I'm chatting with some people from work today and as a joke we changed the name of our team group to "Crypto Gillianners". Over the last few months it has become much more interesting at work. But though we usually have good conversations about all kinds of things. These guys have started to see and understand the connections I am talking to them about, already a few years ago.
In some ways it’s like lifting the veil in reality, to discover that the reality that it claims never was. Although, it could just be another blanket at the bottom and like an onion, we’re still not in the truth.
They asked if I had any etherium and I had to go to answer "something" which they thought meant a lot, but it actually meant something. One of these tokens now costs 60 and I bought 0.5% of the value of Eth - which is a 90% loss on today's values.
One of the boys was asking if I was reading a post on Wall Streetbates and the curiosity of LossPorn. People there are posting their values as if drowning. As I told him, I don’t get involved in the drama and hype of these things. As I can see it affects my decision making a lot and since the negative has been emphasized. This prevents me from taking more risks.
Caution is certainly good, but I have spent a lot of my life with caution. I have failed to create something valuable for the future. It’s an interesting emotional conflict, because people try to invest with such caution about risk. As a precautionary measure, it is better to keep the bird in the bush than the two of them. The problem, of course, is that avoiding long-term investment risks means risky exposure in the future if there are no assets in the future.
For example, that home may not be a good yield investment. They can act as value savings which can then be used in a variety of ways. For example, when buying other assets, a large return is sold as collateral or, if necessary. We were talking about the difference between fixing a house in Finland and one was saying that he was reading an article about a man who was fighting for rent in Helsinki. But he will not leave this city because they like life. In my opinion it is a risky approach to life, because it will make the person become completely dependent on others. Whether it be a taxpayer-funded government, or friends and family.
Home ownership can be a low yield, yield or negative yield investment but it will go a long way in providing a high standard of living after 15-20 years of retirement.
How much is the experience worth, while there are a few more jigs within walking distance with the experience, there are a few more shopping opportunities. Have a few more people and a big city attitude? I am not against this kind of decision. But do people really value what they set, or are they engaged in this propaganda?
I have a lot of friends in Helsinki and they seem to believe that I am much better off than where I am. A city of the fifth size in any city, but do they realize that the cost of their current living could make it impossible for them to ever make it? An asset portfolio?
