Balancing Financial security and Bitcoin Accumulation

[abaeze]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

[GIF-JOBS]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

We basically have to make investment or trading decisions based on our own financial capabilities and then according to our mentality and financial capabilities. In fact, not everything is suitable for everyone, similarly not everyone can do Bitcoin investment and trading, those who can invest, cannot trade, and those who can trade, cannot be so patient in investing. That is why everything here depends on our own mentality and financial capabilities. But we should always understand that nothing should be done beyond our financial capabilities, ability to understand and ability to take risks. If we are greedy or make any decision based on emotions after seeing the profits of others, it will only bring negative results, that is why we have to understand reality and make the right decision according to all our capabilities, only if we can manage it properly, then we will have a good chance of success.

[I_Anime]

 Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

Being aggressive in your accumulation of bitcoin can land you in trouble if you over do it more than necessary, and it's not mandatory that you must be aggressive at any point in your Bitcoin accumulation journey, so if you are too obsessed on accumulating aggressively, try not to go beyond your discretionary income, so that you wouldn't have trouble with your bitcoin investment later in your accumulation journey.

What I think is more important is consistency in your accumulation, not by going aggressive as a new investor, because it may put you in trouble if not done from your discretionary income.

Being aggressive with your investment not actually bad is only when you are over aggressive. Doing more than your capacity , going beyond your budget and stuff like some folks , going to the extent of using their discretionary income just to be aggressive which is actually bad because in a long run he or she won’t be able to keep and it will definitely affect their investment, leading them to sell too early or in loss .

[JayJuanGee]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

[abaeze]

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Exjectly, this view seems to me to be correct, realistic and sustainable, especially for those who want to invest in Bitcoin for the long term.
Also, as you said, measuring aggressiveness based on discretionary funds is the healthiest approach for all investors. Because it does not put the essential expenses of life such as food, rent, medical care at risk. Many people make a mistake here, they invest the necessary money aggressively, later when the market goes down, they fall into two types of problems: mental stress and financial problems. Another most important thing you said about investing in Bitcoin is not to change aggressiveness by looking at the price movement, this is a very important discipline because when you make a decision based on the market price, it often becomes emotional, i.e. FOMO or panic sell. And being able to avoid such emotional decisions is a big factor for successful investment in the long term.

[Proty]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Yes aggressiveness shouldn't be measured by the quantity of bitcoin accumulated but by the percentage of discretionary income used in accumulating bitcoin. This is the right way to define or measure aggressive buying by using discretionionary income, this is really understandable.
It will definitely make an investor to protect his or her financial based while still ongoing with bitcoin accumulation.
Also an investor won't be emotionally inclined to be chasing after prices or timing the market. It will make an investor to be consistent with buying and to remain flexible instead of being regid.

[Rockson1]

We basically have to make investment or trading decisions based on our own financial capabilities and then according to our mentality and financial capabilities. In fact, not everything is suitable for everyone, similarly not everyone can do Bitcoin investment and trading, those who can invest, cannot trade, and those who can trade, cannot be so patient in investing. That is why everything here depends on our own mentality and financial capabilities. But we should always understand that nothing should be done beyond our financial capabilities, ability to understand and ability to take risks. If we are greedy or make any decision based on emotions after seeing the profits of others, it will only bring negative results, that is why we have to understand reality and make the right decision according to all our capabilities, only if we can manage it properly, then we will have a good chance of success.

Why are you mentioning trading, we are only concerned about Bitcoin investment here that apart, I agree with some point you made about investment decisions.
One thing we must learn as investors is trying to know what works for us, maybe I have said this here before that Bitcoin investment is not competition, individual discreationary income is never the same meaning that our level of source of income where this discretionary income is been figure out from differs, although everything depends on our level of understanding.
Of course we should not consider doing what we know that we can not sustain in a long run that is why we keep hearing something like the discreationary income, we are not adviced to use anything apart from our discreationary income to invest to avoid thinking otherwise along the line.

[Shineup]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Yes aggressiveness shouldn't be measured by the quantity of bitcoin accumulated but by the percentage of discretionary income used in accumulating bitcoin. This is the right way to define or measure aggressive buying by using discretionionary income, this is really understandable.
It will definitely make an investor to protect his or her financial based while still ongoing with bitcoin accumulation.
Also an investor won't be emotionally inclined to be chasing after prices or timing the market. It will make an investor to be consistent with buying and to remain flexible instead of being regid.

Anyone measuring their level of aggressiveness in terms of bitcoin price moves will definitely get carried away and over do things without them realizing it, it is appropriate that part of your discretionary income you decided to use for investment determines and measure your level of aggressiveness as it implies a balanced equation of taking care of your basic needs and your investment in a such a way that it suits your circumstances without negligence of some sort that will deteriorate your comfort.

