I believe the  core principles of Bitcoin is Decentralized, Anonymity and privacy. But equality? I don't see how Bitcoin can give people equality. Assuming there was actually a limited number of Bitcoin to which a particular individual can/should buy and everyone has an equal amount of Bitcoin they can purchase, then we can assume  that no one can be able to exceed a the number of Bitcoin that they can buy and thus ensuring equality, but we that's not the case here. There's no way everyone can be equal as it concerns finance, and that's not what Bitcoin is here to do.

First of all, I never said the only reason why teams fail is because they fail to listen to the coach, I literally just pointed that out as one of the good reasons.

Secondly, a team's success isn't determined by just their performance in a single game, the fact a team losses a game doesn't mean they're failures, besides I don't think there is any team that hasn't lost a game, regardless of how skillful their players are

Thirdly, inasmuch as a player's skills is an advantage to the team, I'd the coach doesn't know how to use that player, those skills might just be as good as useless to the team. Ever asked why some outstanding and skillful players leaves their team/club and gets transfered to another club and instead of living up to their performance in the previous club, they end up turning into flops in the new team, you think that's mere coincidence or maybe he suddenly lost his skills.

The only thing at this point that could pace a threat to your investment is financial emergencies. I believe before you must've already had some sort of financial cushion in place before hitting this milestone because there's no way that one could hold for that long without being challenged by an emergency that'd require immediate financial attention and without the presence of a financial cushion, the only option would either be to take loans or to turn to your investment for financial assistance, which both would potentially pose a threat to the growth of your investment. So if you've got a financial cushion and you've safety stored your investment, then you've got absolutely nothing to worry about.

You're right about the fact that both the player's and the couch plays a vital role towards ensuring the success of a team. And what most people do not understand is the fact that these two needs to work together, the player's needs to really submit to the leadership of the coach in order to for them to deliver effectively the coach's plans and strategies. It doesn't matter how good a player is, if he's not always following the scripts written by the coach, there'll always be a problem, it's just like a game of chess, while the Queen is the most flexible piece, it'll still depend on the expertise of the player before the Queen's potentials can be really onfolded. and same thing goes with the coach, it doesn't matter how strategic the coach is, if he can't get the player's to dance to his tune, the team will definitely fail.
So in a case where a team is failing, sometimes it could be a case where the players are no completely listening to the coach or a case where the coach isn't strategic enough. So sometimes it could be the fault of the player's and sometimes it's the coach, depending on the reason for the failure.

Well those students who are in higher institutions have way more to lose than just their lunch money mate. They might not be spending as much as most of the regular gamblers but the fact still remains they're still very vulnerable. Should they get addicted to gambling, a student could even end up using his tuition fees to gamble with high hopes of multiplying it. Sometimes I don't actually blame some students who actually turn to gambling, because some of them end up exhausting money for their upkeep earlier than they're supposed to but still have other financial needs left, and since not every students has the luxury of working while studying, they turn to gambling.

I believe one of the job rules would be not to indulge in gambling just like as it is with the athletes or footballers, because those folks would be exposed to a lot of information, even those that are too delicate and are not expected of them to publicise them, and I believe if they make use of those information on gambling, it might turn out to be a cheat.

If that is so, then doesn't that mean that the you would still stand more chances of losses even when you switch to a different game (which i believe is still the case) because even when you switch to a different game, there are still others who were playing and still playing that game before you, and the chances of those people to win are high which means that the wins of those people would still drop the RTP making you still vulnerable or exposed to the same risks of losses.

This was indeed an educative response as I have grabbed some solid points which you have elaborated on, and i can i say that i completely agree with the way you laid out those points. Cash does indeed serve its own purpose, especially when folks are still relatively in their early stages of building their financial base. When folks have that initial buffer of around 3-6 months' worth of expenses, it gives them that financial security, peace of mind and also literally protect them from tapping into their investment, should incase financial needs that requires their immediate attention arises in subsequent time. But just as you have rightly stated, that doesn't in any way mean that cash or fiat is an ideal way to store one's value for the long term because inflation can easily and slowly make make the value of your wealth fade away overtime.

