Need Ownership

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Yes, this is a very small part of my strategy. And I realize you may be kidding to an extent. But many are not kidding.

Can I believe in this Survivalist! (TM) mindset? Absolutely. But I am by nature a pretty trusting and optimistic dude. And I fear that becoming a Survivalist! would alienate me to my neighbors, put my focus in the wrong place, and ultimately make me more likely to be looted or whatever in the very unlikely chance that SHTF in the near future.

So the abyss stares into me, etc.

Full argument in Hemenway's essay "Flowing toward abundance" for anyone interested:

Flowing Toward Abundance - Toby Hemenway

Glad im not the only one. Given all the BS going on in the world, Ive got solar setup, planning on getting a backup battery soonish, have a years worth of food for 6 of us. Got a greenhouse setup. Planted fruit trees, berry and nut bushes, etc etc.

Im not full on crazy prepper yet, but im getting there.
 
Almost never do tours, private or otherwise, when traveling anywhere relatively safe and accessible. Having some time to wander/drive around and get a bit lost in a new place is too interesting and fun.
Doesn’t sound very fun with 3 kids getting lost in Manhattan and wasting the whole day trying to figure out what subway line to take.
 
Family income of 500k-ish over last 2 academic years, 450k was mine, 50k was my wife's as a resident. Paid $150k of loans during those 2 years. The rest went to savings after taxes and expenses.

The success really has been through earnings and investing mostly.

Massive investments into the market after the March crash helped significantly. A lot of tax benefits through being s corp have helped lower tax bill, especially with my solo 401k contribution of 57k and the 199a deduction.

350k of my net worth is in options now. I used to Target 12-15k/month in profits monthly. I had 1 rough month where i lost 24k, mostly because i folded my positions instead of holding in perpetuity, now i play even more conservatively - aim is to get 6-7k/month (roughly 1.5-2% of what's in the account). Because of the loss of 24k of my profits, I basically have the same return as sp500 right now - about 45 percent since November 2020 when i started options. It's a strategy I'm sticking with.

Plan is to diversify 30-35 percent into physical real estate. Illiquid assets that do not correlate with the markets. All of that will be in private real estate syndications essentially. Doing it all through crowdstreet for now.

I plan on being at 1M net worth in 1-1.5 years, so 33 age. Shouldn't be hard with 600k in family income starting November, though my wife and i are taking a 2 month hiatus from working after August and just traveling.
This is excellent information Cyanide!

When you say you are targeting 1.5 - 2 % of gain per month on the account. Do yo do this with selling covered calls? CSPs? PMCCs? Or another strategy? Thanks for your guidance.
 
This is excellent information Cyanide!

When you say you are targeting 1.5 - 2 % of gain per month on the account. Do yo do this with selling covered calls? CSPs? PMCCs? Or another strategy? Thanks for your guidance.

Strangles usually or naked puts. Strangles initially made me nervous, but the research from tasty trade has shown that strangles is essentially one of the best strategies. So I'm starting to use them and getting comfortable with them. My strikes are extremely conservative though. Seems like the really successful traders all do things like strangles or iron condors. Fyi, a strangle is the simultaneous selling of a naked put and call on the same underlying. It is a strategy when your outlook is neutral essentially, so neither bullish nor bearish. You are betting two opposite things, so if one leg of your option is a losing trade, the other leg mitigates the loss by being a winner.

For example 12 days ago, i sold the following strangle on RUT (Russell 2000 index). This was roughly $2320 when i sold the strangle:

Leg 1) RUT 11 naked calls strike $2660, expiry 8/6 (45 days to expiry at the time of order). Premium for this leg was $1144

Leg 2) rut 11 naked puts strike $1900, expiry 8/6. Premium for this leg = $4840

The above trade used $250,000 of my cash buying power. So roughly 2.4% cash on cash return, or 19% annualized.

The theoretical maximum profit in 45 days on the above trade is $5984. I have 4 other trades open on abnb, sfix, pins, and lmnd. But predominantly RUT is my go to.

