JJG’s Outline of Bitcoin Investment Ideas

[Shaponzy]

Increasing aggressiveness does not come from discretionary income increasing, but instead choosing to invest higher amounts within the same income.

So for example, it could be argued that if a guy had weekly discretionary funds of $100, and he had been investing 33% or $33 into bitcoin each week, then I doubt that his aggressiveness had increased from the mere fact that his weekly discretionary income doubled and he also doubled his investment amount.  So if his discretionary income went up to $200 per week and he started to invest $66 per week into bitcoin, it seems to me that his level of aggressiveness is the same - 33%.

You are correct, and I can attest that alot of people usually uses the terms interchangeably, they do mixed being aggressive with more incomes, I see the agreesiveness as a rate not just an amounts, okay if we are to talk about the 33%, you can't actually be agreesiveness if the percentages stays at the same point, but let say you only scale it and the risks still remains at the same level. Agreesiveness is let say for instance now, BTC 1 has like $100 worth of bitcoin as the discretionary income and decide to invest $33 that's (33%).
BTC 2 has discretionary income of $200 and decide to invest $66 which is same (33%). Then BTC 3 has $100 and invested $80 that's (80%). So the second one is not more aggressive than the first one while the third one has done most agreesiveness, even if he invested less dollars the second one. But the second one has more incomes, not being aggressive.

[JayJuanGee]

Increasing aggressiveness does not come from discretionary income increasing, but instead choosing to invest higher amounts within the same income.

So for example, it could be argued that if a guy had weekly discretionary funds of $100, and he had been investing 33% or $33 into bitcoin each week, then I doubt that his aggressiveness had increased from the mere fact that his weekly discretionary income doubled and he also doubled his investment amount.  So if his discretionary income went up to $200 per week and he started to invest $66 per week into bitcoin, it seems to me that his level of aggressiveness is the same - 33%.

I absolutely agree with this distinction. I also don’t think becoming more aggressive should simply mean investing more money because your discretionary income has increased. It really makes sense to look at the percentage of the discretionary funds you’re putting into bitcoin.

Using the same example, if someone has $100 in weekly discretionary funds and invest $33, they are allocating 33%. If their discretionary funds later increase to $200 and they increase their bitcoin investment to $66, the amount invested has doubled but their allocation is still 30%. So it’s fair to say their investment has increased, but their level of aggressiveness has not. IMO it would  become more aggressive, only if they start putting a larger percentage, let say maybe 40%,50% or more into the investment.

Level of aggressiveness is a choice.

So the guy whose discretionary income had doubled from $100 to $200, he may well decide to keep his savings and discretionary consumption at $33 per week each and then to put all of the extra discretionary income into bitcoin, which would mean that his investment into bitcoin would have had ended going up from $33 per week to $133.33 per week, and surely that is a choice, and most likely we could characterize his level of aggressiveness as going up, yet it may well not be unreasonable. It is his choice on how to allocate and how to balance his investing with his savings and his discretionary consumption.

[B-BossMan]

Level of aggressiveness is a choice.

So the guy whose discretionary income had doubled from $100 to $200, he may well decide to keep his savings and discretionary consumption at $33 per week each and then to put all of the extra discretionary income into bitcoin, which would mean that his investment into bitcoin would have had ended going up from $33 per week to $133.33 per week, and surely that is a choice, and most likely we could characterize his level of aggressiveness as going up, yet it may well not be unreasonable. It is his choice on how to allocate and how to balance his investing with his savings and his discretionary consumption.

You are right that the aggressiveness is actually game's of choice, and having or earning higher income doesn't mean the investor should increase thier own bitcoin, the main thing is the investor's mindset or decisions, if after every expenses are being settled down, it now depends on personal reasons to make a decision, whether to put more additional incomes into bitcoin or not. Example now, if am earning $200 weekly, I may feel comfortable to put $50 into bitcoin investment, while another investor like me that is still earning same amounts may only go for $30, it's still normal things as its game of choices, he may not be able to afford $50 due to one or two circumstances. Moreover, the $200 amounts doesn't actually determine WHT we mean by aggressiveness, but the investor financial stability and how much risks they can afford to matters alots.

