This rebuttal made me laugh again,

I don't know why "ordinary people" are swapped for "cash flow broke, living paycheck to paycheck, and individually in debt".

Is there a cognitive bias here?

What you are talking about is not ordinary people at all; these are individuals whose finances are already in a dangerous zone. For such people, the issue is not long-termism versus short-termism,

but the fact that there should be no ideology at all; they should not invest first, but rather fix their cash flow first.

Secondly, you swap "long-termism" with "mindless dollar-cost averaging, stubborn holding, and ignoring risk". What kind of logic is this?

We are discussing a long-termism system: cash flow, low leverage, position size, dollar-cost averaging, quality assets, health, and income capability.

You are rebutting the target in your own mind that claims "the poor can also go all in for the long term", which is equivalent to setting up a target for yourself to shoot at; is this interesting?

Third, you swap "threshold" for "qualification". Long-termism certainly has thresholds, but the threshold is not meant to keep ordinary people out; rather, it is to tell ordinary people how to gradually build long-term capabilities.

Moreover, having a threshold ≠ you are not deserving. Having a threshold = you should start with cash flow, discipline, position size, and risk control. Furthermore, this threshold is much lower than the threshold for achieving some significant outcome or opportunity in the market, which is why I say it is suitable for ordinary people.

Here are some of my advice; I will not respond to this post anymore,

I do not expect my views to save certain people; if you happen to see this and agree, congratulations to you, you must be exceptionally talented,

if you think all of this is nonsense, that's perfectly fine, I won't rebut you.

People need to go through experiences; the reason why the "chives" (a slang for people who are easily exploited) are called chives is that they can only be harvested and cannot be redeemed,

I'm not here to redeem anyone, I'm only redeeming myself!

1️⃣ Go read "The Psychology of Money". Ordinary people can only earn through investment in one way:

Use long-term unused money to continuously buy low-cost, quality assets, control position size and leverage, ride out volatility, and let time and compound interest make money for you.

Note, every word in this sentence is important:

Long-term unused money means you cannot use living expenses, rent, or emergency money for investment; low-cost quality assets mean not randomly buying useless coins, memes, contracts, or fakes; controlling position size and leverage means not going all in or borrowing money to speculate; riding out volatility means not cutting losses at every dip or chasing at every rise; time and compound interest mean you accept slowly getting rich, rather than fantasizing about making a fortune overnight.

This is what I call long-termism.

People with broken cash flow, living paycheck to paycheck, or heavily in debt are certainly not suitable for investment.

But this is not "ordinary people are not suitable for long-termism"; this is "people whose finances are already in danger are not suitable for investment".

If a person doesn't even have cash flow, doesn't have a month of stable income, and is even in debt, then what is most important for them now is not investment, but:

First work,

first pay off debts,

first reduce expenses,

first build an emergency fund,

first get their cash flow positive.

Isn't this long-termism?

You think this is survivalism; I say this is just the first step of long-termism.

True long-termism does not start with buying BTC, NASDAQ, or S&P,

true long-termism starts with "not letting yourself be wiped out by short-term risks".

2️⃣ Your biggest problem is saying "long-termism has thresholds" as if to imply "ordinary people are not qualified for long-termism".

This is a conceptual swap.

Long-termism certainly has thresholds.

But these thresholds are not about identity, assets, or stating that if you are not A8/A9 you are not qualified to discuss the long term.

They are behavioral thresholds.

Can you control debt?

Can you keep working consistently?

Can you stabilize cash flow?

Can you avoid high leverage?

Can you not invest living expenses?

Can you participate each month with only a small amount of spare money?

Can you commit to long-term learning, long-term reflection, and long-term income capability improvement?

These are not exclusive capabilities of the rich.

These are precisely the capabilities that ordinary people should establish.

So my point has never been: "Ordinary people can just mindlessly dollar-cost average."

My point is: ordinary people should use long-termism to establish a system for survival, accumulation, investment, and growth.

And you repeatedly raise "living paycheck to paycheck, cash flow broke, and heavily indebted groups" to refute long-termism, just like when others say ordinary people should exercise, you jump out and say: can someone who just had surgery run? Can a person with a broken bone lift weights?

Of course not.

But can this prove that ordinary people should not value health?

No, it cannot.

It can only prove: people at different stages need to use different intensities and methods to establish the same long-term goals.

3️⃣ Survivalism is not the opposite of long-termism, but the foundation of long-termism.

First survive, then talk about long-termism; this statement in itself is not wrong.

But the problem is, how can you survive?

By waiting to seize an opportunity and go all in?

By short-term speculation?

By hoping a contract will help you flip your fortune?

By getting rich from a scam?

By completing a class leap in one window?

This is the most dangerous illusion for ordinary people.

A person with poor cash flow, high debt, and low risk tolerance, if still thinking of flipping their life through investment, most likely won’t achieve a comeback but rather a crash.

People with broken cash flow should not invest; first, fix cash flow;

People with high debts should not speculate; first, reduce debt;

People with unstable income should not leverage; first, stabilize income;

People without emergency funds should not have a full portfolio of assets; first, keep a safety net;

People who cannot endure volatility should not heavily invest in high-volatility assets; first, build knowledge and position discipline.

This is not against long-termism.

This is exactly long-termism.

Long-termism is not "I will only think long-term once I have money". Long-termism is "I will start today, no longer using short-term impulses to ruin my long-term life".

4️⃣ Survivor Bias

Long-termism certainly does not guarantee success.

No method can ensure that ordinary people will definitely get rich.

But compared to "waiting for an opportunity to go all in," long-termism is at least a path that is more replicable, lower risk, and more in accordance with the real conditions of ordinary people.

Why are short-term wealth stories so appealing?

Because they are stimulating.

Because they are fast.

Because they make people feel they can also turn their fortune around.

But the problem is, those who died in the market do not speak.

Those who face liquidation do not review their positions daily.

Those who go to zero do not become case studies.

What is truly spread is always the few exceptional success stories.

This is called survivor bias.

If you see someone make money through ten years of compound interest and say this is survivor bias;

yet you expect ordinary people to wait for an opportunity to go all in, isn’t that a greater survivor bias?

The biggest problem for ordinary people is not that there are too few opportunities.

The biggest problem for ordinary people is that they cannot afford the wrong opportunities.

5️⃣ Conclusion —

I do not oppose the notion that long-termism has thresholds,

long-termism certainly has thresholds.

But ordinary people are not unqualified for long-termism simply because there are thresholds.

Ordinary people actually need to gradually cross these thresholds through long-termism.

True long-termism is the simplest, lowest-cost, and most realistic method for ordinary people to combat uncertainty.

Lastly, I also laughed when my wife was brought into the discussion; her success in investing has nothing to do with my money; she simply used a very small portion of her salary to adhere to the simplest principles:

No reckless leverage;

No using living expenses to gamble;

No day trading or chasing after spikes;

No getting scared out by short-term volatility;

Having stable cash flow;

Having a family safety net;

Willing to execute a simple yet correct strategy.

Isn’t this precisely the model that ordinary people can genuinely replicate?

This part is not about my understanding; it is not about my position but about this discipline of behavior: first fix cash flow, then control debt; first establish a safety net, then allocate assets; first improve income capability, then wait for opportunities; first let yourself survive, then gradually become stronger.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。