I get the overall point you’re trying to get at.

I get the overall point you’re trying to get at... assuming you’re going down the zero sum games line of thinking.

When I bought, someone else that wanted to was able to sell, and when I sold, someone else that wanted shares was able to buy. We both got what we wanted... and we both could have made or lost money. Or, Copenhagen’s interpretation, we’ve both made and lost money until you ask us to tell you which

I guess you could also say that if we were all true long term investors never selling until the stock reaches maximum value (which would be when?), no one would ever actually make anything other than paper money either...

Also, it’s kind of a waste of brain power and time to even consider it - we will never have everyone be a long term investor, just like we’ll never have everyone be a day trader.

There is validity in both strategies and they can compliment each other well. When someone claims otherwise it just feels short sighted.

I, for the most part, consider myself a long term investor. However, I can also see the benefits of being a short term trader, especially when I believe my long term play may take longer than I originally thought and I have the potential to increase my long term reward without expending additional short term capital (ie. being able to turn 300k shares into 375k shares without additional money invested). And if the bragging comment was for me, that wasn’t what I was doing at all... more just defending

Thoughts?

Thanks for the discussion!