0:00

have you ever changed your investment strategy based on

0:02

the volatility of the market? No,

0:04

not while the market

0:07

was in super choppy waters.

0:09

But what I have done

0:11

is realized early in my investing

0:13

career, the machine I

0:15

built was not built as efficiently as

0:17

I wanted it to be. And

0:19

so I tweaked the machine,

0:21

meaning I rewrote my

0:23

investment policy statement. All

0:25

right. Well, we're going

0:28

to field. A question

0:30

from a caller who's worried about

0:32

how choppy the waters are and

0:34

is wondering if this maybe demands that

0:36

an overhaul of their investor policy

0:38

statement. We're also going to talk

0:40

to callers who have questions about.

0:43

growth assets versus income producing assets. We've

0:45

got a caller with a comment about

0:47

the efficient frontier. We've got a caller

0:49

with a comment about following your passion. We

0:51

got a lot of ground to cover

0:53

today. All right. Welcome to the

0:55

afford anything podcast, the show that understands

0:58

you can afford anything, but not everything. Every

1:00

choice carries a trade off. This

1:02

show covers five pillars, financial psychology, increasing

1:04

your income, investing, real estate and

1:06

entrepreneurship. It's double I fire. I'm your

1:08

host Paula Pant. I trained in

1:10

economic reporting at Columbia and every other

1:12

episode, I answer questions from you

1:15

with my buddy, the former financial planner,

1:17

Joe Solcihi. What's up, Joe? Happy

1:19

day, Paula. I got my coffee.

1:21

We got questions at the Amazing

1:23

Paula Pant. What could be better?

1:26

Absolutely. It's a wonderful day, and we will

1:28

jump right in with this first question

1:30

from Nick. Hi,

1:32

Paula. My name is Nick, and I'm from Dallas,

1:34

Texas. My wife and I are 36 years old, and

1:37

we both have full -time jobs. We're

1:39

currently making around $260 ,000 per

1:41

year. Our monthly expenses are

1:43

around $7 ,000 a month and

1:45

we have about $550 ,000 invested

1:47

primarily in our 401ks but we

1:49

both also have Roth IRAs

1:51

and brokerage accounts. We

1:54

have around $200 ,000 in our emergency

1:56

fund in our high yield savings account

1:58

and our only debt is our house

2:00

at a three and a half percent

2:02

mortgage with about 22 years left for

2:04

payoff. So we have

2:06

around $100 ,000 that we want to invest

2:08

out of our emergency fund and with current

2:10

market volatility We're looking for other investment

2:12

options outside of equities One idea we had

2:14

was investing in the private equity market

2:16

such as equities on My question is what

2:19

are some of the benefits pitfalls or

2:21

blind spots of taking the strategy? Do

2:23

we even have enough cash to even consider

2:25

investing in private equity? We've looked at the

2:27

real estate market, but feel that it's too

2:29

much overhead for us with our full -time

2:31

jobs We're also open to other

2:34

investment opportunities outside the stock market. Thank

2:36

you so much for your consideration and

2:38

time in answering my question. Nick,

2:40

thank you for the question. My

2:42

short answer is that while I'm

2:45

a huge fan of private equity and

2:47

of looking at investment options outside

2:49

of the stock market, I worry that

2:51

you might be going into the

2:53

right thing for the wrong reasons. I

2:55

question the premise a ton. Yeah.

2:57

And by the way, Dallas, I just

2:59

spent the weekend in Dallas. Nice

3:02

place to live there, Nick. Love

3:04

in Dallas, two and a half

3:06

hours away from me. It's like Nick and

3:08

I are neighbors here in Texas, Paula. Dallas

3:10

is a fantastic city and it's growing so

3:12

rapidly. So, so crazy rapidly. Yeah,

3:14

I think that there is the

3:16

devil that you know, which is the

3:19

stock market. And he knows that

3:21

the stock market, the US stock market.

3:23

We'll talk about that in a

3:25

minute. But the US stock market has

3:27

been quite a devil lately, Paula. But

3:30

the devil I think he

3:32

doesn't know is that you

3:34

are trading U .S. technology

3:36

-based stock market risk for drama. Right.

3:38

For tons and tons of drama

3:40

and specific investment risk, which is a

3:42

whole different world. Yeah, there's a

3:44

lot of concentration risk with private equity.

3:46

If you thought the volatility of

3:48

Public equities was bad. Just wait until

3:51

you see the volatility and lack

3:53

of liquidity in private equity. And I

3:55

don't want to sound like I'm

3:57

bashing private equity. I actually, and I

3:59

say this for the sake of

4:01

everyone who's listening, totally support the right

4:03

person going into private equity markets

4:05

for the right reason. But

4:07

it's got to be right person, right

4:09

time, right reason. Private equity demands

4:11

that you are an accredited investor,

4:13

which means that you have over a

4:16

million dollar net worth. Frankly, Paula,

4:18

I don't like that. Yeah. And I'm

4:20

sure you don't like it too.

4:22

I can't stand that. It's a snobbish,

4:24

crude. Approximation. Just

4:26

absolutely boneheaded way of figuring

4:28

out whether or not

4:30

you are a sophisticated investor.

4:33

I will long die on

4:35

the hill that if they

4:37

want some type of paternalistic

4:39

test to see if you

4:41

are a sophisticated investor, then

4:44

give us a test. Paternalistic

4:46

test. Yeah, if that's

4:48

the approach, then fine. Give us

4:50

a test similar to a driving

4:52

test that you take at the

4:54

end of driver's ed. Give us

4:56

a test. Sure, fine, whatever. But

4:58

to use whether or not you have a

5:00

million dollars in assets or you have above

5:02

a certain income level, to use that as

5:04

a crude barometer for whether or not you

5:06

are sophisticated enough to be an accredited investor,

5:08

I think is absolutely horsewash. But that's the

5:10

system that we have. And so that's the

5:13

system that we live in. But Nick and

5:15

everybody else, I'm sure, are wondering, Paula, why

5:17

I brought that up. And the reason I

5:19

brought it up is because I'm the guy

5:21

that hates rules of thumb. But

5:23

I think just like you said in

5:25

the past, rules of thumb point you

5:27

toward the truth. I

5:29

think this rule of thumb points

5:31

toward a truth that you can

5:33

very easily cover your financial independence

5:35

goals using the things that are

5:38

widely available to all of us.

5:41

The stock market, real estate.

5:43

those two asset classes very

5:45

often over long periods of time

5:47

are the two that consistently

5:49

beat inflation, which is what we

5:51

need to do. And the

5:53

reason I bring that up is

5:55

because when you're looking at

5:57

private equity investments, what

5:59

type of person should be

6:01

evaluating that? I believe it's

6:03

somebody that knows that on

6:06

Maslow's hierarchy of needs, I

6:08

very easily have enough set

6:10

aside that even if this restaurant,

6:13

office, technology company, healthcare,

6:15

whatever it is goes

6:17

under, it's not going

6:19

to wreck my investment world.

6:21

And is it paternalistic? Yes. Is

6:24

it silly? Yes. Is it

6:26

way too broad and approximating?

