I was having a conversation with a person recently who was telling me about an experience he had on how there was a person whom he trusted a lot and as a result they had a mutual business agreement where he would aid the person in return for financial compensation that would be given to him down the road. Unfortunately, he ended up doing his part, but the other person got devious and attempted to weasel his way out from honoring his promises.

There was a lot of money involved too and I was kind of surprised that his decision was to move on while simply cutting contact with the person. His reasoning was a common one too though on how he could of spent his time to force the person to oblige to their agreement, but instead he felt that his time was better spent by recouping his losses through other means.

The other type of responses that I usually hear from people though in situations where there is a substantial amount of money involved is that they won’t allow the person to get away with it. A common reason is that it is the person’s intention to try and drag the situation on with as much drivel as possible so that you will hopefully just forget about it. So, they want to show that they mean business to prevent others from trying to do the same to them.

In my opinion, from a principles point of view, by not doing anything in these types of scenarios the person is essentially getting away with the damage they have done to you and thinking more long term that would increase the chances of them doing it to others as well. To me, that is usually the bigger motivator to do something as just thinking if they did that to someone else who is in a less fortunate position it would probably wreck a lot of people’s livelihoods.

I was told before that while obviously in a business you need to focus your time in doing what’s necessary to generate revenue, at the same time you shouldn’t forget about doing socially responsible things as well if possible.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

I was just passed this story that deals with a recent controversial firing of an 11 year staff member for a video game news site called Gamespot. Recently there was a highly anticipated game called Kane & Lynch that was released and the editor who was reviewing the game, Jeff Gerstmann, gave the title a less than admirable score of a 6/10.

From what I read, shortly after the person in question was fired and there were advertisements placed all over the site to advertise the game. This immediately made the majority of the public scream foul play such as concluding that the company who made the game, Eidos, was obviously paying Gamespot to help advertise its game.

As a result, people are saying that Jeff Gerstmann was allegedly fired partly due to some possible pressure from the advertiser that they would not do anymore business with them because of the review that was given. The company did issue this statement http://www.gamespot.com/news/6183666.html about it to hopefully tame it.

My personal opinion in general in regards to this is that there likely was pressure from the advertiser or that the company possibly wanted to get rid of the person for one reason or another. It just seems too odd that if you have someone working for you that long that you don’t at least give warnings if they are being unprofessional. Of course unless it was something serious such as stealing then that is a different question. What a story this will be if it was proven that money indeed played a big role in the decision making process.

I often hear the phrase on how everyone has a price. My personal train of thought is usually if there is a situation where you will be compensated financially to do something, at most money should only dictate your platform as oppose to your actions. Money can definitely help to facilitate you to do various deeds, but it shouldn’t speak for you.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

I was just reading this interesting article that talked about China’s implementation of a one child policy at around the early 80’s in order to control the growth of its population. The main topic was how being an only child in a family increases the likelihood of the child being spoiled and growing up with a mentality that things should be handed to them.

It went on to talk about how this has created a new generation of thinkers where things like a marriage is viewed more like a tool where one finds the right mate to achieve wealth and power as oppose to focusing in developing a nurturing relationship. Of course, it then dived into how so many people now see a divorce as simply a process to go through if one finds a more lucrative scenario to be in whereas before it was viewed as a disgraceful act.

Some of the comments I read were kind of amazing such as a person saying how it makes no sense to do so much work and planning in life financially when she could simply marry the right person and be worry free. I see this with people even if they are not the only child though. For example, it could even be a family having a lot of girls and so they tend to spoil the only boy in the family who then turns out to be the one who is always financially dependent on others.

Sometimes I would say the most important point to learning good financial management skills is to start from square one and to learn to appreciate the things that you already have while learning to genuinely respect others. That might sound cornball for a lot of people, but that attitude goes such a long way when it comes to money.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

One prominent topic that I heard during that conference was a debate on whether it is better to invest in stocks or real estate if your goal is to generate wealth for the long term. The main point for real estate was that it is more stable than stocks when it comes economic circumstances. For stocks it seems like the argument was that it is more obtainable for the average person to do.

I personally never tried real estate yet as it seems like something you would want to educate yourself about before trying it. There just seems to be so many details and regulations that you need to understand before doing any kind transaction. It’s definitely something I will want to try one day for the income journey section.

I don’t see why you wouldn’t want to try both if your good at it though as like some say it’s about diversifying.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.

I was reading an article today that talked about this pastry and how so many people are lining up early in the morning to buy it. Basically, it sounded like how people were going crazy over Krispy Kreme donuts before here. The article went on about how some people were willing to travel very far as well just to chow down on one. When you think about it, that is one expensive pastry one would be paying.

This article reminds me a lot when it comes to people’s hobbies and habits and the amount of money it costs to allow one to do so. I usually hear debates such as how some people think it is ridiculous to spend say $7 on a great drink that will last for maybe 2 minutes or some say it is such a waste of money to buy expensive things like a movie collection or video game.

In those cases, the debate is usually around how long you will actually use the product to classify something as being justifiable in spending money on it. For example, would you be able to justify paying $200 for a haircut knowing that it is great while at the same time realizing that it won’t last very long? I generally have a personal expectation myself in terms of the cost and result of something to justify spending money on it. It’s really interesting to see other people’s point scale systems too, so to speak.

For blog updates subscribe to our RSS feed.