stinger77
2021-06-12
I'm a speculating investor
Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>
免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。
分享至
微信
复制链接
精彩评论
我们需要你的真知灼见来填补这片空白
打开APP，发表看法
APP内打开
发表看法
2
2
{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"detailType":1,"isChannel":false,"data":{"magic":2,"id":186669167,"tweetId":"186669167","gmtCreate":1623492771859,"gmtModify":1634032392432,"author":{"id":3581827070600518,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorId":3581827070600518,"authorIdStr":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":36,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>I'm a speculating investor</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>I'm a speculating investor</p></body></html>","text":"I'm a speculating investor","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186669167","repostId":1147474880,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147474880?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<p> Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk. I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p> Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk. I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2375,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":23,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"isTiger":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"url":"/m/post/186669167"}
精彩评论