2 ms·
Sorry if I ranted but I went on for "over 6 sentences" because I am sensitive to this cliche of investors/speculators as nonproductive blood suckers. It was one
by HSO 18y ago
Sorry if I ranted but I went on for "over 6 sentences" because I am sensitive to this cliche of investors/speculators as nonproductive blood suckers. It was one of the images that was used in a certain historical catastrophe where I live (Germany). It's also a very popular image today, risking throwing the baby (capitalism) out with the bathwater (corruption, greed, ...).
Regarding 2, I also like the quote. But the article misquotes it by leaving out the crucial part: independent valuation, based on economic fundamentals. I think you overestimate people's "implicit judgement". Many if not most people buy because the price recently went up, and vice versa, without reference to fundamentals or doing their homework. Leaving out the valuation part makes it read as if Klarman was simply inverting the trend-followers. But not so, the point was doing independent research and acting only when price deviates sufficiently far from one's own judgment.
- christofd 18y agoHow ironic, I've lived a long time in Germany. Didn't expect a pure pro-market comment to come from there, which doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with a pro-market view (just to clarify). The historical context is interesting; in other countries speculators are pursued often with more vigor. Even more ironic, that after the downer the Chicago school of thought (Economics) received in 2008, the President's economic and intellectual team is, well, from Chicago.