Page 2 of 3 <123>
Topic Options
#53998 - 05/06/11 10:48 AM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Hegesias]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



The pragmatic, for me, basically means assessing and calculating the probable or exact effect or consequences of an action, potentially every action.

This is a valuable way of thinking or being, as the calculation and prediction of effects means far more effective and comprehensive manipulation.

It also tends to lead too more accurate long term planning and the greater probablility of achieving the end game, where one effect after another must be correctly predicted.

Very valuable for a Satanist I think. One of the arts of the puppet master.

Top
#54035 - 05/06/11 09:21 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Hegesias]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
 Originally Posted By: Hegesias
In general, "utilitarian" refers to a pragmatic view. Philosophical utilitarianism, however, is a broader view encompassing people's lives who seek "happiness". And what is happiness it if it not seeing ones will achieve what it sets out to do. The trouble with utilitarians is that they seek comfort and call this "happiness", making the best from an unfortunate situation rather than to create new opportunities. In looking at things this way we can see there is a distinction.


As I see it, our sense-experience or intellection alone are not enough. If we wish to sound the bottomless abyss of conventional Reality, the higher stages of Mind must be added not mechanically or quantitatively but chemically or qualitatively. When we hear a bell or see a bird flying, we must do so by a conscious Mind. Once the bell rings or the bird flies, they are already in the world of the senses which means that they are differentiated. The acts are subject to intellectual analysis and synthesis which means that "the originality" has been adulterated, and "the full moon" of Mind as seen by certain skalds and bards are now thickly veiled with threatening clouds. Mind is synonymous with the Self.

 Originally Posted By: Hegesias
Slave morality, is fearful, uncertain of themselves, slaves choose to be victims to play inhumane sympathy games. Slave morality is timid, and favours a limited existence; it makes the best of a bad situation. The great man creates his own morality, a higher morality which is life-affirming.


To add supporting comments from the intellectual point of view, scenes of enthrallment are those familiar to our daily lives. We generally pass them by without finding anything significant. Indeed, our daily experiences are as they are, but we fail to recognize the fact because we "lack" something which enables us to understand the meaning of the aphorism: "Only The Pure Shall Enter." If this be a maxim that is applicable across the board, as long as we remain intellectuals we have no means of escaping a vicious, downward spiral.

 Originally Posted By: Hegesias
I have always believed a noble life lies in freedom, no remorse, with loyalty to ones high ideals. One draws rational thought and action in dire situation as it were, and is, mundane, this indifference is level-headedness and maybe indifference was a much too ambiguous term for me to use. There is a line between being passively apathetic and being cold-blooded dispassionate and rational.


We are all to a certain degree a philosopher, a (anti-)moralist, and the spiritually disposed. But, some of you are not strongly inclined to become either one of them. You cannot all be philosophers, but some of you like to approach great problems of Life with an intellectual frame of Mind. While their are even people that are not able to pursue the problems with sufficient vigor and logical acumen, they attempt to begin along the philosophical line. With more emotional people the procedure is different, they seek at once a religious leader and listen to his advice. They do not reason much, they just feel that they must do something to save themselves otherwise their Fall is imminent. Such have no time to use their reason legitimately and patiently. They become devotional followers of the godhead or satanhead. Which side are you on?

I have a tremendous grasp of all sides of theism and non-theism.

Old-Scratch...The-Infernal-One
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#54193 - 05/09/11 01:13 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: paolo sette]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
So many replies:

About the group. I believe the inferior do not understand the value of the group.

An example I use is an investment: a $10k investment might yield a 10% return. But there might be a better investment that yields a 15% return but needs 100k minimal. If 10 people come together and put their resources together they each individually can attain a 15% yield rather than a 10%. It is not because they are weak that they come together. It is because they are stronger as a group.

In most realms of life it is the same. I have usually been smarter, stronger and harder working than others around me yet they have easier lives simply because they have groups looking out for their interest.

I also noticed that pretty much all elites, wealthy and powerful people are part of groups, societies, networks etc.

