Hey guys, I'm not much of an economist but I understand that certain events affect markets. Announcement of further easing in the US is one example. How closely in tune is everyone with this stuff? Do you stay informed well enough to buy before a Bernanke speech for example? What are some other key things a beginner could be aware of?
There are no shortcuts and no crystal balls. You just need to be spend a lot more time reading on financial markets, widely. Not just silver/gold but shares, commodities, indexes and bonds too. Political news - necessary evil given the amount of unnecessary 'stimulation'/manipulation that goes on in the world. Even a mainstream media source like the Wall Street Journal would be a good start. Its much easier now with the 'net than it was say 20 years ago.
Roswell is right. You really need to spend alot more time reading (or listening) about these things on your own. The more you read the more realise that alot of forum talk (even on this forum) is misleading even though it might be accurate. Forums are great for peoples opinions and to challange your view but dont take people word for anything. If you have an ipod I think a good start would be to listen to: Financial Sense News hour - great for all round economic/energy/PM's info - about 5 pod casts each week Financial Survival Radio - about 1 pod cast each week Peter Schiff radio. I am still looking for more worth-while ones myself.
One thing you can do is find yourself more time to do research and general reading/listening. People think that investing is a passive past time. It isn't! If there is anything you can do to change your habits regarding gathering knowledge then that will be an investment in itself. Listen to material as you drive to work instead of the radio and so on - multitasking is king. Or figure out what things you are spending time on that could be put aside for a while. Find out whether you prefer to receive and gather information via visual or auditory means and see if you can access material in your preferred way. You can also figure out whether you prefer the details or big picture approach or like to see some practical application for your information. Tailoring your research like this will make it seem less of a chore for you - if it indeed seems that way. But the most impt thing to realise is that, while we can never know enough, there is a certain point when a sense of understanding kicks in and you become conscious of things starting to make sense. There is no substitute for time. When learning anything at first the brain's neural networks get overloaded and it seems as if things are more confusing than ever. Then after a period of consolidation (where you might take a break for a few days) the new information has sorted itself out and things suddenly seem to make more sense. Continuing to do some regular listening to, and reading of material, slowly adds to this and also some of the world events and market movements will occur and you can see the effects first hand. Again, no substitute for time.
I didn't say I don't read anything, this thread has turned into assumption. Perhaps I should have stated that in my initial post. I regularly read Zerohedge and several other financial news blogs. To be honest I try to stay away from Wall Street Journal and most other mainstream media in general. I prefer the non-establishment bias of Schiff / Keiser / Maloney / Celente etc, it's generally more accurate.
"I prefer the non-establishment bias of Schiff / Keiser / Maloney / Celente etc, it's generally more accurate." Me too! The MSM commentators seem to be oblivious to the near future. That is what their columns make me think anyway. Some of what they say is plain stupid. OC
Notice how I used the words Even the mainstream media. With Independent sources however, I'd be wary of what is known in statistics as 'confirmation bias' and also potential conflicts of interest.
Sorry about the assumption - admittedly I was following on from the two posts before me. I think the non-mainstream media is where most of the experts hide out. So much opportunity for them to get their point across with the platforms available to them they don't need mainstram support. Saw a snippet of Media Watch ((ABC) a while ago where they showed a Ch 7 or 9 reporter talking about CSL (ie: blood plasma products) shares and they put pictures of plasma TV screens behind her! Sadly, that probably sums up the level of expertise in mainstream journalism these days. Might not have been the journalist who chose the images, but isn't that what editors are for??
