Another Cramer bashing article...nothing like shooting fish in a barrel... Problems I have with this article: 1. First of all I don't believe in buy and hold long term. Period. May work in some cases, doesn't work in many. This article loves buy and hold. 2. "Markets move completely randomly and unpredictably in the short term." While true to a certain degree, I do not believe short term markets are COMPLETELY random and unpredictable. If this was the case day traders would inevitably end up even over the long term (actually losing money over long term due to commissions and fees). Just my two cents.
Lord... Marvel and Gamestop for long term? This is just as speculative as Cramer... Besides, Cramer recommends many conservative stocks just as well. Long term investing isn't as low risk as people like him make it out to be. I don't understand how he can praise Jon Stewart when Jon was making a point about the viability of long term investing. In less than one hundred years we had numerous crashes and long term bear markets. If people talk about 10-20 year time horizon, that is about 10 to 5 periods in a century. Out of those periods, how many were long term bull markets other than the 80s and 90s? Not very many. Also, 10 periods is too small a sample to statistically prove anything. Short term trading has a mathematical edge by virtue of a very large statistical sample. Being a successful long term investor still requires market timing; it's just longer term. Yet people like him would denounce market timing as risky gambling.