Yes if a weak or non-altruistic person is in the group they simply burn the group's energy. That is why we measure character and exclude those people who are not contributing to the group's well being.

What if someone wants to ignore me? Then I don't care about them. I don't waste my energy thinking about them. I am only interested in meeting the few people who are like me, have similar goals and will work together with me. If someone isn't interested in what I'm dong I don't worry about them. If someone is interested but incompatible I simply tell them I don't think they would be useful in my group.

also:

I seek power. Wealth is one aspect of power. Power is the ability to satisfy the will (a person's desires). Which is not always an easy or comfortable life. Some people *will* a challenging life, or other such things.

I actually believe in a modified form of Nietzsche. What I think he was getting at is a "will to be". The tree wills itself to be a tree, according to its inherent nature. Most healthy life forms preserve their own existence with a "will to be" they avoid death and seek to procreate for example. The will to power is actually the will of the over-man which is a higher level of will to be. The will to power is a desire for constant self improvement, constant empowerment. Which is the satanic principle.

The key is a defective mind will desire and *will* defective things, a healthy mind will desire good things that lead to actual fulfillment and happiness. This is the role of religion and spirituality (to perfect one's desires and understanding of the world). Anyone who does not desire to be happier, healthier, stronger is not an over man and has an insufficient will to power. He simply wills to be. Such as people have a will to be a loser.

Right now though my goal is to increase power. As said of course a person with a defective mind when given more power will only harm himself more. A good person will do more good with power and bad person more bad. A self destructive person will destroy himself more with power etc.

So power alone is not always good, unless you have a reasonably healthy spirit. I believe my spirit is healthy. I hate being weak and powerless, poor, at the bottom of the social scale etc. and desire to move up. The easiest way to do this is team work.




Edited by Thule (05/09/11 01:17 PM)
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#54199 - 05/09/11 01:38 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Thule
The easiest way to do this is team work.


I always say this too. As long I'm in charge of the team.

Much of what you say here isn't indicative of someone whose interests lie in the ideologies of the power of the individual (which is what Satanism is about).

Once in my life I had aspirations of starting businesses with other people, and actually have done some 'team' projects, but soon learned that without a strong lead these things often fail.

Right now I am developing a business to eventually replace my 9-5. I have clients, goals, etc and all are of my own making. To me, team = compromise and I can't live with that. My wife has a beauty business that is going very well. She is the reason for that, her hard work and uncompromising standards have brought that about. When I do work for the salon (books, etc), I work for her... she's the boss. We have a 'team' of people around us (CPA, Lawyer, Agent, etc) but we call the shots, my wife for her business and me for mine.

If I needed to raise cash for something like your above illustration, my default position would be to broker the deal instead of trying to assemble a bunch of equal partners.

And finally about groups helping people. It's been my practical experience that if one of our clients is particularly happy with service they get from us they tell their friends. When their friends experience the same, they tell their friends and so forth. In this way one becomes part of a network that is valuable. It doesn't have to originate from a group who comes together and decides to do something. Be excellent and provide excellent service and/or work and other excellent folk will notice.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#54207 - 05/09/11 03:28 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Fnord]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I “cooperate'” with some in a side-business and this only functions because there are only two in control. All the rest do what they need to do. This duumvirate only works because we know each other well, have respect, and realize that if one fucks the other, the other fucks him back quite hard.

Groups with too many members all having control simply don't function well. There's always one the dumbest, laziest or greediest, and sooner or later, this will compromise the group.

There is surely power in groups and one can accomplish much but it is rare to find those you can fully depend upon. It is much easier having a hierarchical group where each has his position and where you preferably are on top, or someone you think deserves to be there.

D.

Top
#54275 - 05/10/11 04:13 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Diavolo]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
Everything involves small groups where everyone knows everyone else that is the nature of the structure. It must be a group of all leaders. I am about increasing my own power as much as possible. That involves groups. I'm sure I can grab a gun and stand before an army of 50,000 people and think how great it feels to be in control- until I get shot down dead.

Freedom comes from power. Power comes from team work. People who think they are in control but alone are not.