In short, if in 45 days rut stays between $2660 and $1900 then i realize my maximum profit. But you should never wait for expiry.

When either leg achieves 50% of it's profit, i buy back that option and close position. Then start a new one. Usually 50% is achieved in 2-3 weeks. Or if a large directional move is happening, i may close position at 3 x premium loss. One leg should always be winning when the other is losing.
 
Glad im not the only one. Given all the BS going on in the world, Ive got solar setup, planning on getting a backup battery soonish, have a years worth of food for 6 of us. Got a greenhouse setup. Planted fruit trees, berry and nut bushes, etc etc.

Im not full on crazy prepper yet, but im getting there.

Very nice. I am doing or want to do all these things. Also have a redwood forest out back and getting real into green woodworking.

Can I ask which solar setup you use and what was the initial cost and ongoing maintenance? I looked into this a while ago and it was ~$30k initial for a rooftop system that would last ~10 years. Didn't seem quite worth it at that price point and longevity.

My framing is less that I'm a prepper and more that I'm just a crazy hippie and hopefully a good neighbor. I enjoy this stuff and many others in my hood do as well. We enjoy sharing the fruits of our labor, and they have all kinds of established fruit trees whereas my trees are just starting out.
 
I need some advice people.
I’m a 35yo yo ER doc and I am desperate for some kind of business, any kind, to get into. I’ve worked hard since graduating and become debt free, own my home outright, and have 1.75 mill in investments. I just got a small promotion to an admin position. And I hate it.
I hate how I have zero ownership of anything. I am desperately looking for something to invest in and become an “owner.” The freestanding Er market and urgent care market where I am is completely saturated. I hate working for the CMG that took over my job. I just want to know that I own something to maybe give me some control of my destiny. To know that I won't be fired at someone's whim.
I have no idea what to do but I am desperate. I’ve asked every colleague I know that I am chomping at the bit to get into anything. However no luck. I wish I could meet another entrepreneurial doc and do something. Anything. I just need to feel like I have some kind of control with all the doom & gloom of our specialty. Im not looking for a side gig. Even though I love practicing emergency medicine, I want it to become an option and not a requirement. If anyone could recommend some direction for my life or point me in the right direction, I would truly appreciate it.
Not meant to be misconstrued as medical advice:
You might be experiencing burnout. Consult with your employer/colleagues for more resources.
 
Not meant to be misconstrued as medical advice:
You might be experiencing burnout. Consult with your employer/colleagues for more resources.
Why would it matter if it was taken as medical advice?
 
Very nice. I am doing or want to do all these things. Also have a redwood forest out back and getting real into green woodworking.

Can I ask which solar setup you use and what was the initial cost and ongoing maintenance? I looked into this a while ago and it was ~$30k initial for a rooftop system that would last ~10 years. Didn't seem quite worth it at that price point and longevity.

My framing is less that I'm a prepper and more that I'm just a crazy hippie and hopefully a good neighbor. I enjoy this stuff and many others in my hood do as well. We enjoy sharing the fruits of our labor, and they have all kinds of established fruit trees whereas my trees are just starting out.

My solar was about 45k with a 20 year warranty. More like 33ish k after tax rebates.
 
A 35yo doc with a 1.7M NW ? Dude, you've won the game. They say getting rich is hard, but staying rich is even harder. I'd avoid any high risk ventures at this time. Urgent cares are struggling in my area right now with volume and the market is saturated.
 
A 35yo doc with a 1.7M NW ? Dude, you've won the game. They say getting rich is hard, but staying rich is even harder. I'd avoid any high risk ventures at this time. Urgent cares are struggling in my area right now with volume and the market is saturated.
Staying rich is definitely not harder than getting rich that’s so absurd lmao
 
Staying rich when you started off poor is extremely easy. Staying rich when you never worked for it is very hard. They say all the money is lost by the 3rd generation.

Take a fit 30 yrs old and they will have no problem staying fit.

