Quote

I'm making a case against how money managers are handling customers' money. The objective of the customer is not being met if the fund managers are diversifying their assets into hundreds of businesses. If they do this, they are typically performing close to the indexes. But that's not the way wealth is created.

Money management has been a profession involving a lot of fakery - people saying they can beat the market, and they really can't.

I have nothing against investment banking, but it's like massaging money rather than creating money.

You have to manage money. Particularly with market economies. You may have a great product, but if your bottom line goes bust, then that's it.

To make the most of your money, I recommend sticking with mutual funds that don't charge a commission when you buy or sell.

What we prefer to do is operate our investment bank in a way that is like what investment banks used to be, which is a middle man - someone who is here to match people who need capital with people who have capital - and not position ourselves at the center of that by taking big positions on a trading stance.

If you want better behavior from bankers, then make their financial incentives more like those in the hedge-fund world - where managers have 'skin in the game,' and their net worth is tied to their long-term performance.

Manage your spending by creating and sticking to a budget.

The key to making money is to stay invested.

When running a Ponzi scheme, how does one avoid enormous, unexpected withdrawals - runs on the bank, so to speak - that would pull back the curtain and reveal a little man blowing smoke? One way would be to attract a core of investors who could be counted on to never withdraw more than a small percentage of principal each year.