99% of people I probably don't want to work with. That is why we evaluate people's character and only work with the initiated. Information and membership is not public, but I need to go in public to find potential candidates.

Let's use an example: if I have a team and someone tries to rob me the team can physically go after them. I don't count on the police, santa claus, jesus or superman to protect me. Actually one of our members should be a lawyer, a police officer etc. ideally.

I'm not a slave to this team, they aren't a slave to me. They simply work together out of self interests.

And again with business. One may be a lawyer, another a real estate broker etc. all working together in a business deal out of self interest.

If all people need to be chief and in control very little gets done. People should be able to show a degree of politeness, civility etc.

What I see that makes my philosophy satanist is-

dedicated to constant self improvement, dedicated to increasing ones personal power, dedicated to cultivating leadership and predator instincts, but also very team oriented because of the benefits of team work. Yet if no one is of good enough quality for my group I carry on by myself. The group is not a crutch for personal weakness. It is a tool to sharpen one's own blade with.




Edited by Thule (05/10/11 04:14 PM)
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#54279 - 05/10/11 04:45 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
There can not be a group of all leaders because what a leader does is lead. Every group requires a hierarchy to function well. Hierarchy is not a choice, it is a fundamental part of us, we humans are like many other animals hierarchical in our social structures. I know that in Satanism it is popular to consider us all as individuals, alphas and that our only position in any hierarchy is at the top. I disagree with that and think that any group benefits most when the hierarchy is defined according the skills required for the goals of that group. And believe it or not but we are not always the best in everything and as such, may gain more when tolerating someone more skilled above us.

A group of all leaders is just as dysfunctional as a group of all followers. The first goes everywhere, the second nowhere.

D.

Top
#54321 - 05/11/11 11:51 AM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Diavolo]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
I don't think so. Groups of leaders do exist. I would say it is most apparent in Jewish circles. We can also see the UN as another example.

I agree though the inferior usually want to think of themselves as *the best* and don't see the benefit of being beneath people (or group work in general). Every ghetto rat thinks he is a "playa" with the utmost confidence in his ability, when in reality he is a total loser. It is his inability to assess his own weakness that leads to his failure! Those willing to submit their own egos at the door often accomplish more.

One of the few quotes that I really like to take from the Satanic Bible:

To be able to adjust one’s wants to one’s capabilities is a great talent, and too many people fail to realize that if they are unable to attain the maximum, “a half a loaf can be better than none.” The chronic loser is always the man who, having nothing, if unable to make a million dollars, will reject any chance to make fifty thousand with a disgruntled sneer.

One of the magician’s greatest weapons is knowing himself; his talents, abilities, physical attractions and detractions, etc., and when, where, and with whom to utilize them! The man with nothing to offer, who approaches the man who is successful with grandiose advice and promise of great wealth, has the alacrity of the flea climbing up the elephant’s leg with the intention of rape!

-----------
Hierarchy exists when there is inferiority in a person. True democracy only exists among a group of equals. The whole concept of western freedom is based on the satanic enlightenment and a human's ability to chose and lead himself.

Let's use bees or ants. We say there is a "queen" this is only protected because it breeds, not because it is giving orders. There is no high command. They all work together as a team. This is why they are the most successful insects.

In a similar way I might protect a child or a brother not because he gives me orders but because it is in mutual interests to protect each other. A leader *thinks* and a leader takes *responsibility* all of us can do this.

I need people who I can count on to make good decisions on their own. Not people who I need to supervise constantly. That is the difference between a group of leaders. Anybody not doing their job correctly will simply be removed from that job.

It is the same way I can buy 10 stores and hire someone to run each one. We have 10 leaders working together. The stores might help each other, but they aren't taking orders from each other.

Similarly with humans those who need to be "told what to do" are weak. Someone who similarly needs to kick others down and boss them around is also weak. We shouldn't need such things.

What a leader does is lead- I lead my own life. My partner leads their life. Yet the world is always full of compromise. I can't go around killing people for example. Why? Because in order to live in a society I must respect certain rules and needs of others. Similarly within the context of the group I must give weight to the considerations of others, but this does not deprive me of the ability to lead and make decisions.

