That actually makes a lot of sense. You can’t invest based on perfect knowledge of the market because the investment itself influences the direction of the market. This can’t be said of natural phenomena because a prediction about gravity doesn’t change gravity. This conclusion contradicts efficient market theory, which states all available information about a market is already priced into its assets.. but upon hearing Soros, that idea does seem outdated and unlikely.
@@petermccavington8232 EMH is a common academic theory that's been refuted by the likes of Graham and Buffett for decades. Please the link in the description or the one on ua-cam.com/video/pEA5rYFOMeI/v-deo.html
Investing in a business can increase its value. Markets are volatile. Buffet and Soros have lost billions with bad investments. Gravity is a constant, the markets are not. Your example is irrational.
@@OllieEvansartist He may have been referring to the unnecessarily complicated higher math that the technical analysts use, as opposed to the basic common sense arithmetic that value investors use.
@@mikeutube7888 Soros himself may have mentioned that it's an extrapolation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle from the Physical sciences, into the Social sciences.
let translate i control peoples thinking thru the media and i prey on their hopes and fears to manipulate the markets its actually called insider trading and is a criminal offence but once you get to billionaires you can basically buy everyone off.
comparing incompleteness theorem concepts in maths and physics with natural phenomena and how this is not considered in econmics, especially with the market fully efficient theories. Then he made some points about an another element of uncertainty in social phenomena. some interesting points but nothing really practically useful, more market philosophy related
That actually makes a lot of sense. You can’t invest based on perfect knowledge of the market because the investment itself influences the direction of the market. This can’t be said of natural phenomena because a prediction about gravity doesn’t change gravity. This conclusion contradicts efficient market theory, which states all available information about a market is already priced into its assets.. but upon hearing Soros, that idea does seem outdated and unlikely.
Absolutely. Almost exactly what's written in the link in the description.
Where did you obtain the latter theory from? Who??
@@petermccavington8232 EMH is a common academic theory that's been refuted by the likes of Graham and Buffett for decades. Please the link in the description or the one on ua-cam.com/video/pEA5rYFOMeI/v-deo.html
Investing in a business can increase its value. Markets are volatile. Buffet and Soros have lost billions with bad investments. Gravity is a constant, the markets are not. Your example is irrational.
She laughs when he says he’s not good at maths as if to say there’s no possible way in her mind that he wasn’t good with mathematics 😂
@@OllieEvansartist He may have been referring to the unnecessarily complicated higher math that the technical analysts use, as opposed to the basic common sense arithmetic that value investors use.
Intriguing.
It sounds like Systems Dynamics
@@mikeutube7888 Soros himself may have mentioned that it's an extrapolation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle from the Physical sciences, into the Social sciences.
Longwinded non-explanation of his "theory" . . .
Sickening how rich people obtain so much fawning deference from supposedly educated women.
wtf are you talking about?
Gyuri bácsi 💛
Genius
let translate i control peoples thinking thru the media and i prey on their hopes and fears to manipulate the markets its actually called insider trading and is a criminal offence but once you get to billionaires you can basically buy everyone off.
you're just repeating nazi propaganda
Damn
Great personality
satan
Why? Because Alex Jones says so? Alex is a shittier person than Soros without question.
Soros trading strategy
Srbijaaaaa
What the fuck did he say????
He said Fu*k you Steve bachmeier .
he is just beating around the bush
nothing
comparing incompleteness theorem concepts in maths and physics with natural phenomena and how this is not considered in econmics, especially with the market fully efficient theories. Then he made some points about an another element of uncertainty in social phenomena. some interesting points but nothing really practically useful, more market philosophy related
@@babyjacob5230 bro i just went down a rabbit hole and i cannot watch a video on this guy without seeing a conspiracy