Hmm. You do have a point worth looking at, there. Let me see if I can refine it a bit: Standardization and routine in your trading make for the best trading environment. This does not require a boring lifestyle, in any way that I can see.
DUDE! Your ISSUES are showing! • I am concerned that your brain chooses to see *opposition* in a response that most would read as granting considerable latitude (though not agreement) to your opinion. Sad, that. • Your opinion lacks facts, yet you object roundly to my response. Curious or sad -- I can't decide. • Your projection of "panic" (twice ) is also a red flag for personal conditions that should be examined (on your own time, but with professional help) a.s.a.p. • You wish (*demand*??) cures for educational ills as if they were part of the discussion. You're welcome to discuss them yourself, sure -- but not to paint that requirement on others. "Show your work" first. • My own opinion stems from growing up in an education-oriented household, and reflecting that as well in three collegiate institutions and three academic fields. (And other shit, but what the hell.) I have taught everything from Honors "Capstone" Business Seminars to community-college grandmothers and ex-offenders -- I have seen it all. So -- back to your original post: Thank You! -- a fine set of thoughts. I don't agree entirely, but there you go. Reasonable people can do that.
I'm glad for your son. And I'm not saying that as some sarcastic rejoinder; I genuinely am glad when someone's relationships go right, or even start to (as in this case; you never know how it's going to turn out.) We humans can fuck up a wet dream, or a one-car funeral procession on the random drop of a dime, and relationships in general are slippery as hell. <obligTradingRef> Van Tharp did a bunch of research on stock trading, shared with a top-notch trader friend of his, which showed that entry points are essentially meaningless (they flipped a coin to decide on entries); what matters is how the rest of the trade, including exits, is conducted. I hope you see the parallels. My experience with relationships is that each and every one of them is a universe of its own, with infinite dependencies. But I've mentioned what's worked for me throughout all of my life, in nearly binary terms. BTW, another buried assumption you have: that what turns me on somehow means "drama queen" or something else that is necessarily negative. I assure you that I don't have that kind of a conflicted bias built into either one of my heads. In fact, I've been told that some of my women were not particularly beautiful; to me, for a variety of reasons including who they are as people, they are indeed the most beautiful. (Those preferences have shifted somewhat over the years, but not radically.) If your life has been such that everything you thought or knew when you were 18 is wrong, that simply points up the differences between us. For me, quite a number of the lessons I'd learned by then have remained valuable and became more so over time.
I won't go into all of your demonstrated damage, but your desperation in trying to project your psych issues on others makes you no longer worth talking to. B-bye! <plonk>
When I was 18, I assumed that all trading was algorithmic. I thought you were wasting your time attempting to trade unless you were buying & holding index or mutual funds. I invested in mutual funds for over a decade before really discovering the stock market. If could go back and give myself advice, it would be to simply start earlier, and don't be afraid to fail. I've regretted chances I haven't taken a lot more than the times I've failed.
To me, it appears that you're trying to justify your life decisions and that's dangerous. You further use the analogy to trading where "entry points are meaningless". This is the thought process of someone who has grown up with nothing, because you've probably had to start from zero multiple times. There are both upsides and downsides to this kind of background. The downside is you never learn to compound and make life smoother for yourself. Life (and trading) should be smooth. Trade and relationship filtering is absolutely essential to being successful in this goal.
You're wrong - and worse, appear to be hunting for a way not to be wrong by trying to shift the onus to me. Admitting that you're wrong, correcting your false viewpoint - in this case, insisting that your life experience matters to someone else or even supercedes it - and learning not to do that again would be simpler and more beneficial to you. Digging yourself into a deeper hole isn't. Over the course of a long and active life, one learns many things - including how to start over from zero (but note your unwarranted projection of "many times"; you should watch that tendency to exaggerate from unknowns.) Someone who has spent their life wrapped in cotton batting, with all things made smooth for them, has little (or more likely, no) valid advice to offer to those who don't wish to live that way. You continue to stack one unwarranted assumption on another without anything but guesses, and I would prefer that you stop doing that; continuing would turn the conversation into a dick-length war, and I'll exit the moment it does. For example, I can assure you that I understand compounding quite well. But I can also decide on the amount of risk and volatility I want in my life, and smoothness is not something that I consider as valuable as you do; in fact, I see it as an overall losing proposition. This reinforces the point: you have little or no life advice to offer that I would consider valuable. I understand that you disagree, but that disagreement doesn't mean that you can convince me - or somehow show that your viewpoint is superior. P&L volatility should indeed be minimized. But some of us are not well suited to a life spent hiding under the bed.
You're really going off the deep end. Simply, you have stated that you wouldn't do anything differently with the benefit of hindsight. What's more, as an 18 year old. I've never met someone so sure that they've never done anything wrong. Are you sure you aren't a medical doctor? Edit: also willing to accept highly educated economist.
By the way, I'm perfectly willing to believe that I have misunderstood what you are saying but you have dug such a specific hole about right and wrong, that I doubt it. I have only ever seen such certainty with medical professionals and highly educated academics or economists. What is your background? In fact, I can see in the randomness of life that there are certain people who live lives without any sort of thought towards ultimate consequences and through the luck of the draw, they never have to face any real consequence. Similar to martingale trading. Perhaps you, Blue Water Sailor, are one of those. But without limitless pockets, in the market, martingale trading eventually loses. And on one side, I can also see being a little aggressive while careful can improve your life as well. This can give you great returns. And finally on the third side, being careful and conservative can lead you to be a janitor with 8 million dollars. Without arguing the validity of one over the other, I am more inclined to the second mode. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. It seems to me that you are of the first, where you are so far, so good. Completely possible with the breadth of human experience. In any case, the thread is about 18 year olds. 18 year olds, as a rule, are dumb. God bless you for not being dumb at 18 and having lived such a difficult life that you had to be more mature than most 18 year olds. But 18 year olds are still dumb.