Make a 40 BMI guy extremely fit with a magic pill and dude will be 40 BMI in a year.
Make a Fit 30 yr old Fat and he will be fit in 1 yr.
 
Staying rich is definitely not harder than getting rich that’s so absurd lmao

"In 1982, Forbes Magazine published its first list of the wealthiest people in the world (The Forbes 400). Thirty years later, in 2012, more than 70% of that inaugural class no longer made the cut. Getting rich is hard. Staying rich is harder. The skill set to create wealth is very different from the skill set to keep wealth. Creating wealth often requires assuming measures of concentrated risk-taking coupled with a healthy dose of luck (don’t underestimate the role of luck). Maintaining wealth requires dialing down the risk and adopting a bit of humility when it comes to your confidence regarding future investment outcomes."

Creating wealth and keeping wealth are two different skillsets.
 
"In 1982, Forbes Magazine published its first list of the wealthiest people in the world (The Forbes 400). Thirty years later, in 2012, more than 70% of that inaugural class no longer made the cut. Getting rich is hard. Staying rich is harder. The skill set to create wealth is very different from the skill set to keep wealth. Creating wealth often requires assuming measures of concentrated risk-taking coupled with a healthy dose of luck (don’t underestimate the role of luck). Maintaining wealth requires dialing down the risk and adopting a bit of humility when it comes to your confidence regarding future investment outcomes."

Creating wealth and keeping wealth are two different skillsets.
I agree that those that inherit wealth are inclined to lose it, given enough generations. However, the fact that 70% of the inaugural class of Forbes richest people aren't on the list doesn't mean all 70% are no longer wealthy. Many (if not most) may still be very wealthy. They may however, have been passed by others whose wealth grew beyond faster than theirs, and therefore bumped them out of the top 400. Just because Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos came along and accumulated $100 billion+, doesn't mean your $2 billion, isn't still big money and growing.
 
I agree that those that inherit wealth are inclined to lose it, given enough generations. However, the fact that 70% of the inaugural class of Forbes richest people aren't on the list doesn't mean all 70% are no longer wealthy. Many (if not most) may still be very wealthy. They may however, have been passed by others whose wealth grew beyond faster than theirs, and therefore bumped them out of the top 400. Just because Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos came along and accumulated $100 billion+, doesn't mean your $2 billion, isn't still big money and growing.
I agree that you can't make that conclusion from this data.

If the top 400 back then had an avg net worth of 100M and in 30 yrs had a net worth of 500M then you would say they did a great job of creating wealth. But 500M today will not get you into the top 5000 most likely
 
Last edited:
I agree that those that inherit wealth are inclined to lose it, given enough generations. However, the fact that 70% of the inaugural class of Forbes richest people aren't on the list doesn't mean all 70% are no longer wealthy. Many (if not most) may still be very wealthy. They may however, have been passed by others whose wealth grew beyond faster than theirs, and therefore bumped them out of the top 400. Just because Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos came along and accumulated $100 billion+, doesn't mean your $2 billion, isn't still big money and growing.

I think we're conflating two different issues. That quote illustrates how hard it is to maintain wealth. If maintaining wealth was easy , why are 70% of them no longer billionaires?

Yes, if a billionaire loses 80% of their wealth , they'll still be "rich" but that wasn't the point. The point is that it's a lot harder to maintain wealth.
 
The point is being a billionaire 30 yrs ago doesn't guarantee you to be top 400 in 30 yrs even if your wealth doubles. There are an abundance of tech start ups that will create many Billionaires.
 
I think we're conflating two different issues. That quote illustrates how hard it is to maintain wealth. If maintaining wealth was easy , why are 70% of them no longer billionaires?

Yes, if a billionaire loses 80% of their wealth , they'll still be "rich" but that wasn't the point. The point is that it's a lot harder to maintain wealth.
Falling out of the Forbes 400 doesn’t mean you’re not a billionaire anymore.

I believe the Forbes 400 was simply the 400 richest, not necessarily a list of those that crossed the billionaire threshold. It was simply who has the most money, implying that if you were #400 you’d could get richer, and still fall off the list, if #401 had his wealth growth accelerate faster.
 
