Suppose you know you are an idiot, what profession should you choose?
- Thread starter lolatency
- Start date
I have another idea - learn survival and wilderness skills, then go to a remote part of the country and live off the land. Hunt, fish, grow basic crops and vegetables, live off-grid with solar panels and a generator/dynamo. Supplement your income with giving hunting/shooting/survival tuition to rich yuppies who are bored of city life and fancy some countryside tourism, and set up a website publishing photos, videos, and instruction lessons for these things.
You may be onto a winner here Ghost.
Even if the idiot lives in a big city he could offer spicy weekends in say his home city, preferably New York or somewhere people have heard of. A weekend in the side of the city tourists never see. etc. where yuppies could slum it or meet the weirdos of **** in their natural habitat.
i trade, this is not a hypothetical question.
When I first got involved with the market at a professional level, it was considered that Commodities were the place for idiots. Financials have relative value calculations (even if done on an HP calculator,) and equities have balance sheets to examine. Commodities have industries and economies which are so big and vague that intelligence wasn't an advantageous characteristic. Guts and patience were needed.
Much has changed, but the studies, that I have read, have continued to find commodities too diverse a basket to be tractable to relative pricing methods. Myself, this is what makes commodities so attractive. Relative pricing may make for automated profits, but it makes for boring conversation!
In some ways, I must agree with some of my fellow posters that management is a place for idiots. Supervisory level management ability may be negatively correlated to intelligence. A key cause is the disincentive to advance key competence. Beyond that, intelligent people tend to be flighty, and real solutions take alot of time to become reality. There is a need for a dampening effect to ensure convergence, even if to something suboptimal.
Much has changed, but the studies, that I have read, have continued to find commodities too diverse a basket to be tractable to relative pricing methods. Myself, this is what makes commodities so attractive. Relative pricing may make for automated profits, but it makes for boring conversation!
In some ways, I must agree with some of my fellow posters that management is a place for idiots. Supervisory level management ability may be negatively correlated to intelligence. A key cause is the disincentive to advance key competence. Beyond that, intelligent people tend to be flighty, and real solutions take alot of time to become reality. There is a need for a dampening effect to ensure convergence, even if to something suboptimal.