this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2024
38 points (97.5% liked)

Casual Conversation

1765 readers
59 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Small advice: take that book with a grain of salt. The author took advantage of a specific market, what he did is not achievable everywhere for everyone

[–] berryjam 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You mean it only applies to the US, or something different?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The big issue is the typical issue of survivorship bias. For obvious reasons they can only study the PAWs who are, you know, successful PAWs. So one of their claims is PAWs are willing to take economic risks if the return is high.

But what about the people who took economic risks and had it collapse under them? They'd be UAWs by their nomenclature ... yet they did a PAW thing.

In reality you learn more about what led people to failure than enumerating the things that supposedly led to people's success.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

This, thank you!