[Emjay24]

Being aggressive with your investment not actually bad is only when you are over aggressive. Doing more than your capacity , going beyond your budget and stuff like some folks, going to the extent of using their discretionary income just to be aggressive which is actually bad because in a long run he or she won’t be able to keep and it will definitely affect their investment, leading them to sell too early or in loss .

Using your discretionary income to increase your aggressiveness is not bad, as long as you can sustain using a larger portion of it to buy bitcoin and you are still adding to your backup funds alongside it if you have not built it out earlier while investing into bitcoin, the problem lies when you invest beyond your discretionary income which is being over aggressive and such may entail using funds meant for your expenses to buy bitcoin and this is not advisable because chances are that you would still have to tap into your holdings when the need for that expenses arises and this is a very bad cashflow management practice.

It is better to invest within your means and be as aggressive as you can without overdoing it so that your investment can be sustainable for long and you would not be under unnecessary financial pressure to meetup up with consistency in investment when you set the bar above your means.

[PhilosopherKing]

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

I like in your point because you are not connecting aggressiveness to bitcoin price and that is good thing people can do. Lot of people keep thinking they can outwit the market so they will be waiting for the price to go down low before they can buy more, and may not because no person know how far low the price of bitcoin will go.

Ongoingly buying and increasing when there is more money can make person build up his stash faster than when they be waiting.

[cocadalcan]

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

I like in your point because you are not connecting aggressiveness to bitcoin price and that is good thing people can do. Lot of people keep thinking they can outwit the market so they will be waiting for the price to go down low before they can buy more, and may not because no person know how far low the price of bitcoin will go.

Ongoingly buying and increasing when there is more money can make person build up his stash faster than when they be waiting.

Accumulation regularly without being influenced by the price of Bitcoin is a great way to increase the amount of holdings. The attitude of accumulation Bitcoin regardless of the price keeps you disciplined in investing. The attitude of buying less or more during the period of decline or increase in the price of Bitcoin can create investment risk. The investment mindset is very important for long term Bitcoin accumulation.

It is better to buy Bitcoin aggressively if you have cash funds. It is better to keep depositing Bitcoin regularly in the DCA method and buy Bitcoin with that cash fund during the bearish season because periods of decline in price are not always available and Bitcoin should be aggressive to ensure that it is used properly.

[Yablee0]

Of course we should not consider doing what we know that we can not sustain in a long run that is why we keep hearing something like the discreationary income, we are not adviced to use anything apart from our discreationary income to invest to avoid thinking otherwise along the line.

You're right, discretionary funds has been the best and the recommendable funds to invest with as long as Bitcoin investment is concerned. Again since it's an investment that is more in advantage on a long run, investing outside your discretionary funds is a red flag because you will be forced to sell your assets prematurely when real life challenges come, however this are the mistakes most newbie does, they fail to do what is right then when things later go wrong they now start looking for where to shifts blames by saying allot of discreditable things about Bitcoin. Note: those that follows the rules by investing out of their discretionary funds, and also making provision of all forms of reserve funds to takle future problem are the real gees and success is always what they're known for. Furthermore, if you much get it right then initiate due process even in your investment journey.

[The Founding Titan]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Buying aggressively means using more of your discretionary income then you'd normally, it's shouldn't be dependent on whether bitcoin's price went up or down but on the capacity of our own discretionary income, that's the one way to ensure we don't end up going beyond our discretionary income simply because we want to match the current price of bitcoin, anyone who is already for any reason investing all of their discretionary income in bitcoin is already investing as aggressively as they can and shouldn't go beyond that, if they want to invest more then they should make the effort to increase their discretionary income, that's the only way for them to invest more than they already are.

[Showlove01]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Buying aggressively means using more of your discretionary income then you'd normally, it's shouldn't be dependent on whether bitcoin's price went up or down but on the capacity of our own discretionary income, that's the one way to ensure we don't end up going beyond our discretionary income simply because we want to match the current price of bitcoin, anyone who is already for any reason investing all of their discretionary income in bitcoin is already investing as aggressively as they can and shouldn't go beyond that, if they want to investore than they should make the effort to increase their discretionary income, that's the only for them to invest more than they already are.

I think you are getting something somehow wrong here, in Bitcoin investment you don't invest aggressively when the price is high but rather it is more strategic to be aggressive when the price has gone down and there is always a difference when you purchase aggressively on low price and when you also purchased aggressively on a high price. Moreover, if been aggressively while the price is high is your own strategy then good for you but I will say it again that is more advisable and strategic to be aggressive when there is Dip.

