Could this be why some succeed in trucking?

[LOAD IT]

What smart truckers tell us about the road to success
By Tim Harford

Published: May 2 2009 01:19 | Last updated: May 2 2009 01:19

Aldo Rustichini is a genial Italian economist with a head of hair that seems to have been modelled on Albert Einstein’s. A professor at Cambridge and the University of Minnesota, he quickly transformed my interview with him into a full-blown undergraduate-style tutorial, occasionally asking me questions to check my understanding. Yet this likeable economist has been carrying out work with potentially explosive implications – including the possibility that economic success is genetically transmitted.

Rustichini’s latest research – with Stephen Burks, Jeffrey Carpenter and Lorenz Goette – studies the behaviour of about 1,000 trainee truck drivers in the US. The researchers gave the truckers IQ tests and asked them to participate in a number of small experiments.

In one experiment, the truckers were asked to choose between gambles and certain payoffs. In another, the choice was between a sum of money now and more money later. A more complex experiment required the truckers to play an anonymous “trust” game. The first player was given $5 and offered the choice of sending it to the second player; the second player had his own $5 and was asked how much he would send to the first player were he to receive $5 from him, and how much if he didn’t. The researchers promised to double the money sent in either direction – meaning that if the players managed to co-operate then each could get $10.

An intriguing pattern emerged. The truckers who scored highest on the IQ test were also more patient and more willing to take calculated risks, rejecting unfair gambles and accepting favourable ones. Their choices revealed a more consistent attitude to risk and a more consistent level of patience, too.

The high-IQ truckers were also better at predicting what other players would do in the trust game, and secured more money overall. When they played second, they were more discriminating, rewarding co-operation and punishing those who would not trust them.

High IQ goes hand in hand with patience, calculated risk-taking and interpersonal judgment, it seems – and this is true after statistically adjusting for age and race.

Nor is any of this limited to the laboratory. Many trainee truckers drop out before completing their first year of work, even though this means they must repay the trucking company their training costs, which run into thousands of dollars. This indicates a lack of patience, an inability to appreciate how much money is at stake or a serious miscalculation in the initial plan to be a truck driver. Whatever the reason, dropping out is correlated with Rustichini’s experimental tests of low IQ, impatience and bad judgment of risk or of other people.

Rustichini puts this in a far more striking way: that the ingredients for prospering in a capitalist society all seem to be present together, or absent together. This is not entirely surprising but neither is it obvious. And therein lies the dangerous hypothesis: if all these attributes go hand in hand, it is much more plausible to suggest that economic success is passed on from generation to generation.

“Such a process could be cultural, genetic or both,” comment the researchers in a footnote, “but the genetic version is the most controversial.” Quite so. But even the cultural transmission of economic success is a provocative notion, and a painful one to most economists, who are predisposed to hope that good policies alone may promote economic growth.

Rustichini is not perturbed. For all his amiability, he is quite content to contemplate unwelcome possibilities.

[RostyC]

This indicates a lack of patience, an inability to appreciate how much money is at stake or a serious miscalculation in the initial plan to be a truck driver. Whatever the reason, dropping out is correlated with Rustichini’s experimental tests of low IQ, impatience and bad judgment of risk or of other people.

Actually, I'd say they are the smart ones. I would also say it's a good indicator of how screwed up, or flawed maybe is a better word, the industry is as a whole. Money doesn't equal happiness so I wouldn't care either (and didn't back in 1993) if I just spent thousands on school, when you realize what you're going to be treated like by these big carriers, it ain't worth it.

Unfortunately, that's the way it's set up. You almost have to go with a large carrier to enter the industry. So, usually, (not all the time) it's the people with no other (perceived) alternatives that stick with it, mostly due to lack of self motivation to better themselves and unfortunately those people are lot of what you see running around out here.

I hope I didn't take this thread off topic, but the paragraph I quoted above just struck a cord I guess.