6:28

Absolutely. However, I think

6:30

in this case, Nick,

6:32

when you shared with us your

6:34

net worth number and your

6:36

age, while I applaud all of

6:38

that, and I think you're doing a hell

6:40

of a job saving, I don't

6:42

think you have enough money to

6:44

invest in private placements yet. I

6:46

don't think you're there. Unfortunately,

6:49

in order to be an

6:51

accredited investor, you have to

6:53

either have a net worth

6:55

of over a million or

6:57

have earned income of over

6:59

$200 ,000 or earned income with

7:01

your spouse jointly of over

7:03

$300 ,000 in each of

7:05

the last two years. He's

7:07

like right on all those lines.

7:09

Yeah, yeah, exactly. Or you need

7:11

to have certain professional licenses like

7:13

a Series 7, Series 65, or

7:15

Series 82 license. You're not

7:18

an accredited investor, even though I

7:20

think that that's a complete baloney

7:22

benchmark to have to hit. You're

7:24

not yet an accredited investor. I think you

7:26

quickly could be one if you wanted to be.

7:29

So my concern for Nick is

7:31

not whether or not he passes

7:33

some stupid arbitrary qualification. because

7:35

I think that he could if

7:37

he wanted to. Sure. My bigger

7:39

concern for Nick is, is he

7:41

going into private equity for the

7:44

right reasons? Because if the reason

7:46

is a dislike of the volatility

7:48

of the public equities market, I

7:50

think that he's going to be

7:52

leaving some volatility for more volatility.

7:54

Yeah, when you look at a

7:56

risk reward, a standard deviation chart, private

7:58

equity is up, but it's up

8:00

and to the right, meaning a

8:02

lot more volatility. and not

8:05

soft volatility, right, where we'll get a

8:07

stock market that might go plus 20

8:09

or minus 20. No, no,

8:11

no, no, no. We either

8:13

10x, 50x, or we go

8:15

to zero, 100 % go

8:17

to zero. And when we

8:19

talk about volatility, what

8:21

I want to point out

8:23

is that volatility isn't a reason

8:25

to run, especially if

8:28

you're already there. It is

8:30

a reason to look for opportunities.

8:32

So, whenever somebody tells me that the market's volatile

8:35

and I want to get out, I do

8:37

think you have to check your risk tolerance, Paula,

8:39

and you have to see if, okay, can

8:41

I handle that many stocks? But

8:43

let's talk about this volatility, too, because

8:45

over on Stacky -Bedgeman's, you were part

8:47

of this discussion. Is

8:50

it time to throw out international

8:52

stocks? And we did that

8:54

for reason because I thought that

8:56

it was ridiculous. The number of people

8:58

in the personal finance universe saying,

9:00

I don't need small cap. I don't

9:02

need international. I'm just going to

9:04

load up on the big stuff. Well, the

9:06

big stuff now is through the floor. Meanwhile,

9:09

I just pulled up iShares. And

9:12

this was at the end of February. So

9:14

I know this is dated a little, all

9:16

right? But I just want to have some

9:18

consistent data. Japan up 5 .97. The

9:20

Eurozone up 17 .7.

9:23

China large cap up

9:25

25 .99. Broad China

9:27

up 24. Broad -based

9:30

Europe 15%. Brazil

9:32

up 16 .7. UK

9:34

up 11 .68. South

9:36

Korea up 13 .6. At

9:39

the same time that everybody online

9:41

is talking about let's get rid

9:43

of international, if you

9:45

actually stayed invested, which is what

9:47

people like you and me and

9:50

my co -host over Stackey Benjamin's OG

9:52

have been saying over and over

9:54

and over. And frankly, it's

9:56

a lot of what the efficient

9:58

frontier helps you do, right? Just

10:00

stay invested. You'd be high -fiving yourself

10:02

right now because you probably have 20

10:04

% of your portfolio sitting in international

10:06

funds that are saving your bacon. Yeah,

10:09

exactly. I should say we're

10:11

recording this end of March.

10:14

So as of the time that we're

10:16

recording this, the U .S. stock market is

10:19

in the trash can, but

10:21

international is doing well. International is doing

10:23

well, yeah. I don't know how the

10:25

stock market is going to be at

10:27

the time that this episode airs. This

10:29

is slated to air mid -April. But I

10:31

do think, Paula, the delta between where

10:33

the international markets are and the U

10:36

.S. markets are, it's going to be

10:38

a hell of a time for the

10:40

U .S. market to bridge that gap between

10:42

the time that we record this and

10:44

the time that people hear it. Right.

10:46

And what's cool about broad diversification is

10:48

that if you're worried about volatility, broad

10:51

diversification helps you reduce the volatility,

10:54

which is, by the way, the reason why mutual funds

10:56

were created in the first place. Because

10:58

back in the 1940s, it was

11:00

a way for small investors

11:02

like most of us to realize

11:04

what big investors knew for

11:06

a long, long time, which is

11:09

if I own several different

11:11

things versus owning one. My chance

11:13

of losing my goals, losing

11:15

my ability to get where I want to go, goes

11:18

through the floor, which

11:20

is also why JL Collins talks

11:22

about just buy a little bit of

11:24

everything when you start out, right?

11:27

Only economy. So Nick, the

11:29

reason I'm questioning the premise

11:31

myself, I won't speak for Paula,

11:33

is because when you say,

11:35

I want less volatility, volatility is

11:37

a result of the market

11:39

that you are in. If

11:42

you go into private

11:44

placement money during this

11:46

same economy, if you're

11:48

going into the US,

11:50

you're in it, but

11:52

in a much more

11:54

first person, lack of

11:56

diversification, lack of transparency,

11:58

focused on one single management

12:00

team. A much more concentrated

12:02

bet. Very, very much more

12:05

concentrated. Yeah. You are asking

12:07

for so much drama. Yeah.

12:09

Well, and the beauty of

12:11

private equity is that when

12:13

you can make a concentrated

12:15

bet, you have the possibility

12:17

of a huge concentrated win.

12:19

Absolutely. That's why I'm an

12:21

advocate for private equity for right person,

12:23

right time, right reason. But we

12:25

have to start with what's the goal?

12:27

Is the goal to design a

12:29

portfolio that has the possibility of a

12:32

unicorn win? Or is

12:34

the goal Reduce volatility

12:36

in your portfolio and Nick based on

12:38

the question that you asked you said

12:40

you're worried about the current market volatility

12:42

of equities so it sounds to me

12:44

as though the goal is to reduce

12:46

that exposure that equity exposure that. Leads

12:48

to volatility and what that means

12:51

to me is that you need more

12:53

diversification and private equity would actually

12:55

give you less diversification. If

12:57

there was a way on a

12:59

very small level T for you

13:01

to own. a small amount. And

13:03

by the way, I also question what I'm

13:05

about to say, Paula, because the companies that

13:07

are going to Unicorn generally do not want

13:10

the investor who's looking for a small amount.

