30 books I wish I read before Investing my hard-earned money:

1. You can be a Stock Market Genius by Joel Greenblatt
2. Common Stocks, Uncommon Profits by Phil Fisher
3. Margin of Safety by Seth Klarman
4. The Crowd by Gustave Le Bon
5. Winning the Loser's Game by Charles Ellis

6. The Zurich Axioms by Max Gunther
7. The Most Important Thing by Howard Marks
8. Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
9. The Intelligent Investor by B. Graham
10. A Zebra in Lion country by Ralph Wanger and Everett Mattlin
11. Learn to Earn by Peter Lynch
12.Poor Charlie's Almanack - The wit and wisdom of Charles T Munger
13.Speculative Contagion by Frank Martin
14. The Long and the Short of it by John Kay
15. More than you know by Michael Maubossin
16. Influence - The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini
17. The Psychology of Judgment and Decision making by Scott Plous
18. The Real Warren Buffett by James O'Loughlin
19. Devil take the Hindmost by Edward Chancellor
20. Risk Intelligence by Dylan Evans
21. The Emotionally Intelligent Investor by Ravee Mehta
22.Accounting for Value by Stephen Penman
23. Common Stocks and Common Sense by Edgar Wachenheim III
24. Big Money Thinks Small by Joel Tillinghast
25. Memos from the Chairman by Alan C Greenberg
26. Groupthink by Irving Janis
27. The Investment Checklist by Michael Shearn
28. The Manual of Ideas by John Mihaljevic
29. Adaptive Markets by Andrew W Lo
30. Simple but not Easy by Richard Oldfield

More from Stockifi | Investors का दोस्त!

More from Trading

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?