Due to a lack of better Chess-related discussions, I am opening this thread again to discuss the recent events that happened in the last couple of days! As you all know, Magnus Carlsen has won his FIFTH Rapid World Championship and his SEVENTH Blitz World Championship in which the latter just finished a couple of hours ago. This feat is nothing but greatness due to the fact that there is a lot of strong players that participated in these matches. I really thought that Artemiev would have won the Blitz section given that he was in the lead the whole tournament but Magnus was able to get a 6 win streak which skyrocketed him to the top. From both the Rapid and the Blitz Championship, Magnus lost only ONCE against MVL in the blitz section. What are your thoughts on this? I personally think that Magnus is the undisputed GOAT of Chess with these accomplishments. Now that Alireza has qualified for the candidates, will we see Magnus attempt at the World Classical Chess Championship next year? 
Image taken from: https://www.chess.com/news/view/2023-fide-world-rapid-chess-championship-day-3-carlsen-wins To many like me longevity is going to be a massive factor in determing the GOAT status of a chess player. And while Carlsen is definitely a GOAT in his own right, I still don't think he would hold a candle against Kasparov's decades upon decades of being at the top of the leaderboards with no real competition until the boy wonder. Even now he's still showing his GOAT status despite the fact that he retired from playing competitively a long time ago. Goes to show just how awesome the guy is. Carlsen is one of the greats and we cannot understate that. His ability to just fuck the whole board with variations from theories, but as I said earlier, he has to stay in the top of the leaderboard with a 2900 ELO rating for a long-ass amount of time before I even consider him better than Kasparov or something. Cause if we're only going for the basis of who beats who then that means Niemann's better than Carlsen lol. |
|
|
|
I was in argument with someone. His view is that people who gamble are those that what they have is not sufficient for them and so they try to make more money from gambling. He said if you have sufficient money to take care of your needs that you won't think of gambling. He made reference to some rich people, who don't gamble because they have sufficient money to even gift to charity but that those rich who still gamble are only addicted to it not just because of the money. Therefore, that the percentage of the rich gambling is very small compared to those in middle class and lower class.
So my question is, is the percentage of the rich gambling lower than the middle and lower class?
There is truth to that statement. People with no financial literacy and those who have never really tasted the finer things in life think money could grow from trees and so they gamble in hopes of getting the chance to earn a lot of money in a short amount of time. Of course there's also the desperation factor where people who got nothing to depend on, couldn't get a job and couldn't find ways to earn money at least in the legal sense resort to gambling in hopes of earning a quick buck. The only thing quite wrong about his statement is that he supposes that Rich people do not gamble wherein the first place, they are the ones who spend the most money gambling. But the thing is that Rich people gamble to flex or to pass the time, they don't gamble because they want more money. If they want more money they could gain it from other means. Everyone can gamble but particularly those who are under the poverty line fall victim to gambling for money tactics. They think they can earn money from gambling when the fact of the matter is, they would gain nothing from it. |
|
|
|
Every story you tell someone can either be a motivation or something to get them depressed. I have been thinking about this and I'd like to pass this advice to every serious gambler in this platform who has won a substantial amount of money from gambling, not to share their success story about winning to everyone and in every place. You do not know the story of every gambler, and on the face some gamblers may just look alright but in deep down they are in debt, some depressed due to addiction to gambling that is destroying them and has made them plan to quit. Your success story when shared indiscriminately may trigger and motivate this addicted gambler battling to stop to want to keep gambling, having the believe that their time is close. Be careful who and where you talk about your success in gambling, you may just be encouraging an addicted gambler to continue.