[Powerjumboo]

This here is totally wrong advice, you can’t be serious with this! You’re encouraging investors to go beyond their means on the basis that their discretionary income may increase which is speculative and highly uncertain and after you concluded that you’re against anything that could lead to pressure in the course of investing in Bitcoin.

Investing beyond your means is one of the biggest pressures in Bitcoin investment, so you’ve ended up contradicting yourself and not making a valid point.
Going aggressive is good, but don’t because of it and put yourself in unnecessary pressure like going beyond your means to invest.

It is not certain whether income will increase in the future. Increasing the amount of investment today based on possible future income is not a responsible approach. The amount of investment should be determined by the current real cash flow, discretionary income after meeting necessary expenses, and sufficient financial security for emergencies. One person's discretionary income and financial security are not the same as another. Therefore, there is no universal rule that the same percentage or the same amount will be suitable for everyone. It is more reasonable to invest according to the current ability, and only reconsider the investment amount when the income or financial capacity actually increases.

To invest, you must invest according to your ability. You should never invest by borrowing beyond your ability. Because when a person invests by borrowing, that person will face more losses. Because if the market temporarily declines after investing by borrowing, in that case, if the lender comes to him and asks for the loan money, he will either have to borrow again and repay the loan money or sell it at a loss to pay the loan money. Therefore, it is always better to invest according to your ability.

[Futurexxx]

To invest, you must invest according to your ability. You should never invest by borrowing beyond your ability. Because when a person invests by borrowing, that person will face more losses. Because if the market temporarily declines after investing by borrowing, in that case, if the lender comes to him and asks for the loan money, he will either have to borrow again and repay the loan money or sell it at a loss to pay the loan money. Therefore, it is always better to invest according to your ability.

I find it very funny that someone in his right senses will borrow beyond his ability to pay back, because if truly anyone is actually doing such, that person is fucking himself up in a pathetic way, because such person will surely default on the loan.

Borrowing money to invest in Bitcoin is not entirely bad if you have the capacity to pay back from another source, and your ability to pay back have nothing to do with your Bitcoin investment, but if you borrow with the intention of paying back from your Bitcoin investment, it will never end well, since Bitcoin value may be down when the loan repayment may be due, but a newbie investor should never consider a loan regardless of him having the ability to pay it back from another source, since he wouldn't have the right understanding on how to go about it well.

[JayJuanGee]

Level of aggressiveness is a choice.

So the guy whose discretionary income had doubled from $100 to $200, he may well decide to keep his savings and discretionary consumption at $33 per week each and then to put all of the extra discretionary income into bitcoin, which would mean that his investment into bitcoin would have had ended going up from $33 per week to $133.33 per week, and surely that is a choice, and most likely we could characterize his level of aggressiveness as going up, yet it may well not be unreasonable. It is his choice on how to allocate and how to balance his investing with his savings and his discretionary consumption.

You are right that the aggressiveness is actually game's of choice, and having or earning higher income doesn't mean the investor should increase thier own bitcoin, the main thing is the investor's mindset or decisions, if after every expenses are being settled down, it now depends on personal reasons to make a decision, whether to put more additional incomes into bitcoin or not. Example now, if am earning $200 weekly, I may feel comfortable to put $50 into bitcoin investment, while another investor like me that is still earning same amounts may only go for $30, it's still normal things as its game of choices,

I don't see why you choose to throw "game" into your descriptive choice.

Sure, investing can be fun, and even making choices about how much to put into bitcoin can be made into a kind of fun, yet overall if we are balancing out our investment for a period that is 4-10 years or longer and for many guys the investment timeline will end up being more than 10 years unless he has age and/or health considerations that does not allow him to have an investment timeline that is more than 10 years.

