Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David who wrote (172855)	6/6/2021 7:03:44 PM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219492

I think many people find themselves in situations they never expected they would... where they discover a need to make difficult choices. If that happens to you, and you never considered it as possible before it happened... there's a good chance that how you respond might be driven by your emotions, rather than a well considered plan... including a prior consideration of tolerances... even in general terms not as "what is acceptable" but of "pick your battles". Everyone thrust into that sort of situation will find hard choices to be made... between "I can't ignore this" as a conflict with oneself and a moral code... and "I can't afford this" as a practical limit that includes how your own choices might have negative impacts on others. So, "if" you choose to act... does require full consideration of the tolerances. But, of course, "If" is a different question than "how"... or "when"... and any well conceived plan for how to solve a problem... will naturally tend to include all of the elements of any good story that a journalist might cover, in the "who, what, where, when, why and how"... not forgetting "how much" and "at what cost"... including careful consideration of how to write that story... while leaving yourself out of it... or crafting your role as required to rectify conflicts between tolerances and "worth it" in risks/costs to be borne... not only by yourself... Sometimes, I think the best answer is simply to walk away... and get on with your life, without going out of your way to make your own life more difficult... pick your battles... but, that choice can also be the prelude to a proper response being made only when there is a sufficient distance between yourself and the risks that existed... before you began acting to manage them. In my own case, I considered all of those issues long before ever encountering a need for a gut check. But, in planning a proper reply... how others are likely to be impacted requires some care... but, it also contains potential... so a part of what you have to consider is both in "what" you are loyal to... but also "who"... as any problem you recognize... is also an open ended risk for others... only more of a risk in being unrecognized. So, a part of the decisions you will have to make will be "which team(s) are you playing for"... and what does that set of choices offer as a potential benefit... or, a potential risk in a trap... as you cannot expect others, who might find benefit in your choices, to honor your own taking of risks even as you consider theirs. The "easy answer" openly provided for "how you are supposed to do this"... is probably a trap. How much are you willing to sacrifice in an attempt to ensure a just outcome ? You can't count on winning every battle ? What did Vince Foster know... and, given what he knew... why wasn't he able to survive it ? The bankers "hot crazy" matrix, again ? Where would he have fit ? Those you expect are "there to help"... probably are "there to help"... but you might want to be careful in considering "who" they are there to help... and "how" ? I didn't volunteer for the "difficult choices" program... but, didn't ever shy away from the responsibility when thrust on me... was never conflicted in my loyalties... and, then, found that even delivering success... still prevented me from continuing life as before... on my own terms... and instead ensured being thrust onto a path of ever increasing risks... chosen by others. Ultimately, that required me "walking away"... not because that is what i wanted... as doing so prevented me ever accomplishing my personal goals in life... but, as the second paragraph, above... both in order to survive it... and in order to gain the power to solve problems being forced on me to address... "in my own way" and "in my own time"... and not because others had discovered you as a tool to be used... to deflect more of their own risks onto you... Freed from others choices... I've opted to not believe what others say about... pretty much anything... but simply proceed to go do the work to find answers for myself... The costs have been significant... the truth often far uglier than you'd believe... but, I value the truth more than I value others "talking points" ? I understand the world well enough... to not expect "there has to be a pony in here somewhere" ? I'd still not recommend my own choices to most others. I do think there is still a viable "free market" function that still applies in "correction" of others corruption... but, given reality in the timing of cycles... versus your self interest ? The aspect of making your own choices... in self interest... works... not as a function of that punishing others by your choice... but, only in terms of exercising your right to choose who it is you want to be associated with... and who you don't want to have imposing risks on you. A part of "who you want to be associated with"... includes that element in living with yourself... which is a lot easier if you don't allow others to dictate the conflicts that rule your life... but exercise choice in avoiding others who impose problems you don't need.