Within this group ideas bounce off of each other. Each one is *thinking* planning and *leading* but within the context of consideration for others, intelligent conversation, and reaching a group consensus where necessary.

It is not needed that all satanists feel this way or that all people believe this. It is only needed that the people on *my team* believe this and operate this way.

We believe altruism is one of the highest marks of a civilized person and a sign of superiority. Only we define altruism differently. Altruism is team work, consideration of others. Most people today think altruism is taking responsibility for failures (such as feeding the poor) we don't believe that. We are not ashamed of doing better than others and have no problem letting other people fail or die on their own. Yet at the same time we are not destructive and causing any of the harm. We are also capable of working together ourselves.


Edited by Thule (05/11/11 11:59 AM)
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#54323 - 05/11/11 12:03 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I hardly think the social structure of a bee-hive resembles human hierarchy. Will to Power implies each living “unit” will maximize its influence upon its environment. This is evidenced quite well in human affairs. As such, democracy, true or not, egalitarianism and non-hierarchical groups are fantasies based upon a misunderstanding of human nature, or even the nature of life.

This doesn't imply people can't function without clubbing the weaker but it does imply there will always be a hierarchy and if not, one will be established in time. Will to Power will always find a way to fill that vacuum.

Groups of leaders is simply socialism at a different level.

D.

Top
#54337 - 05/11/11 02:22 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Diavolo]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
Human organization and relationships are complex and probably there will be various roles. But it is not the master-slave kind of hierarchy one might imply. We can compare the relatively free United States to perhaps some Feudal system. Both have hierarchies and social organization, but one promotes an atmosphere of leadership, a freedom, a will to power etc. another doesn't.

It's about tribalism.

If someone was far inferior to me I would not tolerate them in the group. Similarly if someone was extremely superior to the point that we are incompatible they would not be in this group. We must be essentially the same species. The group is about being homogenous- similar and united with the same basic goals and culture.

Most people can't operate like bees. That's why we are a different species from most. We believe in inherent differences between people, their cultures and so on.

We believe that attitude of always wanting to be on top is inefficient. Most people would rather be the king of a pile of sh*t than at the bottom of a group of millionaires (this has been proven through studies). We hold to the Jewish maxim "better to be at the tails of lions than the head of sheep"

We don't compare ourselves to others. We don't need "inferiors" to look down upon to feel good about ourselves. That is the attitude of the loser. The loser must drag everyone into the sh*t with him in order to feel better by comparison. The average person looks at the bum down the street and feels superior by comparison. Instead we look at those above us and say "we must compete with that" we seek constant self improvement and minimal standards (not in comparison to others, but in comparison to an absolute standard of ability and conduct).

That's the whole source of weakness in the world- the human desire to be on top of others. That's the whole source of socialism (make everyone around you weak so its easier to master them rather than improve yourself).

For example: in modern society most people are either givers or takers. Either cattle or people sucking the blood from cattle. This is what we call "corruption" because very little energy is used to actually produce anything.

Most people spend their time "watching their back" against the takers, scam artists, abusers etc. in society. This energy can better be used producing wealth/power.

Most third world nations have high corruption. There you will find the predators with the sharpest claws. Yet people who cooperate more are actually stronger than those who spend all their time trying to dominate or scam their neighbor.

A rising tide raises all ships so to speak.

The goal is not to be either a giver or a taker but rather altruistic- a team player. This is maintained through exclusivity. Those who do not conform are removed from the group.

I guess if you are already rich and have an easy life you don't need this philosophy. But I've always lived a hard life.

I see that wherever people are most aggressive I see the worst ghettos. It's dog eat dog in the ghetto and low classes, yet go among the rich elite of the world and they are part of cooperative societies, polite etc.

The thing about Marxists is they see their neighbor is living better than them so they think if they can burn down their neighbor's home they will look better by comparison.

Myself I don't care about my neighbor, I care about having a nicer home myself. So that is where this is not socialist at all. Nothing exclusive can be considered socialism. It is more elitism.

