|
Please do not be scared away by unfinished theories. If the
conclusion is missing you may be unaware of where I am heading
especially with provocative subjects.
Details coming...
- The concept of equilibrium makes it unnecessary to pay for
financial advice. Every such book, magazine, or newspaper is
woefully outdated. You can probably make more money by doing
the opposite!
- Five (5) minute correction theory: The market incorporates
any news into the stock price within 5 minutes/
- Financial planning in the sense of asset allocation is
worth every penny.
- In choosing securities, you are more likely arrogant than
brilliant. Sorry.
- The stock market is unpredictable and any casual attempt
to predict it will be fruitless.
- Risk and return are inseparable, yet return is almost
exclusively focused on. Real money can be made by studying
the former, unless too many people heed this advice.
- Mutual funds under-perform the market by 0.7%! Buy index
funds instead which only under-perform the market by about
0.2%! (The reason is transaction costs)
- Following my advice will redirect your investing hours
into activities that are far more productive.
- Transaction costs are appreciable.
- Talking about stocks is tantamount to discussing churning
Bingo balls. (Humble opinion)
Opening your own business will likely
be a losing enterprise:
Ave NI for sole proprieterships in
America is $6,200. 25% make no profit in a year. 42% of
partnerships, and 45% of Corporations. p232 MND
http://www.statcan.ca/english/ads/11-010-XPB/nov97.htm
(description of Self-employed Canadians) "Earnings" and "Push
and pull"
Median SE vs EM'd made 68.5% of other.
Work harder...more responsibility, risk, etc.
Rather, it appears that most were drawn
by its many positive aspects, including added independence, the
opportunity to run the family business or because they believed
they could make more money.
"Critical Faults of the Current Religious
Tolerance Movement "
Date: December 29th, 2002
Abstract:
Body: So often nowadays it is heard, probably for the the
first time in the history of man, "I am tolerant toward your religion
or set of beliefs." The mood after September 11th really brought that
point home in hearing staunch Christians say that despite fanatical
Muslims perpetrating ghastly acts of terror they still 'tolerated'
Islam. This is a welcome break from the past and even the present in
some countries and regions where religious tolerance must still emerge
from religious hatred.
It accessing my relationship with those who do
not share my religious convictions, while I don't feel that I am
better (or more 'saved') than anyone I do feel a certain mistrust. Now
I use mistrust because it is purposefully too strong, but it will help
to illustrate a point.
How can someone who goes to church religiously
every Sunday and has a personal relationship with her Creator, look
with eyes of true non-judgment and love upon someone from a different
faith. If she's current on political correctness she will quickly
remark that she is tolerant of others' beliefs...but what does this
mean? Can she be sincerely tolerant toward Wiccans or Pagans if she
has no idea what they believe? Does tolerant mean that if they don't
bother her then she won't bother them?
This shift from overt antagonism to private mistrust is
reminiscent of the treatment of blacks in the United States. Whereas
in the past it was acceptable to publicly vent racial feelings, such
behavior now is deprecated...which has led to these thoughts being
held surreptitiously. Which is worse, a restaurant owner saying "we
don't serve n-----s" or dealing with someone who secretly harbors and
acts upon such discrimination? Personally, while both scenarios are
reprehensible, one is being open and honest (about his obviously
misguided feelings) while the other is caving to societal pressure and
acting deceptively.
Conveying your religious tolerance while subscribing to
a religious philosophy that reserves a warm place for infidels is
tantamount to hypocrisy. When we explore deeper we inevitably ask,
'what exactly are we tolerant of?' I don't believe that we can be
tolerant of beliefs that we know nothing about. If there is a
religious sect that believes that terrorism is the solution to the
troubles in the world am I insensitive not to be tolerant of these
folks? I don't think so. There are however many commonalities between
the major religions and such can form a basis for sincerely valuing
someone else's beliefs. Tolerance without knowledge is prejudice--an
act of prejudging a group without exploring their beliefs and tenets.
When I hear agnostics or atheists say that they don't
believe in God, but have nothing against those who do, it makes me
wonder. Aren't they thinking...wow, those religionists, wasting their
time and energy worshiping something that can't even be perceived by
the senses...what nuts? So this tolerance seems to b not much more
than...'feel free to worship whatever rubbish you want, just leave me
alone.' Are these the private thoughts of agnostics and atheists?
Only by learning about the belief or non-belief
sets of others can we really be tolerant. Only when we appreciate
their faith: their understanding of the Creator, their love for the
Message Bringer, and their thoughts on the meaning of life and the
spirit, can we realize those similarities that we share and identify
commendable factors of their faith. Only when we humble ourselves and
our understanding of the Truth, and genuinely explore the beliefs of
others, can we say we are tolerant.
The first step in understanding another's
religion is at least temporarily assuming that their Manifestation of
God (Prophet, Messenger) was indeed from God. We can then begin
testing the fruits of his message: 'How does the scripture compare to
today's understanding and science?' Have.... toleration must be turned
into appreciation. involves effort and knowledge.
Conclusion:
|
