3 ms·
I agree on the tone. A calmer (but still pretty negative) version of the rant has been given repeatedly for some decades now by John Bogle, who argued that surp
by mjn 14y ago
I agree on the tone. A calmer (but still pretty negative) version of the rant has been given repeatedly for some decades now by John Bogle, who argued that surprisingly large portions of unsophisticated investors' funds were going to paying the management fees of financial products, when in many cases the managers' primary virtues lay in being good at marketing said products to said unsophisticated investors. This is one of the more recent iterations of his spiel: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/047064396X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=047064396X&linkCode=as2&tag=kmjn-20 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/047064396X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...
This article does mention Bogle, but really just reading something by Bogle directly would be better than this piece.
- hkmurakami 14y ago>who argued that surprisingly large portions of unsophisticated investors' funds were going to paying the management fees of financial products IMHO, the situation cannot improve unless the "unsophisticated investors" are educated to have at least some semblance of investment savvy. You don't need any quant stuff at all. Even just some basic understanding of why a balanced portfolio makes sense, the power of compound returns, the impact of fees, the effect of taxes on your returns, the tax exposure nature of various securities, and a sense for what "financial products/funds" even exist in the financial universe would do.
- jaibot 14y agoAlternative: sane defaults.
- hkmurakami 14y agoI have zero faith in that ever happening so I'd rather preach an attainable alternative