Ok, they're good for context and history but when it comes to investing and analyzing opportunities, there are only two gurus to invoke, Mssrs. Newton and Barnum. Simply put: 1) what goes up must come down and 2) there's a sucker born every minute. Full Disclosure, I did take a (as of this moment) $170 loss in crypto but I'll chalk th…
Ok, they're good for context and history but when it comes to investing and analyzing opportunities, there are only two gurus to invoke, Mssrs. Newton and Barnum. Simply put: 1) what goes up must come down and 2) there's a sucker born every minute. Full Disclosure, I did take a (as of this moment) $170 loss in crypto but I'll chalk that up to curiosity. JVL, thank you for these Saturday Triads. They have lead me to some very thought provoking content.
You'll pardon my pedantry here but I have a lonely crusade to debunk the most likely apocryphal notion that Barnum made that statement about suckers. It wasn't a commonly-used term in his time, and there is some evidence that Barnum was honestly baffled and wounded by people being angry about his exhibits. He seems to have thought that people knew they were fanciful and when he initially discussed how they were acquired or made in his autobiography, he was so taken aback by the response that he bought up every copy of the original book that he could find and released an edited version.
The sentiment may be true, but the source most likely is not.
Ok, they're good for context and history but when it comes to investing and analyzing opportunities, there are only two gurus to invoke, Mssrs. Newton and Barnum. Simply put: 1) what goes up must come down and 2) there's a sucker born every minute. Full Disclosure, I did take a (as of this moment) $170 loss in crypto but I'll chalk that up to curiosity. JVL, thank you for these Saturday Triads. They have lead me to some very thought provoking content.
I took a loss in GE. Nothing wrong with taking your chance in the market or with crypto as long as it's money you can live without.
You'll pardon my pedantry here but I have a lonely crusade to debunk the most likely apocryphal notion that Barnum made that statement about suckers. It wasn't a commonly-used term in his time, and there is some evidence that Barnum was honestly baffled and wounded by people being angry about his exhibits. He seems to have thought that people knew they were fanciful and when he initially discussed how they were acquired or made in his autobiography, he was so taken aback by the response that he bought up every copy of the original book that he could find and released an edited version.
The sentiment may be true, but the source most likely is not.
Entirety plausible and without direct evidence, quite possible. But we use a well known name to reinforce the sentiment.