13:12

Right. By the way, I don't mean Unicorn

13:14

in the literal sense of it's going to

13:16

reach a billion -dollar market cap. Sure. Will

13:18

it be a runaway winner? Absolutely. But

13:20

companies that do that know what

13:23

they've got, and they have the

13:25

right management team, they have the

13:27

right people, they're well -regarded, companies

13:29

that will let somebody invest the amount of

13:31

money I'm talking about, maybe 10, 20, $30

13:33

,000, though that's an

13:36

even bigger risk. However, I

13:38

do think that if you could

13:40

do a small number like that in

13:42

something that you like, I think

13:45

you can begin learning from the School

13:47

of Hard Knocks. Why is it

13:49

important to know what the business plan

13:51

is and not just talk to

13:53

the CEO? I used to go through

13:55

this all the time when clients

13:57

would bring me. private equity deals. They'd

14:00

be like, oh, yeah, listen to what they said. And I'm

14:02

like, yeah, but none of that's on paper here. None

14:04

of that is in the business plan. Oh, no,

14:06

but I talked to the guy. He's good. Like this

14:08

guy's great. Well, just because he

14:10

talks a great game doesn't mean

14:12

that this new product to the market

14:15

is going to have any wind

14:17

beneath its wings. To quote Betmiddler. Can't

14:19

believe it is a quote of

14:21

Betmiddler. Well, yeah, it's

14:23

a lot of fun to like go to

14:25

AngelList or go to Hive and just spend some

14:27

time poking around and seeing all of the

14:29

companies that are out there. If nothing else, it

14:31

gives you a very good sense of the

14:33

innovation that's happening and all the opportunity that exists.

14:37

Those types of investments, especially

14:39

if you can make

14:41

a small bet, they're certainly

14:43

fun, they're certainly educational,

14:45

but they are a deep

14:47

concentration of risk rather

14:49

than a diversification away from.

14:52

Risk 100 % I know that there

14:54

used to be and I don't

14:56

have any names on me right

14:58

now But there used to be

15:00

Paula some fintech companies that would

15:02

pool together a bunch of smaller

15:04

Investors and by smaller I mean

15:07

people that want to invest 10,

15:09

20, 30 thousand dollars. Smaller

15:11

investors in that market, they pull them together

15:13

and they go in as one market. And

15:15

the people that run the FinTech

15:17

operation actually have already applied their

15:19

own filtering system on top of

15:21

it. So they might be looking

15:23

for investment in five different private

15:25

placements. You get in to help

15:27

them fill the barrel of money

15:29

that they're looking for to come

15:31

across together, united as a single

15:33

big investor, maybe going and looking

15:35

for one of those companies. Now,

15:37

the bad news when you do

15:39

that, of course, what are you

15:42

adding? You're adding another layer of

15:44

management between you and the management

15:46

team and higher fees, which, by

15:48

the way, the transaction

15:50

costs sometimes on these private

15:52

deals are not phenomenal. If

15:54

you're used to .0007 and

15:56

you get mad when you

15:58

get .000, Nine.

16:02

Joe is exaggerating by a couple of

16:04

decimal places. People's

16:06

heads could explode. I'm to pay zero, zero,

16:08

zero, nine. Joe is exaggerating by at least

16:10

two orders of magnitude. But your

16:12

point is taken. The

16:15

management fees, well, they're steep because

16:17

there's a heck of a lot

16:19

of diligence involved. Yeah. A

16:21

lot of moving parts and people need to be

16:23

paid. I mean, in this

16:25

market, Paula, even France was

16:27

up 15 .78%. Even France,

16:30

for goodness sakes. Talking

16:32

to me wrong, France, I love you. But I

16:34

never thought of you as an investment powerhouse. So

16:37

Nick, I think that you're on

16:39

the right track in asking the

16:41

question, how can I diversify? But

16:44

private equity per se is

16:46

not for you a good

16:48

road to diversification at this

16:50

juncture. And besides which, the

16:52

paternalistic forces that determine accredited

16:54

investors won't even allow it.

16:56

until you reach some certain

16:59

arbitrary threshold anyway. That is

17:01

so bad. Right? Daddy's not

17:03

going to let you. Yeah,

17:05

exactly. It is so bad.

17:09

Exactly. That's the system

17:11

we live in. It drives me

17:13

bonkers. But give us a driver's

17:15

test. I will absolutely die on

17:17

this hill. Give us

17:19

a driver's test to test our level

17:21

of sophistication. That would be a

17:23

much better way of filtering. But

17:26

no. No, that's not the system we

17:28

have. They want you to get a

17:30

raise at work, and then you're an

17:32

accredited investor. So thank you,

17:34

Nick, for the question. Hey, Paul, before

17:36

we move on, I'm looking at

17:38

all these iShares, right? Yeah. Which

17:40

country of all the countries represented

17:42

in BlackRock's iShares exchange trade of

17:45

funds was up the most at

17:47

the end of February, year to

17:49

date? Ooh. Which country?

17:52

And not the US. Not the

17:54

US. Well, US is down, right? Okay,

17:56

which country up the most? Let

17:58

me think about, well, China is the

18:00

obvious answer. So I'm not going

18:02

to guess China because it's too obvious.

18:05

China look good though. We were talking

18:07

about that in the mid -20s. I mean,

18:09

that's some good chaching already for one

18:11

quarter or, well, one sixth of the

18:14

year. Yeah, but too obvious. So I'm

18:16

not going to guess it. Bangladesh is

18:18

under an interim government right now. They're

18:20

still cleaning up after. their treasury

18:23

got robbed. So I'm not going to

18:25

guess them. And I'm also not

18:27

going to guess India. So I'm methodically

18:29

eliminating South Asia. This

18:31

is a Eastern European country.

18:34

I know. Is it Latvia?

18:36

Or right next door.

18:38

Lithuania? No, no, no. Come

18:40

south. Estonia? Wait. Poland.

18:42

Poland. Poland. Can

18:45

you believe it? Poland number

18:47

one in the world. Congratulations. Go

18:50

Poland. At the end

18:52

of February, up 37

18:54

.72. Wow.

18:56

Percent. That's wonderful. Congratulations

18:59

to Poland. It's amazing. Yeah.

19:01

Anyway, that blew me away when I saw

19:04

it. Amazing. Speaking

19:06

of amazing. We've got

19:08

another caller coming, Paula. We

19:10

do. Cindy is 10 years away

19:12

from being work optional, possibly

19:14

even closer, and is wondering how

19:17

to split her investments. Meanwhile,

19:19

Josh has some questions about Roth

19:21

versus Trad when it comes

19:23

to retirement withdrawals. And we got

19:25

a couple of comments, one

19:27

on the efficient frontier and one

19:30

on following your passion. All

19:32

of that is coming up next.

19:37

I was just looking at Masterclass, so do

19:39

you remember R .L. Stein? Remember him he

19:41

wrote the Goosebumps books? He

19:43

teaches a class on Masterclass on writing for

19:45

young audiences, so I was just looking

19:47

at that this afternoon. Because how cool would

19:49

that be? You know, with Masterclass, you

19:52

can learn from the best to become your

19:54

best. Masterclass is the only streaming platform

19:56

where you can learn and grow with over

19:58

200 of the world's best. For just

20:00

$10 a month built annually, a

20:02

membership with Masterclass gets you unlimited access

20:04

to every instructor and you can

20:07

access it from your phone, computer, smart

20:09

TV. You can learn how

20:11

to invest in the stock market

20:13

with Ray Dalio. You can learn leadership

20:15

skills from Howard Schultz or Whitney

20:17

Woolford. There's a huge selection.

20:20

So I mentioned I'm looking at the

20:22

R .L. Stein one, but a class that

20:24

I completed was through another children's author,

20:26

Judy Bloom. She's very conscious

20:28

about not being an adult writing to

20:30

children, but instead when she writes, she

20:32

really tries to embody the perspective of

20:34

her protagonist, the perspective of a child.

20:36

So that's something that I think about

20:38

when I write. If you want to

20:40

check it out, every new membership comes

20:42

with a 30 -day money back guarantee. And

20:45

right now, our listeners get

20:47

an additional 15 % off

20:49

any annual membership at masterclass.com

20:52

slash afford. That's 15

20:54

% off at masterclass.com

20:56

slash afford. Masterclass.com

20:58

slash afford.

21:05

When you're shopping online, do you ever notice

21:07

that purple shop pay button? You'll see

21:09

it on a lot of websites, so you

21:11

want to check out, but your wallet

21:13

or your credit card is in the other

21:15

room, but there's this big purple shop

21:17

button, and it has all of your payment

21:19

and shipping information saved, and so you

21:21

can just hit the button and it makes

21:23

buying really easy. You know that button,

21:25

right, the purple one? Well, that's Shopify. And

21:27

there's a reason that so many businesses

21:29

use it, and it's because Shopify makes

21:31

everything easier, from checkout to creating your

21:34

own storefront. Shopify is the

21:36

commerce platform behind 10 % of all e

21:38

-commerce in the US, ranging from household

21:40

names like Gymshark and Mattel to brands

21:42

that are just getting started. And Shopify

21:44

gives you a leg up with hundreds

21:46

of beautiful, ready -to -go templates that you

21:48

can use to express your brand, and

21:50

you don't need to know how to

21:53

code, and you can tackle all of

21:55

these important tasks in one place, everything

21:57

from inventory to payments to analytics. So

21:59

you can your brand's word with built

22:01

-in marketing and email tools and that

22:03

iconic purple Shoppay button. It's why Shopify

22:05

has the best converting checkout on the

22:08

planet. If you want to see less

22:10

carts being abandoned, it's time for you

22:12

to head over to Shopify. Sign

22:14

up for your one

22:16

month, $1 per month

22:18

trial period and start

22:21

selling today at Shopify.com

22:23

slash Paula. Go to

22:25

Shopify.com slash Paula. Shopify.com

22:27

slash Paula. This

22:32

episode brought to you by

22:34

Progressive Insurance. Do you ever

22:36

find yourself playing the budgeting game,

22:39

shifting a little money here, a little

22:41

there and hoping it all works

22:43

out? Well, with the name your price

22:45

tool from Progressive, you can get

22:47

a better budgeter and potentially lower your

22:49

insurance bill too. You tell Progressive

22:51

what you want to pay for car

22:53

insurance and they'll help find you

22:56

options within your budget. Try it today

22:58

at Progressive.com, Progressive Casualty Insurance Company

23:00

and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited

23:02

by state law, not available in

23:04

all states. Welcome

23:15

back. Our next call comes

23:17

from Cindy. Hi

23:21

Paula. This is Cindy. I

23:24

have a question about

23:26

building out a taxable

23:28

account with income yielding

23:30

assets versus an account

23:32

with growth assets. So

23:35

a little bit about my financial

23:37

situation. Between me and

23:39

my husband, we have over

23:41

$900 ,000 saved. We

23:43

are in our mid 40s. We

23:45

have no debt and 90 % of

23:47

that money is in retirement accounts.

23:50

So my focus now is going

23:52

to be building out my

23:54

taxable account. And we have a

23:57

goal of being work optional

23:59

in 10 years. And

24:01

I've read different things

24:03

about investing in growth

24:05

and then converting it when

24:07

I'm ready to retire.

24:10

to income yielding assets or doing that

24:12

now and reinvesting. And I know

24:14

there's tax consequences associated with that. And

24:16

I wanted to get your thoughts

24:18

on that. Cindy,

24:20

thank you for the question. So

24:23

first, if you're talking about investable assets, so

24:25

if you're talking about sticking in the equities

24:27

market, then broadly

24:29

speaking, optimizing for growth

24:31

in the value of the

24:33

underlying asset is a better

24:35

long -term approach than optimizing for

24:38

high dividend stocks. So

24:40

if you're thinking about, for example, pursuing

24:42

a strategy of having a

24:44

huge portion of your portfolio and

24:46

a bunch of high dividend

24:49

yielding funds, I think

24:51

a portion of that is fine,

24:53

but I wouldn't put too much

24:55

of your portfolio into chasing high

24:57

dividend funds. I would instead

24:59

allocate your portfolio towards companies that

25:01

you think will grow. Now, I

25:03

want to clarify that when I

25:05

say growth, I don't mean growth

25:07

as in growth versus value funds

25:09

in terms of investment style. When

25:12

I say growth, what I'm referring

25:14

to is that any asset earns

25:16

money in two ways. There's the

25:18

appreciation of the asset itself, and

25:20

then there's the dividend that it

25:22

pays or income stream that it

25:25

pays. And so when I say growth,

25:27

I don't mean growth versus value as a style.

25:29

I mean assets that are likely

25:31

to appreciate in value, equities that

25:33

are likely to rise in value

25:35

over time, I would focus on

25:37

that as a long -term strategy

25:39

for the bulk of your portfolio

25:41

as opposed to choosing specifically a

25:43

whole bunch of high dividend stocks. The

25:46

difficulty, Paula, in that approach is

25:48

that what you do when you go

25:50

with growth oriented stocks is you

25:52

increase My favorite measurement of risk.

25:54

I mean, they all do something a

25:56

little different, but the one that I always

25:59

look at first is standard deviation. That's

26:01

amount that it's going to fluctuate. And

26:03

so you're going to be

26:05

on a much more volatile train,

26:08

which is going to make

26:10

it more important than ever that

26:12

you don't miss when you're

26:14

pulling money out to spend it.

26:17

because high volatility means, like we were

26:19

just talking about with Nick, high

26:21

up, but also potentially high down.

26:23

And when things go down and that sequence

26:25

of returns works against you, it's going

26:28

to work against you more if it's a

26:30

position that doesn't pay dividends than one

26:32

that does. And by the way, for people

26:34

that don't know why that is, so

26:37

why do dividends mean a higher

26:39

standard deviation? Like, Joe, how can

26:41

you say that? How do you

26:43

know that? Well, the reason is,

26:45

is that companies pay dividends, they

26:47

return money to shareholders when truly

26:49

their growth options with that money,

26:51

there really aren't many. Yeah.

26:53

A railroad isn't going to

26:55

be doing a lot of expanding

26:58

lately, last 100 years across

27:00

the plains anymore. So instead, the

27:02

money that they make, they

27:04

return it to shareholders. So a

27:06

company that's big, established, not

27:09

much room for growth, they're going to pay a

27:11

dividend. A high dividend, yeah.

27:13

Yeah. And a company that doesn't pay

27:15

a dividend, they don't pay it

27:17

because the owner and the management team

27:19

knows that money's better left with

27:21

the management of that company. Right. It's

27:23

better off reinvested, exactly. And

27:26

so, for long -term investments, you want

27:28

the types of companies where there is

27:30

that room for growth, where the management

27:32

is reinvesting back into the growth of

27:34

the company because there's room for expansion. Those

27:37

are the staples that you want in your portfolio.

