>>> If you want to make some money get trained and get a good salary. Save your money in safe assets.

You mean like the good salary you get working for a trading firm?

I'm not sure what this comment you made is meant to be, but it reads like a blend of somebody who's high and a tik tok wellness influencer.

Trading is not a zero sum game in the sense you intend to suggest it is. It is 0 sum only if all participants have the same trading horizon.

The pool grows in the same way because it is linked to the economy. The markets are a variety of players with different requirements.

Most transactions occur between parties who have different horizons. Yes the hft makes money over 5s and the pension fund loses it. But the pension fund is looking at the return over the next year, so the small loss to the hft is just a cost of acquisition.

It's a long winded insult assuaged by a meme phrase at the end to not appear as one, I wouldn't treat it as anything more, what you've said is pretty apt though.

> I am disturbed to see so much enthusiasm here for "trading"

It is lots of fun. Very mathy. A nerd's dream.

Then the data. Oh the amount of data. 34 Gbit/s to get the full US options feed last I checked (someone posted that here I think). Much of the rest is kiddie stuff compared to dealing with that.

People can lament has much as they want that it drains the great minds: it is fun.

I didn't invent that game. Don't blame the players.

> the purpose of markets is not speculation

Arguably, the purpose of markets is part price discovery, part liquidity, and arguably mostly to support economic growth and stability by channeling funds from savers to those who can invest them productively.

> If you want to make some money get trained and get a good salary. Save your money in safe assets

Sure, as long as you're not into dynamism.

Don't even know where to begin with this:

No, not all of finance is a zero-sum game. If you're connecting a buyer and seller that otherwise wouldn't have met, you provided value. Same for connecting them through time (in that you can e.g. help prevent somebody having to panic-sell their house from getting a suboptimal price).

Sure, there's speculation, nepotism, corruption; there are immoral and illegal market practices with no end, but you're making it sound like that's the entire purpose of finance, and not an undesirable byproduct.

Also, as if these only exist there, and not everywhere where there is power and money: Politics, business, even charity are not immune.

Starting a company is more ethical than trading – seriously? While there might be a general trend, can you think of no philanthropic traders and of no unethical founders (some of them in jail)?

> If you want to make some money get trained and get a good salary. Save your money in safe assets

100% agreement on the first part. But if everybody invests their money in "safe assets", there is no capital for people to start companies other than banks. Is that desirable? And who even determines what a safe asset is? What about people that manage and allocate risk? That's a function of finance again!

> Friends, look after friends. Maximise happiness. Be honest, be ethical, be safe

I agree, but this arguably has little to do with the remainder of your sweeping generalization.

You assert a lot of personal opinions. On top of bad "characterizations" of people who are not you.

I don't think this is a signature of a person being honest, or trustworthy.