The best part about investing in Bitcoin is that, the more one continues investing and growing their Bitcoin portfolio, the lesser they rely on Fiat or cash as a safety net. At this point, rather than cash, folks will now rely more of their other income streams, their diversified investment and even the growth of one's Bitcoin position could sometimes potentially serve as back up layer, which potentially reduces the need to leave a huge some of cash just lying around. I also saw lots of sense in your perspective and point about diversifying to other asset classes when folks notice that their Bitcoin holding has actually reached a point of covering a year or more of their living expenses, and this isn't because Bitcoin isn't reliable or a bad place for your funds to be but simply because it also makes sense to allocate into other other asset classes, and diversifying to other assets helps to balance liquidity, time horizon and even volatility.

You are also right about the fact that different people who get started in Bitcoin investment do so from different starting points. An individual who already have an existing stock or other investments will definitely have different decisions to weigh compared to someone who is still very new to investment and hoping to have Bitcoin as their first serious asset. Either ways, the key lies in what you said, which is the individual's ability to weigh volatility, liquidity and the long term growth and potentials of the asset. Unlike other traditional assets, Bitcoin has displayed and shown its uniqueness because of its asymmetric upside, but context is really important and matters a lot when it comes to integrating it with everything else.

I believe i get what you are trying to say but IMHO, i don't think i will ever feel like losing everything would be more preferable than losing some of the money, simply because i could've won the whole money but didn't because i cashed out early. No matter the angle i try to look at the whole thing, having a single slice of the cake will always be way more better than not having anything at all. at least I'll get to recover my capital, which is more important to me.

I've also had similar experiences like this before, and you are damn right those experiences are hard to forget, but the best part of those experience is that it has thought me some valuable lessons about being too greedy and wanting to take the whole cake when you can just take a few slices and still be happy you had some at the end of the day, rather losing everything on a quest to take everything.

Yeah, I totally get where you're coming from and honestly think you're right about your perspective. The key isn't just about saying invest a certain percentage of your income, the real question should be, just as you rightly noted, what is really left with you after covering all the basics. The real decision making happens with the discretionary income. Some could decide to put 100% of that into accumulating Bitcoin, but he does this, there'll certainly be no room left for Emergency fund or unexpected things, and yeah, that could be considered to be leaning too far into risky, and in such a case, it'll be smarter to just hold back a little and readjust your approach.

I also believe that the example you gave about the guy earning $2000 income a month really helps to further make it more concrete. If $1k goes to essential expenses, $300 goes to some other things that are actually discretionary, which of course leaves him with around $700,  now the wise thing to do in this scenario would be to split it into two equal halves, one going to Buying Bitcoin and the other half goes into backup funds. This way, the approach is well balanced because this shows that he's simultaneously building his future as well as a safety net to fall back on, should incase an emergency occurs unexpectedly. And when his emergency funds is strong enough to carry at least 3 months worth of his living expenses, he can then make the necessary adjustments and even if he invests all $700 into Bitcoin, it wouldn't be seen as reckless any longer because he already have a safety net, should incase something unexpected comes up, rather, it could be seen as taking advantage of his financial stability.

Yeah, you're absolutely correct that a lot of people finds it hard to be able to save even up to 10% of their income. So if an individual decides to put in 17.5% into Bitcoin, when you look at it at first, it might seem like a really small amount, but when you also consider the fact that it is around 35% of his discretionary income, then the whole picture changes. That's far from being whimpy, on the contrary, it's a very disciplined approach.

Ever wondered why some gamblers are struggling with gambling addiction, and others are actually having fun and leaves the casino happy irrespective of the outcome of the gambling. it all boils down to their abilities to stick to basic gambling rules. Those who observe and stick to those rules are most likely to have a pleasurable experience, and it doesn't matter whether they lose or win, it sure also doesn't matter what strategy they choose to apply.

I'll agree with you that gambling is mostly an individual thing and every gambler must tailor out their own unique strategies just like in trading. but when it comes to rules, there are indeed some basic rules that every gambler must adhere to if they must maintain a safety gambling habit, and not adhering to these such rules might result to irresponsible gambling and most definitely unintended losses. so while you are busy developing and tailoring your own unique strategy that suits your style and financial position, it is important to stick to certain rules that keeps you safe as a gambler.

Except of course the gambler is a beginner who knows very little or nothing about gambling and just wish to test his luck by making some lucky picks, I can remember doing that in my early days as a gambler, I knew absolutely nothing about sports gambling, but since people around me were gamblers, i was quite curios to give it a try, and my first attempt were lucky picks, i knew absolutely nothing about what i was doing but still made the picks anyways, and even if it didn't turn out successful, but it kinda gave me a sort of insight and gradually, i got better in making analysis.

A wonderful new week to you Sir Hhampuz.

