Share Traders More Reckless Than Psychopaths, Study Shows

Share Traders More Reckless Than Psychopaths, Study Shows

www.spiegel.de

What makes individual stockbrokers blow billions in financial markets with criminal trading schemes? According to a new study conducted at a Swiss university, it may be because share traders behave more recklessly and are more manipulative than psychopaths.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Look at this note,

"Using a metaphor to describe the behavior, Noll said the stockbrokers behaved as though their neighbor had the same car, "and they took after it with a baseball bat so they could look better themselves." The researchers were unable to explain this penchant for destruction, they said.

Well this old news but now said by a new study. This is the kind of behaviour that is guiding us to the cliff. The worst part is that being a shares trader is socially accepted and has an air of distinction and luxury. Our society is so aberrant sometimes that makes me wonder where are we heading to...
We exalt competitive people and reject cooperative ones.



www.spiegel.de
(visit the link for the full news article)

Just like how I am with writing. Writing is a socially acceptable form of schizophrenia. If I write a scene about a cop being killed by a character, I'm looked at as a writer with an edge. The reality of my situation is that I hate cops and I want to kill one but not willing to risk jail or death. So I do it in an "entertaining" fashion. This world is scary like that sometimes!

Funny how that study shows that fact.

Originally posted by greenCo
...makes me wonder where are we heading to...

Makes me wonder who it was that decided to take those study results of share traders and compare them to psychopathic data. I'd like to shake his/her hand.

They are gamblers.... nothing more. Their culture has created the image of them as something more... but they are not. Their success is a function of luck and familiarity with their choice of investment.

Find a chronic gambler and compare their irrationality... you'll find they are no different.

Just my opinion of course.... No offense intended to you aficionados out there.

reply to post by greenCo


When I read this the first person I thought of was Kevin O'Leary from Dragon's Den.

Now I don't actually see him as someone who takes chances and is reckless.. but I do see him as someone who is very manipulative, and ruthless with his "prey" when it comes to money.

He is very psychopathic to me in his demeanor ,and how he operates.. and has convinced himself..(through who he associates with perhaps) ..that he is knows what life is all about.... and that's making MORE money.... at whatever cost it might be to others. (cause a few billion is never enough you know)

The only thing I can respect about him, is at least hes upfront about it.. not like the snakes who pretend to have your best interests in mind, and then once taken in, pounce on their prey like the piranhas they really are.

They are gamblers.... nothing more. Their culture has created the image of them as something more... but they are not. Their success is a function of luck and familiarity with their choice of investment.

I don't think they are regular type gamblers.. more like setting up the game with what they understand so they can insure a safe win.. and a good one.

maybe it is gambling to a degree, but they know the odds , as well as sometimes create the odds..

sorry, but I disagree with you.

Here's a prime example:

Trader on BBC - "Golman Sachs rules the world"

He comes straight out & says he dreams about economic catastrophe because it's a great opportunity to make money, even saying he has no interest whether governments can fix things. He even thinks viewers should join him!

recklessness + megabonus culture = psychopathic carelessness

Markets should be there to capitalize strong businesses; they have become an egomaniac's paradise.

reply to post by Absco


Whoa.... that blew my mind. Wow, never looked at it like that. But.. ha wow. just right one, thanks for that one.

reply to post by pause4thought


There is a considerable difference between business and share-trading.

Share-trading is exactly that - people buying and selling shares in a company as though they are trading cards.

Business, on the other hand, must make a product or service and sell it at a price that people are willing to pay.

Typically, businesses that are performing better have greater value to their shares - so there is that relationship between the two.

reply to post by Aim64C


There is also a crucial difference. If it were simply a matter of people trading in the hope of putting funds in strong businesses things would be very different to the reality. As it is, unimaginably huge investments are made in financial vehicles whose sole purpose is to reap a profit if the value of particular businesses goes down.

Enter the psychopathic trader...

reply to post by pause4thought


My point was that the stock market is really not a causal factor in economic concerns. It is merely an indicator.

The stock market collapse in the 20s is exactly the same as what happened this time around. In the 20s, we had people buying huge amounts of stock on credit. This turned out to be bad, because when it came time to "pay the piper" during trigger events, such as the Dustbowl - we found that there was not enough in hard assets to back the value of one's stock.

Fast forward to today.... same issue - only it is government-endorsed sub-prime mortgage lending. This artificially inflated the values of homes that were used to back loans in banks that were used, effectively, to pay investors in the stock market. The problem is that the amount of money floating around during our boom at the turn of the century were predicated on the successful payment of loans through their term. ... When a lot of loans out there are 10+ years (particularly concerning the mortgage environment) - that means our economy was running off of hard assets that wouldn't be produced for at least ten years.

Anyway - with such policies, it wouldn't matter how much regulation you impose on the stock market or how saintly share traders decided to become. The system was designed in a way that precluded this collapse. Part of me wants to believe it was intentional - a slight-of-hand to try and pin the blame on banks and the stock market (so as to push stronger socialist policies). The rest of me says it was incompetence.

Either way - we pay the price in the end.

alrighty

never heard a share trader going on a shooting sprees oh like say

postal workers and students who been shoved in a locker too many times.

meh anything to justify their hatred for wall street.

reply to post by neo96

Mental breakdowns while sad, are not related to psychopathic behavior in any way. Why would you relate the two?

reply to post by greenCo
Here is confirmation of this fact. They control so much that this guy admits Goldman runs the planet. The economy is shot and needs to be reset with a new standard of law. This video shocked me and I'm sure you will be shocked as well.


www.youtube.com...

Thanks. They create volatility to lure the innocent for a plucking. Here is the video embedded.

reply to post by Getsmart


Man, I'm going to quietly put money down that man is found dead somewhere soon. He let a lot of cats out of that bag.