[The Founding Titan]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Buying aggressively means using more of your discretionary income then you'd normally, it's shouldn't be dependent on whether bitcoin's price went up or down but on the capacity of our own discretionary income, that's the one way to ensure we don't end up going beyond our discretionary income simply because we want to match the current price of bitcoin, anyone who is already for any reason investing all of their discretionary income in bitcoin is already investing as aggressively as they can and shouldn't go beyond that, if they want to investore than they should make the effort to increase their discretionary income, that's the only for them to invest more than they already are.

I think you are getting something somehow wrong here, in Bitcoin investment you don't invest aggressively when the price is high but rather it is more strategic to be aggressive when the price has gone down and there is always a difference when you purchase aggressively on low price and when you also purchased aggressively on a high price. Moreover, if been aggressively while the price is high is your own strategy then good for you but I will say it again that is more advisable and strategic to be aggressive when there is Dip.

I'm not sure where you read that I said we should be aggressive when the price is high but it's definitely not from what I just wrote, maybe read it again carefully, there might have been some typo towards to end but it's definitely not something that will completely change the meaning of what I wrote as you have just done,  if you read the part I just bolded out you will see that I said being aggressive shouldn't be dependent on the price of bitcoin but on your own discretionary income.
Please don't misinterpret or change the meaning of any of what I wrote.
If you want to invest aggressively when the price is low then that's your choice, do it if it works for you but what I said was that we shouldn't base how aggressively we invest on the price of bitcoin.

[Crakryptvest]

Being aggressive with your investment not actually bad is only when you are over aggressive. Doing more than your capacity , going beyond your budget and stuff like some folks , going to the extent of using their discretionary income just to be aggressive which is actually bad because in a long run he or she won’t be able to keep and it will definitely affect their investment, leading them to sell too early or in loss .

Aggressive is good at some point of your investment, but let's not force it, it is about the financial capability to do that, as an investor if I'm not financially capable to be aggressive in my Bitcoin acumulation, I don't see any reason to go hard on myself since I know that It has to come from my discreationary income, our discreationary income should be where our bitcon investment funds should be coming from, going outside that al to in the name being aggressive might be dangerous to us as investors but if we can figure ways out to do it without making things difficult for us that might even lead to a change of plans for our investment that shouldn't be a problem but if there's no way, then it will be of good for us to keep doing what works for us, this is my opinion.

[Silikiem]

Yeah I thought so too I mean for someone who can consistently DCA then in the long run you should be looking at being aggressive too  I mean if you can afford to DCA over a period of time then being aggressive should be the goal. Especially when you are using your discretionary income to DCA.

You are actually correct but this is a two way thing, if someone remains consistent in his DCA with his discreationary income that's fine but if he has the financial ability to considering applying aggressiveness that is fine too but preisssure should not be applied if not continuing with the usual routine is not a bad idea, I'm not an advocate if being aggressive when you know that you that you can not do that, being aggressive is good but it is not something people should just jump into because maybe they see MR B doing it without knowing the financial strength of the person they want to follow, just our discreationary income, we are good to go.

Ultimately, many people understand that being aggressive just means investing more money, buying more during dips, and increasing accumulation quickly. However, they fail to understand that the main driving force behind all of this is having a clear awareness of one’s own financial condition and the ability to sustain risk.

In reality, aggressive investing should be understood as increasing investments in a disciplined manner, based on one’s capacity, using discretionary income. Otherwise, new investors may adopt the idea that 'aggressive investing is good' without knowing when it is appropriate, and end up facing losses because they did not assess their own financial capability.

I like to conside aggressive investing to be measured in terms of how much of the discretionary funds are beind used for investing rather than for discretionary consumption or savings.

I am not a big fan of changing aggressiveness based on BTC price moves, yet if there is some latitude in the discretionary funds, then perhaps there could be some changes in the aggressiveness without overdoing it.

Buying aggressively means using more of your discretionary income then you'd normally, it's shouldn't be dependent on whether bitcoin's price went up or down but on the capacity of our own discretionary income, that's the one way to ensure we don't end up going beyond our discretionary income simply because we want to match the current price of bitcoin, anyone who is already for any reason investing all of their discretionary income in bitcoin is already investing as aggressively as they can and shouldn't go beyond that, if they want to investore than they should make the effort to increase their discretionary income, that's the only for them to invest more than they already are.

