11-06-2017 All about Miss the Point

11-06-2017 All about Miss the Point

Heard this morning's talk about missing the point.
My response: Missing the point is what I agree if an employee confronting an investor's private matter when this employee was having some work related problem with an investor's family,

It is not an employee's employment to confront who deserve to be an investor's most beloved or real true love, it is also not an investor's family's privilege to insult an employee at workplace.

I would say why not let Business related Laws, Labor Laws and company's management to take care of the complains regarding an employee's lawful interests instead of confronting if someone is beloved enough by an investor to be privileged enough to insult an employee at workplace.

----Nov. 6th, 2017

Heard this morning's talk related to a lot of investors wives confusion of deserved privileges in the husbands' investment.
My response: This is another missing the point issue.

The wives deserved privileges are protected by Marriage Laws, Family Laws but not the Business related Laws. Investors families do not have the protection by Business related laws, just like employees' lawful interests are protected by labor laws but not marriage laws.

Investors wives are not privilege to insult any employee in husbands' business, and employees are not privilege to fight for who deserve to be the investors true beloved.

----Nov. 6th, 2017

Exactly being a wife who share children and life with an investor husband, why this wife can't have a saying over her husband's inherited investment.
My understanding:  This is to say that husband have a saying over inherited investment because of blood, why not the wive because of sharing life together with the investor?

I am similar to the investor husband in this saying that I have saying over my inherited investments because the blood I carry, and impressively obviously, I am not willing to privilege anyone to have a saying over my inherited investments.

So, the first and foremost issue that may be "missed the point" is: If the investor husband willing to let the wife who share life with him to have a saying over his inherited investments?

I was confronted in 2004's meeting if I know anything at all to have a saying over my own inherited investments from those who worked their way up. and I have to earn their ears to convince them that  I also worked my way up. And currently, as everyone already heard a lot, that all these shits throwing at me is to bring out the argument "why listen to her even this or that is her inherited investments?"

So, the second issue that may be "missed the point" is: If this sharing life wive know anything at all that deserve employed professionals' ears even if the investor husband willing to privilege the wife to have a saying?

I made myself very clearly that I have no intention to perform daily operation over my own investment. I do have this understanding that why I need to take on such huge responsibilities since those much talented professionals are taking good cares of my investments on my behave responsibly and can do a much better job than me? I also have enough work experiences to know that if I want to do a technology research, I do not need to run a business daily to achieve so, and if I want to practice some MBA's general administration, I do not need to run a big business to achieve so.

So, the third issue that may be "missing the point is:
If this wife is benefiting the investor husband's investment by having a saying over it? Mark here: the wife is the sharing life wife, the husband's investment is her shared interests.

If this wive is demanding to be respected as the investor's wife or she is demanding to be respected as the investor to the husband's investment?

----Nov. 6th, 2017