In my own situation, I had more than 20 years investing in various other investments before coming accross bitcoin, so for guys who had invested (and/or saved) for many years prior to bitcoin, they may be in a position to front load their bitcoin investment by taking from other investments to reallocate some of their other value into bitcoin.. yet still, even if a guy front loads or reallocates into bitcoin, it still could take time for the bitcoin investment to grow to a place where it might be justifiable to switch from ongoing buying to maintenance or maybe even to liquidation (or sustainable withdrawal) later down the road.

Again, I am getting back to the use of the term "game."  How come "game" is descriptive of what you believe is going on with bitcoin investment choices?

he may not be able to afford $50 due to one or two circumstances. Moreover, the $200 amounts doesn't actually determine WHT we mean by aggressiveness, but the investor financial stability and how much risks they can afford to matters alots.

An example of $200 per week in discretionary income gives the upper range in regards to how much discretionary income is possible to be drawn upon each week, so the guy has a choice to invest anywhere between $0 and $200 per week into bitcoin and still be within his discretionary income, yet at the same time, it seems that he would be a bit irresponsible if he were to fail/refuse to allocate any value to either savings (back up funds) and/or discretionary consumption, yet, for example, if his back up funds are already a quite large size, then perhaps he has more flexibility in terms of whether he adds more value to his back up funds or not. 

Maybe, for example, this guy broke (or lost) his phone, and he is temporarily using an old phone, and so within a few weeks he wants to buy another phone, yet he has to save up for the model that he wants to buy.  The phone could be considered as a basic need, but it also could be considered as discretionary, especially since he already has a functioning phone, yet he has some flexibility in terms of the urgency in buying his replacement phone.. and yeah, maybe he is planning to spend around $500 for a new phone, yet at the same time, he ONLY has around $300 in his reserve funds that he could use to buy such new phone, so in that regard, he is thinking that it could take himself around 3 weeks more to save up for the phone, if he saves $70 per week for the next 3 weeks.  These are choices that the guy makes about his discretionary funds, yet the choices can still have assigned priorities based on his preferences and priorities. 

Maybe the guy also knows that his wife has a birthday coming up in late October, and so he has to have some money available for that occasion, so he is ongoingly considering how much extra money that he wants to have available for his wife's upcoming birthday.  He is thinking that he is going to need around $300 for that occasion so he is saving up for that, too.. which may well cause him to run out of money if the  totality of his discretionary funds is only $200 per week.

[cyberninja2]

Snip

You are right that the aggressiveness is actually game's of choice, and having or earning higher income doesn't mean the investor should increase thier own bitcoin, the main thing is the investor's mindset or decisions, if after every expenses are being settled down, it now depends on personal reasons to make a decision, whether to put more additional incomes into bitcoin or not. Example now, if am earning $200 weekly, I may feel comfortable to put $50 into bitcoin investment, while another investor like me that is still earning same amounts may only go for $30, it's still normal things as its game of choices, he may not be able to afford $50 due to one or two circumstances. Moreover, the $200 amounts doesn't actually determine WHT we mean by aggressiveness, but the investor financial stability and how much risks they can afford to matters alots.

I think this is a very appropriate answer, providing advice to all parties to avoid greed in making decisions, as this often occurs uncontrollably when income exceeds needs.
This is similar to someone who previously didn't have the money to live up to expectations. When they have a large amount of money, they don't need to increase their lifestyle by collecting luxury items. This doesn't mean they can't just act within reason, remembering that we've all been through difficult times so making decisions is part of being careful in managing our finances with the income we have.

Similarly when investing in Bitcoin, how do we manage it properly so that our investments run smoothly and have enough money to meet our needs? This is what we must do to ensure our investment aspirations and savings are aligned with our desires, even if we invest in small amounts, but consistently in our decisions.

[Fire_man]

Increasing aggressiveness does not come from discretionary income increasing, but instead choosing to invest higher amounts within the same income.