I think you are getting something somehow wrong here, in Bitcoin investment you don't invest aggressively when the price is high but rather it is more strategic to be aggressive when the price has gone down and there is always a difference when you purchase aggressively on low price and when you also purchased aggressively on a high price. Moreover, if been aggressively while the price is high is your own strategy then good for you but I will say it again that is more advisable and strategic to be aggressive when there is Dip.

I think you’re the one who’s getting everything wrong here by misinterpreting what The founding Titan was clearly stating in his post. He never said you invest aggressively when the price is high or low, what he was merely saying is that there’s no market price one cannot invest aggressively what matters most is strictly based on the level of your discretionary income. He clearly wasn’t saying that aggressive buying should be based on market price but should be based on one’s level of discretionary income. If you want to buy aggressively then you should try to improve your discretionary income it’s a simple as that. If you’re buying aggressive based on market price especially when the market is bearish or dip then what you are doing is buying the dip strategy.

[Hardyrobust]

I think you’re the one who’s getting everything wrong here by misinterpreting what The founding Titan was clearly stating in his post. He never said you invest aggressively when the price is high or low, what he was merely saying is that there’s no market price one cannot invest aggressively what matters most is strictly based on the level of your discretionary income. He clearly wasn’t saying that aggressive buying should be based on market price but should be based on one’s level of discretionary income. If you want to buy aggressively then you should try to improve your discretionary income it’s a simple as that. If you’re buying aggressive based on market price especially when the market is bearish or dip then what you are doing is buying the dip strategy.

aggressive buying has nothing to do with increasing an investor discretionionary income but rather it is the percentage of discretionionary that is being used by an investor in buying bitcoin that truly determined there levels of aggressiveness or if they are being aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. So an investor doesn't need to increase there discretionionary income in other to be aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. Someone that used 85-90% of there discretionionary income to buy bitcoin is being aggressive.

[Futurexxx]

aggressive buying has nothing to do with increasing an investor discretionionary income but rather it is the percentage of discretionionary that is being used by an investor in buying bitcoin that truly determined there levels of aggressiveness or if they are being aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. So an investor doesn't need to increase there discretionionary income in other to be aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. Someone that used 85-90% of there discretionionary income to buy bitcoin is being aggressive.

Investing with 85-90% of your discretionary income from the start or as a new investor can really be over aggressive and problematic to your Bitcoin investment because at that beginning point of your accumulation journey, you have not set aside a reasonable emergency and reserve funds to safeguard your Bitcoin investment from any real life emergencies that may threatens your Bitcoin holdings.
So what's am trying to say is that accumulating aggressively is good, but it might be problematic to your Bitcoin investment if you go as high as investing like 85-90% of your discretionary income as a new investor that has not kept a huge emergency funds already to protect your bitcoin holdings from emergency situations.

[Cgrexp]

aggressive buying has nothing to do with increasing an investor discretionionary income but rather it is the percentage of discretionionary that is being used by an investor in buying bitcoin that truly determined there levels of aggressiveness or if they are being aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. So an investor doesn't need to increase there discretionionary income in other to be aggressive with there bitcoin accumulation. Someone that used 85-90% of there discretionionary income to buy bitcoin is being aggressive.

Investing with 85-90% of your discretionary income from the start or as a new investor can really be over aggressive and problematic to your Bitcoin investment because at that beginning point of your accumulation journey, you have not set aside a reasonable emergency and reserve funds to safeguard your Bitcoin investment from any real life emergencies that may threatens your Bitcoin holdings.
So what's am trying to say is that accumulating aggressively is good, but it might be problematic to your Bitcoin investment if you go as high as investing like 85-90% of your discretionary income as a new investor that has not kept a huge emergency funds already to protect your bitcoin holdings from emergency situations.

Investing 85 to 90 percent of discretionary income is a high-level aggressive and risky investment. If a person invests 80 percent of his discretionary income, then only 20 percent of the money will be left. And with this 20 percent of the money, he has to create his emergency fund, backup fund. A person's monthly income is $ 200. That person's discretionary income is $ 50 per month. If he invests 80% of the $ 50 of discretionary income, that is, $ 40, he will have only 20%, that is, $ 10. However, in the case of Bitcoin investment, he should keep an amount equivalent to two to three months of salary. That is, if this person wants to keep an amount equivalent to two months of salary in the emergency fund, then the amount is $ 400. But if he keeps 20 percent of his money every month for the emergency fund, then it will take him 40 months or about 3 years and 4 months to create a fund equivalent to two months. And of course, during these 3 years, he may have an emergency or bad situation sometime or the other.  In such a situation, investing 80 percent of discretionary income can be acceptable only if the investor has an emergency fund equal to at least three months' salary. Therefore, financial management should be done by keeping a balance between investment and emergency fund.