[Musicman]

Actually, I'd say they are the smart ones. I would also say it's a good indicator of how screwed up, or flawed maybe is a better word, the industry is as a whole. Money doesn't equal happiness so I wouldn't care either (and didn't back in 1993) if I just spent thousands on school, when you realize what you're going to be treated like by these big carriers, it ain't worth it.

Unfortunately, that's the way it's set up. You almost have to go with a large carrier to enter the industry. So, usually, (not all the time) it's the people with no other (perceived) alternatives that stick with it, mostly due to lack of self motivation to better themselves and unfortunately those people are lot of what you see running around out here.

I hope I didn't take this thread off topic, but the paragraph I quoted above just struck a cord I guess.

You’re assertion that the trucking industry is unique in the way trainees are treated falls completely flat for those of us who have had a variety of jobs in the past. There are many, many industries (and not just blue collar, I assure you) where entrant level workers aren’t treated much better than slaves. There are a variety of reasons for this, but it must work, since the U.S. military employs similar tactics, even in the military academies. I don’t remember being treated much like a human being in Basic Training or Airborne School.

Large companies in our industry will always treat trainees poorly and underpay them because not only do they cost the company a ton of money through increased insurance premiums and accident claims, they also are literally a dime a dozen. Have you ever seen the Star Trek episode “The Trouble With Tribbles”? Trainees aren’t as cute as Tribbles, but they are just as plentiful and many will never become competent drivers and should have never obtained a CDL in the first place.

The biggest problem is with unscrupulous CDL schools that mislead prospects about what this industry is like and what they can expect for the first few years as new drivers. People come from all backgrounds to join this industry because they are sold on “The Freedom of the Road” and told what glorious piles of cash they are guaranteed to make as long as they get their license. They only find out after blowing $5k or more on CDL school that this career comes with plenty of BS and that as a company driver, there is little freedom on the road.

[Jumbo]

Along with the schools companies also add to the problem by taking these students with their newly gotten licenses and telling them "our company will pay you this amount and get you home this often, please sign on with us". Then they leave them out on the road for extended periods of time or sitting around with no freight. If you dont have freight dont hire drivers. Or flat out lying to them about how much freedom and money they will have if they just sign on the dotted line of this lease purchase. I understand that people need to do their research because it is ultimately their decision to work somewhere but how about recruiters start telling the truth.

[RostyC]

You’re assertion that the trucking industry is unique in the way trainees are treated falls completely flat for those of us who have had a variety of jobs in the past.

I didn't say it was unique, we're talking about trucking, not other industries. I agree with you that every industry has it's own problems with new comers. I have worked in other professions as well.

Maybe it's me, but I never let anyone treat me with disrespect or try to screw me, no matter the circumstances, no matter the industry.

[GMAN]

What smart truckers tell us about the road to success
By Tim Harford

Published: May 2 2009 01:19 | Last updated: May 2 2009 01:19

Aldo Rustichini is a genial Italian economist with a head of hair that seems to have been modelled on Albert Einstein’s. A professor at Cambridge and the University of Minnesota, he quickly transformed my interview with him into a full-blown undergraduate-style tutorial, occasionally asking me questions to check my understanding. Yet this likeable economist has been carrying out work with potentially explosive implications – including the possibility that economic success is genetically transmitted.

Rustichini’s latest research – with Stephen Burks, Jeffrey Carpenter and Lorenz Goette – studies the behaviour of about 1,000 trainee truck drivers in the US. The researchers gave the truckers IQ tests and asked them to participate in a number of small experiments.

In one experiment, the truckers were asked to choose between gambles and certain payoffs. In another, the choice was between a sum of money now and more money later. A more complex experiment required the truckers to play an anonymous “trust” game. The first player was given $5 and offered the choice of sending it to the second player; the second player had his own $5 and was asked how much he would send to the first player were he to receive $5 from him, and how much if he didn’t. The researchers promised to double the money sent in either direction – meaning that if the players managed to co-operate then each could get $10.

An intriguing pattern emerged. The truckers who scored highest on the IQ test were also more patient and more willing to take calculated risks, rejecting unfair gambles and accepting favourable ones. Their choices revealed a more consistent attitude to risk and a more consistent level of patience, too.

