I Have the Money, What Shall I do With It?

June 15, 2010

Just as your status says, wealth is rarely an accident. Capital preservation and not interest is the more important consideration when choosing among investment vehicles at your age. Not saying not to risk at all. You could, if you know what you are doing. But if we put your age in the equation, safeguarding your 300K becomes all the more critical. At you age (and at this time when uncertainty predeominates) if you would like to take a risk, risk a little.

1. Avoid high risk ventures like the forex and stock markets (and those investment products that are derived from them like hedge funds, mutual funds and UITFS).
2. Money market and bonds are relatively low risk, but offer less returns than the former. But based on personal experience, revenues from these products almost equal that of regular TDs.
3. Definitely, you should now be looking into deals that are insured by the government or insurance companies, like T-bills, lifeinsurance/healthinsurance/pension, time deposits and similar instruments.

Nothing against PMters or other people for that matter who offer, for a lack of appropriate term, “casual” money contracts. I believe that these arrangements pose the same threat as the riskiest of investment products. I don’t think, these would suit you either.

Anyway, this is just my opinion. Invest but don’t lose money.

Do you think you can be wealthy?

March 20, 2009

We put so much importance in money (not because we are in Pinoymoneytalk) but because it has been made an intermediary of trade. Something that we regard with value because in the first place it has to have worth, otherwise how can we use it as medium for our exchanges? It is NOT the pursuit of money that made Celso delos Angeles or Madoff or our corrupt officials for that matter, evil men. But HOW they accrued the money, the MANNER by which they were able to procure such wealth that made them wicked human beings. Afterall I don’t think you can say the same thing for Oprah?

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with wanting to have more or most (but with wanting to have less – e sakit ata yan, hehehe). But again, with how you are planning to amass such wealth that determines if it is greed or not. Though it is true that we need only air, water, food, and shelter to exist, they are not the ONLY things man needed to survive not to mention PREVAIL. And It is the pursuit of money or should I say what we can do with it (besides, can you still tell the difference) that makes man, ironically - CREATE, INVENT, and INNOVATE.

E sandali nga, e di kung di mayaman e ano ngayon? Hehehehe. It will not be the end of the world (but perhaps "my" world)

As for the question, who wouldn’t want, wish, pray and hope, (least think) they could be wealthy? The question is WHEN and HOW? (Next week, pag nanalo ako sa lotto)

Seriously though, it is easier said than done.

Is it called Financial Freedom or Greed?

March 13, 2009

Me difference pala? Hehehe.

In psychiatry, a psychological disturbance becomes a disorder, when it impairs the functioning of the individual, be it in the activities of daily living (like eating, bathing, etc), or in the more complex functioning as decision making. I guess we can use this tool to tell when financial freedom becomes already greed. But in this case, the individual we are pertaining to is not only the one who is in pursuit of it, but the people who might get affected in the pursuit as well.

For me there is nothing to discern. For one, they belong at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Financial freedom is something that is good, while the other is bad (absolutely and not relatively). The former is an end. While the latter is more of a means to achieving an end.

However the parallelism exists between the two because one is a matter of perspective while the other is not. Because of our individuality, the definition of financial freedom is viewed at many context, such that its pursuit may resemble that of greed. But when it does, it is not financial freedom anymore, but, greed, actually.

Financial Freedom means different things to different people. It entails a spectrum of definition from having nothing at all,no possessions, staying under the government’s mercy, commuting and not having the burden of owning a car, for example at one end. For some it simply means being debt free, having a decent salary, having enough money for retirement or earning (a lot) from passive income. And at the other, being extremely wealthy – being able to buy anything, wanted or needed, having the money to take lavish vacation, the power to buy expensive cars and jewelries. You see, the latterdefinition is the one responsible for the ambiguity.

Being greed as an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth, and since that clearly what one needs is but a matter of opinion, it then confounds us as to what makes greed andfinancial freedom different from one another? It is the denial of the same goods (food, power or wealth for this matter) to others that completes the meaning of greed and that which makes it distinct fromfinancial freedom.

Thus when money is pursued to have the power to buy dignity or life for example, now that one is greed. But when it is used to buy a diamond, well that one is a matter of opinion. Hehehe

Why Savers are Losers Literally?