Honestly speaking, I could care less if it demotivates them into gambling, In fact I hope they become disheartened. You might think I'm evil or whatever but the thing is that people who get disheartened quit from what they do. And if that's what it takes for them to finally quit chasing wins and their dreams of getting a financially full life from gambling their lives away, then I say so be it. Now it's a different story when they get encouraged or inspired to gamble even more, as I want as less people who are not for gambling to even explore the world of gambling if you know what I mean. We have a surplus of people here who are revenge gambling and at the same time those who are already on the verge of gambling addiction. If we let these people run around gambling and getting even more riled to gamble when they should've already stopped then the blame is indirectly put upon those who plants the idea of gambling to their minds. Plus from a safety standpoint, it doesn't make sense to brag about your winnings, you're attracting people who aren't supposed to know about your shit. |
|
|
|
|
It is a waste truly. But the thing is that it's kinda you're fault for holding on to these "bonuses" and supposing you could make something big out of them. They are handsome and all but at the end of the day, they aren't going to be enough to make you stay within a casino, let alone sustain your whole gambling journey which is what seems to be the thing you're looking towards here. At some point you will have to fund your own gambling indulges with your own money and if you couldn't, then perhaps it's time you look into other hobbies/pastimes cause gambling's not gonna be for you. I also think it's a little predatory to make people feel as if they're going to get something big out of their referral bonuses, as if to say that they can make a whole business/living out of it which they clearly cannot as it depends upon the health of the casino they are holding this referral campaign itself, as well as the eagerness of the people to join a casino they barely know in the first place.
|
|
|
|
I wish I could have posted this in a more better place but since the thoughts came from gambling addiction, I thought it wise to ask this question over here and I hope we can discuss and get this straight.
Just as the tittle already ask, I really want to know if people who are successful in gambling also seen as addicts because I believe for one to be successful in gambling or whatever they choose to do, there must be some good amount of time and effort invested in it as well as money and we know that a successful gambler must have invested both time, effort and even money to make any reasonable winning and these also are features of an addict as there are always excessive time spent on a betting site.
Now let's be sincere, will you also classify a successful gambler as an addict?
People on the pro scene especially those who play Poker couldn't really be considered as addicts, cause for one, they don't lose money when they play. Another factor that causes me to not think that they are addicts is the fact that they are sponsored by their team, and they have a real skill that brings them wins, which then in turn causes them to play more, gambling addicts on the other hand are inadvertently stuck in a perpetual loop of gambling and chasing after wins because they don't know how to stop, and they can't settle with the fact that they are not as skilled as they think they were, which turns into losses. Plus Poker Pros know when to stop, a lot of them take home their earnings and if they couldn't bag a win they know from the get go to stop from there and ensure that they don't incur any more losses. They instead go back to the drawing board, and practice more. You can't see this happening in games where there are many gambling addicts. |
|
|
|
|
I get that work can become so monotonous and boring at times but it doesn't warrant you to spend your hours that you're supposed to be spending working on something so trivial as gambling. First off, it's stupid. It's a terminable offence for one, are you saying you're going to put your job and financial security on the line for the sake of fulfilling your gambling desires. That's deranged and downright abominable if I do say so myself. I say don't make gambling such a big deal and only gamble when you really feel like it, not when you're bored or whatnot, and especially not when you're working.
Don't bring so much problem into your life than you can work with. If things go worse here you'd lose your job and at the same time you'd also become very addicted to gambling since you'd have no other thing to do but to gamble at this point in time. Make great use of your time and instead only gamble in certain occasions, not when you're on the job lmao.