So for example, it could be argued that if a guy had weekly discretionary funds of $100, and he had been investing 33% or $33 into bitcoin each week, then I doubt that his aggressiveness had increased from the mere fact that his weekly discretionary income doubled and he also doubled his investment amount.  So if his discretionary income went up to $200 per week and he started to invest $66 per week into bitcoin, it seems to me that his level of aggressiveness is the same - 33%.

I absolutely agree with this distinction. I also don’t think becoming more aggressive should simply mean investing more money because your discretionary income has increased. It really makes sense to look at the percentage of the discretionary funds you’re putting into bitcoin.

Using the same example, if someone has $100 in weekly discretionary funds and invest $33, they are allocating 33%. If their discretionary funds later increase to $200 and they increase their bitcoin investment to $66, the amount invested has doubled but their allocation is still 30%. So it’s fair to say their investment has increased, but their level of aggressiveness has not. IMO it would  become more aggressive, only if they start putting a larger percentage, let say maybe 40%,50% or more into the investment.

Am also a beginner that is very interested in Bitcoin and I have been making series of researches about Bitcoin and how profitable it is, I need a suggestion on how much to be investing from my discretionary income. I earn 300,000 monthly and after my expenses and all, I usually have around 80,000 remaining on until the next salary is paid.

In your opinions, how much should I invest or should I just invest all as I have been thinking?

[Perfect-World]

Level of aggressiveness is a choice.

So the guy whose discretionary income had doubled from $100 to $200, he may well decide to keep his savings and discretionary consumption at $33 per week each and then to put all of the extra discretionary income into bitcoin, which would mean that his investment into bitcoin would have had ended going up from $33 per week to $133.33 per week, and surely that is a choice, and most likely we could characterize his level of aggressiveness as going up, yet it may well not be unreasonable. It is his choice on how to allocate and how to balance his investing with his savings and his discretionary consumption.

Yea, and this is a major and/or serious part of our investment that every investor should be careful and making decisions and/or choices on what they decide to do, because any wrong choice or decision will affect your amount of accumulation or quality of your portfolio or your investment generally.

A guy who makes choices of putting more into Bitcoin while his back up funds are yet not considerably built up might face challenges due to his decisions and choices. This also have a positive impact when the investor has actually built up his back up funds to a highly reasonable amount and decides to prioritize his him investment. However, it is very important getting a favourable balanced pattern of managing your finances and income allocation into your investment, back up funds and discretionary consumption.

[Livingleged]

Am also a beginner that is very interested in Bitcoin and I have been making series of researches about Bitcoin and how profitable it is, I need a suggestion on how much to be investing from my discretionary income. I earn 300,000 monthly and after my expenses and all, I usually have around 80,000 remaining on until the next salary is paid.

In your opinions, how much should I invest or should I just invest all as I have been thinking?

Okay, I wouldn’t suggest that you should invest the whole 80,000 immediately, especially if you’re still a beginner. The fact that you have 80,000 left after your monthly expenses doesn’t mean the whole amount should go into bitcoin investment. You should also consider some cash available for emergencies and other unexpected expenses.

For example, you could start with let say 40,000 or maybe 50,000 into your investment monthly and keep the remaining 40,000 or 30,000 as savings. Doing this will allow you to keep buying regularly instead of putting everything at once. And if you later build up a reasonable emergency funds, and your financial situation remains stable, you can decide whether to increase your bitcoin allocation. The important thing is to invest with amount you can continue doing consistently without putting your self under financial pressure.

[Ummeettaa]

Increasing aggressiveness does not come from discretionary income increasing, but instead choosing to invest higher amounts within the same income.

So for example, it could be argued that if a guy had weekly discretionary funds of $100, and he had been investing 33% or $33 into bitcoin each week, then I doubt that his aggressiveness had increased from the mere fact that his weekly discretionary income doubled and he also doubled his investment amount.  So if his discretionary income went up to $200 per week and he started to invest $66 per week into bitcoin, it seems to me that his level of aggressiveness is the same - 33%.

