No. They were hardly successful. In fact, there were dirt poor because the education system was reserved for the elite. They may have had the genetics for Banking or Finance but they were force to swing hammers and other tools to survive. No education will do that to you. Lincoln and Einstein were genetic flukes.
That being the case, I think you would really enjoy reading the Yogananda book I mentioned earlier. If you choose to read it be patient because it doesn't get good until you are nearly 1/2 way through it. If you read it and practice it I promise you will not be sorry.
OK so they did not have the opportunity. That is another point. But still does not mean that everyone who has the opportunity is as capable. You could even argue that working in a career for generations will develop skills need through evolution making someone better at that role in the future. If my family were bankers for generations could I have evolved to be more capable at the skills needed than people that do not have that ancestry?
Only to you, my friend, only to you. Anyway, enough fun for the day - I promise I'll be the first to line up to deposit in your bank when you start one. Until then (must be late over there in GMT zone), good night.
Agree with your analysis, on the margins, DMTB... To me, there's an enormous amount of value in establishing the model, which is why I am happy to, effectively, subsidise it. So I sort of think about the lending I do on ZOPA as a "hybrid", rather than a pure loan/bond.
Hilarious - yes; disturbing - no. I cannot claim I've had the pleasure of meeting the (wo)man... Does he/she also come from a long and illustrious line of people with a genetic predisposition towards banking?
I don't know. I think there are a few flaws in his business model though. One is that the size of the loans is barely above the legal cost of chasing it from what I can remember. Banking, economics etc is my art. Can you understand where I am coming from. Is it just a way for you to make money, or is it more than that?