Jan 16, 2009


Well, there’s always a goal for starting a thread. I’m sure, learning is one of them. So let’s always be nice. Hehehe.

Given the title though and the many reactions here, it makes me wonder, is this just to promote some products, say BDOs UITFS, create a controversy, call all PMTers to a “get-together” or to simply define the terms. Which by the way, are pretty much being achieved, here, most singlehandedly by the one who started it, kinda impressive i may say, and no offense, hehehe.

Except for the logic and the definition of terms.

To be honest, like many others probably here, i find the title a little bit offensive, really. Hehehe. Not because I am a LOSER (yes, I am pretty much convinced that I’m not) but because I am a SAVER too, and an investor, but with the present economic crunch, more of the former and not YET a GAINER. But ironically, right now, I am LOSING my money NOT in SAVING, but rather in INVESTING. So if you come to think of it, though I know what the thread is trying to get across (that saving can’t beat inflation), the LOGIC behind the statement (that savers are losers) FALTERS (because losing is also possible ininvesting). If I have to agree on it, it has to be figuratively and not literally. Hehehe.

There are only 2 sets of terms here that need defining. Saving vs Investing, Losing vs Gaining. With saving and investing , though 2 different concepts, are both IMPORTANT means in amassing wealth. You need both to achieve your financial goal.

Saving by definition is putting your money in savings accounts, TDs, or money markets for the protection and preservation of money from loss, which gains interest but not enough to beat inflation in the long term.

Investing on the other hand, is committing your money in risky vehicles such as stocks and mutual funds, which may lose in the short term but gain in the long term due to an overall upward pattern.

We INVEST to cover our future needs. We SAVE to address our short-term necessities, at the same time PROTECTING your investment capital given that your money in the bank is always intact and accessible for emergencies, unlike your investments.

As you can see, sir FutureGizmo is right, there is no debate here. Because we realize in the end, it’s not really saving or investing that will make you a loser or a gainer, but rather its your decisions, and money management that will make you one, LITERALLY.

Do We Have to Get Rich?

Sept 1, 2007

We should get RICH

I don’t know how the dictionary defines the word. But for most of us, this is something relative. Meaning, when one has more compared to others, he is rich. Can I use the analogy of the pie?

Now imagine the pie as wealth. And we all have to share it. If one gets much much more than the others (say 5 slices out of 10, and he isn’t sharing anything) and five more people would have to share the rest (maybe one would end up with nothing), then the problem begins. This is the unequal distribution of wealth.

Now, what’s the reason why one would end up with a lot? For most of us, we'd think we've been cheated on. But maybe it just so happened that he’s got the more appetite, or means. It’s true that supposedly, we should get an equal share, a pie for each person,but then again, this is the problem with democracy, freedom gets abused. And more importantly, I’m sorry to say, this is but man's natural tendency. And only a few can resist. Personally, it’s difficult to change reality. Ok, I know, it begins by a change in one’s self, but the above isn’t something that can be done overnight. I don’t have a lifetime.

If you (good-hearted people) can take more pie to give to those who doesn’t have the means, why not. Instead of greedy people getting their hands on them.

Or, if only we have the same appetite for wealth, it is likely that we’ll end up with an equal share.

Personally, I choose the second option. So, kainan na (lol)!

P.S. nakaka-addict pala dito, I think, stop muna kasi di ako makapagtrabaho.

Can You Live On Investing Alone?

August 31, 20o7

Funny, but this was my original plan, until I got first hand experience if I only had my investments to depend on.

IF you, are referring to these investments, bonds, equities, stocks, even real state, and NOT your OWN businesses, then it’s not enough. Before these can give you enough yield, you must have a huge capital.

Let’s say, you have a huge sum. Investments differ in yield. Lets just say, your 600T in UITF can earn from 0-30T or more depending on the stock market. Losing is always there.

Investment is risky. Again it’s common knowledge. However, the riskier the higher the interest is. I myself experience losing some 75% of my money in a scam (I didn’t know it was legal, and I was ignorant then ). Well, even if I know better now, I still experience losses.