I absolutely agree with this distinction. I also don’t think becoming more aggressive should simply mean investing more money because your discretionary income has increased. It really makes sense to look at the percentage of the discretionary funds you’re putting into bitcoin.

Using the same example, if someone has $100 in weekly discretionary funds and invest $33, they are allocating 33%. If their discretionary funds later increase to $200 and they increase their bitcoin investment to $66, the amount invested has doubled but their allocation is still 30%. So it’s fair to say their investment has increased, but their level of aggressiveness has not. IMO it would  become more aggressive, only if they start putting a larger percentage, let say maybe 40%,50% or more into the investment.

Am also a beginner that is very interested in Bitcoin and I have been making series of researches about Bitcoin and how profitable it is, I need a suggestion on how much to be investing from my discretionary income. I earn 300,000 monthly and after my expenses and all, I usually have around 80,000 remaining on until the next salary is paid.

In your opinions, how much should I invest or should I just invest all as I have been thinking?

You have made a very nice decision trusting and intending to invest in Bitcoin, as Bitcoin is one of the most trusted and reliable crypto investment ever, that can "likely" profits you in the future.

Deciding to invest in Bitcoin should be thoroughly thought of because, most people get it wrong expecting fast profit from Bitcoin overlooking it nature of being a long term assets, where profits can likely be met when patience and persistence are adhered to.

I will have you know that making profit after investing in Bitcoin is not 100% assured.

On that note, I will suggest for you to invest 60,000 out of your 80,000 discretionary income and save the remaining 20,000 elsewhere other than Bitcoin. My reasons are because an emergency situation might arise someday that might warrant additional funds from your regular spending, which you can easily use the other saved funds to attend to rather than withdrawing from your Bitcoin investment.

It's a suggestion though, the rest is left for you to decide as you have the final say, but do try and make the right decision and be sure you are ready to invest before you start.

[Grease5000]

Am also a beginner that is very interested in Bitcoin and I have been making series of researches about Bitcoin and how profitable it is, I need a suggestion on how much to be investing from my discretionary income. I earn 300,000 monthly and after my expenses and all, I usually have around 80,000 remaining on until the next salary is paid.

In your opinions, how much should I invest or should I just invest all as I have been thinking?

If the 80,000 is what you have left after your normal expenses, I wouldn't put all of it into bitcoin. First separate your emergency savings from your discretionary money. Your emergency fund is for unexpected needs, while discretionary money is what you can choose to invest.
Once that is clear, you can use part of the discretionary money for DCA and keep some for emergency fund and back up fund, The exact amount  should depends on your situation, but I think the important thing as a beginner is to start with an amount you can keep investing without putting yourself under pressure.

[Tetu100]

To invest, you must invest according to your ability. You should never invest by borrowing beyond your ability. Because when a person invests by borrowing, that person will face more losses. Because if the market temporarily declines after investing by borrowing, in that case, if the lender comes to him and asks for the loan money, he will either have to borrow again and repay the loan money or sell it at a loss to pay the loan money. Therefore, it is always better to invest according to your ability.

You shouldn't sound as if investing from a borrowed money is like a serous crime, is not. Even if you are investing with such funds let it be that you wouldn't be repaying back the loan from your investment else you risk pressuring yourself unnecessarily. Perhaps if there is other stream of income you are hopping to pay back that loan with, that'll be perfect.

Again, you're making me believe that once someone is investing from a borrowed funds, that automatically set the said person on lost. I don't agree with that because even if you are investing from your own personal funds which is from your discretionary funds, if you aren't holding for long term which is the right thing to do, you will still stand a higher chances of running at lose if you sell earlier than expected.

Therefore, what I'm saying is essence is that it doesn't matter whether you are investing with borrowed funds or not, what is important is to be able to set emotions aside and hold regardless. But I wouldn't advice anyone to invest with a loan funds and with the arrangement of paying back from his investment holdings, that's not what I mean.

