A couple of days ago I was talking with some co -workers and a friendly discussion arose.

Both are in a training process to develop skills that allow them to generate extra income to work.

One of them has been paying a training course, where he has practically not produced any money with such training. He even had losses to follow bad advice and seek to oppose rapid profits.

The other for what I comment, also takes time in a training process, however, much of its education has been self -acting, although he said he has also paid for some of the knowledge he has acquired. But this person is producing money with his training and has won during the process (in small quantities, but profits at the end of the day) while the other does not.

Then one of them said, that it was best that he will look for a mentor and pay to learn as he was doing (although he has not yet won anything apart from the theory) while the other said that that lacked logic, that the best option was to be instructed mainly, and that if it could be free or auto didact, it was the best way, and especially if you see income.

And then, being I presented as a spectator, they ask me what I think, which option was the best.

I think that both options are valid however what really matters are the results.

The results in the medium and long term are those that dictate which option would be better.

"Mathematics does not lie" 🧮

Now I ask you, what do you think? What is the best option?