android bbm

There's no such thing as a get-rich quick scheme.

There. I said it.

In the realm of human existence, there are only a handful of ways to get rich in the shortest amount of time. You could win the lottery, invent something that sells like hotcakes, author a best selling book, create a successful business, get a high paying job, inherit from a rich deceased relative, be a movie/rock/sports star, marry into a rich family, or find hidden treasure.

If you're live in some Southeast Asian country south of Taiwan and east of Vietnam like I do, you could also add being a corrupt government official, or working at the Bureau of Customs to the list.

The truth is, for the vast majority of us, our financial situations hardly deviate much from where we started from. Yes, there will be improvements, but these are incremental (albeit tangible), and nowhere near the rags to riches prospect that everyone dreams of.

In short, more often than not, if you're rich, you stay rich, and if you're poor, well, you stay poor. Of course this is not a hard and fast rule...there are exceptions, and you'd be surprised how hard work and perseverance go a long way towards achieving one's dream of financial bliss.

What everyone knows, and what almost everyone is quick to forget when faced with the prospect of a get-rich quick scheme is that it takes money to make money. That's why the rich get richer, and the poor, stay poor. Get-rich quick schemes were invented by people who wanted to generate instant wealth without the bother of investing their own money. So what do they do? They come up with systems were they use other people's cash.

The most common schemes are Ponzi schemes and pyramid schemes. A Ponzi scheme in simplest terms involves inducing people to invest money with the promise of a high return...more often than not too high to be sustainable, and without any concrete proof or only a vague description of how the money is invested or how it generates profit. A pyramid scheme on the other hand, is like a Ponzi scheme in that it induces people to invest their money, and the investors in turn are encouraged to find other investors, and so on and so forth. The key characteristic is that there isn't any tangible product or service to speak of. It's just money generation, and, in most countries, it's illegal.

Some manage to make pyramiding legal by simple adding a concrete product or service. In this case, the scheme is no longer pyramiding per se, it's now a Multi-level marketing scheme. While it's no longer illegal, to me at least, I think it's unethical, unsustainable, and encourages greed.

I've seen a lot of multi-level marketing schemes over the years, and, as much as I'm ashamed to admit it, participated in quite a few as well. The products can involve anything from hotel accommodations, herbal juices, vitamin supplements, shark oil, garlic capsules, imitation jewelry, leather goods, garments, cleaning products, cookware, ionized water, and the list goes on and on. Virtually any product can be shoe-horned into a multi-level marketing scheme, and people will continue buying into it, to be swayed by a mere (but impressive) PowerPoint presentation.

Frankly my experience in multi-level marketing wasn't that pleasant. Did I make money? Yes, I suppose. Did I get rich? No. If you're a multi-level marketing advocate you'd probably just say I didn't persevere enough in getting many downlines. You'd probably be right. In the end I find myself being reduced to a mere salesman, selling products people don't need, to people who don't want to buy them, only to get them in the same boat as I am. It's distasteful. You could probably get rich if in multi-level marketing if you really push yourself...but the scheme itself stimulates greed, you end up alienating a lot of friends, you saturate the market, enter into arguments as areas overlap and downlines cross, and at the end of the day, you're not even that richer. Is it worth it? In my book, no. The only ones who get rich in a multi-level marketing scheme are the product manufacturers/retailers who supply the object of the scheme, and those at the uppermost tiers (who probably started the scheme), leaving everyone else below to fight among themselves for prospective downlines. Again, it is distasteful, and quite indicative of how some people are willing to get rich at other people's expense.

Only recently a former officemate was inviting me to participate in another scheme of sorts. The rules seem simple enough. I'm supposed to invest 299 USD, and in a week's time, I'll get a return of 777 USD, or a return of investment of about 160%. When pressed for details, she said something vague about travel accommodations. The 160% return on investment by itself is already a red flag. No legal investments can offer such a high rate, and by itself is more than enough to arouse suspicion. I tried browsing such a a scheme on the internet and found this. Simply put, it's another multi-level marketing ploy that is in fact, under investigation. No way I'm giving away 299 USD. As if I had 299 USD in the first place anyway.