I'd like to request for another change of address, I know this is much of a stress considering the fact that I had just recently changed to a new address and I sincerely apologize for whatever inconvenience this may be causing cause you.

Here's the new address Sir: bc1qkc788mg4y00jdy3w55v2wqt2dkc89lj8wwz35n

This here is a very important nuance that most people miss whenever they're making broad comparisons between being single and being married, as it concerns their finances. You're very correct with your thoughts and I completely agree that it's less about the individual's marital status, but more about the complexities of the individual's overall financial situation, which of course as we know can take many forms. Marriage can undoubtedly add some new layers of responsibility and obligations, but that doesn't in anyway imply someone who's not yet married doesn't also have these responsibilities and obligations too. Besides marriage and family, a single person could have other things that might as well demand so much from him, like his business, juggling employees and even the need to balance family responsibilities outside marriage.

So when thinking about financial needs, it makes more sense to think about it in terms of the level of entanglement the individual has, rather than just focusing on the binary aspect of being married or single. Some individuals keep their expenses and work relatively simple, like offering their own services or running a straightforward side business, which may not require so much or be so demanding, while some other individuals decide to take on a much larger ventures that demands ongoing commitment and of course safety nets. The folk with the more intertwined income sources and obligations have more need to hold more backup reserves regardless of their marital status.

And then again, you're also very correct to point out the fact that marriage does have the ability to reshape a person and the equation, and this comes in both directions. In one way, it could potentially complicate matters by introducing some sort of shared responsibilities and expectations, while also looking at it from the other angle, it could also bring stability or some additional income, which can potentially offset some burdens. The key takeaway from this, is to not just go with the assumption that being married automatically reduces one's financial freedom or that life is simpler for single person. Each of these situations uniquely comes with its own variables and the decisions people make about their finances should account for those specific realities and not marital or generic assumptions.

I've surfed the net for credible source(s) that validates the claim of Africa launching their own different internet protocol stack that doesn't work on Google's or American Server,  but unfortunately I can't seem to find a reliable source, I'm an African and inasmuch as I'd like those claims to be true, I'm a afraid that's not entirely true.

What's actually happening is more of a push for digital sovereignty in Africa. More local data centres, subsea capbles, internet exchange points as well as policy coordination, in order to allow data to stay within the African locales. Smart Africa, in collaboration with the AU are actually the ones making this push. And for what it's worth, most of the bandwidth growth still comes from those Big Tech cables, like the Meta-backed 2Africa and Google's Equiano.

Honestly, I really don't have a budget, but I still manage to regulate my gambling. Most of the times that I gamble, I don't usually plan to, I might just check the games for that day, and if I'm moved to make my prediction, I will, and by sticking to this habit, I manage to not gamble frequently, maybe twice or thrice a month, and with very little amount of money.

That's an important question Mate. When it comes to Investing in Bitcoin, there's actually a thin line between being aggressive enough to maximise on potential gains and being overly or too aggressive to the point that it turns to recklessness, and this all depends on two things, which is your financial reality and your emotional resilience. I believe the main idea is that to take on enough exposure that your stash can potentially grow substantially in the long run, but not so much that you'll be forced into a financial hardship or panic by a sharp downturn.

If you've got a solid financial cushion in place, a steady income stream(s) and of course a long term perspective, then surely you are free to lean more aggressive, and this is because Bitcoin's volatility is a lot more easier to ride out when you don't have the need for the money anytime soon. But even then, when those aggressions becomes way too much, it turns into recklessness and that's when the real danger sets in. Recklessness could be seen as, going all in, acquiring some debt to keep the accumulation going or maybe using leverage. It's a lot more healthier for every investor to size their Bitcoin position at a particular level that even if there's a downturn in the market and their Bitcoin portfolio size drops by 50% to 70%, it won't affect you pretty much or push you to panic sale.

I believe the ultimate test to consider one's level of aggressiveness is psychological, any investor that can hold through a red market without losing sleep is definitely still within a reasonable level of aggressiveness. But when you start to observe that your exposure has now become a threat to either your peace of mind or your financial stability, then that's a major cue that you've crossed the line.

Not just unreasonable, but also has the potential to birth irrational thinking and behaviour that could lead to even more losses or even addition. every gambler should come to the realization that losses are an inevitable aspect of gambling, and that no one regardless of their expertise is above losses, and perhaps this could help them device a better way to approach gambling in order to avoid unintended and unnecessary losses.