I've heard of people getting 5-10% per MONTH on returns if they have an established system they use.

But, for the most part, I would say stock trading is fastlane if you know what you're doing. Other's could argue that it's just an "accelerant".

 

I some how made a new thread of this... how embarrasing. Somebody please delete it.



Maybe fast lane in stocks is when you start a hedge fund at 26 years old.... like this guy: http://timothysykes.com/freedom-of-finance.html

 

Jim Cramer always refers to the stock market as the only place where people can get rich quick in America, blah blah blah -- But unless you have serious insider information, you're never going to do it making 10% a year... You need to find that stock that shoots to the moon 1000%, etc... Just my thoughts.

- Hakrjak

 

Stocks are just a more liquid way to invest in businesses.

The way most people invest in stocks isn't really fastlane.
They pick the large cap, blue chip stocks with no growth left in them.

You want true ownership, go small-mid cap
(but ya gotta do your own research there, no analysts covering)

And yeah, for my safety portfolio, I average about 12% after fees
(I pay for management,
stocks, like real estate,
aren't truly passive income if you manage it yourself).
Not exactly fastlane.

But for my fun portfolio, well,
I've had 4 and even 10 baggers in a single year.
Lost my shirt on other ventures though.
Averaged out okay.

 

I think it may end up being fastlane for me. Almost doubled my money in 2 months...see my stock collar thread. I plan to take out some of the profits to set aside in case of disaster.

 

Investing in paper assets is no different than having a job (perhaps a high paying job if you're good at at, but a job none-the-less). When you're not trading (or protecting what you own), you're not making money.

So, it's no different than a job. And most people would agree that a job is not fastlane...

 

JScott,
Please share your definition of fastlane so that I might understand it better. I sense that it involves occupying none of your own time. So, starting a business is not fastlane, nor is real estate investing, or establishing a website (all of which are on this site).

Please correct me and/or elaborate so I might understand. Or if anyone else can shed light, I would appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

 

Most jobs aren't fastlane, but some can be if you make enough money. I know of a lot of people making $500k+/year. That is fastlane. Just because they are in the "rat race" doesn't mean they aren't in the fast lane.

To OP's question, I think it really depends how much you are making to determine if it's fastlane. If you make $50k/year trading stocks as your job it's not fastlane, but if you can make $500k/year trading that's fastlane.

 

kidgas,

http://www.thefastlanetomillions.com/showthread.php?t=23

People's definitions differ. Just because you work a job doesn't mean it's not fastlane if you make enough money though.

 

Well in that case is gambling a fastlane vehicle?

 

Thanks, I had the opportunity to read that thread and re-read it. I will stand by my original comments that, for me, I believe stocks will be my fastlane vehicle. It does consume some of my time, as would building a business, but has the potential to accumulate great wealth in a relatively short time frame. Thus, I believe it fits MJ's definition mentioned in the thread. Jesse Livermore made a fortune on the day of the great crash in 1929. I believe stocks can be fastlane.

 

It's a nice part of the puzzle, but I have yet to meet someone that started with next to nothing, invested it, traded, and really got rich. I have made some money, and have friends that have come out really well, but they had a pile to invest in the first place. Don't get me wrong, starting a hedge fund, managing opm, etc can work. I cringe every time I hear someone tell me that they listened to Dave Ramsey, and now they are investing $30.00 a week in a mutal fund which will make them wealthy when they are 50 years old.

I am not saying to invest, you can and need too.

A job can be a fast lane, but taxes really bite. If you owned a company (instead of working for it) you can make less, and have more because of tax write offs, depreciation, etc.

 

Treat paper like a business (the way it should be treated).
Once you have developed a system that works,
hand the system off to a management team.

That's how paper, real estate AND business
goes from active to passive income.
No exceptions
('course then y'all going to come up with exceptions... LOL).

 

I don't agree. There are certain systems that only require like 1 or 2 hours a month that allow you to run successfully. That's not the same as working 160+ hours a month.

A job may keep a person tied down, while if done correctly, the stock market can buy back your time and free you up. It comes down to designing your life and finding the systems that reflect the lifestyle you wish to live.

 

"Is stocks a fastlane investment vehicle?"

Too me fastlane is all about leverage.

Can you apply leverage to stock investing via call and put options ? Yes

You can control $100,000s worth of stock with a few thousand dollars. That is leverage. That is Fastlane.

 

I agree that fastlane is about leverage whether you are leveraging your time, money, or systems.

 

Sorry, I should have qualified my statements a bit more...

According to how most people on this forum define "fastlane," trading stocks would not be considered fastlane. I don't necessarily agree with the definition that most people use here, but hey, it's not my site...

That said, if you define fastlane as how much money you can make in how short a time, then stock trading certainly could qualify. As could having a job. In fact, I've probably made more money from working a job than most people ever make in business, real estate or stocks...so if you want to consider me fastlane, all the better...