As I have grown older my view of money has changed. As younger I thought it to be sums in a bank. But having money in a bank but being with very little experience in using it, and then investing in something big. propably does not make on succeed in an investment. Likewise it does not make one succeed in safeguarding the money so detailedly as one planned. A more emotional and flexible, yet rational way of using money seems better. Using little sums of money and not saving so large part of what one earns makes one more experienced in buing and in fitting together thinking and feelings. Feelings connect to goals and to one's touch of what works well and what not, even if one does not always know the reasons for such. Like if one does not succeed in safeguarding all of one's money but one still plays by the ordinary rules, does it mean that if for example via foreigners wanting Finnish money, someone working in a bank steals some partm, your maney is largely still safe, since they can collect their sums from smaller parts and still get them?
I have had for some time a small money tree plant which has via time become even smaller. I bought it from a large market for less than ten euros, for the ordinary price of green plants. I have via it learned something about buying. The shop does not always have all things, so planning too much does not work well: one might so get extra expenses quite much and not so successful things bought. But if one is kind of catching changes, using more time and being open to options, then one can catch bargains and change plans to suit them, and those are often the best things that the shoipkeeper wants to sell. Yet it is far from being detailed in using money.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti