shortfatbalduglyman wrote:
funeral empire
it's a balance.
it's good to do some things. you have to balance risk versus reward.
I agree wholeheartedly that one has to balance the risk vs. reward. You just seem consistently risk-averse to the point of it causing greater harm than it prevents.
I wouldn't suggest being as reckless as I was at times when I was younger, but sometimes the fairest read of a situation is that the worst likely outcome is survivable and that with the abilities one possesses, a desirable outcome is within reach.
You often talk about some people picking all of the battles, which can't be true because you only see some of their battles to begin with. But, what you do see is them picking battles you wouldn't, because they trust they have a reasonable chance of winning those battles. Especially when they involve people who rarely or never pick any battles.
I'm not saying to become reckless or belligerent, but instead to be mindful that experience with taking risks or with pursuing conflict tends to make one better equipped to manage those situations successfully in the future.
It might also lead to less passive-aggressive rumination on here, since fewer defeats should mean fewer grievances to collect.
Feeling miserable and defeated all of the time is one of the harms that results from not taking the right risks when the opportunity presented itself.
_________________
There's no such thing as a free market.If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm XJust a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.