To build a better home myself I work together with people, but only those of the proper quality to associate with me.
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#54339 - 05/11/11 03:08 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Hierarchy doesn't need to be despotic. A good hierarchy implies each at their natural position in the ranks. Of course most of human society isn't exemplary for this. Every time we participate in any human structure, we are a part of a hierarchy. Of course in human affairs it is defined by wealth, status, power... etc. But never, in any system on the world, is there no hierarchy. Even freedom does not come for free.

The human desire to be on top isn't the source of weakness as it is the very drive that made us what we are. Of course we can look at it as a simplistic emotional urge we follow but deep down, like all animals, we just act according our Will to Power. That is the inherent drive and it translates into many different behaviors, some horrible, some pathetic, some marvelous.

I understand your desire to financially improve but instead of waiting for a group to form around you, which probably won't happen spontaneously, you should look around and realize there is plenty of money to be made for those willing or daring. In that might be your ticket to improvement.

D.

Top
#54345 - 05/11/11 09:36 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
 Originally Posted By: Thule
So many replies:

About the group. I believe the inferior do not understand the value of the group.


I have a story for you:

A person once, a long time ago, incurred the displeasure of another who had the ability to imprison this individual in his straw-thatched, bamboo enclosure which was the only place he called home. As he found out, he began studying different philosophies and discovered one which propelled and engrossed his mentation. When he was released from his straw-thatched, easily destroyed, make-shift home years later, he began to practice his philosophy with religious zealots.

He allowed a well-respected, dignitary of the philosophy he had been so intently studying all these years into his "group".

This flagrant person was known for the physical abuse of followers or constituents who accepted whatever kind of abuse the higher-up could dish out. The person who had been studying all these years was given a delicate task: interpret important documents to the burgeoning philosophy. When he came to the dignitary to present his view, the luminary said nothing and pummeled the newcomer hard on his head. This naturally angered the tenderfoot to be treated in such a fashion.

The strict student that was looking for acknowledgement to be a teacher was dismayed, he could not suffer such an indignity that was considered by others as shameful.

He wanted to cut the insolent person's head off with a sharp blade, but a friend quietly said: "Even if you cut his head off, it will not do any good to either of you. From the first, he had no idea of his-Self: he is doing all for the sake of the newfound, perspicuous Mind-set."

Advice: Sever by hewing the individuals who do not come to the "group" with the agreement of your hoary, ideational interests. I have.

Old-Scratch
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#54360 - 05/12/11 10:57 AM Re: Pragmatism [Re: paolo sette]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
I would suggest with reference to groups and leaders and followers, that it is simply wrong to think that a group of leaders can exist in any real way. In the UN, people that are leaders in other contexts, become followers quite rapidly. It's not having a group or think yourself superior that allows a person to assume power. Power is actually extremely easy because NO ONE REALLY WANTS POWER.

Yes, that even includes most of us, if we have the courage to be honest. Because the the reality of power is that if you have power, you have responsibility (they are exactly the same thing) and if there is blame - it is entirely the responsible person's fault.

And if it is your fault, you DO NOT GET TO BE RIGHT ABOUT IT. No, people that have power - they are always wrong, because it's easy to be right from a position of no responsibility and no power.

In any group there is only one person that has actual power, and you know who that is because they have the most responsibility.

This make believe fairy tale that "we can all be leaders!" - that's the bed time story of a SLAVE that refuses to accept what they are and chooses to bullshit themselves rather than do anything real about it.

This site, in my opinion, is not valuable for it's community in such a way that helps any one of us get done what we would not get done otherwise. Here we all have big egos and believe "it's my way or the highway". We don't cooperate, many of us, because we're attached to the idea of 'leading' even if that's not what we're doing. So all of us really, the path of least resistance is to be alone, to work alone. And to produce results alone, so everyone else has that critical freedom to doubt and so more easily believe themselves better than everyone else.

That's here, Occult orders have hierarchies and force upon members roles of submission and servitude. And the reality is that most of us with a natural innate ability to dominate also often contain a need/desire to submit, human being is complex that way.