The high-IQ truckers were also better at predicting what other players would do in the trust game, and secured more money overall. When they played second, they were more discriminating, rewarding co-operation and punishing those who would not trust them.

High IQ goes hand in hand with patience, calculated risk-taking and interpersonal judgment, it seems – and this is true after statistically adjusting for age and race.

Nor is any of this limited to the laboratory. Many trainee truckers drop out before completing their first year of work, even though this means they must repay the trucking company their training costs, which run into thousands of dollars. This indicates a lack of patience, an inability to appreciate how much money is at stake or a serious miscalculation in the initial plan to be a truck driver. Whatever the reason, dropping out is correlated with Rustichini’s experimental tests of low IQ, impatience and bad judgment of risk or of other people.

Rustichini puts this in a far more striking way: that the ingredients for prospering in a capitalist society all seem to be present together, or absent together. This is not entirely surprising but neither is it obvious. And therein lies the dangerous hypothesis: if all these attributes go hand in hand, it is much more plausible to suggest that economic success is passed on from generation to generation.

“Such a process could be cultural, genetic or both,” comment the researchers in a footnote, “but the genetic version is the most controversial.” Quite so. But even the cultural transmission of economic success is a provocative notion, and a painful one to most economists, who are predisposed to hope that good policies alone may promote economic growth.

Rustichini is not perturbed. For all his amiability, he is quite content to contemplate unwelcome possibilities.

Although I don't necessarily think that intelligence is a factor in success neither do I think the unintelligent are guaranteed to fail. I have known many well educated failures, if you consider their earnings history. On the other hand, those with a higher level of education do tend to have a higher earnings history than those who do not. I think intelligence can be a factor in success. One reason is that those with higher intelligence tend to work through problems and challenges rather than giving up. The lesser intelligent are more likely to throw up their hands at the first snag and not move on or give up.

I think perseverance has as much or more to do with success than any other single factor. Those who succeed simply don't give up until they obtain their goal. That is true whether the individual is a trucker or executive at a multinational corporation. I would also not necessarily equate intelligence with education. I think that you are born with intelligence. It is what you do with it that is important. An education will open possibilities and opportunities, but will not make you more intelligent. A good education will only show that you have the ability to learn.

I have known some very successful truckers. One who comes to mind only had an 8th grade education. That doesn't mean that this guy wasn't intelligent, just uneducated. He made a lot of money in this industry. I think the only thing he ever did was drive a truck.

I believe another factor in success in business is being single minded. You have a goal or purpose and you work toward that goal until you achieve your objective. You only fail with you give up. Business is full of obstacles. You learn by failing. When something fails then you change tactics. You still have the same goal, but may take a detour to achieve it. You have not failed, but the idea or concept may have failed. As long as you don't give up on your goal then you have not failed.

I am also not convinced that success is genetic. I think that success can be learned. There have been some who have come out of extreme poverty to achieve a high level of success. Sometimes it is only one individual in a family who goes on to achieve success. It can be the entire family. Parents can instill success or at least a desire for success and achievement in their children. That isn't genetic but environment.

There have also been children of highly successful people who have failed at everything that they have attempted. If it were DNA then they should be as successful or more so than their parents. Some do go on to achieve, but it has nothing to do with genetics. A lack of nurturing from the parents may be more a factor in their lack of achievement than DNA.

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

Read "Fooled By Randomness" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He has also written another excellent book; "The Black Swan"

I am convinced that a significant portion of success or failure in whatever portion of ones life is quite random. I also suspect that success does breed success in that catching one good break or making one smart/lucky choice can sometimes seemingly position one for another. I also think it works the same way in the other direction, which is why some people never seem to get a break or make any progress in life, no matter how hard they work.

I would like to know more about this study. The thought that there may be a genetically imprinted component intrigues me. I wonder if it could also possibly be some sort of learned behavior, either of which might help explain why one branch of my family seems to be able to fall in pig crop and come out smelling like bacon while my branch always seems to struggle, just missing out on the great chances.

