Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Janice LeCocq's avatar

Thank you. I have crept up on those approaches but get sucked back into the insanity all too often...at 74 it’s difficult to hope than the world will improve in what’s left of my life. I recall my mother wistfully commenting on her deathbed in 2017 that it was sad to leave in a downward spiral...but these words of advice motivate me to rally again and again and....

Expand full comment
Tom Sparks's avatar

Ouch.

Watched linked podcast: Ouch

The irony that she addresses polarization by suggestions that are clearly meant to change (albeit gently) benighted non-leftists seems to be lost. Her partisanship (and apparent blithe unawareness of it) is the reason for the divisiveness and lost trust. (I cancelled/stopped watching virtually everything in 2015; and now only subscribe to people to my left, so as to avoid confirmation bias. She should try this.)

My Rules, on politics, relationships, investing etc (based on: two engineering degrees BSc MIT 1980, MSc Northwestern 1981; 20 years trading bond options at the Chicago Board of Trade; co-managing small hedge fund for 9 years; managing own capital for 14 yrs):

1) There's a good chance I'm wrong.

2) What are the ramifications of being wrong?

3) Who can I seek out to challenge my assumptions?

4) At some point, if it's not working, I have to just assume I've been wrong, change, and move on.

5) I don't have to have an opinion on everything. (Warren Buffett/Munger put this in the "too hard pile.". ) If you have to have an opinion on everything, you're not a good citizen, you're a partisan.

She, and all pundits, pols and others should memorize and follow these (and likely others I've forgotten. The joys of getting older!)

When I do read "news" or political commentary, I ask "How does that make me feel?". If I feel righteous indignation, sophisticated, urbane, smarter-than-thou, etc, then I know I have read confirmation bias. Delete. Avoid.

If I read something that I don't like (and not for obvious misrepresentations of things I'm fairly confident I'm knowledgeable of), then it's probably something I should reread because it's subconsciously challenging my assumptions and therefore may have something to teach me.

Avoid anyone, personally or in the media, who spouts talking points, or poor sophistry versions of talking points. They have nothing to teach me. I've heard it already, and probably done better.

I strongly recommend serious people read Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow". It explained everything I've seen in markets for 43 yrs (and in the past many years Market's Evil Twin, Politics.). I'd recommend Cialdini's "Persuasion" and "Presuasion", so you can see how you are manipulated. The key to being successful in financial markets is psychology: Others' (manias etc), but more importantly, your own. And this applies to everything in life. And it all starts with humility. "I know there's a good chance I'm wrong; so let's approach things with that in mind.".

The author and the media as a whole start from the assumption that they are somehow especially enlightened. And if only the hoi polloi could be reached, "solutions" (amazing how embedded in that is a certainty that "we, the enlightened" have the "answer".) could be implemented and "problems solved.".

The key to getting along is humility. Maybe that crotchety old Uncle is sometimes right. What if he is?

Me? I LOVE being proved wrong. I'm smarter the moment thereafter than I was before. And grateful for it. The substacks/podcasts I follow frequently give me that wonderful endorphin rush. Siloing only makes you angry, miserable.....and counterproductive.

All JMHO. And, I could be wrong........ : )

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts