Quite a good post and I agree with most of it, just a slight nitpick: > 1) The stock-market itself is theoretically a zero sum game. Stock markets aren't nece

Quite a good post and I agree with most of it, just a slight nitpick: > 1) The stock-market itself is theoretically a zero sum game. Stock markets aren't necessarily a zero sum game, because investors have some say over the management and running of the company. For someone with .00001% of the company they don't make much difference, but if Warren Buffet buys 15% of a company, he also brings prestige, cache, signals it's a good buy and will be going well for a while, and thus helps the company attract greater personnel. So if Buffet buys a stake of the company, it can be a net gain in the long run. The smaller the company, the greater value-add intelligent investors can be. Individual stock transactions might or might not be zero sum - they might even be slightly negative sum if you consider brokers' fees. But this is a bit different from the stock market itself - wise and intelligent ownership and investors can bring value to a company by taking over ownership positions from less wise and intelligent investors. Very good comment though, I agree with the essence of what you're saying.