The Intelligent Investor

>>1759013
a lot of neat old timey phrases
you'll feel smarter though that's for sure
it's a solid good read
you should find time to read it at least 3 times in your lifetime though
by the third time you'll actually understand it all

>>1759062
lol i already found that out, first page in the book and im like oh shit what does that even mean

that its basically impossible to play the market

>>1759102
Now is it just stock stuff in this book, or will I learn investing in other things?

>>1759108
The basic underlying principles of value investing extend far beyond equity securities.

>>1759108
>>1759013
Just ignore everything in this book, basically the book's premise when it comes to personal finance in relation to investing (in securities), is that you have to actually work hard for money- and invest a small/medium amount of that money into a long-term secure investment that you have done thorough due diligence on, then an even smaller investment (one you can easially afford to lose) on a short-term higher risk investment..

1. Are you a faggot?
2. Do you want to make bank?

Then instead of following this crusty old book written by effeminate old fools, put everything on $AMD

>>1759322
So im still gonna read it because I got nothing better to do and its something I can say I've done recently other then play a video game lol

>>1759013
You'll be far more aware of how very little you know.

>>1759375
Even less then zero o.o?! Oh boy

>>1759013
For short gains I suggest investing in the Iconomi coin. It is the NASDAQ of all cryptos.

>>1759013
Only read the original chapters at least the first time you read it. There's a lot of contradictions in the "commentary" chapters

I have the exact same book, and its basically about controlling yourself psychologically, and invest long term, it's written for the layman who knows nothing about stocks, it's also abit outdated

The best book about finance is the irrational exuberance by Robert shiller
It's alot more useful

>>1759013
you won't find the answer to riches in a book.

>>1759013
i don't make progress on this book it's so fucking mind numbingly boring.

>>1759013
>>1759013
4 Hour Work Week shits on this crusty old diaper shitter book.

>>1759013

Nothing bc you didn't buy the 1st edition written before the SEC was created. Hope you enjoyed lining Warren's pockets cuck.

Read enough value investing books to realize that individual stock picking isn't worth my time. Put everything in betterment and lending club.

>>1759013
"Here's how I would have picked stocks 3 million years ago, but now index funds exist."

There, summed it up for ya.

>>1761236

When you were reading these books did you allow the author to sway you over to their way of thinking? If so big mistake. I use books solely for factual information, that's why I normally stick exclusively to textbooks. The books I have ready that have a semi story along with the facts always end up trying to convince people they need huge sums in order to start trading which is bullshit, if you trade with lower sums you might only make 20 or 40 or maybe even 100 from each trade, after commission, if you are lucky... that's 100 more capital to trade with tomorrow... people get stuck in the mindset of infinite riches and not slow sustained growth

>>1759882
I love the commentary because it's the easiest part to understand. Even if there's contradictions, he still summarizes well.

>>1761776
The commentary is fine, but the examples he chooses aren't as good as Graham's

Know a bit about the stock market before reading this. Everyone who is telling you not to listen to this guy is stupid - it is exactly how Buffet got to where he is today. It is really one of the best books on value investing ever written. A better book to start out with is Buffetology - great read. Last suggestion - read Graham's other book, Security Analysis, once you know more about all of this. It's a heavy read, but it's a masterpiece.

>>1761294
This.

It's not that useful of a text. All kinds of billionaires made their riches off it's ideas but that was 50-60 years ago and a lot of people applied its wisdom and went broke or underperformed.

So, I'd find something more modern, even though the version I read had all kinds of foot-notes and commentary, especially about the dot-com boom and bust in the 90's, it's hard to relate to it when it mainly talks about companies that don't even exist anymore and it mostly just says to buy index funds, which everyone already knows.