For those familiar with Lars Kroijer and his views

Malthusian wrote: »

What gives you that idea? Genuine question. Asked a generic "where should I invest" question, the majority of regular posters here will generally recommend index-tracking funds (Vanguard etc) which implies they don't think they have an edge.

Just what i feel from reading other peoples posts.
There'll be those who are quite cryptic in their answers, like they're being interrogated by the police & they don't want to rat on their buddy, but once you get past all that and actual answers start coming in (or at least the ones that i've seen) - they seem to be actively managed.



I've not ran any tally and done proper research but that's just the feel i get from reading the posts. That thread that was linked to earlier in this thread, people were listing off actively managed more than not.


Maybe the people on this board or at least this section of the board are smarter than your average Joe, especially when it comes to investment. I don't know. I'd say (the regulars at least) appear smarter than the circles i move in which is why i come here for info a lot. If i knew anyone in person where i could get this information/advice from then i'd do it.

Outside of this forum, I don't think the majority of people think they have an edge either. Most people have never thought about it - they have no clue what an edge is and whether they have one or not.

Agreed.

I think we're all very 'aware' on this forum. Even people like myself and the very small percentage of people on here who know less than I do - they're still 'aware', but your average Joe on the street isn't so they just put their money where their mate said they put theirs because they got a good return last year kind of thing. They refer to buying a new car as an 'investment' when it's anything but. They know of ISAs but nothing of the varying types.



Talking to people at my work it's incredible how little people know. Me to them is like the regulars on here to me. It's scary.

"There is no such thing as 100% passive" is an argument in the same grab bag as "What is reality?" Even they know there is such a thing as passive and what it means.

See, without naming names, there's a person or persons on here who appear to challenge such statements. They answer questions with questions. Forget trying to get a straight answer.

I remember one time i did mention what i'd read - about the whole passive & active thing. They flipped it on me that basically nothing is passive because it's managed in some way, somethingorother.


Me as a know-nothing started wondering what is this Matrix nonsense i've just gotten involved in. What is the meaning of life and is reality even real?
That's when one or two others stepped in and pulled the poster on the awkwardness of their post and basically how they knew what was meant kind of thing.
And that's the issue - i don't know enough to challenge these views so when they say nothing is passive and it's all managed i start thinking well this book just lied to me because this guy must be right, right?


Now i'm not saying this person is unhelpful or helpful, that i agree or disagree with them. It is what it is at the end of the day. That sort of posting knocks any ounce of confidence a know-nothing thought they'd built but hey ho, that's life.