|
|
|
|
This thought just crossed my mind after I dropped my comment on this board here some hours ago. I have tried to search for any related topic but have not gotten any results. Guys, if this topic has been discussed before, please do well to tag me while you also drop your opinions here. If the title is a bit tricky, then I will break it down. Gambling is for fun, and actually, if someone wants to have fun gambling, there is no way they can spend six hours gambling or even spend the rest of their day gambling. In my opinion, the more time one decides to spend on gambling, the more money they lose. For example, if I spend like one hour gambling and another gambler spends like six hours gambling, which one of us do you think will spend more money? So the question again is: how many hours do you gamblers think are more appropriate to spend while gambling? Some people will say that they will gamble for as long as their deposited money is still not exhausted, while others will say that they will gamble until their urge is satisfied. But I think that it will be exhausting to gamble for a very long time, like more than 6 hours, and it will also cause the gambler to lose more. I don't think I have gambled more than 2 hours without getting tired (not sure)  . I have not actually checked my gambling strength to know how long I can last while gambling; now that I have thought of it, I will try it. I assume it's no longer Christmas Day, so happy World Boxing Day, guys. I myself don't spend as much as an hour when I gamble. For the most part I only spend as much as 40 minutes when I gamble. I make it a point to not let gambling become a bigger part of my life, so I never oblige myself to gamble on a schedule, nor on a specific time frame. When you start scheduling and making time for when you gamble, you're already setting your priorities straight, and unless you're a recovering gambling addict I don't recommend this as this will only link you with gambling even further, until such a point arrives where you can't get away from gambling because it's already become a part of your life. Gambling occasionally and sparingly should always be the thing you go for. Remember, gambling is nothing more than just a way for you to spend your money when you don't know what to do with it. When you make it an even bigger deal than it was supposed to be, problems will start to arise. |
|
|
|
Is it possible one can dodge KYC verification request after winning a big amount of money and decides not to withdraw a lump sum but bit by bit in smaller amounts. I have read many posts talking about how they wanted to withdraw the money they won but due to the amount they wanted to withdraw was big, they were asked pass kyc verification because they never did when they first registered.
There is the possibility but for me it all depends on which casino you're dealing with. There are casinos that will ask for KYC regardless of how much you're trying to withdraw, and there are some who right from the get-go (from sign up) will ask you to verify your identity. I think your solution per se to avoid verification is a little situational, and honestly if it takes me that much effort to just avoid it I'd rather have myself be verified and trusted by the casino instead of risking getting banned cause there are some betting and gambling sites out there that take a close look at your bets and make sure that you don't one up them in one way or another. Might as well just get yourself verified, or look for a reputable casino that doesn't require you to undergo KYC instead of going through so much trouble for a few minutes of letting the casino know who they are dealing with. There's a method to this madness and even I who hates beating around the bush understands how much important this is in the business side of things. Plus to top it all off, the prerequisite is already hard to achieve lol. "After winning a big amount" c'mon dude. |
|
|
|
People are thinking what's the best way to get rid of this blockchain network congestion. Network congestion is a problem for us because it affects the fee. The normal fee is just around $1 but this month we are experiencing a very high fee which is unaffordable to most people. We found out that the reason of this issue is because of brc-20 tokens, they use Bitcoin blockchain. And since Bitcoin's blockchain is only process 7-10 transactions per second which is not enough to manage all the transaction if we included the brc-20 tokens. Now, is the problem will be fixed if brc-20 tokens will be removed? Yes, very possible, but how? Brc20 tokens keeps improving and lot of brc20 token is being launch everyday. The total confirmed market cap of brc20 tokens that is listed in Coinmarketcap is $3b with a $1b trading volume which is very difficult to stop. The other solution to fix network congestion is to increase the block size. Is increasing the block size fix network congestion? Definitely yes, and there is no need to eradicate brc20 tokens. But in what way? Is it really possible to increase the block size of Bitcoin? For sure there's a reason why Nakamoto put only a very limited block size. I have found another solution to remove this obstacle in Bitcoin but I don't know if this idea is acceptable to the majority. If