[allan5oh]

What matters most is how they apply that intelligence. I know some people that might be considered having less then average intelligence, yet commit themselves to learning certain aspects of the industry. It may take them longer to learn, but learn they will.

In our capitalist society, anyone can succeed. I do not think there is randomness of it at all. At the end of last year my contract was canceled. I went to another company that I wanted to work for. I wasn't taking no for an answer. The result? Highest pay job I've ever had, with the most chances of advancement.

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

What matters most is how they apply that intelligence. I know some people that might be considered having less then average intelligence, yet commit themselves to learning certain aspects of the industry. It may take them longer to learn, but learn they will.

In our capitalist society, anyone can succeed. I do not think there is randomness of it at all. At the end of last year my contract was canceled. I went to another company that I wanted to work for. I wasn't taking no for an answer. The result? Highest pay job I've ever had, with the most chances of advancement.

I think you should read the book before you comment on it.

[tracer]

...I believe another factor in success in business is being single minded. You have a goal or purpose and you work toward that goal until you achieve your objective. You only fail with you give up. Business is full of obstacles. You learn by failing. When something fails then you change tactics. You still have the same goal, but may take a detour to achieve it. You have not failed, but the idea or concept may have failed. As long as you don't give up on your goal then you have not failed....

I"d add that goals must be specific and WRITTEN. There's a great book by Brian Tracy on the topic and he also recommends to have one major goal at all times - something that's really important to you at the moment. He calls it "Most Definite Purpose". I have a file on the desktop of my laptop called "GOALS" and I constantly update it depending on what I shoot for. Right now for example it says:

"2009 MAJOR DEFINITE PURPOSE
switch to the flatbed division with my own stepdeck trailer"

Tracy's book helped me buy the truck, believe it or now. I was procrastinating in Spring 2007 and when I read his book I did all the exercises that were supposed to pinpoint what you really want from life, and it worked! I bought the truck in April 2007 and became an owner-operator.

Here's a link to the book page on amazon Amazon.com: Goals!: How to Get Everything You Want-Faster Than You Ever Thought Possible (9781576752357): Brian Tracy: Books

[GMAN]

Read "Fooled By Randomness" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He has also written another excellent book; "The Black Swan"

I am convinced that a significant portion of success or failure in whatever portion of ones life is quite random. I also suspect that success does breed success in that catching one good break or making one smart/lucky choice can sometimes seemingly position one for another. I also think it works the same way in the other direction, which is why some people never seem to get a break or make any progress in life, no matter how hard they work.

I would like to know more about this study. The thought that there may be a genetically imprinted component intrigues me. I wonder if it could also possibly be some sort of learned behavior, either of which might help explain why one branch of my family seems to be able to fall in pig crop and come out smelling like bacon while my branch always seems to struggle, just missing out on the great chances.

I don't believe that success or failure is random. If that were the case then it would not make any difference what we do. Based upon random selection we are either successful or failures. I am familiar with this concept. It isn't new. The problem with the theory is that it is unproven. If you look at those who have achieved a high level of success in any field there are common threads, but randomness isn't one of them. There are some people who seem determined to fail. It is their actions or how they handle obstacles that determine whether they are successful or fail.

There are some proven paths to success. Just take this industry. One way to help insure your success is to save your money until you can pay cash or at least have a good down payment with a cash reserve. They get a job, take notes and learn. That will not insure your success but it will go a long way toward being successful. On the other side are those who want the illusion of being an owner operator, so they become involved a lease purchase with a carrier. They have little or no experience, credit or money. Those who seem to be successful owner operators put their desires aside to achieve their goal. They will start with a truck they can afford rather than one that they want. They look at this as a business first. Those who succeed keep costs down. Those who fail start with a truck they cannot afford, buy all the toys they cannot afford and are surprised when they lose everything.