[Stive009]

To invest, you must invest according to your ability. You should never invest by borrowing beyond your ability. Because when a person invests by borrowing, that person will face more losses. Because if the market temporarily declines after investing by borrowing, in that case, if the lender comes to him and asks for the loan money, he will either have to borrow again and repay the loan money or sell it at a loss to pay the loan money. Therefore, it is always better to invest according to your ability.

You shouldn't sound as if investing from a borrowed money is like a serous crime, is not. Even if you are investing with such funds let it be that you wouldn't be repaying back the loan from your investment else you risk pressuring yourself unnecessarily. Perhaps if there is other stream of income you are hopping to pay back that loan with, that'll be perfect.

Again, you're making me believe that once someone is investing from a borrowed funds, that automatically set the said person on lost. I don't agree with that because even if you are investing from your own personal funds which is from your discretionary funds, if you aren't holding for long term which is the right thing to do, you will still stand a higher chances of running at lose if you sell earlier than expected.

Therefore, what I'm saying is essence is that it doesn't matter whether you are investing with borrowed funds or not, what is important is to be able to set emotions aside and hold regardless. But I wouldn't advice anyone to invest with a loan funds and with the arrangement of paying back from his investment holdings, that's not what I mean.

You seem to view investing with borrowed money quite simplistically as if the issue is resolved simply by paying the loan installments from another income source. But is it really that straightforward?

You have no control over the price of Bitcoin yet loan repayment is a fixed obligation that remains outside your control. Even if you cover the installments using other income that money is still part of your earnings this means your financial obligations persist regardless of how the market performs. Consequently you lose the flexibility needed to hold onto the investment when the market turns against you.

It is true that someone investing their own discretionary income might sell early and incur a loss. However equating that scenario with the risks associated with borrowed money is incorrect. When you invest your surplus money using a  DCA strategy the invested funds are not earmarked for immediate needs. This makes it comparatively easier to stick to your plan despite market volatility.

A long term mindset isn't just about saying I won't sell. It requires investing an amount that aligns with your financial capabilities and can be comfortably maintained over the long haul.

Therefore the logic that  borrowing to invest is fine as long as the loan is repaid from another income source does not convince me. If the goal of investing is to alleviate financial pressure why create a position by increasing your financial burden right from the start?

Never invest with borrowed money. Invest from your own income first set aside funds for essential expenses and emergencies then use your remaining discretionary income to invest regularly even if the amounts are small using DCA. Creating a plan that you can sustain stress free for years is far more important than making a massive investment.

[sotelorene]

To invest, you must invest according to your ability. You should never invest by borrowing beyond your ability. Because when a person invests by borrowing, that person will face more losses. Because if the market temporarily declines after investing by borrowing, in that case, if the lender comes to him and asks for the loan money, he will either have to borrow again and repay the loan money or sell it at a loss to pay the loan money. Therefore, it is always better to invest according to your ability.

You should never invest borrowed money in Bitcoin and having the mentality or mindset of paying back with the Bitcoin because Bitcoin movement is full of uncertainties which means you can not predict correctly where the market will be heading next that is why it is better to invest having the long term mindset. One should make sure to have a source of income that will help them repay the money back without thinking of touching their investment. One thing is very certain if you invest borrowed money into Bitcoin and hoping to make profit and repay, there is a high possiblity that market will disappoint you

[Rabata]

---

Investment method never gives you the certainty of success. Investment method is the purchasing method, by which you continue to buy continuously or buy in small amounts. Even if a person uses the best investment method, the success of his investment is not certain.

Those who assume that investing is guaranteed to succeed will experience discomfort in achieving the desired results. I believe that if you place too much hope in investing, you won't be able to anticipate what you'll receive.

This movement has caused many people to be less aggressive in making purchases, so this may be a good lesson for us in placing our hopes on investment success. This is natural, as market cycles can often deviate from our expectations.