you remember what happen to Ethereum way back 2017, it encountered this such problem. They made Ethereum to POS from POW as a solution to this problem, and it's called ETH 2.0If there will be a Bitcoin 2.0 or a change of network from POW to POS then not only the network congestion is being fixed but many more, and also it can reduced the energy consumption. Honestly, I don't think the switch of consensus mechanism is going to do wonders for bitcoin. I mean there is a reason why all these years, bitcoin remained to be PoW instead of submitting to the Proof of Stake meta outside the bitcoin network. For one, networks like Ethereum are known to be very versatile and all-encompassing. You got an idea, Ethereum can make it work for you. So do other networks that popped into existence in the past few years. Bitcoin's not really known for this since besides the fact that it has a very low scalability propensity, it also doesn't have that extra capability to handle projects with innovative motifs in them. Prime example being Ordinals. Besides that, it would seem as though the whole network, developers and consumers like us included, made it a point to not actually use bitcoin for anything other than investing, trading, and sending money from far off lands. Nothing wrong with it honestly, but it would signify the lack of need for us to switch to PoS and jeopardize bitcoin's otherwise robust security just so it could cater to a wider audience. There are other ways we could integrate a solution that would make the bitcoin network faster and cheaper, employing a robust layer 2 off-chain that would facilitate transactions off the blockchain being one of the biggest examples I can think of right now. But if I were to rate consensus mechanism switch, I'd put it at the bottom of the solution's list. |
|
|
|
|
At first I was like "that mindset is what's going to get you one day" and after reading your story, while I still harbor the same feelings as before I kind of feel what you're trying to convey now. The fact alone that you trusted your friend with money that I don't think you just dilly-dallied to get is already something, for them to not get back on their words is definitely disappointing. But at least for me, I don't think you should be this disappointed to your bro since at the end of the day, the money that they borrowed is still yours, and you'd probably get it later eventually.
Just think of it this way, at the very least your friend owes you money that you don't even have to gamble for anymore. And while it could've helped increase your gains from when you're all-in-ing in your gambling spree I would say the situation could've been different my friend, so be careful about that. I guess we just have to be very happy about what we have, and not attribute to malice what we could attribute to incompetence.
|
|
|
|
Ok, let's forget Binance withdrawal fees. If I want to make transactions from the ledger, then the transaction has to arrive in 15 minutes. I am pretty sure if I want to ensure the time frame, then I have to spend similar fees, even from Ledger. So it's become hard to pay $17 transaction fees to make a $50 deposit. And by force, I had to use a virtual card that doesn't cost anything (I didn't notice any significant fees) and was an instant transaction as well. It made me believe that we are drifting away from Bitcoin's original goal in some way.
To some extent what you say is true. If the classical system is able to compete with Bitcoin in terms of transfer speed and fees, then Bitcoin will lose its position. Bitcoin community is confident that this is periodic and it will pass, meaning that the situation is not permanent as has happened throughout the history of Bitcoin, and this is actually what is supposed to happen. Most of us still believe this, if my estimates are not wrong, given that this is not a new event. Our assessment of things will not remain the same if the network continues as it is today. The thing is that it is periodic, so it will pass but this will resurface again some time in the future, where we got a new generation of bitcoin enthusiasts complaining about bitcoin's slow transaction fees yet again. It has become annoying and depressing at this point honestly. It's like we don't have a say in bitcoin's future, and all that we can really do at this point is deal with all of bitcoin's shortcomings instead of complain about it to the devs until they find a solution. I know the solution we're looking for that could solve this conundrum's a little major, as it would require an upgrade in the scalability features of bitcoin to help support a larger client base but at the same time, if we're looking at bitcoin and crypto in general as a long term industry and financial venture this is as great a time as any to actually integrate such solutions. We wait a little bit longer and we'll lose credibility and trust from those who waited for so long. |
|
|
|
As the gambling industry is evolving, I think innovations would have kicked in that can make someone create a career from gambling. I do not know how this can be achieved but I feel it is possible.
Making gambling a full time job might be seen as risky but I still feel one can make gambling full time job and a career.
What do you all think?
