the economics of...

...life.

there's always a trade off; somewhere, somehow.

the opportunity costs of a decision in life becomes easier to manage if you know what the ultimate objective is. in life, sometimes, you want to gain everything and do not want to lose anything. how?

how does one chase for the best of everything? how does one know that the probability is there? when it comes to facts and figures, it's easy. it is in fact, very impersonal. but what if it is personal? what if it is, an intimate matter? what about then?

this is worse than chess. i like the game, but i'm horrible at it. i understand it theoretically, but gravely lacking practice. i've chosen not to play it because i know i'm bad at it. the same can be said about life. there are things in life that you can choose to not participate in.

for example, the recent general elections. i did not participate, at all. means to say, i didn't vote. i chose to be ambivalent. i still do not fully understand the impact of the consequences of the election results in my life. i admit, i am not properly informed. worse still, i do not actively seek out the information. (that's a long-winded way of saying, i'm not bothered. it doesn't mean though, that i don't care).

a conversation with a friend brought up the topic of 'the impact of the election results on the inter-racial harmony within our immediate community'. surprisingly, i do listen. only that i articulate things in a different way. i thought about it. there is a valid reason for worrying. as human beings mature, we tend to lose the frankness we had as children. we learned how to put on a face. some individuals become really good at it. in front of us, with us; their behaviour is in a certain way. however, the genuineness of that behaviour becomes questionable when that individual behaves in a manner other than we expect them to. in turn, we become cautious and naturally put on a facade when we are next with that individual. it's a vicious cycle.

so, the trade off is that i'm no longer in the position to do anything until the next general election.

that "lost of frankness" becomes embedded in our personalities. the trait surfaces in other situations; in work, at home, in personal matters.

there are times when the trait itself becomes an issue. that, because of it, we are faced with a dilemma. whether to continue putting on that facade, or, to simply do away with it. because, the facade is coaxing us to make decisions that we do not truly want. the opportunity cost of a circumstance is then greatly distorted. matters are greatly aggravated because we now have to manoeuvre around that facade. the question of morality of the facade doesn't arise because the facade in itself is neutral. it is just, is. in fact, for some, it is necessary.

to break that facade with a renewed frankness brings about a certain and related, opportunity costs. the tangible and intangible costs. in certain circumstances, we are at times, even halted at the tangible cost.

apparently, it doesn't take much to break that facade. a misplaced, simple self-confession seemed sufficient.

how simple it is for one's judgement to be clouded. how simple it is, to be distracted. how simple it is, to jump to conclusions. how simple it is, to get excited. we forget sometimes, how fragile some things are. especially, things like a facade; reputation, credibility...trust.

there's a phrase that says, seek to understand then, to be understood. but if by seeking to understand alone is enough to cost you; where then, do you begin?

so, do i repair that facade? or do i continue to break through it? what can i expect to lose by either of my actions? is it even reparable? on what basis do i make my judgement if the ultimate objective is absent? well, maybe not exactly absent. more like, the ultimate objective is itself not properly established.

did i mention i'm distracted?