Face the facts people. You will never meet a person who got rich from a multi-level scheme (except of course the very top tier), the same way you'll never meet a fortuneteller or psychic who has won the lottery. Most of the die-hard multi-level marketers I know are still at it, moving to another scheme when the old ones saturate the market or become stale. Yes, it could be a way to eke out a living if you're really good at it...but let face it, you'll hardly get rich from it, and you'll probably lose a lot of friends along the way. You're probably better off with a stable, moderate to high paying job, especially if income security is what you're after.

I know a lot of multi-level marketing diehards out there...and to be honest, most of them are not very pleasant people to be with, almost always seemingly obsessed with making money, and are the type to say almost anything...even lie...just to close a transaction. And God do I hate liars.

Just consider yourselves warned people.

The Law of Conservation of Energy states: Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it may be changed from one form to another. The same can be said for money. It is neither created, nor destroyed, it has to come from somewhere.

So if the return seems too good to be true...then it probably is...and you should avoid it at all costs.

As for multi-level marketing...personally I'd rather not lose my soul for the pursuit of easy money. Because in the real world...there really isn't such a thing as easy money...unless you take advantage of another.

Tip:

When being recruited for a multi-level marketing scheme, save yourself the aggravation and just say No. If you're into that type of thing though, at least look it up on the internet to see if it's viable, or a scam.

Just a repost. You never know who might notice.

Anyone here interested in purchasing or leasing a plot of commercial land located along Commonwealth Ave. in Quezon City? It's my father's property, and it has a lot area of 2,844 sqm., with a number of residential improvements. The frontage is a bit on the small side, at 14 m., but it directly faces Commonwealth Ave.

The lot has been on the market for quite a while, but since the real estate market has been down for some time now...well you know how it is.

Just in case you're interested, or know someone who is, please feel free to leave a comment or to email me at ronallandottk@yahoo.com. To cut the hassle, would prefer to deal with direct buyers only. Sometimes it can be quite hard dealing with a multitude of brokers and middlemen...you know how that is too. :-)

You can also call 9315575 if you have any inquiries.

Siteplan of the property.


Aerial view. The road at the top of the photo is Commonwealth Avenue.


Here's a tighter aerial shot. The improvements are clearly visible from this distance.

And just in case you're wondering, no, I didn't hire an airplane or a helicopter. Used Google Earth instead. :-)

I've always prided myself for being strong...for being sure of myself. The irony is, that's all an illusion. An illusion I've built for myself to make sure that I'm always in a position of control, to give others the impression that I'm okay in my own little niche, the niche inside my head where I've often sought refuge to protect myself from the pain of the real world.

It's not often I drop that illusion to anyone I know. In fact, I can count on the fingers of one hand the times that I showed my true self to anyone, that of being a needy, insecure individual, devoid of self-confidence, always expecting things to go wrong, always in need of reassurance or validation of the things I do or think of.

Therein lies the rub.

It is this weak side of my persona...dare I say who I am for real, that I show to the few people I've really cared for. It is also this weak side...that disappoints them and drives them away. They see, and perhaps are attracted to the illusion of strength that I project, when in truth, despite my age, I am just a sniveling snot-nosed kid on the inside who needs someone to be there for me.

This is probably the reason why I have often been left behind through the years...and the reason why I've always been reluctant to be close to anyone in the first place...though I wouldn't want to admit it to myself. When I drop my mask, I'm just someone who's more of a burden that I'd care to think of myself as.

I guess this may well be one of those times again.

If this happens again, I may just have to admit the fact that I'm not one anyone would ever want to go out on a limb for, to takes risks for. I mean, why would anyone want to take a chance on someone who lives his life showing a false mask to the outside world, only to see a crumbling, rotten, termite-infested weak core on the inside?