This is true in any industry, not just trucking. There are some who have made it on a shoe string. Those are few and far between. Success comes from planning and following your plan. They learn from their failures. Those who fail and continue to fail don't bother to plan and operate by the seat of their pants. They are surprised when success eludes them.

Success or failure are neither random. It comes from planning and hard work or lack thereof. Those who fail do not learn from previous failures. Nor do they learn from mistakes. They continue making the same mistakes over and over again expecting a different outcome. Nearly every previous owner operator who has worked for me knew more than I did about running a trucking company, yet they are out of business and are likely still struggling. They blame me or anyone or anything for their failures but themselves and their actions. I have managed to stay in business for many decades. It hasn't always been easy. There have been many challenges along the way. Surviving in this environment has been one of the most challenging. What is the difference? Whatever the reason it isn't random.

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

I don't believe that success or failure is random. If that were the case then it would not make any difference what we do. Based upon random selection we are either successful or failures. I am familiar with this concept. It isn't new. The problem with the theory is that it is unproven. If you look at those who have achieved a high level of success in any field there are common threads, but randomness isn't one of them. There are some people who seem determined to fail. It is their actions or how they handle obstacles that determine whether they are successful or fail.

There are some proven paths to success. Just take this industry. One way to help insure your success is to save your money until you can pay cash or at least have a good down payment with a cash reserve. They get a job, take notes and learn. That will not insure your success but it will go a long way toward being successful. On the other side are those who want the illusion of being an owner operator, so they become involved a lease purchase with a carrier. They have little or no experience, credit or money. Those who seem to be successful owner operators put their desires aside to achieve their goal. They will start with a truck they can afford rather than one that they want. They look at this as a business first. Those who succeed keep costs down. Those who fail start with a truck they cannot afford, buy all the toys they cannot afford and are surprised when they lose everything.

This is true in any industry, not just trucking. There are some who have made it on a shoe string. Those are few and far between. Success comes from planning and following your plan. They learn from their failures. Those who fail and continue to fail don't bother to plan and operate by the seat of their pants. They are surprised when success eludes them.

Success or failure are neither random. It comes from planning and hard work or lack thereof. Those who fail do not learn from previous failures. Nor do they learn from mistakes. They continue making the same mistakes over and over again expecting a different outcome. Nearly every previous owner operator who has worked for me knew more than I did about running a trucking company, yet they are out of business and are likely still struggling. They blame me or anyone or anything for their failures but themselves and their actions. I have managed to stay in business for many decades. It hasn't always been easy. There have been many challenges along the way. Surviving in this environment has been one of the most challenging. What is the difference? Whatever the reason it isn't random.

Why don't you read the book before you comment on it? Are you frightened that some of your precious sanctimonious assumptions might challenged?

You sound just like I imagine some of the Wall Street traders that Taleb describes must sound. Assuming that their success is a result of their hard work and superior intelligence, when in fact they have merely been lucky enough to be trading in a time interval in which tthe behavior of the market matches whatever their strategy happens to be. When the market forces shift they are unable to recognize the change and protect or modify their strategy. They blow up & lose everything.

One of the most successful people I know is someone I consider to be a complete azzhole. But when we were talking one day he told me this; You know, I've made a lot of money, and I worked really hard to do it. but I've been lucky too"

I'd say he gets it, you obviously don't. He probably doesn't need to read the book, you should.

[GMAN]

Why don't you read the book before you comment on it? Are you frightened that some of your precious sanctimonious assumptions might challenged?

I have no need to be frightened about ideas. As I stated earlier, this is not new. I read about it several decades ago. Feel free to challege any of my ideas or assumptions.

You sound just like I imagine some of the Wall Street traders that Taleb describes must sound. Assuming that their success is a result of their hard work and superior intelligence, when in fact they have merely been lucky enough to be trading in a time interval in which tthe behavior of the market matches whatever their strategy happens to be. When the market forces shift they are unable to recognize the change and protect or modify their strategy. They blow up & lose everything.