27:40

when you're taking a multi -decade approach.

27:42

Whereas when you're actually in the

27:45

withdrawal phase, moving more of

27:47

your money into high dividend assets

27:49

at that time makes a lot

27:51

more sense. I think though, Paula,

27:53

when you're moving into the retirement

27:55

phase, I think there is some

27:57

room for both, not either or.

27:59

Oh, yeah, absolutely. Where you

28:01

know that you're going to get

28:03

hit a little harder with taxes,

28:05

but we're still looking for some

28:07

growth. So an investment like the

28:09

spider S &P dividend ETF as an

28:11

example, that'll kick out a 2

28:13

.5 % dividend versus a 1 %

28:15

dividend. So more of that money is

28:17

in your pocket. The companies are a little

28:19

bigger, but they're still got some companies in there

28:21

that are looking to grow. So you're going

28:24

to get some of the growth, a

28:26

higher dividend, you're going to pay

28:28

marginally higher taxes. but you're

28:30

not turning on this tax me

28:32

to hell engine. Right.

28:35

By doing that, I think there's some

28:37

midpoints there that you can explore. Right.

28:40

And what I like most about

28:42

that, Paula, you're also decreasing the standard

28:44

deviation. Looking at standard deviation as

28:46

an example, I'm looking at this S

28:48

&P dividend ETF, ticker symbol SDY right

28:50

now. Standard deviation over

28:52

the last three years,

28:55

16 and a quarter versus

28:58

the S &P 500 growth

29:00

index, 19 and a

29:02

quarter. Now you hear 19

29:04

a quarter and 16 a quarter,

29:06

that doesn't sound like a huge difference,

29:09

but think about three points in

29:11

16. I mean, that's a

29:13

big difference in volatility. That

29:15

is a nice difference. Again, it doesn't

29:17

mean that it can't go down to

29:19

standard deviation to 16 points either way

29:21

from your average 66 % of the time.

29:24

Still a pretty big swing there, but.

29:26

a lot less than going with

29:28

just a growth portfolio, which means it's

29:30

going to be less likely. You're

29:33

going to have times when you're not

29:35

going to want to harvest the gains. I'm

29:37

looking at lower standard deviation, not to

29:39

cap my growth opportunity. I'm looking

29:41

at it so that if I have to

29:43

go there to get some money out

29:45

to live on, that I'm not as likely

29:48

to be stepping in it when I

29:50

do that. Right, exactly. And that's the reason

29:52

why I want her to be in Growth

29:55

oriented stocks now and again I

29:57

don't mean growth as in the investing

29:59

style this is not a growth

30:01

versus value conversation I mean stocks that

30:03

appreciate I want Cindy to be

30:05

in more of those now because she's

30:07

at least 10 years away from

30:09

being work optional actually Cindy your number

30:11

sound great so if you wanted

30:13

to be work optional earlier I believe

30:15

you could be but in your

30:17

own words you're 10 years away from

30:19

being work optional and even in

30:21

10 years work is. Still going to

30:23

be an option that's on the

30:25

table. You're not 10 years away from

30:27

a complete and permanent cessation of

30:29

work. You're 10 years away

30:31

from the optionality. And so, given

30:34

the fact that withdrawal is so

30:36

far into your future, you

30:38

at this stage are very much going

30:40

to be in the mindset of a long

30:42

-term investor. And I'd be excited

30:44

about that with 10 years to go to

30:46

looking at the US stock market. You

30:48

know, we were talking with Nick about international

30:50

and how that could save your bacon.

30:53

But I think the U .S. being down,

30:55

if I've got 10 years to go right

30:57

now, it's a pretty nice thing because

30:59

what's the thing everybody on Wall Street has

31:01

been worried about about U .S. stocks, Paul,

31:03

evaluation. So we're seeing these

31:05

valuations come down in a hurry, in a

31:07

big hurry. And if that continues over the

31:09

short run and you're 10 years away, fantastic. The

31:12

people I worry about are the people

31:14

that aren't thinking 10 years out and they

31:16

still have money in growth oriented stocks

31:18

for money they need right now. It's a

31:21

horrible place to be. I'm

31:23

specifically speaking about public

31:25

equities that are in

31:27

your investable portfolio. The

31:30

conversation shifts if the

31:32

question becomes, should I,

31:34

for example, buy a handful of

31:36

buy and hold rental properties? Because

31:38

my argument has always been

31:40

that rental properties are functionally a

31:43

high dividend stock. Not exactly,

31:45

but they can be analogous to

31:47

that in that rental properties

31:49

bias A lot of their returns

31:51

towards the income stream, they bias

31:53

much of their returns towards the dividend, but

31:55

in that particular case, you can then

31:57

reinvest the dividend both through the cash flow

31:59

as well as through borrowing against the

32:02

equity in order to grow that portfolio. If

32:04

we're talking about owning assets

32:06

that are outside of an investable

32:08

portfolio, yes, you might have

32:11

some assets that are analogous to

32:13

dividend stocks, and then it

32:15

becomes a different conversation. Rental properties

32:17

are a different conversation. direct

32:19

ownership of private businesses that have

32:21

more of a cash flow orientation,

32:24

like maybe you buy a vending

32:26

machine. That vending machine is

32:28

unlikely to appreciate in the long term,

32:30

but it's a type of side hustle

32:32

that throws off a lot of cash.

32:34

It's a type of business ownership that

32:36

throws off a lot of cash. That's

32:38

a different conversation because that you can

32:40

more directly reinvest in a more direct

32:42

way. So my comments around

32:44

encouraging you to focus on asset

32:46

growth are specific to public equities

32:48

in your portfolio. Speaking of which,

32:50

I think we've said the word

32:52

public equities on this episode more

32:54

than we have on maybe any

32:56

other episode ever. If you're playing

32:58

the bingo game, congratulations. Take

33:01

a shot every time. Speaking

33:04

of which, since we're on

33:07

this topic, should we play the

33:09

comment about the efficient frontier?

33:11

OK. This comment, by the way,

33:13

comes from anonymous. Hi,

33:15

Paula. In your most recent

33:17

episode, you asked about whether

33:19

there was a way to

33:21

show that the efficient frontier

33:23

is the best without bid

33:25

to authority. Partied back

33:27

to my grad school days,

33:30

there's a reason why I've

33:32

been very confident and

33:34

excited by your exploration of

33:36

the efficient frontier, which

33:39

is that we actually did

33:41

the calculations ourselves

33:43

to show that with

33:46

several points along

33:48

a graph of the

33:50

beta risk and

33:52

the expected return, you

33:55

could, through a

33:57

combination of different points,

33:59

achieve a more

34:01

efficient outcome, a higher

34:03

return for the same level of

34:05

risk. And it was a simple

34:08

math problem. no

34:10

calculus involved. So

34:12

if any of your listeners

34:14

might be interested in showing to

34:16

themselves why the efficient frontier

34:18

works and you don't need to

34:20

just trust the Nobel Prize

34:22

committee, doing that simple

34:24

math could be a helpful exercise.

34:27

I'll also say that

34:29

in terms of portfolio

34:31

visualizer not being an

34:33

ideal tool, I would

34:35

be willing to pay

34:38

Quite a hefty sum

34:40

if you all invested

34:42

in creating a better

34:44

tool at the Afford

34:46

Anything crew. So

34:48

if you didn't have enough

34:50

things on your plate

34:52

already tossing that out there.

34:54

Thanks Paula and Joe

34:57

for everything you do and

34:59

so glad that we

35:01

get to hear the sum

35:03

of your thoughts which

35:05

when combined are greater than

35:07

each dot would be

35:09

along the plot line. Thanks,

35:11

guys. Along the

35:13

efficient frontier of thoughts. Yes.

35:16

Thank you so much, Anonymous, for

35:18

that comment. And I love

35:20

the business idea. I'm going to leave it

35:23

to some hungry entrepreneur in this audience.

35:25

There's a market and there's a demand.

35:27

So if someone wants to build it,

35:29

if it's good, we will promote the heck

35:31

out of it. I like the

35:33

tactful way you say hard pass. There

35:36

are many, many great options that

35:38

are out there, and I can't pursue

35:40

them all. So I

35:42

have to... No bandwidth. Yeah, I

35:44

have to be selective about what

35:46

I'm doing. Right now, our course

35:48

on how to get a raise,

35:50

our course, Your Next Raise, has

35:52

been under development for a year,

35:54

and we're now in our second

35:56

round of beta. So

35:58

I can't take my eye off

36:00

that. Because build fewer things

36:02

but build them well much more

36:04

of a recipe for success.

36:07

Yeah, exactly. So I got

36:09

to keep my focus on being

36:11

able to teach you how to

36:13

get a raise still under development

36:15

after one year of production and

36:17

two rounds of beta. But Cindy,

36:19

I play that now because I

36:21

think it links back to your

36:23

question because your question when you

36:25

ask about growth versus dividend is

36:27

largely around the efficient frontier and

36:29

asset allocation. And so I think

36:31

if you take some time to

36:33

play with portfolio visualizer, it

36:35

can give you a good sense of

36:37

how you want to invest that portfolio

36:39

in the 10 years in which you

36:42

work towards work optionality. It's funny, Joe,

36:44

with all of our talk about the

36:46

efficient frontier over the last several episodes,

36:48

we're functionally saying, hey, here's a smart

36:50

and interesting way to divide up your

36:52

assets. I like the

36:54

fact that it's a, yeah, been by

36:56

smart science tested. Yeah, it's a science

36:58

tested way. to divide up your assets.

37:01

Absolutely. So thank you, Cindy,

37:03

for the question, and thank you,

37:05

Anonymous, for the comment. Up next,

37:07

we all know that Roth IRAs

37:09

have tax -free withdrawals and retirement,

37:11

but Josh is wondering if he

37:13

withdraws from his Roth IRA, is

37:15

his tax bracket going to go

37:17

up and neutralize those benefits? We're

37:19

going to field that question from

37:21

Josh next, and we're also going

37:23

to hear a comment about following

37:25

your passion. You're

37:28

the owner of a small

37:30

business, which means you're also the

37:32

tech guy, and HR, and

37:35

personal assistant, and head honcho, and

37:37

intern. You could use

37:39

another pair of hands. Like the

37:41

experts you'll find at Verizon

37:43

Small Business Days, April 21st through

37:45

27th. Get a free tech

37:47

check, special deals, and more. Call

37:50

1 -800 -483 -4428 or visit Verizon.com

37:52

slash Small Business to book

37:54

your appointment. Verizon Business.

37:59

You know that feeling when someone shows up

38:01

for you just when you need it

38:04

most? That's what Uber is all about. Not

38:06

just a ride or dinner at your

38:08

door. It's how Uber helps you show up

38:10

for the moments that matter. Because showing

38:12

up can turn a tough day around. Or

38:14

make a good one even better. Whatever

38:16

it is, big or small, Uber

38:19

is on the way. So you can

38:21

be on yours. Uber, on

38:23

our way. Don't

38:28

miss your chance to spring into

38:30

deals at Lowe's. Right now, get

38:32

a free 60 volt Toro battery

38:34

when you purchase a select 60

38:36

volt Toro electric mower. Plus, buy

38:38

3 19 .3 ounce vegetable and

38:41

herb body plants for just $10. It's

38:43

time to give your yard a grow

38:46

up. Lowe's, we help, you save. Valid

38:48

to 423, selection varies by location. While

38:50

supplies last, discount taken at time of

38:52

purchase. Actual plant size and selection varies

38:54

by location. Excludes Alaska and Hawaii. Our

39:04

final question today comes from Josh.

39:08

Hi Paula, we have a question

39:10

here. We all know that a

39:12

401k is going to be taxed

39:14

in retirement when you start drawing

39:17

and that a Roth IRA is

39:19

not going to be taxed. The

39:21

question is, will the

39:23

income received from a

39:25

Roth IRA increase your

39:27

tax bracket, therefore marginally

39:29

increase your tax burden

39:31

from what you paying

39:34

taxes from your 401k

39:36

income. Thank you. Josh,

39:38

thank you for the question, and I

39:40

have great news for you. Withdrawals

39:43

from an IRA are tax -free,

39:45

as long as you are

39:47

above the age of 59 and

39:49

a half, and the account

39:51

has been open for at least

39:53

five years. So you

39:55

will not be taxed on those

39:57

Roth IRA withdrawals, so it

39:59

will not neutralize those benefits that

40:01

you get. I love Josh

40:03

looking around every corner though, because

40:05

there are unintended consequences that

40:07

happen when you withdraw from places

40:09

as an example in retirement. Income

40:12

that you're bringing in, earned

40:14

income you're bringing in could affect

40:16

your ability to either, it

40:19

could affect your social security payments,

40:21

so you need to be careful

40:23

about that. Also, of course, anyone

40:25

who is getting any type of

40:27

government assistance needs to know what

40:29

the rules are around. income

40:32

streams and taxable income streams,

40:34

but often we get hit with

40:36

these unintended consequences. So I

40:38

absolutely love, love the question. Yeah.

40:41

And Joe, since you mentioned social

40:44

security, Roth IRA with Charles also

40:46

don't impact social security. Do

40:48

not affect it. Yeah.

40:50

As an example, one

40:53

retirement tax that

40:55

people pay is called

40:57

Irma. income related

40:59

monthly adjustment amount.

41:01

I can't stand. You

41:03

can't stand these

41:06

acronyms. Oh, I just

41:08

ate them all. I can

41:10

see the pain on your

41:12

face. Just throw them away.

41:14

The Irma is a fee

41:16

that you might have to

41:18

pay on part B and

41:20

part D premiums of your

41:22

Medicare. And it's based on

41:24

the income on your tax return the

41:26

two years prior. So it's funny because

41:28

you're going along, Paula. Everything seems great.

41:30

And oh, by the way, you got

41:33

this additional fee really added to your,

41:35

your Medicare benefits. Yeah. But

41:37

the good news is the Roth IRA

41:39

qualified withdrawals from a Roth IRA are

41:41

tax free, tax free. You're not going

41:43

to have to worry about any of

41:45

that. So Josh, take it all

41:47

out right now. No, no, wait

41:49

until you're 59 and a half. Oh, sorry.

41:51

Or older. And make sure that the

41:53

account has been open for at least five

41:55

years. Make sure you meet the five -year

41:57

holding period. Check those boxes and dinners

42:00

on you. Well, thank you,

42:02

Josh, for the question. We

42:04

have another comment, Joe.

42:06

Another. Another comment and

42:08

also anonymous. Are you curious

42:10

to know what it is? I'm so

42:12

curious. Aren't you curious? All right. Well,

42:14

let's follow that. That's so good. Hey,

42:18

Paula. On a recent episode, you

42:20

attributed the quote, follow your curiosity

42:22

to Cal Newport, and I just

42:24

wanted to suggest that this actually

42:26

isn't fully accurate. He did

42:28

suggest the idea that following

42:30

your passion isn't a great

42:32

idea, but actually the phrase

42:34

follow your curiosity was first

42:36

notably said by Elizabeth Gilbert

42:38

in her book in 2015.

42:41

Just wanted to share that bit

42:43

of information as it is a

42:45

somewhat obscure fact, but I think

42:47

it's important to attribute quotes from

42:49

where they came from. Thanks. Anonymous,

42:52

thank you for the comment. Liz

42:55

Gilbert is widely attributed as

42:57

having popularized the phrase follow your

42:59

curiosity with the publication of

43:02

Big Magic in 2015. Cal

43:04

Newport first discussed following your

43:06

curiosity with the publication of

43:08

So Good They Can't Ignore

43:10

You in 2012. The

43:13

book So Good They Can't Ignore You,

43:15

that book title, is actually a

43:17

quote from Steve Martin who when

43:19

asked what the secret to success is

43:21

said to be so good they

43:23

ignore you so even Cal Newport's book

43:25

which he published in 2012 that

43:27

title is actually from Steve Martin and

43:29

Steve Martin himself was really not

43:31

the first person to say be so

43:34

good they ignore you but he

43:36

was the one who popularized it. I

43:38

think Paul when you say he's

43:40

the one that popularized it at that

43:42

time. Right. Because what you'll also

43:44

find is that throughout history with different

43:46

phrases, there are skips of maybe

43:48

30 years, and somebody reaches back 30

43:50

years and pulls this back out

43:52

of obscurity and makes it again, and

43:55

nobody that's listening at this point

43:57

remembers what people were saying 30 years

43:59

ago. Right. So you

44:01

are correct. Follow Your Curiosity is

44:03

widely attributed to Liz Gilbert, but

44:06

she stands

44:08

on the shoulders of many who

44:10

have also discussed following your

44:12

curiosity who came before her. When

44:14

Cal Newport published So Good

44:16

They Can't Ignore You, the premise

44:18

of that book is about

44:20

what he calls the passion hypothesis.

44:23

The passion hypothesis is that if

44:25

one follows their passion, they will

44:28

succeed. And he

44:30

spends his book refuting

44:32

the passion hypothesis and

44:34

proposing following your curiosity

44:37

as the remedy to that

44:39

hypothesis. Now, I haven't

44:41

done a reread of that

44:43

book, so I don't know if

44:45

he specifically uses the phrase, follow

44:48

your curiosity within that

44:50

book. But it is from

44:52

that book that he

44:54

first became associated with and

44:56

the doctrine of follow

44:58

your curiosity. That said, Cal

45:01

Newport is, with

45:03

all due respect, not as famous as

45:05

Liz Gilbert. So it makes a

45:07

lot of sense to him, particularly in

45:09

2012. Cal Newport

45:11

was this young professor

45:13

of computer science at

45:15

Georgetown, whereas Liz Gilbert, by

45:18

the time she published Big

45:20

Magic in 2015, already had the

45:22

fame that came from having

45:24

published Eat Pray Love. Cal

45:26

Newport, in 2012, he talked

45:28

about the importance of following your

45:31

curiosity, but because he wasn't

45:33

as famous, he spoke that phrase

45:35

to a much smaller audience.

45:37

He had a much smaller platform,

45:39

particularly at that time. So

45:41

it makes sense that Liz

45:43

Gilbert is often attributed as the

45:45

one who popularized the phrase

45:48

because Liz Gilbert is more popular.

45:50

Because her book did moderately

45:52

well. It was an

45:54

absolute smash runaway. Let's put

45:56

it this way. Julia

45:58

Roberts has never starred in a

46:00

movie based on a book that Cal

46:02

Newport wrote yet. yet And

46:04

Julia I know you want to

46:06

but Cal might not be ready

46:08

a man that I have a

46:10

lot of appreciation for his artist

46:13

and writer Austin Cleon He's been

46:15

on my podcast a couple times

46:17

and he of course wrote a

46:19

book called steal like an artist

46:21

Paula Which is kind of exactly

46:23

what we're talking about right now

46:26

great art is built on the

46:28

backs of other great art and

46:30

while certainly stealing

46:32

plagiarizing ripping off

46:34

is not only

46:36

not acceptable. It

46:38

doesn't create new art. It

46:40

doesn't advance the discussion. Taking,

46:43

though, what somebody else built

46:45

and riffing off it is exactly

46:47

how great artists have existed

46:50

forever. And so they pay homage. They

46:52

remix it. They truly make it

46:55

their own and build it into their

46:57

work. while at the same time

46:59

pointing at the people around them going,

47:02

you know what, this came directly from

47:04

them, but fused together with this thing

47:06

I brought from somebody else creates an

47:08

entirely new era, which is really exciting.

47:10

When you think about the number of

47:12

people that think that they're not creative, like,

47:15

oh, I'm not creative. It's so

47:17

hard to come up with stuff that

47:19

nobody's ever thought of before. That's

47:21

not at all the way artists create

47:24

is Austin's thing. People are constantly

47:26

reading, looking, knowing, and then taking

47:29

these diverse activities and pursuits and

47:31

discussions and fusing them together in

47:33

a new exciting way. It's funny

47:35

because it's great with art. It's

47:37

great with food. It's great when

47:39

you think about finance. I

47:41

mean, it truly is, regardless of

47:43

the discipline, how advancements are

47:45

made. Right. And so all

47:47

of everyone that we've talked about, Liz

47:50

Gilbert, Cal Newport, Steve Martin, we

47:53

all draw inspiration from

47:55

those around us. Somebody

47:57

said, follow your curiosity,

47:59

maybe in a little different way, maybe

48:01

in a different platform, maybe related to something

48:03

different. I'll bet before either of the

48:05

two of them. Think about the number

48:07

of people, by the way, just to

48:09

bring this a little closer to home. The

48:12

number of people, older

48:14

people in our community who

48:16

have said, I was

48:18

practicing the fire movement before

48:21

the acronym came. Right.

48:24

Yeah, exactly. This isn't new. The

48:27

number of older people I know that go, this

48:29

isn't new. This isn't something that

48:31

Vicki Robin just out of the middle

48:33

of nowhere went, you know, I got

48:35

this new thing. All right. Let's spend

48:37

less money and be self -sufficient. Vicki

48:39

and Joe did a great job of

48:42

taking it, but then look at what happened.

