Do you tell people you're a trader?

flat5 · May 25, 2005

Quote from science_trader:

Couldn't say it better....

flat5, if you really do have that level, then do a search for 'Minority Game' on the net. Read a little and you'll discover what has been found and proved. From a toy market like this one, which displays stylized facts comparable to real markets, it is shown that speculators are a necessary group in a market.

http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9909265
http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0101326
http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0103024

Thanks for the refs. Looks interesting.

I might remind you, however, that we probably won't find the answer to why people might look down on traders from an academic paper on a mathematical model for market dynamics.

science_trader · May 25, 2005

Quote from flat5:

Thanks for the refs. Looks interesting.

I might remind you, however, that we probably won't find the answer to why people might look down on traders from an academic paper on a mathematical model for market dynamics.

This is an answer to your problem with trading...

People looking down on traders ? Perhaps in the US, but here in Switzerland, whatever they don't know what a trader is, or they consider you very well (as long as you work for a bank... otherwise they don't understand what you really do...)

flat5 · May 25, 2005

Quote from science_trader:

This is an answer to your problem with trading...

Well, first of all, you're assuming I have a problem with trading. For the Nth time: I don't. It's interesting that people continue to assume this.

Second, from a quick skim of these papers, they appear to be trying to show that speculators generate "stylized facts" in the market. This is hardly refutation of anything I've said. Maybe they say more than that, I'm not sure yet.

People looking down on traders ? Perhaps in the US, but here in Switzerland, whatever they don't know what a trader is, or they consider you very well (as long as you work for a bank... otherwise they don't understand what you really do...) [/B]

As has been mentioned many times, people (here, at least) often see it as either akin to casino gambling (and therefore irresponsible), or a non-productive activity (moving money from here to there), or predatory (taking money away from those less smart than you.)

Imagine · May 25, 2005

Quote from nicholaf:

what subject? i was in wharton undergrad, financial engineering at iit and am now in gsb for mba.

IIT as in IIlinois Institute of Technology?

if so me too.

nicholaf · May 25, 2005

Quote from Imagine:

IIT as in IIlinois Institute of Technology?

if so me too.

yup, when did you attend? i graduated about a year ago. maybe we have met

I Missed Boat · May 25, 2005

Quote from flat5:

Compared to what? People have been getting hit with 6% or more commissions in real estate forever, and yet the real estate market seems to continue functioning. 1% transaction cost is a bargain, depending on your comparison point

Quote from flat5:

There's really one reasonable answer for some markets and I'm surprised no one has offered it.

In the case of commodities, the speculators do offer the hedgers a service by absorbing their risk for a price. The hedgers can benefit from a "loss" from the resulting stability they've gained that has other benefits for their business.

Was that so difficult?

actually someone did mention heding. btw, poker is nothing but wealth transfer and entertainment. The stock markets serve to provide capital for businesses, give average people the opportunity to participate in investing in the economy, price companies, encourage new ideas, etc.

as far as your comparison to the home market, you're logic is that because the new bubble is in the housing market, and because the housing market charges 6% commission, then 1% is cheap. The housing market is by its nature much less liquid, so the commissions should be higher (although the gov't is about to come down on numerous brokers for colluding to freeze out other, low cost, brokers). Overall, the money saved by investors and retirement funds due to tighter spreads and lower commissions is substantial. And being a quant man, i know you can calculate the difference of 1 or 2% a year for 30 years on someone's retirement savings. It's no small amount, unless someone has saved almost nothing.

Everest · May 25, 2005

Quote from flat5:

Well, first of all, you're assuming I have a problem with trading. For the Nth time: I don't. It's interesting that people continue to assume this.

I can't imagine why

Everest · May 25, 2005

Quote from flat5:

should consider your post an emotional epileptic fit.)

you do that

Hydroblunt · May 27, 2005

Quote from flat5:

I have an advanced degree from an Ivy in a quantitative subject

This pretty much explains your inability to differentiate between trading & gambling.

Get your head out of your a$$, you might figure out why day traders are making money in the market while the average joe shmoe investors like you are losing it.

The fact that you need to type so many paragraphs to fight an argument that you are obviously losing is a sign that you are lost and confused. Do yourself a favor, put the time toward your super duper poker strategy and come back when you have smth worthwhile to say. Or do you need a break from winning play money?

Cutten · May 27, 2005

Quote from flat5:

Thanks for the refs. Looks interesting.

I might remind you, however, that we probably won't find the answer to why people might look down on traders from an academic paper on a mathematical model for market dynamics.

People also used to look down on bankers. People used to look down on science, and respect alchemy and witch doctors.

Let's face it - people are pretty f*cking stupid.