Are groups valuable? Yes they are. And if you take yourself away from a context of big egos - you may find that simply being willing to take on responsibility, and doing that job well - it effortlessly allows you to assume roles of power. And if you are supportive and helpful to people under you - it's not uncommon they will worship you like a GOD. But the equation is leader plus followers.

Which is not to say most of the folks here are not followers. But y'all are followers that follow very poorly because you're uncomfortable with the role. Which makes you worthless if you produce nothing of value on your own.

Top
#54363 - 05/12/11 11:35 AM Re: Pragmatism [Re: myk5]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
I already explained my points so I don't want to continually repeat the same thing. I also don't want to appear like I'm trying to force my beliefs on anyone else. There are many good points here but none of them will convince me against the value of team work.

Of course different people "shine" in different environments. I would not consider one life path to be the best for all people. It has been my observation though that generally the most successful people have strong families, good social skills, members of various social clubs and private communities etc.

I think true power comes from within. A wolf will always be a wolf even when chained down by others. And it is this "wolf" characteristic that I speak of when being a leader.

The best teachers are also learners. The best leaders also followers. It all depends on the context. I may lead someone else today and he may lead me tomorrow depending on who is best suited to do so at the time. There is not a strict hierarchy. If someone doesn't want to lead or doesn't want power, again they would not be in the group. It's a different reality when something is exclusive and with minimal standards of qualification.

I see power as being able to get what I want/need. Not as exactly control or dominance over others. So I have a different world view. If I have no power than I have failed. If I grasp power then I have a chance at success.

I always get the same reply from losers "why try we will just fail anyway" and "don't do that it's too risky". Well if you don't try you are 100% guaranteed to fail and not get what you want. If you try and fail then at least you did your best. It isn't productive to talk about the possibility of failure. It is only productive to do everything possible to succeed and make no excuses not to. At least that's my attitude.

About money:

I am doing everything I can reasonably do. This is why I'm going to college and working towards a college degree despite the difficulty given my poverty. So once I have my degree I should be able to land a descent paying job, live cheaply and invest.

I'm also well educated in investments and I have connections who have knowledge in offshore banking and other matters.

But I also am working on joint investment projects and building up my group.

I do not sit back and wait for other people to join me before I can do something. I do everything I can, part of that though involves actively looking for others.

But I don't do this by trying to convert others to my point of view. I simply look for others who already think like I do and are looking for the same thing so that we can quickly work together and accomplish things together.

There are maybe 10 people in the groups outer edge but only 2 core members as of now. Simply by finding 1 person like me I have been able to be 10 times more effective. We have shared all the most effective magick techniques and other knowledge we learned and we work together effectively in accomplishing goals. Likewise we can specialize in different areas of expertise.

I have never felt a need to control him nor him me. I always found that strange when I deal with people in the outside world, they see their own success somehow in being able to put down others, tell them what to do etc. I find that inferior in my own eyes.



Edited by Thule (05/12/11 11:43 AM)
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#54369 - 05/12/11 12:35 PM Re: Pragmatism [Re: Thule]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Going to college is not bad and getting a degree might land you a good job but there are many people going to college for years, getting their degree, and spend a lot of years gathering money to pay back those debts. If you count the years in college as “missed income” and add to that the amount of debt build, many start with a huge disadvantage.

Another option is going to work directly. You might not make a tremendous amount of money being unskilled but if you're smart and have the right drive, you'll quickly develop your skills and move further in life. Many in the world of labor are those that left school because they didn't have the required intellectual skills to do higher studies. Those that are intelligent in that environment have a huge advantage. I'm a contract whore and while I have no fancy job title to boast about, as many of my former schoolfellows, I do make more money than most. Of course I'm only working for the money.

The thing is, if you're just going to get a job and save some here and there, you might do fine but you'll likely never do more than that. Gathering great money, most of the time, will require taking a risk. All you have to decide is how much is worth what risk.

D.

Top
Page 2 of 3 <123>


Moderator:  SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.