upvote

points

by Imustaskforhelp4 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby tchalla1 hours ago|
next
[-]
> So even if NEWTON, the legendary ISAAC NEWTON could lose money in bubble and was left holding umbrellas when there was no rain.

The moral of that story is that being a legend or smart doesn’t count for much in investing.

reply
upvoteby seanhunter3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
People often use that example, but Newton, for all he was unquestionably a giant of physics, was a bit of a weird dude and not 100% rationalist[1]. Additionally, just because he was a great physicist doesn't mean he knew anything at all about investment. You can be an expert in one field and pretty dumb in others. Linus Pauling (a giant in chemistry) had beliefs in terms of medicine that were basically pseudoscience.

Intelligent investor is a great book though.

[1] eg he wrote more than a million words on alchemy during his lifetime https://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/newton/project/about.do

reply
upvoteby duskwuff30 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Newton, for all he was unquestionably a giant of physics, was a bit of a weird dude and not 100% rationalist

The norms of "rational" science hadn't really been established yet. There wasn't really a clear line drawn between alchemy and what we would consider chemistry today.

reply
upvoteby roenxi2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> ...was a bit of a weird dude and not 100% rationalist...

That covers everyone. Especially and including the rationalists. Part of being highly intelligent is being a bit weird because the habits and beliefs of ordinary people are those you'd expect of people with ordinary intelligence.

Anyone involved in small-time investing should be considering that they aren't rational when setting their strategy. Larger investment houses do what they can but even then every so often will suffer from group-think episodes.

reply