If you're talking about making a killing while you're gambling with money, then I have bad news for you. No one was ever able to make a safe income stream just from gambling, besides those in the Pro Scene, and some of them are sponsored by their teams and endorsements in the first place, so the money that they got isn't even from gambling per se. You could look into being a gambling streamer like TrainWrecksTV but I wouldn't advise it as he's often seen spending upwards of a million dollars in and out of stream, just from gambling alone. So from there you'd realize you're going to be in a really precarious gambling addiction situation if you were to take this path. You can also look into working for a casino, but it has its own sets of caveats as well, like dealing with the constant suicide attempts of most of your patrons for one. |
|
|
|
|
If blackrock goes so far as to acquire all bitcoins on the market right now including those that are still unmined, the whole industry will collapse but not for the reasons they state. If anything I think the whole industry will do just fine soon as every bitcoin is mined and is acquired by the people, but having one entity, and a capitalistic enterprise for that matter take over the whole bitcoin network will leave bad taste in the mouths of the people, which would mean that we'd either leave the bitcoin industry, or we'd leave crypto for good cause if they could acquire the top dog there's no reason for them to not take over the rest. And while you guys may argue that ETFs are given publicly anyway, so it's not like they are acquiring bitcoin for themselves, it still is going to be the only thing that would pop into the people's minds when they hear about bitcoin ETF, and impressions last in this industry for a long long while.
Miners are gonna do just fine, that's for sure. I don't think the industry would do great if it gets ridden with companies from the outside market taking a stake out of what bitcoin could offer. Judging how we hate centralization in the first place, having someone take over the business is going to be the doom of this industry, but not in the "congestion blah blah" matter.
|
|
|
|
Short answer: they won't be able to afford things that GenXs and GenYs would be able to. House, Cars, heck I reckon most of them including those that live in the US will die paying off their student loans cause Gen Zs get paid shit, for jobs that give them the most stressful work profiles and settings. Most Gen Z people nowadays have to work 2-3 jobs just to get by. Not to mention the worsening state of the environment, microplastics in blood and in babies. We're literally at the end of times at this point. What I could advise those who are sadly in this position is to either look for high-paying careers instead of sticking to whatever they think is their forte, cause at this point in our lives you really have no choice if you want to live and survive. You also would need to look into ways to passively earn income like cryptocurrency, investing, or other ways. Right from when I read “internships or low paid job”, I started sensing that you may be siding with the way things were in the 1980. First, I’m not sure if the average gen z does internships. Second, what you wrote for gen z age 35 is really personal . Because why would you consider that the average gen z will divorce their partner? And then what you did again at age 50. In case you have forgotten, getting divorced started before gen z, low paying jobs were there too back in those days. In fact, if you speak to the grannies they will tell you how much suffering they went through. But today, we can see very young gen z making a lot of money. Aren’t they the ones cluttering the internet as influencers? There's a study that says the rate at which partners divorce are increasing every generation, so while the age itself isn't necessarily apparent, there is some truth to OP's statement. Plus Gen Zs do take apprenticeships/internships, but unlike back in the days where even if you don't get paid you get support in some way or another, all you get from modern internships now is nothing but a pat on the back and a certificate that says you're able to do the job. |
|
|
|
Without:
Charity, begging, illegal, stocks, trading.
