roland comments on Shane Legg on prospect theory and computational finance - Less Wrong

13 [deleted] 21 June 2009 05:57PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (6)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Psychohistorian 22 June 2009 02:58:44AM 3 points [-]

This is interesting, but (as far as I know) a much better explanation as to why most people don't own stock is that they don't actually bother researching how to invest or spend much cognitive effort on investing.

Perhaps Napoleon's old statement needs a corollary: "Never attribute to a complicated model of behaviour contingent on the interconnection of numerous noisy empirical estimates that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

Comment author: roland 22 June 2009 03:38:53AM 0 points [-]

I was thinking about the same. The question is, how much research must you do in order for stock investing to become profitable comparing to other ways of investing? There is also the question of fees to pay, the less you invest, the more the fees weigh in.

Comment deleted 22 June 2009 01:38:50PM [-]
Comment deleted 23 June 2009 05:30:58AM *  [-]
Comment author: SoullessAutomaton 23 June 2009 09:33:49AM *  0 points [-]

I invested £500 in the stock market on 2003, and 9 months ago I withdrew £850.

Wouldn't that be 2003-2008, i.e., five years?

That's about 11.2% annual return, if I'm mathing correctly this early in the morning.

Comment deleted 23 June 2009 03:19:07PM *  [-]
Comment author: andrewc 29 June 2009 11:57:26AM 0 points [-]

Depends on what you bought. More than a few stocks had the last few years of growth wiped off them last year, and that includes many well hedged managed funds. Your youthful assessment of the risks was perhaps better than you give it credit for.

What would the original investment be worth right now had you not cashed it in?