Interesting Articles...

[Ergel]

Maybe they should ask how many long term users have chronic pain?

+1 (I clicked through just to assume that you were wrong, but the study is pretty silly. There is probably a correlation between people being on opioids for 10 days and needing pain killers for longer, no? Silly that they didn't even mention that)

That being said, there is a real problem in this country. Trump should solve it

[JTZ]

I clicked through just to assume that you were wrong...

Normally a good assumption. 

[JTZ]

That being said, there is a real problem in this country. Trump should solve it

He can solve one of the real problems this country has by stepping down.   

[Ergel]

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/226929

[ExGingi]

http://ritholtz.com/2017/03/steady-wins-investment-race/

While I have tremendous respect for Ritholtz's acumen and clear thinking, I find his last sentence a little disturbing. I personally think Richard Russel's lessons make a lot more sense for almost everyone (see rule #2) http://dowtheoryletters.com/Content_Free/2494.aspx

[skyguy918]

http://ritholtz.com/2017/03/steady-wins-investment-race/

While I have tremendous respect for Ritholtz's acumen and clear thinking, I find his last sentence a little disturbing. I personally think Richard Russel's lessons make a lot more sense for almost everyone (see rule #2) http://dowtheoryletters.com/Content_Free/2494.aspx

Not sure what your issue with it is. These are very basic outcomes of time value of money, and they both say the same thing.

[ExGingi]

Not sure what your issue with it is. These are very basic outcomes of time value of money, and they both say the same thing.

The issue is in the attitude that a reader my take from this. See Richard Russel's rule #3 in the link above.

[skyguy918]

The issue is in the attitude that a reader my take from this. See Richard Russel's rule #3 in the link above.

State your point clearly.

#3 has nothing to do with what Ritholz was talking about, and doesn't contradict it in any way.

[ExGingi]

State your point clearly.

#3 has nothing to do with what Ritholz was talking about, and doesn't contradict it in any way.

Ritholtz finishes up with: "The second is that if you’re aiming for outperformance, make sure you win big early."

Is that within anyone's control? If it were, why would the same person not win big consistently?

I guess my problem is with Ritholtz calling this a lesson, as if it is something that can be learned and replicated.

It might be a lesson for hedge fund managers, that if they didn't win big early, they should close shop, but where's the lesson for the retail investor?

[Ergel]

he's just pointing out a simple mathematical fact. I don't think he's giving advice

[skyguy918]

Ritholtz finishes up with: "The second is that if you’re aiming for outperformance, make sure you win big early."

Is that within anyone's control? If it were, why would the same person not win big consistently?

I guess my problem is with Ritholtz calling this a lesson, as if it is something that can be learned and replicated.

It might be a lesson for hedge fund managers, that if they didn't win big early, they should close shop, but where's the lesson for the retail investor?

It's obviously not intended to be actionable advice. It's highlighting the lesson of the importance of early returns due to compounding (TVM).

he's just pointing out a simple mathematical fact. I don't think he's giving advice

+1 Hard to read it any other way.

[ExGingi]

he's just pointing out a simple mathematical fact. I don't think he's giving advice

Lesson?

[JTZ]

he's just pointing out a simple mathematical fact. I don't think he's giving advice

What mathematical fact? To out preform you don't need to win big early.

[Ergel]

What mathematical fact? To out preform you don't need to win big early.

No, that big returns early are beneficial to long term growth (and more beneficial than big returns later)

[ExGingi]

No, that big returns early are beneficial to long term growth (and more beneficial than big returns later)

My problem is with him calling this a "lesson for investors". Contrast that with how Richard Russell (עליו השלום) put the lessons for investors, stressing NOT chasing returns, and not losing money (which I am sure Ritholtz agrees with). Russell's advice could be replicated by anyone.

[ExGingi]

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-19/democrats-don-t-use-republican-playbook-on-gorsuch

[aygart]

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/mar/16/oxford-comma-helps-drivers-win-dispute-about-overtime-pay

http://www.theonion.com/americanvoices/oxford-comma-wins-court-case-workers-55578

[ExGingi]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/20/japan-stranded-singles-virtual-love

[good sam]

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/mar/16/oxford-comma-helps-drivers-win-dispute-about-overtime-pay

I don't understand the appeals court. If "shipment or distribution" is a single clause, then the sentence is a fragment, missing the "and" or "or" to tie the list together.

[elit]

http://forward.com/news/365904/kosher-pizza-war-erupts-in-hasidic-brooklyn-and-jewish-court-slices-the-pie/