It truly is ironic, if you think about it.

The only time I'm comfortable being my true self is with someone I really care for. But when they see who I really am under the surface...they turn tail and go...maybe not at first...but eventually.

It's not their fault I guess, even though I've spent years convincing myself that I'm a good person, an honorable person, a person who keeps his word. Maybe I really am not. I'm just weak. And no one wants to be with a weak person, who ends up being more of a liability than an asset. And no one really wants liabilities.

I guess this is the awful truth that I just have to accept.

It took me several years...but maybe that's what I need to admit to make peace with myself. That I'm just a burden to those I open up to...and I really don't want to be a burden to anyone.

If I lose what I have now...this would only confirm my worst suspicions about myself, and its probably not a good idea to show who I really am to anyone anymore.

It's disappointing...but I guess it can't be helped. Better I disappoint now than later I suppose...

Just when I was starting to feel really good about myself too...

I've always prided myself on being what I am. I guess what I really am on the inside is not something to be proud of.

*sigh*

Am I?

Someone close to me asked me once or twice if I'm the possessive type of person in a relationship. To be honest, I never really thought of myself as the possessive type. I've been in a few relationships in my life, and while I have my share of character flaws...more than my share actually, being possessive didn't seem to be one of them. I guess I could be mistaken for that though, because I am fond of giving my attention to someone I care for, but it doesn't really mean that I give my attention 24/7, nor do I obligate her to receive my attention, 24/7.

While I definitely enjoy the company of someone special, I would like to think that I know where the lines are drawn, and what things I shouldn't intrude into. I know this, because I tend to be a very private person myself, and indeed there are just some things that are better left to yourself.

Couples don't really have to tell each other everything. While I don't really like too many secrets between couples, it doesn't necessarily follow that one always has to tell the other everything. I suppose it depends on one's comfort level. If one is comfortable divulging all the details of his or her life, then let him or her do it by all means. If one isn't, then he or she shouldn't be forced to. Being forced to talk about stuff one would rather not only makes the person uncomfortable, and being uncomfortable is one of the last things you want when you're in a relationship.

I have this "thing" though. Not that I have many things like this, but there is this something I'm not really comfortable with... I just don't like it when a significant other (hypothetically speaking of course, since I may or may not have a significant other) would go out with another guy...just the two of them, even if I know there's nothing going on, even if I know that they're just friends...unless of course, they're related. I don't know if I'm being unreasonable or not...and I would like to think that I am not, but, that's it. That's my "thing". When I think about why such a situation upsets me, I guess it reminds me of less than pleasant things that happened in my past, that people aren't perfect and may fall to temptation, and that there are indeed people...who can...break your trust.

Looking at the big picture, it doesn't mean that I don't want my significant other (assuming I had one) living her own life, doing her own thing, going out with her own friends. Of course she can...and she should. Relationships should broaden the parties' horizons, and not limit them. A relationship is not a set of blinders one puts on the other party to narrow his or her view of the world. With respect to the "thing" I mentioned above, I just prefer it if she doesn't go out with another guy as a pair. It would be better it if they weren't just by themselves. Other than that, I don't really mind.

Maybe its paranoia I suppose. If I had the choice I'd simply rather not deal with the potential for gossip, the possibility of temptation no matter if remote, the emergence of doubt, or the chance for lies to rear their ugly heads. It's because yes, I've been in such a situation in the past, and no, it didn't turn out so good. The ironic thing is, it wasn't the going out with another guy, just the two of them which did me in. In fact I didn't mind...at least at the time. It was its aftereffects, which led to one thing and then another...and I don't really like thinking about it anymore.

What about now? If that "thing" happens again would it upset me? I guess it would. But would I be really, really upset? Probably not. Still...

