You have a technical mind, don't you? - page 11
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
This "commonplace swag" has led to the already trillion-dollar value of the eppl.
Yura Shatunov is an ordinary star like Frank Sinatra or Lady Gaga plus the effect of an unsaturated market.
I'm not denying this law. There are markets where it prevails, but there are also markets where its effect is very tentative.
It was originally about gasoline and oil. It would not be enough to say that simply supply has fallen - you would have to go on and say that it was because of tax changes. So this law is secondary in this market and government policy is primary.
No, it is not. The law is primary. And in all these cases it works very well.
BSN - have a look at Maslow's Pyramid of Needs - after all all all needs below the modern person are already practically completely realized. That is why it is possible to make big money on BSV - just in accordance with the law "the price is determined exclusively by the balance of supply and demand".
Shatunov, Sinatra, Gaga - the point was that they were not monopolists, but simply "got into the flow", which allowed them to have huge profits, just in accordance with this rule - there was a great demand and supply was limited.
Gasoline is the same. Tax restrictions simply shift the supply-demand balance point to a different place on the curve. But they cannot undo the basic rule. The rule can only be overturned by a willful central planning, as it was in the USSR. But even in that case - if the bid price does not fall into the intersection of the supply and demand curves - there will be either shortages or overstocking.
Well yes that's right, beyond our knowledge everything ends, and in singularity there is no space and time, there is nothing there, emptiness. We do not know the world, we create it, i.e. everything works the other way round.
This is where the logic is all right. People have clocks and they have time and space to move around. And then there is no clock, no time and space.
Maybe then the earth is flat).
It is enough for me that you acknowledged the possibility of describing the 3-dimensional by 2-dimensional. As was the case with the "authoritative scientist" you describe, who also used 2-dimensional to describe 3-dimensional. No need to jump further from one to the other (thereby illustrating a violation of the law of identity).
Don't make this up. Where did I admit that a plane is a volume? Show me, please.
In the example of a "authoritative" two points of space are connected due to a "plane" having no 3rd dimension orthodoxy. And in reality there are no two dimensional material objects. Consequently, the mathematical model revealing this method in detail is fundamentally flawed.
The fact that you don't understand logic is not my fault))
Now find me a drawing that describes a two-dimensional or four-dimensional object that engineers have built in our three-dimensional. Very curious. [2]
No. The law is primary. And in all these cases it works very well.
The most important thing is to have a good understanding of what is needed in the modern man, and what is needed in the modern man, and what is needed in the modern man. That is why it is possible to make big money on BSV - just in accordance with the law "the price is determined exclusively by the balance of supply and demand".
Shatunov, Sinatra, Gaga - the point was that they were not monopolists, but simply "got into the flow", which allowed them to have huge profits, just in accordance with this rule - there was a great demand and supply was limited.
Gasoline is the same. Tax restrictions simply shift the supply-demand balance point to a different place on the curve. But they cannot undo the basic rule. The rule can only be overturned by a willful central planning, as it was in the USSR. But even in that case - if the bid price does not fall into the intersection of the supply and demand curves - there will either be a shortage or overstocking.
Secondary as a mechanism for transmitting force from the rudder to the wheels, and the force applied to the rudder is primary.
The hierarchy of needs theory, despite its popularity, is unsupported and has low validity
I can't say anything about the star market, but it's obvious that it's not 'easy' to 'get into the flow' and stay in it.
I've already written about natural monopolies and public goods, where things work differently
Don't make this up. Where did I admit that the plane is a volume? Show me, please.
In the example of a "authoritative" two points of space are connected due to a "plane" having no 3rd dimension orthodoxy. And reality has no two dimensional material objects. Consequently, the mathematical model revealing this method in detail is fundamentally flawed.
The fact that you don't understand logic is not my fault))
Now find me a drawing that describes a two or four dimensional object that engineers have built in three dimensional our. Very curious. [2]
My words:'you recognised the possibility of describing the 3-dimensional by the 2-dimensional. As was the case with the "authoritative scientist" you describe"
were a reaction to your saying,"Drawings describe 3-dimensional space."
and I'm not saying that you admitted, "the plane is a volume."
Notice any difference? The absence, so to speak, of fulfilling the law of identity?
My words:"you acknowledged the possibility of describing the 3-dimensional by the 2-dimensional. As was the case with the "authoritative scientist" you describe"
was in response to you saying,"The drawings describe 3-dimensional space."
and I'm not saying that you admitted, "the plane is a volume."
Notice any difference? The absence, so to speak, of fulfilling the law of identity?
"Drawing a three-dimensional object existing in reality" and "drawing a two-dimensional object existing in reality" - understand the difference?
I hope the point is clear.
"Drawing a three-dimensional object that exists in reality" and "drawing a two-dimensional object that exists in reality" - understand the difference?
I hope you get the idea.
Would a blueprint blueprint be all right? )
Would a blueprint blueprint be all right? )
This is handled by the "wheelbarrow for hire" team)
Would a blueprint blueprint be all right? )
Explain the nerdiness. A drawing can be represented as an object's width, length and height, but how do you push time into the drawing?
Explain the nerdiness. A drawing can be represented as an object's width, length and height, but how do you push time into a drawing?
A cartoonist knows exactly)