I could be wrong, but I believe the Forbes 400 was simply the 400 richest. I don’t think there was a minimum net worth. It was simply who has the most money, implying that if you were #400 you’d could still get richer, and fall off the list if #401 had his wealth growth accelerate faster.
Yes maintaining wealth has a lot to do with the rate at which one accumulates wealth
 
This is exactly what I want. I just don’t know how to achieve it.

Take $200k of your $1.7m and sell options. Really not *that* hard and $200k can generate $2-8k/mo of low-risk income depending on volatility with a couple clicks a month. Way easier than becoming a slumlord or buying into a business. The main risk is losing out on the upside if the underlying takes off. Put $1.5m in your desired asset allocation (80/20, 60/40, whatever) in low cost index funds (VTI + BND or VTI + VSUX + BND) then buy a couple high volatility growth stocks (preferably in the $10-$20 range so you can sell 100-200 contracts) and sell covered calls, straddles, iron condors, wheel etc.. if you're single you probably don't even really have to do that but it's nice to be able to pay living expenses rather than use taxable investments.
 
I don't think it's that hard to keep wealth. Don't invest in anything risky once you've hit FIRE, and put your money into "set it and forget it" mode. With a couple million in assets, just stick it into index funds, or various sector funds, and re-invest the dividends. Should be more than enough to last well into retirement without touching the 401K.
 
Most investing websites have retirement tools. Fidelity has one that can integrate all your accounts from other institutions and can extrapolate out your income to any age you want. Mine says I can retire now, and with expenses of 10K per month and about 150K in part-time income .
 
I don't think getting to Fire for most docs is too difficult if they don't go crazy with spending. When you retire, just scale back.

If you want to retire with the same lifestyle when you are making 400K then its a different story.

My goal at retirement is to have enough passive income so I can leave all my kids millionaires. I know some may disagree with this, but I want my kids taken care of and not struggle like I had to. I will definitely teach them about money and keeping wealth.
 
I don't think getting to Fire for most docs is too difficult if they don't go crazy with spending. When you retire, just scale back.

If you want to retire with the same lifestyle when you are making 400K then its a different story.

My goal at retirement is to have enough passive income so I can leave all my kids millionaires. I know some may disagree with this, but I want my kids taken care of and not struggle like I had to. I will definitely teach them about money and keeping wealth.

The thing is, while I was making 400K, I was spending like I was making 200K. It's therefore easy to get to FIRE at 2-3 million in retirement/investments.
 
I’m a 35yo yo ER doc…debt free, own my home outright, and have 1.75 mill in investments.
I just want to know that I own something to maybe give me some control of my destiny.
You answered your own question… or you aren’t asking the right one. You already have a ton of control. You don’t need more money to control your destiny. Financially, you are doing it right. Most entrepreneurs start out with far less before some achieve incredible financial success (and yes most fail, so don’t spiral yourself down an endless hole of spending on an entrepreneurial endeavor).

The reason many physicians don’t achieve FIRE is because they spend more than they save/invest early on. If physicians save the majority they make, they will find themselves in the OPs position and then fat FIRE within another few years.

Hence your question is more, “what is the meaning of life?” Please tell me if you think you’ve found it.

I was once told: ‘When you are young life is all about the answers. Then life becomes all about the questions. Finally, when you are old you realize life is about the journey. You can’t shortcut the journey.’

So, to answer your question. Go for it, whatever that may be, and then tell us about your journey.

Edit: Edited for clarity given a misinterpretation of the original intended meaning.
 
Last edited:
You answered your own question… or you aren’t asking the right one. You already have a ton of control. You don’t need more money to control your destiny. Financially, you are doing it right. Most entrepreneurs start out with far less before some achieve incredible financial success (and yes most fail, so don’t spiral yourself down an endless hole of spending on an entrepreneurial endeavor).

For many physicians, financial independence is defeated by over spending. If physicians save the majority they make, they will find themselves in the OPs position and then fat FIRE within another few years.