Making money in the stock market isn't rocket science. Those who make money trading do so by watching trends and taking advantage of those trends or cycles. Stocks have cycles. All of them have cycles. All it takes is a little money, a plan and patience. For everyone who makes money in the market someone will lose money. Those who lose money in the market usually do so by getting greedy. They don't follow those things which worked for them in the past. It is not random.

One of the most successful people I know is someone I consider to be a complete azzhole. But when we were talking one day he told me this; You know, I've made a lot of money, and I worked really hard to do it. but I've been lucky too"

I'd say he gets it, you obviously don't. He probably doesn't need to read the book, you should.

What some people call luck is preparation. You can get "lucky" if you are prepared. You prepare for success. When opportunities come along you are prepared and get "lucky." People who fail, usually do so by not preparing. Again, it isn't random. It has nothing to do with genetics. You either prepare for success of failure. It is a choice. I am not sure what good it would do for me to read a book about random success. If I am to be successful or fail then there is nothing that I can to to effect the outcome since everything is random.

We all have setbacks in our life. Einstein, Edison and others had many setbacks over their lifetime. Some would have called them failures. A failure would have given up. They learned by their failures and persevered. That was not random.

[Dejanh]

Read "Fooled By Randomness" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. He has also written another excellent book; "The Black Swan"

I am convinced that a significant portion of success or failure in whatever portion of ones life is quite random. I also suspect that success does breed success in that catching one good break or making one smart/lucky choice can sometimes seemingly position one for another. I also think it works the same way in the other direction, which is why some people never seem to get a break or make any progress in life, no matter how hard they work.

I would like to know more about this study. The thought that there may be a genetically imprinted component intrigues me. I wonder if it could also possibly be some sort of learned behavior, either of which might help explain why one branch of my family seems to be able to fall in pig crop and come out smelling like bacon while my branch always seems to struggle, just missing out on the great chances.

Ive read Black Swan.....very interesting and a scary book at the same time which pretty much says that a failure of one single institution can bring about the collapse of all other....No one believed that there were black swans just like no one believed in the observation above.

[GMAN]

I think that success can breed more success just as failure can breed more failure. When you are surrounded by successful people or have successful role models in your life then you are more likely to take on those same traits. The same could be said about failure. When you see your role models as drug dealers or living off the government then you are likely to mimic the same behavior. Just as there will be some who will blow their chance at success even though they had every opportunity, including good role models, there will also be those who grow up in poverty who break out from their surroundings to achieve great success.

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

[QUOTE=GMAN;460098]I have no need to be frightened about ideas. As I stated earlier, this is not new. I read about it several decades ago. Feel free to challege any of my ideas or assumptions.

Where did you read about "it"? Please describe what you claim to have read.

Making money in the stock market isn't rocket science. Those who make money trading do so by watching trends and taking advantage of those trends or cycles. Stocks have cycles. All of them have cycles. All it takes is a little money, a plan and patience. For everyone who makes money in the market someone will lose money. Those who lose money in the market usually do so by getting greedy. They don't follow those things which worked for them in the past. It is not random.

This whole paragraph demonstrates your ignorance. Tell the guys writing the automatic trading algorithms that it's not rocket science. How many Nobel laureates did Long Term Capital have on their Board of Directors? Read "The (Mis)Behavior of Markets" by Benoit Mandelbrot and then make the above statement. Outliers exist and they will frock up every distribution they can. Markets, and indeed the universe as we know it, may well be fractal in nature.

What some people call luck is preparation. You can get "lucky" if you are prepared. You prepare for success. When opportunities come along you are prepared and get "lucky." People who fail, usually do so by not preparing. Again, it isn't random. It has nothing to do with genetics. You either prepare for success of failure. It is a choice. I am not sure what good it would do for me to read a book about random success. If I am to be successful or fail then there is nothing that I can to to effect the outcome since everything is random.

CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE BOOK BEFORE YOU START TO COMMENT ON IT?
In one of his books Taleb talks about someone who did a study of successful entrepreneurs and decided that the largest quality they had in common was a willingness to take risks and thus decided that to be successful a person needed that ability. Taleb pointed out that if they had done a study of FAILED entrepreneurs they probably would have found an equal, if not greater, willingness. Sometimes the very qualities that get you to a certain point in life keep you from going any further.

