- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 10,350
- Reaction score
- 4,989
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Typically a Hedge Fund manager makes 'only' 20% of what he makes for his customers, oft above some given percent. Unlike say a mutual fund manager who makes a flat 1%/1.5% even if the Fund goes down. You don't understand the difference I see.Bull****. They just transfer wealth from others. If you want to consider acquiring wealth the same as earning wealth, then maybe you are correct, but personally, to me, "earning wealth" means creating wealth, not simply getting a piece of someone elses wealth.
Do you REALLY think that a hedge fund manager creates a billion dollars worth of new wealth that wouldn't exist if they didn't perform their job? All they are really doing is skimming a percentage of wealth from investors who are have way to much faith in the hedge funds. Statistically the investors would actually do better if they randomly invested directly into the stock market. The reason for this is simple - the fees that hedge fund managers charge eats up any small statistical "above market" profits that hedge funds may make....
To make a billion they would have to make At Least 5 billion for their investors.
Typically these returns can be 20% or even 200% on the original money. They go for big returns and are paid accordingly.
Unsuccessful ones don't stay around long. Unlike say, S&P 500 CEOs who just get paid lots because it's their turn to be boss.
Accusing the best ones, we are talking about here, of not beating 'Random' is.. off.
They only get paid big bucks if they make big bucks.
The Hedge Fund universe in general contains many levels of smarts, but the Best, including guys like Soros are worth their pay and investors Flock to the best ones.
Investing in mutual funds in general creates No 'new wealth', but it's performing a valid and valuable service to it's customers. Investing is a different business than manufacturing.Now lets say that a fund manager is able to manipulate the market and actually does year after year predictably beat the market. Does that actually create any new wealth? Does making bets on a investment and then intentionally driving up or down the price of that investment as to benefit from that bet create any new wealth? Of course not. It just creates a situation where people who take the other end of the bet are loosers - and transfers wealth from the loosers to the fund investors. No new wealth created.
Say that I am able to convince you that I can communicate with the dead (although I can't) and you paid me a million dollars to convey a message to your dead loved one. Did I create any new wealth? heck no, all I did was to scam you out of a million dollars.
Fund managers are not creating wealth. They are simply getting paid for a valueless service. Claiming that they made wealth is no more legitimate than a bankrobber creates wealth when he robs a bank. Yes, he did something that made him wealthy, but it created no new wealth.
As a society we really need to re-evaluate what we call "earning" money. There's a difference between creating wealth and transfering wealth, and while most certainly creating wealth can be called "earning" it, and that is positive for society, but simply transfering wealth has little value to our society. It's a concept that tends to get lost in the wee minds of many conservatives.
When the average person invests (401k etc) he's just trying to make money on his money- creating nothing. This doesn't make making a profit an invalid pursuit.
Venture Capital funds, another super high paying position, do bring many new good ideas to fruition.
And as evidenced by your anger... You don't understand the objective of investing.
And you apparently didn't watch/have no reaction to the content of the vid. I wish you would watch and comprehend it, or even disagree with it. I think it was enlightening.
Last edited: