I see nature as investive

[The Voice of Time]

I see nature as causal and investive (invests in what it does), therefore half-finished works will never land major benefits besides accidental ones.

In the same manner that you cannot give two people half the water they need to survive, and expect them to benefit from it in any major way, you must give them all the water they need to survive, or just one of them should there be a choice, to experience that full benefit of water.

While this may seem like common sense, it has practical implications when dealing with such things as money, utility measures, food, drink or any quanta whose distribution is fixed to produce benefits. If people are gonna get something, they must get it in the sufficient amount that it can matter for them, that it can produce a causal effect that is more beneficial than if two people were given half the quantity but didn't get this wonderful benefit, and for this to happen, generally, one must exploit the investiveness of nature (or nature acting out in the man-made world), that is, nature's tendency to not only give one particular reaction to a cause, but multiple ones, forming a whole investment into the foundation that the cause sets.

Among things, this is why smart allocations of money are necessary to accelerate economic growth and increase widespread prosperity, for instance, it is why building roads pay for themselves because their usefulness far outweighs the cost of setting them up (under normal circumstances... in some, especially densely populated wealthy areas, this may not be the case, but that's another problem), or any other infrastructure for that matter. Electricity for instance is an example of a vastly effective accelerator, as without electricity one can hardly imagine the western world being anywhere near the wealth it has accumulated today.

Do you find this persuasive? Do you think nature is not investive and does not act in such a strict causality-driven manner? Perhaps you think that it is merely the perception of common sense that produces this seeming effect, and instead there's a greater mixture where nature perhaps does affect significantly with small quantities spread out? For instance in the case of bank savings leading to a consumption restraint that avoids reckless spending?