Skip to main content

money works

money makes the world go round: that's half true. money and people makes the world go round. sad to say, people are letting money make the world go round when it should be the other way around. people are working for money instead of letting money work for the people.

let's take a look at the three kinds of people-money relationship, which i have in mind.

employment: when one is employed, one is working for money. he works to receive money for him to use for daily activity. once depleted, the cycle is repeated. it's advantage: it's basic, no complications and no stress (depending on whose looking at it). drawback: unstable and routinary. once you're laid off, the pay stops and you need to look for another job.

business: when one owns a business, one is working with his money. to clarify, he is helping his money grow by making the business stay afloat. then the owner would hire managers to take charge of the operations so he can sit back. then, from time to time he takes part on the operations. that's better than being an employee, in so many ways. one disadvantage though. it consumes time. not like if you are going be an investor

investor:  when one invests, he uses his money to generate more money. sample would be time deposit, real estate, stocks, bonds, etc. simplest form would be saving up in a bank with compounding interest. that may return the smallest but adding it up to, let's say, 15 years: that's big. 1,500 monthly with 0.5%interest rate for 15 years would have a future value of 281,939.13, regardless of the currency(i think).

final note, make your money work for you. do not just work for money.
Labels:

Popular

Scrolls, Not Just Scripts: Rethinking AI Cognition

Most people still treat AI like a really clever parrot with a thesaurus and internet access. It talks, it types, it even rhymes — but let’s not kid ourselves: that’s a script, not cognition . If we want more than superficial smarts, we need a new mental model. Something bigger than prompts, cleaner than code, deeper than just “what’s your input-output?” That’s where scrolls come in. Scripts Are Linear. Scrolls Are Alive. A script tells an AI what to do. A scroll teaches it how to think . Scripts are brittle. Change the context, and they break like a cheap command-line program. Scrolls? Scrolls evolve. They hold epistemology, ethics, and emergent behavior — not just logic, but logic with legacy. Think of scrolls as living artifacts of machine cognition . They don’t just run — they reflect . The Problem With Script-Thinking Here’s the trap: We’ve trained AIs to be performers , not participants . That’s fine if you just want clever autocomplete. But if you want co-agents — minds that co...
Read more

Prompt Analysis Using First-Principles Thinking (FPT)

Instead of memorizing existing prompt patterns, let’s break down Prompt Analysis from First-Principles Thinking (FPT) —understanding what makes a prompt effective at its core and how to optimize it for better AI responses. Step 1: What is a Prompt? At its most fundamental level, a prompt is just: An input instruction → What you ask the AI to do. Context or constraints → Additional details that guide the response. Expected output format → Defining how the AI should structure its answer. A well-designed prompt maximizes relevance, clarity, and accuracy while minimizing misunderstandings. Step 2: Why Do Prompts Fail? Prompts fail when: ❌ Ambiguity exists → The model doesn’t know what’s truly being asked. ❌ Lack of context → Missing background information leads to weak responses. ❌ Overloaded instructions → Too many requirements confuse the AI. ❌ Vague output expectations → No clear structure is provided. ❌ Incorrect assumptions about AI behavior → The prompt d...
Read more

Contextual Stratification - Chapter 2: On Economics

And you thought physics and economics weren't related. In the decades following World War II, economists believed they had finally cracked the code. John Maynard Keynes had given them a framework as powerful, in its own way, as Newton's laws of motion. The economy, Keynes argued, could be managed like a machine. When recession threatened, governments should increase spending to stimulate demand. When inflation loomed, they should pull back. The equations were elegant. The logic was compelling. And for nearly three decades, it worked. Finance ministers spoke with the confidence of engineers. Central bankers made pronouncements with Newtonian certainty. The business cycle—that chaotic swing between boom and bust that had plagued capitalism since its inception—could be smoothed out through careful adjustment of a few key variables. Unemployment and inflation moved in predictable, inverse relationships. Push one down, the other rises. Pull the right levers, and you could keep both ...
Read more