Hence your question is more, “what is the meaning of life?” Please tell me if you think you’ve found it.

I was once told: ‘When you are young life is all about the answers. Then life becomes all about the questions. Finally, when you are old you realize life is about the journey. You can’t shortcut the journey.’

So, to answer your question. Go for it, whatever that may be, and then tell us about your journey.
I highly disagree with this
 
I am in the same spending boat around 2-250k/yr. if u want to keep the 200k lifestyle, u need way more than 2M.

I plan on cutting back by 50 and that leaves me 30-40 yrs left to live. 2M without any passive income will not do it. I don’t want to worry about having enough when I’m 75.

thus my need to have passive equal 300k/yr to essentially ensure I won’t touch my investments/retirement.

even if I had 5M at retirement, I have no idea if that will last 35 yrs. I know the calculators tell me it will but what happens when the market tanks during 2001/2008/2020? I could be looking at 2-3M loss and having to scale back my lifestyle.

thus I hope to have 300k in rental income. People have to live somewhere so it will never dry up completely.

just redid my net worth and I’m right at 5M. 2.5M rentals, 1M market, 300k cash, and 500k business. 1M equity in our homestead. Once I clear my 1.3M in rental debt, I think I’ll be at my FIRE.
 
Last edited:
I highly disagree with this
Where does all the money physicians make go then in your opinion? How does everyone who makes substantially less in this world possibly survive? They spend less. I don’t spend anywhere near $200-250K/year as emergentmd does, so I don’t need near as much for FIRE. Sure, you want to be able to spend a lot, then you need to make a lot. Physicians make more than enough. They prevent themselves from obtaining FIRE when they spend more than they save and invest.
 
I don't think it's that hard to keep wealth. Don't invest in anything risky once you've hit FIRE, and put your money into "set it and forget it" mode. With a couple million in assets, just stick it into index funds, or various sector funds, and re-invest the dividends. Should be more than enough to last well into retirement without touching the 401K.

Sounds easy but once you've accumulated wealth there's always the temptation to accumulate more and spend more. Why stop at 1M , why not 2M, 3M, 4M etc? The same drive that made someone a millionaire doesn't just disappear.

I read a great book on behavioral finance called The Psychology of Money by Morgan Housel. It discussed story after story of great wealthy men that lost everything because they didn't know when to quit the game after they've won.

The OP at his age has already won the game but probably doesn't even know it yet. He's looking to start a business . It could be a feast, it could be famine. Not a bet I'm willing to make.
 
Successful people are used to work and have challenges. You don’t go from a hard worker to next day have nothing to do.

We are no the lazy, wake up anytime, watch tv til dusk kind of people. That would drive us crazy.

There has to always be some type of challenge, hobby, work to keep us happy.

I am close to FIRE and even if I got $10M, you bet I will be still working in some capacity if physically able.

waking up each morning having nothing to do/look forward to is depressing
 
Successful people are used to work and have challenges. You don’t go from a hard worker to next day have nothing to do.

We are no the lazy, wake up anytime, watch tv til dusk kind of people. That would drive us crazy.

There has to always be some type of challenge, hobby, work to keep us happy.

I am close to FIRE and even if I got $10M, you bet I will be still working in some capacity if physically able.
Bezos, Musk. Gates, Zuckerberg, Buffett. They could have retired 1,000 times over. They choose to still work.
 
Where does all the money physicians make go then in your opinion? How does everyone who makes substantially less in this world possibly survive? They spend less. I don’t spend anywhere near $200-250K/year as emergentmd does, so I don’t need near as much for FIRE. Sure, you want to be able to spend a lot, then you need to make a lot. Physicians make more than enough. They prevent themselves from obtaining FIRE when they spend more than they save and invest.
Your statement that "most physicians do not achieve 'financial independence' because they spend too much is ridiculous. Why then do doctors stereotypically drive Benzs, Porsches, Lamborghinis, etc.?? I would link an article but this point is too simple to merit one.
 
