Very anti-trading tone to the article, like no one should trade, but there's nothing wrong with criticizing deceptive marketing. Talk about deceptive marketing, there are constant ads on TV for my state's lottery and for several casinos, 99.999% lose, nothing wrong with that according to the state. Several years ago, my state approved gambling at Native American owned casinos. An ad on TV paid for with tax dollars tells me my state now has 300,000 people with a lifetime gambling problem, 3% of the population, and it recommends to go get treatment at taxpayer expense. The article says in 1999 that there were only 4000-5000 traders. I don't see where the problem is compared to my state's huge approval and problem with real gambling. Article: Stock trading: 70% lose, Futures trading: 80-90% lose, maybe 95% lose. Article: "Day trading is analogous to guessing the outcome of a coin toss.....odds with day trading stocks are actually worse than this..." They obviously know nothing about trading. Over the last 5 years, 70% of large cap funds underperformed the S&P, 80% of small to midcap funds underperformed their index. Why don't they pick on mutual fund managers? Nothing wrong with the peasants getting scrooged by big companies, but can't let the peasants have a 5-30% chance of doing well at individual trading.
that is your opinion, and you included nothing to support it. Otherwise, it can be argued that all your posts on ET are a joke, because someone happens to have that opinion. You would probably fume if someone stated this without real proof. Every post, every trading article could be considered a joke, just because someone thought so. Frankly. almost all the stuff on ET could be considered a joke. It is mostly rants, opinions, objections, naysaying, or other unsubstantiated chatter. So why do you then come here? The # of traders who fail is one of the most chatted, published or mentioned statistics on trading forums. What people think it happens to be is quite relevant, whether one person thinks so or not.
that is an amazingly ignorant take on what I said. What makes you think someone's feelings were hurt when you display drive-by witlessness? I questioned your purpose and your post. Does you brain do anything besides throw out random thoughts? Try reading what I said again, and let it sit long enough to understand it.
I corrected that quote for you. Thanks for the entertainment, man. It's a slow trading day, but threads like this on ET do a decent job passing time.
Yes. You consider it entertaining that you like to complain, and prove you have nothing to say. In spades. The polls posted have somewhere in the range of 2000-3000 votes. I am still waiting to see your value add here on ET? Try tipping your head and let the hot sand run to the other side. Your "edit" was painfully simplistic. And you demonstrated you know how to make "happy faces" It is hard to feel insulted by you, because you have made several posts, and still said nothing of value. But you are in the wrong line. Cave trolls are off to the left, see: "Lord of the Rings."
I think a better way to look at it is how long did it take you to figure out how to trade. There are those that blow up their account multiple times and still come back for more. They get counted several times. I did figure it out, but I failed first. At least I didn't have to get a second on the house. Also, the poll I read was a poll of brokers for brokers and it basically said most customers were over 50 years old and 95% lost it all. That was back when you had to call a broker to make a trade (slipping all the while) and there was no mouse to click.
I average a 20% return from trading - giving around $100k "profit" annually. Even at that rate, however, when you take out taxes and true inflation on the principal, it barely provides any true profit. The way this country's tax system and central bank are structured, make it nearly impossible for anyone to profit from trading or even to save money efficiently. That is why so few try anymore. -Ron Paul 2008!!!