Get a job lol. Charities don't give you money, they give you the opportunity you need to make money-grabbing easier. Begging is the same but only if you're willing to stoop so low for money lol, and besides, you don't earn enough money to make a living out of begging unless you integrate a little bit of syndication in it which is illegal. Stocks and trading are the same thing so that's out of the equation right now. Only thing out there for you really is to earn money through employment. So sign your resume up and find a job cause if you're that picky to look for a new way to earn money then that's the only option you have going for you. There's no such thing as instant money too, one of the biggest misconceptions about this industry is that you're going to earn instant money in the process and when they get hit with the realization that you're not gonna earn that much or that instantly, they quickly dip. |
|
|
|
Hi Everyone,  I have an online gambling related question. I don't know if this is the right place to post such a question, so I'm sorry if I posted in the incorrect forum. I'm a Gambling Affiliate and something is bothering for some time. In most of the casino affiliate programs that I registered to, I can make a little amount of money or nothing at all. Did anybody encountered a similar problem? Thanks, Idan That's the problem that I have with people who join affiliate programs, especially those related to gambling. They thought soon as they are joined to the roster they can start earning from the get-go. The thing is that you'd need to really put yourself out there and have people believe you can be trusted so they'd sign up under your name. And if you couldn't do that alone then you have your answer why your profits as an affiliate's not working as intended. Now, let's say you have a sizeable following and you are expecting a great deal of money coming your way, have you checked the terms and conditions of the affiliate program you just signed up for? Sometimes these casinos oblige their users to stay on a low-income setup for the meantime while their skills and efforts are tested, and this low-income setup could be the reason why you're not earning as much as you've expected. But affiliate programs like these are few and far between cause hello, this is not fair for the people who exert the effort to put themselves out there in the name of the casino they are advertising, so most likely you might wanna check the first reason I just stated. |
|
|
|
India is the new leader of the global south .... And a replacement for China ? China has recently started to openly surrender its position. both politically and economically. politics is not the place to discuss, but the economy leaves much to be desired. Although it is partly a consequence of politics ) But to the main point - in the "Global South" today there is a situation when yesterday's leader, China, can no longer fulfill this role (although it wants to), and no one can take this place except India, due to many reasons. At the same time, India looks much more attractive to the "Global West" than China, which has decided to go into a dictatorship inside, and has a rather dubious foreign policy. China has ceased to be a profitable global factory, plus purely political contradictions with the West. It was the outflow of Western investments, and the decline in demand of the Western market for products manufactured in China, that became the catalyst that accelerated the 3 processes: - Import growth - Reduced exports. - And as a consequence, a shrinking trade surplus. At the same time, a very complicated situation is brewing inside China with a chain of bankruptcies of budget-forming companies. Of course, China will hide it, but as they say "you can't cheat arithmetic, and 2+3 will never be 10". Another problem is the relocation of Western assembly sites from China. Large regional high-tech companies are also leaving Chinese sites - for example, Samsung. And guess where all this is moving to ? That's right - to INDIA ! Stable, predictable, adopting the Western vector of development, and moving away from contacts with "dubious countries". India does not "beat in hysterics of dedolarization", does not conduct dubious negotiations, and does not support economic terrorism of some other countries against the world economy. India benefits from stability, long-term mutually beneficial relations with the developed world, a well-deserved place in the world economy and financial system, and realization of its regional ambitions, which China is beginning to lose by failing to implement 2 projects: - "Yuanization" of the BRICS countries - An attempt to "put the same BRICS club members on the needle" of importing Chinese products. It was a poorly concealed but absolutely understandable attempt to save the economy, but ... What about India? A country with a huge territory and great human potential, developed industry, and long-established ties with the Western world. India has a very good education, and not a small middle class, with good education from western educational institutions. In India, stealing Western technology is not part of the economy as it is in China, for example. In terms of logistics to EU and African countries, India is more conveniently located. Plus in India there is no problem of population aging, which started to give itself in China "thanks to" the policy - "one family - one child". It is also worth paying attention to the IT market - it is perfectly developed in India and continues to compete with other markets. Plus - wiser, more balanced and liberal business policy is what China is losing and will not contribute to the free development of the economy. So the question is - what do you think about India's potential, opportunities and prospects, in light of the idea of India becoming at least the economical "Head of the Global South", and possibly "one of the poles of the world system" ? Highly unlikely, the thing is that India is good and all but it doesn't have the recipe to create an economy robust enough for it to topple China's powerful economy over. Let's just talk about hygiene and basic education, which in some parts of the country is still a foreign topic. China doesn't have this problem, for crying out loud they even have convoluting education systems that literally equip students with extreme levels of information, imagine going to school at 6 am and going home at 9 pm, 6 days a week. No wonder they are great at what they do. They also seclude their wealth within themselves, which is something that India doesn't do, they export, they outsource, elites in the country can transfer their wealth willy-nilly without having to go through extreme processes before they can even transfer a sliver of it out of the country. China has that up their sleeves which effectively also pumps the value of Yuan by a staggering amount. |
|
|
|
What would happen if all Bitcoin is mined and all Bitcoin is lost?