Your statement sounds like you’re placing a curse on people who will be investing and expecting profits because you seems to be convinced that they will experience distress, you can never neglect the fact that most people who are investing in bitcoin are doing it because they feel they’ll definitely get some profits in the long run, but some people knows that profit isn’t guaranteed, while some people also believe that profit is guaranteed, you can’t totally change the mind of people, but they can only be made to know that before going into investment in Bitcoin that nothing is guaranteed which is why I feel it’s important to get some basic knowledge and understanding about bitcoin before getting started.

I do not say that it is wrong for someone to buy Bitcoin with the hope of profit. Because many people may be interested in it because of the possibility of profit in Bitcoin. But the difference here is whether they have seen the possibility of profit or they are buying more than they can afford, assuming that the profit will be guaranteed. Of course, the result will not be the same in the two situations.

When someone is interested in the possibility of profit, he will try to stick to his plan even if the price drops. But those who have assumed a guaranteed profit and later their expectations are not met are the ones who are disappointed and forced to sell. Therefore, I think it is probably more useful to examine the plan of a new buyer than to assume what is right in most investors. How much money does he have on hand after meeting the necessary expenses? If the price drops significantly after buying, will he have to sell Bitcoin quickly for that money? I think the answers to these questions will help him decide the amount he should buy.

[Junii]

Level of aggressiveness is a choice.

So the guy whose discretionary income had doubled from $100 to $200, he may well decide to keep his savings and discretionary consumption at $33 per week each and then to put all of the extra discretionary income into bitcoin, which would mean that his investment into bitcoin would have had ended going up from $33 per week to $133.33 per week, and surely that is a choice, and most likely we could characterize his level of aggressiveness as going up, yet it may well not be unreasonable. It is his choice on how to allocate and how to balance his investing with his savings and his discretionary consumption.

I agree with you and it is a genuine idea but investment needs discipline when discretionary income of some people doubles from 100 to 200 dollars they are trying to upgrade there lifestyle because investment needs time and now a days majority of people wants instant results. Personally i believe if income doubles you do not have to invest all of the extra money but investing a meaningful portion of it toward long term investments can help improve the financial position of the person without completely sacrificing the current lifestyle. 

[Obulis]

If an investors want to increase the size of their discretionary income, they need to increase their hustlings or work multiple jobs to increase their incomes since their discretionary income is figure out from their incomes, but if they have yet to secure additional jobs, they should just manage whatever discretionary income that they can figure out at the moment instead of buying beyond their means.

You don't really need to work multiple jobs to increase your income, you could be intentional about increasing your competence in your area of specialization, upgrade your skills and take advantage of better offers.

You could also find a way around your finances to decrease expenses so you can have more discretionary income available. The truth is that most people are wasteful and don't plan their finances adequately. A lot of guys would be amazed at how much they could save from what previously went into expenses if they could sit down and plan their finances properly as the paycheck arrives. The extra saved money from decrease in expenses can be put towards increasing your aggressiveness in your DCA buys.

Increasing aggressiveness does not come from discretionary income increasing, but instead choosing to invest higher amounts within the same income.

So for example, it could be argued that if a guy had weekly discretionary funds of $100, and he had been investing 33% or $33 into bitcoin each week, then I doubt that his aggressiveness had increased from the mere fact that his weekly discretionary income doubled and he also doubled his investment amount.  So if his discretionary income went up to $200 per week and he started to invest $66 per week into bitcoin, it seems to me that his level of aggressiveness is the same - 33%.

Technically, nothing actually changed since it was investment based on certain percentage (33%) of the discretionary funds, so such scenario can't be described as being aggressive.
Here's what I mean, that discretionary funds increased and the percentage remains the same then nothing changes. Something only changes only when the percentage discretionary funds to be invested increases as the amount of discretionary funds increases. That's since it used to $100 discretionary funds and 33% investment and there is now an extra $100 add up making it now $200 then an increase of 33% initial investment to 55% (or anything higher than the initial 33%) will mean aggressive buying due to increase in discretionary funds.
$100 @33% =$33
$200 @55% = $110
Which makes it $110 - $33 = $77 aggressiveness.