Personally, I wouldn't do that, or at least avoid it as much as possible. That is, go out with another woman, as a pair. It doesn't really matter if we're not doing anything bad or illicit, or anything like that. It's just that I'd rather not give my significant other (again, assuming I had one) a reason to doubt me, and that's it.

Doubt leads to fear, fear leads to pain, pain leads to sadness...you know the rest. That's why I never liked it when there's doubt.

Back to the issue of possessiveness, I took this test just for the hell of it, and answered it as truthfully as I could. This is what I got:

Your score is 5. You don't really have any issues with possessiveness. You are a secure and trusting partner and this is to your credit. You don't let things get to you until you have a concrete reason to do so, and this makes for some really healthy relationships. Keep up the good work!

Go figure.

Maybe I'm really not that possessive at all. But let's see.

Foreword to the repost:

This is one of my most read blog entries, as well as one of my oldest ones, having been posted almost six years ago. Thought I'd post it again. Old or not, some people still find it interesting. That's one of the nice things about having posted a ton of entries. I can always recycle one if I'm suffering from writer's block. :-)

(Foreword to the repost dated June 3, 2010)

Foreword:

This is one of my very first posts, made more than a year ago. Just thought I'd post it again.

Since it is more than a year old, and written during the dawn of my blogging days, it doesn't really meet my present standards as far as the writing style and thoroughness are concerned, especially taking into consideration the fact that it deals with a rather touchy subject for some. Then, I just wrote for myself, about whatever comes to mind, without any regard for the sensitivities of an audience. A year later, some things have changed. Not only are there people kind enough to actually read what I post, my thoughts about the subject have also changed somewhat...mellowed down if you will, perhaps because of time and age.

However, I still think this post is still interesting, even a year down the road. Consequently, I didn't bother updating or rewriting it, and posted it exactly how it came out a year ago. As such, if you find it lacking in some aspect, don't forget to treat it for what it is...simply an old post, possibly written ahead of its time.

(Foreword dated November 25, 2005.)

I'm 32 years old, and I have been married once. That marriage had been over for the past five or so years, and declared null and void for the last two. Yet on occasion...like now for example...I still tend to reflect and ponder over it.

Divorce/annulment rates are on the rise, more so in developed and developing countries. I predict a trend: in a about a couple of generations...less than a hundred years...marriage would not be a prevalent custom or tradition between couples as it is today. It's just a matter of time before divorce/annulment rates take up a major portion of the marriage numbers...making marriage an inconsequential and insignificant undertaking.

Even now, we see the effects of this trend. Whereas marriage used to be an end in itself...a life decision...with lifetime consequences...it is common knowledge that marriage has not been as durable as a bond between couples as it was in the past. Instead, it is now considered more or less a stop over, a temporary and reversible state, much so that it is no longer unusual to see people move in and out of marriages repeatedly throughout their lives.

Don't get me wrong. I still respect marriage. In fact, I'd rather be married than single. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, or still cling to old morals and values, but a lot of people nowadays feel just the opposite.

Maybe it was inevitable. Historically, it has only been in the last forty to fifty years or so when we saw divorce/annulment rates skyrocket. And why did this happen? The number of broken marriages started a slow but steady upsurge when women started empowering themselves...the women's liberation movement of the 60's perhaps? Before, no matter how abusive, irresponsible, or downright unpleasant husbands became, their wives never left them, never filed for divorce, never separated from them. Why? Simply because they did what was expected from them at the time. Women were supposed to be homemakers, and unquestionably loyal to their husbands, no matter what. Nowadays, this sentiment hardly exists anymore, and women are hardly expected to remain silent in the face of spousal abuse. Of course, I do not condone abusive, irresponsible or unfaithful husbands...and women have the right to leave any environment...such as marriage...that is detrimental to their well being. But it seems that with our modern society granting equal status to women as a sex, the place of men being the traditional heads of families is now up for grabs. The logic is: if women can do anything men do, why can't they perform the functions of being head of a family?

