The market of money always goes up and down, which I equate to interest and its price.

I equate investment in people with equity. While equity can grow vertically as a by-product, with equity, it’s not just the depth but the breadth that matters. Investment in human resources has a more sustainable return on investment than interest in terms of equity. Therefore, it’s not about return on interest or return on equity but the order of operations of both and how they interact. That creates the sustainability of return in the marketplace that matters most — the internal marketplace where investment management is not just the key but the ruler.

Both have nothing to do with good or bad, right or wrong, but, rather, preference. In terms of return on interest, the terms are quite simple and black in white in terms of their vertical function. Equity, however, is not only much more nuanced, but its complexity lies in its simplicity. While the return on equity has a more expansive (horizontal) approach by nature, it equally embodies the vertical attributes of the return on interest. Return will mean something different to each individual. A helpful example of return on interest in life is the business of marriage, whereas the corresponding return on equity is a relationship.

I do not believe in “or” when it comes to equity/interest, as I believe “and“ is the only way to look at the parallels of life. Order of operations is crucial when it comes to the return on equity. Without the expansive return on equity, interest is often not enough to gain in the long term — not only in thinking but in action. Therefore, what typically ensues in the absence of order and its operation is inaction.