[Tien]

Again.

The writer of the article presented his arguments in a way that I don't like. He could have easily presented his points in a much more less controversial manner to get his point across, but he decided to make people angry. I don't agree with the fact that getting people angry = changing their views. It actually accomplishes the opposite.


His point was that it's foolish to solely rely on a job to earn you a living. The world today is filled with so many oppurtunities that can earn you passive income = income that you don't have to work for to earn.

If you continuously leverage your brain you will achieve the status of creating passive income that you don't have to work for that far >>>>>> exceeds what you would make actually working at a job swapping hours for dollars.

That is the point he tried to make but made the mistake of making people angry. I DON'T agree with that, but I agree with his points.