – it became apparent that he was well aware that Powell increasing rates is like a drug addict doing drugs and this harmful behaviour needs to stop. But then as he is coming to realize what he is saying, he “pivots” and adds an additional part of his metaphor that does not make any sense whatsoever. He states “your kids a drug addict and telling him okay you took enough you know you you you stop drinking enough now okay go ahead and good time again”. As you can see the two scenarios don’t match in the least unless you realize he likely slipped and realized last minute he had to change the metaphor before too much was revealed.
That’s my take on it, just a thought!
Kevin Araujo
Hello, in min 24:45 he says " we need to get rid of the *** problem" I understand that the rates are going to be between 5 to 5,25% before they start going down again. That is what I understand that he is traying to say about. The other day you published in telegram a guy who was making a metaphore, with antibiotics saying that when ever the person is feeling well, the treatmente cannot be stopped. Please if this is not what should be understood let me know it. Thank you!!