2007-12-27 13:24:36 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
Yes, the oracle of omaha comes to mind, as well as John Maynard Keynes.
2007-12-28 04:09:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Must people think so, but economist believe you can not statistically tell the difference between a financial genius and being lucky. That is you can't beat the market.
"The efficient market hypothesis says that the PRICE of a financial ASSET reflects all the INFORMATION available and responds only to unexpected news. Thus prices can be regarded as optimal estimates of true investment value at all times. It is impossible for investors to predict whether the price will move up or down (future price movements are likely to follow a RANDOM WALK), so on AVERAGE an investor is unlikely to beat the market."
2007-12-28 02:31:53 · answer #2 · answered by meg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe financial advisers can make about 100,000 dollars a year just for working if they are good. If they invest that, that is, practice their profession, at a 15% rate, that's 115,000 a year. Do that for 40 years and I would say they were rich because they were finaicial geniuses. That's actually my plan. I am majoring in Econ and Finance.
2007-12-29 17:28:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