"eggs can't be in the same basket."
Do you agree that in this game of wealth, eggs cannot be placed in the same basket
You are welcome to leave your point of view, where you agree or disagree, in the comments section below。
Indeed, in the mainstream view, many people have become aware of the devastating nature of the risks, and many media have been bitter to persuade investors to avoid risk by not putting eggs in a basket, and by then having an accident。
It's not wrong to even move buffett, the great investment god
In many financial courses, some academic experts have given much-needed advice, and the central idea has been to focus on the importance of “diversifying investment” around “eggs cannot be placed in the same basket”。
In this way, it is true that diversification can avoid risk and that growth with access to wealth is a more reliable way。
But is it true
If wealth can grow through diversification, how many people have made it through the "freedom of wealth" class
How many people around you have gained freedom of wealth through diversification and have made a leap forward
"the wealth of ordinary people has risen."
Of course, at the very beginning, i also believed in the idea of "diversification," i. E. I would take tens of thousands of dollars to pick and choose among the various properties。
I began to reflect until i realized that this concept of diversification had not brought me wealth to grow, or even became my nightmare。
Then i came to the conclusion that diversification is not for people like you and me。
In other words, we ordinary people have too little leverage on our hands, an investment that is no less than a cup of water to do too much。
A lot of people are going to talk about "compensatory thinking", and they're going to suggest a "data model" to support their financial outlook。
It is also because ordinary people have little leverage at hand that makes it more urgent for ordinary people to find a shortcut that allows them to cross the curve and leapfrog wealth. Some people in the real world who are not motivated take full advantage of it and start the business of "slicing herbs."。
Financial courses, such as the internet-filled "fiscal courses" that capture ordinary people, combined with a full-fledged book book, have led to the discovery that much of what is learned is basic financial commons. It would be more practical to spend a few dozen dollars on books in bookstore to buy books of a financial nature, without any realism。
Of course. There's a real rich secret that tells you? So, abandoning the idea of being rich all the time to avoid falling into the pit, the principle of wealth distribution tells us that no loss of money is a gain。
To answer the first question, money management has always been "a big one" and that makes sense. If someone boasts to you about "a little big one," note that it's not money management, it's gambling, it's just a "set" that others use to harvest you. Once you're set up, the wealth on your plate will be wiped out。
The rich are “diversified” because of their large base, which means that ordinary people's principal is 10 times less than 1% of the rich. Just as you envied via for 1. 341 billion dollars in taxes and fines, this is a wealth that ordinary people have struggled to reach since the ape age。
The tens of thousands of dollars that ordinary people spend on "diversified investment" to make a leap in wealth is simply a dream, and remember what friends say when you have millions of dollars to talk about it。
It's a complete disservice to me。
"can you lie flat and make a leap of wealth?"
In that case, it must be asked that you're talking about the principles of wealth distribution, and that a few articles feel the sense of "negativeness" permeating ordinary people. And you're saying that wealth distribution is a top-down movement. Am i right
Maybe you can lay down a perfect life。
I've been thinking about it here, and first of all, i don't think that doing nothing means doing nothing. That means that the king of demons is merely presenting an "objective reality" that society is cruel and unfriendly to ordinary people。
In essence, many people would not understand that the recognition of objective reality does not seem to be of much use to their lives, i. E. I have heard a lot of big things, but life is still a chicken hair。
It's the same thing as the hacking empire's red pills and blue pills. It's a test of humanity。
It is important to point out here that making wealth leaps, even class leaps, is not a pleasure per se, even anti-humanity, a systemic "change" that is constrained by perceived limitations。
It is almost impossible to be perfect for extreme rationality, so it is our leverage to make the leap of wealth without making mistakes or making mistakes。
The only game suitable for the advancement of ordinary people's wealth is to put eggs in a basket and do what they can。
If i say so, someone's gonna get mad, right
You can definitely answer that. Yeah, that's it
What's the difference between that and gambling? There are many examples of failure. How can you be sure you can succeed and start without saying "risk"? Now you're talking about your pants
If you look at my last article, you know what the essence of "risk" is, the nature of "risk" is the difference between the two。
So the question is, if the information is equivalent, is the "risk" or "risk"? Here you can think。
"have you ever seen a pig run before?"
I'm often given to anli by a blogger. Haven't you ever seen a pig run before
What she means is that there's a "data model" to support, and the risk points that you might encounter can be prejudged, and the smaller the error, the greater the probability of success。
From the principles of wealth distribution, we understand the nature of the flow of wealth, which, in order to leapfrog, has to move closer to the "centres" of your circle, so that we can jump out of the "centres" of the wider circle。
Here, lying flat does not mean doing nothing, and raising awareness is what is most urgently needed at this time。
It is clear here that many people are unable to grasp the "opportunity" because they do not have the appropriate level of knowledge, which, like the three yfung lius in the way, has lost the opportunity to leapfrog wealth because of lack of awareness。
And look at the shoya on the inside, her wisdom and courage to help herself seize the opportunity and make the leap of wealth。
In the face of the 6 million claims filed by lu xing corporation, yvonne liu and shoawen are in stark contrast to each other, both in terms of fear of losing their lives and in view of the opportunity to bring into stock all their savings。
As a result, the claim was won, and the price of gertrude went up with the shoyavin shareholders, who naturally earned 3. 3 million. At once, the leap of wealth is created between different options。
Thinking about it, is it an accident that shoyavin's success is? She quit her job as assistant to yuanying. Are you lying down? She's just waiting for a chance, and i think she's the only one who can take it。
"crisis" and "opportunity", which one will tell you? I don't know. I have to kneel。
The success of anyone seems to be by chance, but it is inevitable. It is only by itself, and it is given to you, not yours, and you cannot hold it。