Bitcoin wouldn't be lost when every piece of it is gone you silly. Every coin up till now that is being used after all is primarily those that are mined in the past and is just passed down from one person to another, so the most sensible inference you can make out from this is that when all coins in the future are mined, either we get the full 21 million supply circulation or we get even more issues with how transaction fees and transactions are being taken care of in this network. Suppose that you have 10 kids, and you gave them shirts to wear, but they have to dig it inside their drawers first, once a day. Eventually all of their shirts will be drawn out of the drawers and they would've worn every shirt in there, but they can switch shirts, pass their shirts to another sibling, or perhaps even hoard all the shirts to become the most shirt-wealthy kid in the family. Economy will still commence and carry on even when all coins in the market are mined, that I can assure you my friend, so don't worry about it. |
|
|
|
|
The only thing that's expensive about bitcoin nowadays is its transaction fees lol. The reason why you think bitcoin is expensive is because you mainly assume that "buying" bitcoin, an investment tool, is more like buying stuff conventionally, which counts as an expenditure. And in that regard let me break that wrong preconception for you so you gain more confidence in making investment choices in the future, doesn't have to be bitcoin or whatever.
When you buy something like bitcoin, you don't just "buy them", and that's it. When you buy an investment, you don't generally buy them, you make them work for you. It's like sending your kid to school really, or hiring someone to do your work for you. Your kid does all the heavy lifting in school and graduates to provide himself a future that you can be proud of, you reap some of the benefits, and that's it. or in the case of the outsourced worker, you have him do your work for you so you can have more opportunities to earn money in other ways, he gets your job done and you get paid still.
Basically buying bitcoins or any investment for that matter doesn't just entitle you to a purchase, it entitles you to a better financial future that you can achieve soon as you make that choice. And for crying out loud, if you can spend hundreds of dollars a month paying for useless subscriptions I think you should be able to buy yourself a few bitcoins consistently lol.
|
|
|
|
With cases of failed marriages and an increasing population of youths without proper training and upbringing, it's sad to know that the root cause of it is mainly as a result of poor financial structure and plan before entering into marriage.
Setting up a system that is consistently bringing money before getting into marriage is almost as important as choosing who to get married to. as long as food and some basic needs of the children is not a problem, it's easy to tame your children to behave a certain way but if you lack the financial resource to taking care of your family, it's almost certain that you've lost your children to learning and depending more on others to meeting most of their needs which automatically defeat what ever moral you intend planting into their lives.
It's very necessary we educate ourselves and the younger ones coming behind us to take their financial life seriously before embarking into the journey of marriage, even the Bible that most religious people depends on for guidance strictly admonishes that "he that can not provide for his household is worse than an unbeliever" and so you understand how important your financial life his before thinking on settling down.
Your wife will in addition to the love you both shere , respect you the more if she knows that you've been very responsible when it comes to providing for the financial needs of the home and likewise, no man will want to loose A woman that support in providing for the needs in the home.
Don't be blended by love as a young person, their are times that love won't be enough to run a home and that's when factors like your financial strength can come through for you.
Being financially buoyant in marriage will even help you love your partner better so try and use your head.
I would agree with everything you said since at the end of the day, it always pays to be financially responsible in such a way that you're ensuring the stability of your finances before you even decide to settle down. The only thing that I couldn't really agree with is the fact that you're supposing as if your wife's not gonna be financially responsible in her own right as well, and not in a sense where "I'm gonna depend on her for shit" type. I mean in a way where she would also be partnering with you in ensuring that a safe financial future between the two of you is achieved, you feel me? She might get herself her own job and save her own money while chipping in on the family bank account, and I think that's okay as well. Ultimately you are right, it's better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener at war as they say, but it also helps to actually invest time in finding a responsible partner that you know's not gonna just be leeching off of your funding. Someone who's going to help you through and through. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