48:44

Then Pete, Mr. Money Mustache, rift on

48:46

it. And then we have all these other

48:48

brilliant craters now riffing on it. The

48:50

idea that we have all these other annoying

48:52

acronyms that I can't stand. Coast

48:55

-fi and dumpster -fi and

48:57

all that. Barista

49:00

-fi. Barista. This podcast has

49:02

its own fire acronym. Double -I

49:04

-Fire. Double -I. Double -I. Double -I

49:06

-Fire. You'll never hear one

49:08

of those acronyms come out

49:11

of my mouth. That's

49:13

a perfect example. of

49:15

taking an idea and riffing on it

49:17

and making it your own. And what

49:19

was the origin of fire? Was it,

49:22

it is widely attributed to Vicky Robin and

49:24

Joe Dominguez with the publication of Your

49:26

Money or Your Life in 1992. But

49:28

prior to 1992, prior to when

49:30

they came out with that book, they

49:32

had to draw their ideas from somewhere. And

49:35

sometimes I think it's just your ability to

49:37

tell a story. A

49:39

great book in the entrepreneur space

49:41

is The E -Myth. And

49:43

there is Truly nothing. All he's

49:45

doing is showing little entrepreneurs what

49:47

McDonald's does in that book. If

49:50

you want the TLDR on the

49:52

E -Meth, he's taking a small entrepreneur

49:54

and saying, look, McDonald's

49:56

has all these systems and

49:58

that's why they got to the

50:00

place that they are. If

50:02

you apply systematic workloads and roles

50:04

to the jobs that you

50:06

do in this business, you're much

50:08

more likely to be successful

50:10

than just be great at making

50:13

cupcakes or whatever the businesses, all

50:16

Michael Gerber does in this book.

50:18

And no stake on Michael Gerber,

50:20

phenomenal book and love it. And

50:22

I think it's so hard to

50:24

tell a great story. But just

50:26

Paula, his ability to tell that

50:28

story takes this thing that people

50:30

already knew and makes it much

50:32

more widely accessible. I

50:34

think Pete, Mr. Money Mustache,

50:36

is available to write that

50:38

one blog post to tell

50:40

that story about this is

50:42

incredibly simple math. This is

50:44

way, way, way simple math.

50:47

And to do it in

50:49

his way with his quirky

50:51

spin on it makes people

50:53

pay attention where previously people

50:55

might not have. Yeah. But

50:57

thank you, Anonymous, for the call because

50:59

I'm a huge, huge fan of Liz

51:01

Gilbert. I would love to have her

51:03

on the show. And for

51:06

anyone who has not read Big

51:08

Magic, it is an incredible book.

51:10

highly recommend it. I read it

51:12

as soon as it came out.

51:14

She talks in that book about

51:16

not burdening your art by forcing

51:19

it to pay the bills, which

51:21

is an important message, particularly for

51:23

people who are trying to figure

51:25

out what's next in their life. She

51:28

has given TED Talks and

51:30

made other remarks where she's talked

51:32

about the fallout of the

51:34

runaway success of Eat, Pray, Love.

51:37

Really? Oh, yeah. Because she had

51:39

to deal with this incredibly

51:41

difficult existential question where she says,

51:43

you know what? The

51:46

peak of my professional career

51:48

might be behind me.

51:50

I'm in my 30s and

51:52

my biggest professional accomplishment

51:54

of my life is most

51:56

likely behind me. So

51:58

how do I go on

52:00

to have a fulfilling career

52:02

knowing that it's all downhill

52:04

from here. She's talked

52:06

about that publicly many times. I

52:08

was so moved by that question that

52:10

when Mark Manson came on the show,

52:12

shortly after the publication, after the runaway

52:15

success of the subtle art of not

52:17

giving an F, I asked

52:19

him the same question. I said, Mark,

52:21

with all due respect, your

52:23

greatest accomplishment might be behind you. How

52:25

are you? facing that. And

52:27

we had a great conversation. We'll link to it in

52:29

the show notes. We had a great conversation about

52:31

that. Wait, did he say, did he say, I really

52:33

don't give it up? Because

52:35

that's the answer I really want. That

52:38

would be very on brand. It would have been

52:40

so good. Yeah, I really don't care. There's

52:42

a subtle art to it, Paula. The

52:47

questions that all of these

52:49

thinkers pose around the

52:51

nature of work and fulfillment

52:53

at work is an incredibly

52:55

important concept. And I think,

52:57

especially with so many affordors

52:59

being part of the fire

53:01

community, a lot of

53:03

the fire community also concerns itself

53:05

with workplace fulfillment. It's not all

53:08

asset allocation all the time. It's

53:10

not all efficient frontier all day

53:12

long. There's also the very deep

53:14

question of how do we have

53:16

a fulfilling and meaningful Career

53:19

or series of careers. How do

53:21

we find fulfillment at work and fulfillment

53:23

after work? I mean, that's my

53:25

passion right now, right? Is one of

53:27

the happiest retirees all about exactly

53:29

so thank you for bringing that to

53:31

our attention because I think it's

53:33

important to Keep these names in the

53:35

zeitgeist Joe. We've done it again.

53:37

I can't believe it. That was so

53:40

fun. Thanks again everybody for some

53:42

Really great questions and great comments. I

53:44

love the fact that this episode

53:46

was as much a discussion, right?

53:48

With two people just commenting

53:50

on stuff that topics we've had,

53:52

really, that originally sprang from

53:54

you and our thoughts on stuff

53:56

that you brought to the

53:58

table. So nice job, everybody. Yeah.

54:01

And please, I encourage you

54:03

all to call in with

54:05

comments, questions, affordanything.com slash voicemail

54:07

is how you can leave

54:10

feedback, comments, questions, We

54:12

love to hear from you. We want more

54:14

voices on the show. So thank

54:16

you so much to everyone who

54:18

takes the time to lend your voice

54:20

to the Affordor community. Joe,

54:22

where can people find you if they want to hear more from

54:24

you? I would point

54:26

people, Paula, to our last

54:28

Monday and Wednesday episodes. We

54:30

were joined last week by

54:33

Kevin Evers from the Harvard

54:35

Business Review. And he

54:37

did a deep dive along

54:39

with the folks at Harvard

54:41

Business Review on the genius

54:43

of Taylor Swift, the systems, the

54:47

processes, manufacturing,

54:49

creativity, managing

54:51

this monster tour, all of the

54:53

above. When we have big

54:55

topics like this on Monday, we do

54:57

a deep dive, OG and I. And

54:59

then on Wednesday, we talk to the

55:01

person that actually wrote the book on

55:03

it. In this case, Kevin Evers from

55:05

Harvard Business Review. So all things Taylor

55:07

Swift on the Stacky Benjamin show, except

55:10

Taylor Swift. No Taylor Swift. But

55:13

hey, if we got to talk to Harvard

55:15

about Taylor Swift, okay, so be it. Awesome.

55:17

I can't wait to listen. Thanks

55:19

to all of you for

55:21

tuning in. If you enjoyed today's

55:23

episode, please head to affordanything.com

55:26

slash newsletter so you can get

55:28

our incredible newsletter delivered hot

55:30

and fresh to your inbox. We

55:32

publish. Insights on there

55:34

that you will not find

55:36

anywhere else, so a fordanything.com slash

55:38

newsletter absolutely free and a

55:40

great place to further and deepen

55:43

this discussion. Thank you

55:45

so much for tuning in. I'm Paula

55:47

Pant. I'm Joe Salcihi. And we'll

55:49

meet you in the next episode.