We all have setbacks in our life. Einstein, Edison and others had many setbacks over their lifetime. Some would have called them failures. A failure would have given up. They learned by their failures and persevered. That was not random

[I]What does that statement have to do with anything we are discussing here? What I read into it is that you will only get lucky if you keep gambling. I agree that randomness can't strike you if you quit. That's why I keep going, someday I will get another opportunity. I will also say that people like Einstein and Edison appear to pretty randomly distributed..[/QUOTE

[Orangetxguy]

Maybe it's me, but I never let anyone treat me with disrespect or try to screw me, no matter the circumstances, no matter the industry.

That is a BIG 10-4!!!


If anybody lets anybody else treat them poorly, or lets anybody else "screw them over", without correcting the wrong done, this contributes to the problem.

Standing up for yourself, and doing so in a straight forward and intellectual manner, puts an individual yards ahead of those whom sit on their hands and cry "Poor me"!!

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

Ive read Black Swan.....very interesting and a scary book at the same time which pretty much says that a failure of one single institution can bring about the collapse of all other....No one believed that there were black swans just like no one believed in the observation above.

That's why Long Term Capital Management was bailed out. It was the excuse given for bailing out AIG.

I say any business "Too big to fail" is actually too big to be allowed to exist to begin with. Of course if you want to stop companies from reaching such cancerous proportions you will need regulations and heaven knows we can't have that.

I think Taleb gave the mathematical odds of the 1987 Wall Street meltdown as somewhere in the quadrillions. But it still happened. How random is random? I was predicting a housing market correction in 2003. But I never imagined it would melt down like it has. I thought there would still be credit and that the demand for rentals would mushroom. Wrong on both counts. I'm not sure you could calculate the odds of the housing market behaving like it is, but it feels highly random to me.

[Dejanh]

That's why Long Term Capital Management was bailed out. It was the excuse given for bailing out AIG.

I say any business "Too big to fail" is actually too big to be allowed to exist to begin with. Of course if you want to stop companies from reaching such cancerous proportions you will need regulations and heaven knows we can't have that.

I think Taleb gave the mathematical odds of the 1987 Wall Street meltdown as somewhere in the quadrillions. But it still happened. How random is random? I was predicting a housing market correction in 2003. But I never imagined it would melt down like it has. I thought there would still be credit and that the demand for rentals would mushroom. Wrong on both counts. I'm not sure you could calculate the odds of the housing market behaving like it is, but it feels highly random to me.

I have followed Nasseb for quite a while, but one that i think i like the best is Marc Fiber as well as Jim Rogers

Only reason why we have not collapsed as a country is because of foreign capital...I strongly believe that sooner or later VERY hard times will come and they will come with a vengeance making the 30's look like a walk in a park. Back then our dollar was sound and tied to gold, government was small and we didnt have deficits and debt of these proportion that we have now......

I am afraid what will happen when foreign capital looses its trust in ours and our dollar which is steadly declining in its value..

We will see....

[LightsChromeHorsepower]

I have followed Nasseb for quite a while, but one that i think i like the best is Marc Fiber as well as Jim Rogers

Only reason why we have not collapsed as a country is because of foreign capital...I strongly believe that sooner or later VERY hard times will come and they will come with a vengeance making the 30's look like a walk in a park. Back then our dollar was sound and tied to gold, government was small and we didnt have deficits and debt of these proportion that we have now......

I am afraid what will happen when foreign capital looses its trust in ours and our dollar which is steadly declining in its value..

We will see....

Rogers isn't as much fun for me to read. I will check out the other guy, I've never heard of him. Did Rogers work for George Soros? Both Taleb and Soros reference Carl Popper in their writings so I have him on my list of books to read.

I agree with you on our dependence on foreign capital. I think the best we can hope for is decades of slogging it out. The alternatives could be very, very scary.