Hedge Fund
- Thread starter ShoeshineBoy
- Start date
NickLeeson
Guest
I think maverick's point is that the average joe does not act high and mighty about how much he is paid
Oh, I see, just read a bit, and then you've got say that a good education may make it easier for you to get an initial interview to get your foot in the door, but then it's just performance that will decide your income, and that then has little to do with education itself.
Either you got it, or you don't.
And nobody can teach you that it
Oh, I see, just read a bit, and then you've got say that a good education may make it easier for you to get an initial interview to get your foot in the door, but then it's just performance that will decide your income, and that then has little to do with education itself.
Either you got it, or you don't.
And nobody can teach you that it
Originally posted by NickLeeson
Oh, I see, just read a bit, and then you've got say that a good education may make it easier for you to get an initial interview to get your foot in the door, but then it's just performance that will decide your income, and that then has little to do with education itself.
Either you got it, or you don't.
And nobody can teach you that it
damn skippy- couldn't have said it better.
NickLeeson
Guest
Hehe, Darkhorse, are we starting to agree too much
Plus, you gotta say that the guy Druckenmiller who was running Soros' Quantum funds for some years( and as traders they don't come richer than Soros with 6 billion private net worth if you're not going to include Buffett as an extremely long term investor), he was hired on the basis of his performance of his at the time own very small fund alone, no other stuff mattered, apart from his obviously having hit it of with the man, apparently no quite easy feat.
Plus, you gotta say that the guy Druckenmiller who was running Soros' Quantum funds for some years( and as traders they don't come richer than Soros with 6 billion private net worth if you're not going to include Buffett as an extremely long term investor), he was hired on the basis of his performance of his at the time own very small fund alone, no other stuff mattered, apart from his obviously having hit it of with the man, apparently no quite easy feat.
Well, you gotta understand that wealth is relative right? One person's richness might be another man's poverty and vice versa.
But Stattrader's achievement is still laudable in an institutional environment. Not everyone is George Soros or Bill Gross or Warren Buffet. I think his point was that one of the surest bet to fair decent income(upper middle class at least) is to 1) get a good education 2) work hard in an institutioanl world,etc.
But that formula is as old as time. And people are beginning to "rediscover" that via The Millionaire Next Door and other studies. It basically say the surest way to wealth/financial freedom is to get a good education, work hard, get married, stay married, save, save, invest, invest for long-term growth(via tax deferred retirement accts,etc.), and if possible be an entrepeneur since American capitalism rewards that. And everything else will be OK by the time retirement comes around. The good gives examples of people who open up laundromat and in a few decades if they are successful are "millionaires" according to the book even though they themselves don't view themselves as such.
It's a relatively simple and straightforward formula yet millions and millions don't follow it because they lack discipline and mainly because people are looking at instant riches instead of hardwork. Everyone wants to win the lotto, cash out big on dotcom stock options, and look at this quarters earnings only(i.e. executives at big companies). But of course, there are many, many , many paths to financial independence.
Anyhow, I would think wealth,intelligence,social standing, height, mass,etc. is all relative.
Life is all relative.
trader99
p.s. you wrote,"You know, some of the top professors at the Ivy league schools make as much as you. Have you ever thought about going back to academia and teach instead of trade?" Hmm.. Well, professors still have to pay taxes etc too. Very, very few Ivy League professors make half a mil a year. I should know I went to one and know quite a few of them.
You missed my point. This whole discussion was not about earning a good living. It was about the positive correlation to trading results and education. I'm not argueing the fact that if you go to a great school and prostitute yourself to the corporate world you will make a good upper middle class living. I agree completely. For those people who don't like to think on their own and need to be told what to do and how to do it then the corporate world is for you. You can earn a very nice safe salary with benefits. But you will be a slave to your master. Nothing wrong with that. However some people on this board have decided to grab their nutsack and put their money where their mouth is. I'm sure they know as much about trading as anyone at Goldman Sachs. They may not be managing a 100 million dollar portfolio but that does not make them a worse trader. I have read just about every book out there on the various profiles of traders. Every magazine article, every newspaper article, every tidbit, and all the evidence and I mean every last piece points to no correlation between your ability to trade and education. That is what this whole thread is about. Not posting w-2 statements. The fact of the matter is that around 90% of the traders trading on their own will not be able to live off their trading. But guess what, the numbers are the same for institutional traders. Most of them don't make money either. Why don't you pull up a balence sheet from Morgan Stanley or Goldman, very erratic results. The only difference is that when little Joey Ivy League blows out his accouunt at Goldman they just put him in another dept. So please if you decide to post again, show some supporting evidence that education and trading have a positive correlation. I am placing my bet that you can't because none exists. Good traders are successful because of personal qualties or characteristics they have, not knowledge. There is no special indicator, no quantitative science, no magic formula, no secret method. It's the same qualities that allows one quarterback to be able to hit a guy in the end zone with .03 left on the clock with three guys in his face while the other guy takes a sack or throws an interception. It's one ability to step up under pressure and make the big plays. Do you think NFL coaches care what college a quarterback went to or his ability to make plays under pressure. Think about it. It's exactly the same with trading. Your witness, the defense rests your honor. No further questions.