Tag Archives: #Trajectory

Activation

Posted on by
Reply

Wrt success and happiness…

…what was your pick.

You said both, right?

There was a thing about that, though.

Thing was, success made one happy, sure, but how long did that particular happiness last?

It got boring after a point.

Taking any one thing, and succeeding at it again and again and again, gave no kick anymore, after a while.

Because everyone wished to succeed in life, and, also, because everyone strove to be happy, how would one go about making the happy condition regular, in worldly terms, apart from the spiritual angle?

Accumulation and activation of good fortune was a must here. How would one go about this?

By doing anything that helped the cause of another. By doing good deeds that helped something, or someone. This would then create a field of good fortune. On such very field, success could flow, towards one. No field meant no flow. Creating field after field, then moving on to create another – such behaviour would accumulate mountains of good fortune, which, upon breaching of critical mass, would get activated for fruition. Activation was important, since initial success motivated one to continue.

On this trajectory, success would eventually overflow. Perhaps there would be fame.

Hey, what had happened to one’s happiness?

Did it increase post activation? Upon fame? Or did it decline?

Down the line, the high would summon its buddy, the low.

Between highs and lows, there was a high chance of balance being lost. Happiness levels would start to decrease. There came a time when it was gone.

One started to ask. When was one happiest?

While creating field upon field, yes, that seemed correct, that’s when one was happiest.

Creation of good fortune, the sheer act, that was it.

One didn’t seem to bore of that particular kind of happiness emanating from creation.

That brought us back to the basic question.

What was worth striving for most in life?

To immerse repeatedly into the act? The act of creating good fortune?

That seemed to be the best answer.

2050?

Posted on by
Reply

Yes.

Why?

Why what?

Why 2050?

Growth trajectory.

Whose?

India’s.

What about it?

Spurts with bottlenecks. Not linear.

So?

Will take 2050 till fruition.

Meaning, for you?

Quest for multibagger accumulation will be successfully achieved.

By 2050?

Yeah.

Anything else?

My own trajectory.

Will you be around?

Not relevant.

Why?

I’ll leave the assets as my legacy.

To whom?

Family. Country. Charity.

Striving and then leaving it?

Doesn’t cause me any reaction.

Why?

It’s cost-free.

Meaning?

My principal is not invested. Pulled it out in profit. What remains in the markets is cost-free. I live and enjoy my life on my income, simultaneously creating a cost-free legacy. The cost-free-ness tricks my mind into an eternal hold. I stop jumping. Vicissitudes of price path have no meaning for me once something has become cost-free.

And why stop in 2050?

Growth culmination. India enters first-world territory. It becomes difficult to create multiples fast. Life is far more efficient, and so is price, then. Loopholes are filled in by artificial intelligence before an EoD chap like me can react. Info-flow is so fast and transparent, that everybody knows. Everyone is smart because they use the appropriate tools. Since all money is smart, there’s no edge anymore. But that’s 2050. Today, oh, there are edges. Inefficiency lasting longer than EoD. Sometimes lasting months. Loopholes. Pattern related. Operator related. Price related. AI is not fully there yet. Most market players are not smart, I think the official statistic reads 88%. Almost all tools look at the wrong stuff. By the time one reacts to indicators, which are a function of price, most of the edge is gone. Information-flow is not fast enough, and if you can read it in the numbers or the chart before it happens, the edge is huge. And, forget about transparency. It’s just not there. We’re sitting of big edges currently.

So, 2050, stop, and then what?

No idea. Let’s go with the flow. Right now the flow is leading up to 2050.

And what if there are world-shattering events before that?

We buy. We are almost always highly liquid. When we’re not, we start creating liquidity. We are never illiquid. 2050 is just a number. We have numbers to go on, like lamp-posts. It’s another lamp-post, like 1984, or Y2k, or what have you.

Do you want to be the person remembered for 2050?

That’s not even a question for me. I’m flowing with 2050 because that works for me. I don’t care about the rest. If you wish to think with that mindset, that’s on you.

Why rude?

Nothing rude or not rude about it. 2050 is part of my framework. Nothing more, nothing less.

I see.