Death if you don't GIVE to the young.
gdvonly This is a little different, it's really more like "if you can't GIVE to YOUNG PERSON than yourself, you will die". This is a matter of course, and essentially younger people are stronger. In history, people who have taken too much from the young have usually perished. If everyone realizes this and puts it into practice, then revolution will soon occur and confusion will ensue, so a system like seniority by length of service is effective for the sake of overall optimal order. In Asia, Confucianism is automatically installed. But with entrepreneur and such, that rule is almost unnecessary. Since it exists for revolution in the first place. It's more profitable to hide your rationality and act like you have good intentions, so that's why you say it that way.
By the way, it is even more serious today because young people are stronger and have a much longer average life expectancy.
That's the way I am, and I live my life with the help of people younger than me somehow.
>0xfene I felt somewhat sorry to consult with senior managers because I was inexperienced and had nothing to give. Then, from a senior manager,
"Don't worry about being young, it's worth it."
gdvonly So the optimal action on the young side is to GIVE back to the older side. If you are older, you will die if your default is not able to GIVE, but you will be in a heck of a pinch if the opposite is true.
As a result, an impossible give may be returned that is not commensurate with the market price.
All successful young entrepreneurs do this.
I feel that this statement is a bit of a bosichon talker's flourish with this statement.
relevance
---
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/若い人にgiveしないと死 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.