|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
You'll have to answer your own question. Don't like your answer--- get
the hell out. It's a very expensive hobby. A form of relaxation.
Personally, I want a choice about those I associate with-- minus any
governmental mandate. This activity fits just fine. Belong to a computer
club; an investment club; associate with those who have a common interest
in the market. Want to improve your education? Then, devote time each
day to study more about your investments-- stocks, commodities, whatever.
There's a lot more to this than SYMBOLS or POINTS. It's fascinating at
this higher altitude, don't you think? T.C.
On Fri, 08 Aug 1997 23:54:17 -0600 Leo Karl <leokarl@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>Hey guys,
>
>There's been two interesting discussions going on here for the last
>few
>days, the first dealing with the validity of Gann's ideas as a
>function
>of how much money Gann himself made in his lifetime; and the second
>dealing with the relative success of short term traders versus long
>term
>investors.
>
>The common thread running through both discussions seems to be an
>effort
>to show that the *best* approach that we as investors/traders should
>pursue is the one that PROVES the most profitable; i.e. the proverbial
>*bottom line*.
>
>I submit that the conventional wisdom embodied in this "bottom line"
>mentality is NOT what really drives any of us to invest the way we
>chose
>to, and until we're clear about why we really trade as we do, we'll
>seldom be satisfied with our results. And to chose our investing
>methodologies based on what SEEMS to work or not work for someone
>else,
>may prove unrewarding. After all, the values of Gann's ideas are
>really
>no more or less validated by his modest earnings than were the value
>of
>Jesus's teachings invalidated by his untimely end.
>
>I guess what I'm trying to get clear on for myself at least, is that I
>suspect, but can't prove, that damn few of us are REALLY doing this to
>make money. Rather, we're doing it for other reasons which we don't
>fully understand, then justifying it to one another by accepting the
>common bond in a need to make a money.
>
>I would be interested in how many of us understand why we are here?
>(On
>the metastock-list that is---I want to confine my philosophic
>tendencies
>to reasonable proportions!) If it's ONLY to make money then I fear
>that
>we may be leaving too much on the table. (Not unlike when I sold TXN
>at 87 a few weeks back.) I mean, there's got to be some other joy
>that
>keeps us toiling over our charts, and I think that if I, for one,
>could
>discover what REALLY makes me persist with the frustrations of this
>pursuit, then maybe I could, in recognizing that joy, find a kind of
>happiness that money only teases you with.
>
>Anyone else out there concern himself with that kind of stuff?
>
>Leo
>
>
|