Well, the reality is, yes, they can. However, this role as far as women are concerned puts them directly at odds with several thousand years of social traditions and customs which assume that the man is the indisputable head of a family. Perhaps this precept makes this pattern go against several million years of evolution as well. The end result of this is that there will be an inevitable clash for leadership of the basic block of human society...the family. And in the process, we can expect many families to be casualties of this conflict. I know I was. Maybe.

In the future, we will have women bearing children by different men. We have men living up to their polygamous nature. Marriage as a social institution will probably cease to exist, or probably still exist as an exception to general rule. In fact we can even see this happening today...just look around you. If this isn't the middle of some trend, I don't know what else it is. Scary? Perhaps. Society is changing faster than our sense of morals can keep up with it. And fear brings up a vicious cycle...fear of the weakening marriage bonds only weakens it further...in effect even less people would dare risk getting married.

This idea somewhat lodged itself in my brain after watching the movie The Stepford Wives. In the movie, husbands actually went as far as reprogram their wives with mid 20th century values...turning them into plain homemakers and housewives....The movie wasn't all that bad, and the premise was...intriguing to say the least. What will the family be like in the future? I cannot say with complete certainty, but it will be different from what we know. Same sex marriages are already in the horizon. What else is in store for us in the future? Whether it will be better...or worse, remains to be seen.

(Originally posted November 23, 2004)

I have writer's block. I don't know what to write about.

At this very moment I'm sitting in front of my notebook, listening to random MP3s, while I burn another hour before I can take to the streets.

Everything is a blank though. No, I'm not sad, nor am I depressed. Am I happy? In a general sense I am. Maybe I'm just bored, but then again I really have no idea what I want to do at this particular moment, so I'm sitting here, staring into space, my mind devoid of anything, except for the words I'm typing at this very moment.

The music of Coldplay fills the air, emanating from the tinny speakers of my cheap notebook while the setting sun shines its last few minutes of sunlight through the window blinds at the other side of the room. And here I sit. Pondering nullity.

I guess I could go for a cigarette right about now, but I'm making a conscious effort to reduce the number of cigarettes I smoke, so, no. I could go downstairs and check if the ATM to my bank is now online, but somehow I can't bring myself to stand up. Maybe later.

So what's on my mind? Nothing really. And I mean nothing. I think I ran out of scenarios to run through my head. I still have that favorite scenario of mine, what to do in case I win the Lotto, but I've thought about that so many times during my frequent episodes of idleness that I seem to have grown tired of that one.

I called up my son just to exchange a few pleasantries, but we really don't have much to talk about right now, so that's that.

Hmmm...

Maybe I could use a beer, but I guess my days of drinking for no reason are now numbered. Not that I'm complaining really, since I was never really much of a drinker in the first place.

Things have settled down on the western front though, so no worries there. No sense wasting brain cells on that anymore, I have already thought that situation and all possible scenarios related to that to death, and the bottom line is, Que Sera Sera.

I want to do something, though I don't really know what.

I'm not that hungry. Nor do I really feel like seeing a movie. I'm not that sleepy either. I'm not really lonely though...not anymore, so that's not it either. Maybe I should buy something, but I don't really need anything.

Daughtry is now playing.

I'm going to the place where love and feeling good don't ever cost a thing...

Do I feel like singing?

I'm not sure. I always liked singing to myself. When I drive, or when I'm alone. Lately someone kinda likes hearing me sing. I really don't mind...though it's a bit different. There was this one person a long time ago...who also used to like hearing me sing too, but that was so long, long ago, and I scarcely remember whatever feelings I had during that time, and how I felt whenever I sang a song to her then.

I still love singing though. And I don't really mind singing for another person...for her...now.

I used to be in a band, but that seems like a lifetime away. It's different now. Singing for her. How different? Basta.

Maybe I should pack up now. Only half an hour left before seven.

Maybe tomorrow I won't be such a blank.