/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>17508121
no, anon—the success that i've seen in life has been attainable because i have been observant of the strengths and weaknesses of my person, and have chosen and approached objectives with these observations in mind. being somewhat of a social outcast who initially had very low tolerance to criticism, i understood that trying to participate in canada's keynesian economy (in which you must make social connections to flourish) would be a very painful, and ultimately risky way to proceed with attempting to make enough money to eventually reinvest in whatever i could—and so, i have taken a different approach. for years, i have lived in relative squalor, saving all the money that i can and investing it in the crypto projects that i saw as the most promising—and i have seen success.
it is merely a matter of carefully managing my funds. i work for next to minimum wage, at a job that i hate. plenty of people—who you might think i am one of—would think that i am a loser, or that i am lacking in ambition. there are plenty of rational arguments to make against such positions—but until asked for such arguments, one response is perfectly good enough.
we all get what we deserve.

as a side note, you totally strawmanned me. either that, or if what you got out of >>17506513 was "this is me proclaiming that i am a genius" and not something along the lines of "deductive reasoning and understanding principles of the natural world on which we and our world exists are the keys to success" then your observational skills are very poor. not only that, but you and every other collectivist has STILL, TO THIS TIME, utterly ignored the observation:
>implying that there is no difference between a central authority planning the actions of VOLUNTARY actors and a central authority planning the actions of INVOLUNTARY actors
if this is such a shallow idea, then why is it that neither you, nor any one of the collectivists in this thread can refute its relevancy?