/biz/ - Business & Finance

5 years of accumulation. The breakout will be biblical

m2sl price levels keep blowing my mind how dead set they are, as though whales really do trade according to money supply

>>50843408
Ok what am I looking at.

>>50843906
>as though

>>50843408
Where you decided to draw the bottom line is somewhat arbitrary isint it?? Shouldn't it start at the major bottom in mid 2015?

>>50845507
a massive bear flag

>>50843408
>M1SL
fucking retard, you can't use M1 anymore because of the definition change they made in May 2020. Just look at the graph on your chart. There is a large vertical discontinuity in May 2020 implying a massive dump where none occurred. And then you drew a bunch of lines based on this incorrect data.

>>50847259
I bet you're vaccinated too

>>50849035
Never vaxxed, just care about facts. A thread died so OP could shit up the board with his retarded fucking opinions, more retards need to be put in their place.

This is a great hedge as well, forgot to add. I’ll drop 10k in a 9/23 call. Still watching and waiting though. Wait for the premiums to drop further. December calls on SARK might print as well. I’ll also be rolling these nvidia calls at the bottom of any substantial drop. I’m bullish on their 4090 series of video cards.

Hmm.
Checks out.
Sell crypto in 2024, buy house 4 years later.

>>50843408
is this the new thick lines bobo?

>>50843408
why is it important only with M2suppy?

>>50843408

>>50843408
No fuckin way, it's not just gonna crab until 2024.

>>50843408
>The Only Chart That Matters

>>50843408
16 years cycle basado, m charts are just bull/bear cope though

>>50843408
Holy shit a smart thread in /biz/?

https://www.blockchaincenter.net/en/bitcoin-rainbow-chart/#:~:text=The%20Rainbow%20Chart%20is%20meant,and%20without%20any%20scientific%20basis.
funny rainbow chart

>>50847259
>May 2020
Typical retarded faggot talking shit he doesnt understand. What happened in 2020 was they printed 80% of ALL DOLLAR IN EXISTENCE.
Changing definition my ass

>>50856189
This isn't true, prove it. They show on the fed's own website that they changed the definition of M1 to include savings deposits, leading to a spike of $11 trillion in M1 in May 2020. M2 has no corresponding spike, why doesn't it have the same spike if M1 is a subset of M2?

>>50856678
So how do you explain the 5-6 trillion spike of m2 in the last 2 years? Roughly coinciding with the total cost of all stimulus efforts.

>>50856879
That was money printing, but your "spike" and my "spike" are not the same thing being described.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M1SL
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

Take a look at a narrow slice of time surrounding May 2020. The spike in May 2020 does not occur in M2. Why is this? You just have to scroll below the M1 chart and read.

>Before May 2020, M1 consists of (1) currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of depository institutions; (2) demand deposits at commercial banks (excluding those amounts held by depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign banks and official institutions) less cash items in the process of collection and Federal Reserve float; and (3) other checkable deposits (OCDs), consisting of negotiable order of withdrawal, or NOW, and automatic transfer service, or ATS, accounts at depository institutions, share draft accounts at credit unions, and demand deposits at thrift institutions.

>Beginning May 2020, M1 consists of (1) currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of depository institutions; (2) demand deposits at commercial banks (excluding those amounts held by depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign banks and official institutions) less cash items in the process of collection and Federal Reserve float; and (3) other liquid deposits, consisting of OCDs and savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts). Seasonally adjusted M1 is constructed by summing currency, demand deposits, and OCDs (before May 2020) or other liquid deposits (beginning May 2020), each seasonally adjusted separately.

>>50856925
>>50856879
Pic related is M2 over a similar timeframe, only an increase of around $5-6 trillion, as you already said. If 80% of all dollars in existence were printed in 2020 then that would be a 5x in the money supply, or a 500% increase, not 25%.

>>50856959
damnit, forgot pic.

>>50852363
That really isn't that unbelievable. You think the next bull run is going to happen in the next 18 months? LOL

>>50856979
>>50856959
>>50856925
Right, I'm tracking savings was included. I misread your post when you said this isn't true and assumed you meant the printing as a whole.

What does it mean

>>50856925
>>50856959
80% is an exaggeration for sure, but the FED DID massively print money in 2020.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGMBASE

They changed the definition of M1 so they can hide the money printing and midwits like you will come out of the woods to say ACKHTUALLY and defend ((THEM)).

>>50857083
>The monetary base (or M0) is the total amount of a currency that is either in general circulation in the hands of the public or in the form of commercial bank deposits held in the central bank's reserves.
Commercial bank deposits at the fed are highly illiquid, this money only causes inflation if banks can actually create new loans with them. It's basically a liquidity sinkhole, all your chart tells me is that banks are not lending.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CURRCIR
Pic related is currency in circulation which is what I think you wanted to show, it increase by around 25% which is pretty well in line with M2's corresponding increase.

Changing the definition of M1 wasn't to hide anything because it DIDN'T hide anything, you can just look at M2 anyway. The real reason it was changed is because adding savings deposits to M1 made it nearly identical to M2 so they deprecated it. Now this begs the question, why did they add savings deposits to M1? And THAT is because in 2020 as a form of stimulus they changed the rules surrounding savings accounts so that you can make transfers out of them to checking accounts a lot easier to increase liquidity. They never reversed this so now checking and savings accounts really don't have any difference between them, you are not restricted to 6x a month transfers.

>>50857188
So what you're telling me is inflation is transitory

>>50857227
If the fed's balance sheet and the money supply continues to remain flat like this, then yes actually it will be transitory after another few years, but there is a time delay between printing money and all of it leading to consumer price inflation by circulating in the real economy. There is still a lot of money built up in people's checking accounts from stimulus over the last few years, much higher than pre-pandemic levels.

>>50857227
Don't ask questions goy, just follow ((((them)))

>>50849144
>shift to china in 2037
>when 66% of the population will be older than 40

lmao

>>50857276
Right, what does concern me is the fact that money velocity is no where near pre pandemic levels according to FRED. Supply chain issues might have had a part in increase costs as well as recent geo political events. Do you think prices will increase more than what it is now if we do creep back up to pre levels?

>>50857350
>2037
>chinese average age 40
>westerners average age 80 years

>>50857443
The trend for money supply has been plummeting for decades, I honestly don't think it will ever go back to pre-pandemic levels. It might increase a bit more if supply issues get sorted out which would be inflationary but I just don't see what would cause the economy to fully return to the way it was in 2019. There have been too many structural shifts in spending habits.

>>50857457
the average american is growing younger than the average chinese. europe's screwed tho.

>>50857496
Makes sense, thanks for the discussion

>>50843408
zah?

>>50857561
My pleasure, thank you for being civil.