And viewing it in another perspective, people who retire young have the tendency to live a sedentary lifestyle. Have you ever wondered, why farmers live longer than some executives? This is kinda off-topic but people often forget to consider the benefit we get from being engaged in work. Example, your walk to the office every morning, and back to your home may give ou the 30-minute exercise you need. Work hard or less (depends on your preference, but definitely don’t stop working) AND work smart, that, is better.

Is a House a Liability or an Asset?

Nov, 26, 2o08

If we are going to be strict about the definition of liability as "something that takes money out of your pocket every month, wether you work or not", then life itself would be a liability.

But then again, if asset is, "something that puts money into your pocket each month, regardless if you work or not", life can only be an asset if you work or you make money from your mere “existence” (ansarap nun!). Otherwise, you are worthless. Papayag ba kayo?

Unfortunately, life is not the issue here, otherwise, I think I've settled the score already. Hehe. I'ts the house that we are trying to qualify as an asset or a liability.

Now the reason, I'm giving the above analogy for, is to support what neo just said. It doesn't mean that just because we are spending some money for owning a house, it becomes an accountability.

Besides, when we talk about income, it is the “net” proceeds that matters more. Clearly having your own house increases net returns as it decreases expenditure compared to renting an apartment. Unless of course, you prefer to stay in the streets.

“Revenues and expenses” will always be part of any aspect of life, literally and figuratively. Unless of course we return to prehistoric times. When everything (I think) is neither an asset nor a liability.

Or a liability! Try living during those times.

How Do You See Rich People?

Feb 14, 2008

How do I see rich people?

In terms of the amount of wealth – FORTUNATE
They get to buy the materials things perceivable

In terms of the way they were able to procure such a fortune:
If it’s inherited – PRIVILEGED
If it’s out of hardwork – ADMIRABLE
If it’s out of sinful acts, say for example, drug pushing and corruption – INHUMAN


In terms of the way they use their wealth:
If they use if for charitable purposes – COMMENDABLE
If they use it for power and manipulation – CRUEL


So how do I see rich people? My perception of them obviously varies considerably, but definitely the amount is not the only measure.

Bakit Mahirap ang Pinoy?

Sept 21, 2007

For the longest time, I blamed it on illiteracy because my mother brought me up to think that we were poor because my father had only a high school diploma. And so I strived hard (very ) and got myself even a postgrad degree.

When I started working, I realized, how come I still find it hard to achieve financial success? I thought, maybe, I’m not working as hard, not saving as much. So I worked 72 hrs, saved most of my money. But what I have couldn’t compare with what my peers get abroad (who work less hrs). This is when I realized, the problem is a poor economy. Which tured out to be one that was long shaped by corruption.

Then a few month ago, I came across an article in newsweek which tried to explain why some Asian countries especially, the Southeast Asian region has remained poor while contemporary countries like Taiwan and South Korea have gone past them. I was surprised actually that the author referred to these countries as our contemporaries when their economies are way above in comparison. We couldn’t have started on the same ground, I thought. But I was mistaken.

I couldn’t find the magazine anymore, but I’ll relate it as far as I could remember, the way I understood it.

According to her, after the World War II, the economy of most Asian countries used to be the same. After the war, we were left by out foreign allies to rule on our own. This is when we first had our government ruled by true Pinoys. However, this is when it all started.

After assuming power, officials from barangay captain to the highest authorities, gained control over resources which later on, they would claim as their own. Little by little, they started to build business, since they were the only ones who have capital, they soon gained control over most of the country’s businesses (kasi kanila iyon). This would soon tip the balance of wealth distribution on their favor.

In order to elude query eyes, they would have their wealth, businesses hidden under names of relatives and friends. Soon, they found a better way. These officials would run in politics as many times as our constitution permits, not for good governance, but to protect their interests. They then would pass the positions to their sons and daughters after their term expire in their desire for power and control. Again, to protect their ill-gotten wealth.

This scenario, holds true for other Asian countries as well. The reason why Taiwan have gone this far is because of a person who had the political will to change the system which made possible, economic growth.

This is how far I could remember it.

Poverty is a vicious cycle. We can’t know for sure when exactly it all started. But how and why, it’s so easy to tell. Because it has remained the same. At least in this country.

In fact, it’s so transparent that even outsiders, like the author could see right through it.

CORRUPTION.