For many physicians, financial independence is defeated by over spending. If physicians save the majority they make, they will find themselves in the OPs position and then fat FIRE within another few years.
Where does all the money physicians make go then in your opinion? How does everyone who makes substantially less in this world possibly survive? They spend less. I don’t spend anywhere near $200-250K/year as emergentmd does, so I don’t need near as much for FIRE. Sure, you want to be able to spend a lot, then you need to make a lot. Physicians make more than enough. They prevent themselves from obtaining FIRE when they spend more than they save and invest.
Your statement that "most physicians do not achieve 'financial independence' because they spend too much is ridiculous. Why then do doctors stereotypically drive Benzs, Porsches, Lamborghinis, etc.?? I would link an article but this point is too simple to merit one.
You misstated and possibly misread my posts. I said that for many that don't achieve financial independence (I probably should have used the terminology FIRE instead of financial independence in my first post), it is typically secondary to over spending (I'll add, usually occurring at a younger age taking away from compound investing over time). I didn't say that very few physicians achieve financial independence. Most physicians (but not all) reach financial independence eventually, but few do at a young age.

I don't personally know any physicians that drive Porsches, and especially not Lamborghinis.

For physicians that don't achieve FIRE, what is the alternatively reason why you think they didn't?
 
You misstated and possibly misread my posts. I said that for many that don't achieve financial independence (I probably should have used the terminology FIRE instead of financial independence in my first post), it is typically secondary to over spending (I'll add, usually occurring at a younger age taking away from compound investing over time). I didn't say that very few physicians achieve financial independence. Most physicians reach financial independence eventually, but few do at a young age.

I don't personally know any physicians that drive Porsches, and especially not Lamborghinis.

For physicians that don't achieve FIRE, what is the alternatively reason why you think they didn't?
Why are you asking me? If this is a concern of yours, focus on your own finances.
 
Mount Asclepius said:
I didn't say that very few physicians achieve financial independence.
Mount Asclepius said:
For many physicians, financial independence is defeated by over spending.
The second quote is the exact converse of your primary statement.
 
Well, I know a whole lot of community physicians who DO drive Porsches, Lambos, and even a Ferrari (in my little suburb.) Many of them are not on their first wife, either.
The majority aren't retiring anytime soon, either. And that's not necessarily by choice.

Docs are historically lousy at managing money. This forum is an outlier. A HUGE outlier.
I am an outlier and I freely admit that. (I am also pretty much FIREd, but "retired" from EM... to a much happier subspecialty. I work because I want to, not because I need to. Well, I need something to do, and it's fulfilling.)

but I digress.
 
The second quote is the exact converse of your primary statement.
I think you’re seeing the trees instead of the forest by taking an overly literal interpretation and misconstruing the different populations. Out of all physicians, many achieve financial independence in their lifetimes due to their hard work and earning potential. For the subgroup that doesn’t, especially the group that doesn’t achieve FIRE earlier on, I believe it is usually because they’ve lived beyond their means.

Maybe it will help you to see my point if I change the statement, “For many physicians, financial independence is defeated by over spending” to “For many of the physicians who don’t achieve FIRE, it is due to spending more than they save and invest early on.”
 
Well, I know a whole lot of community physicians who DO drive Porsches, Lambos, and even a Ferrari (in my little suburb.) Many of them are not on their first wife, either.
The majority aren't retiring anytime soon, either. And that's not necessarily by choice.

Docs are historically lousy at managing money. This forum is an outlier. A HUGE outlier.
I am an outlier and I freely admit that. (I am also pretty much FIREd, but "retired" from EM... to a much happier subspecialty. I work because I want to, not because I need to. Well, I need something to do, and it's fulfilling.)

but I digress.
Generally agree. Perhaps in the area of the country that I live in physicians drive more modest vehicles though (by modest in full disclosure that does include BMW, Mercedes, Acura, etc.). My understanding of the concept of FIRE is freedom and flexibility to do what you want, and not necessarily to be ‘retired’ in the traditional sense. We all need fulfillment and I suppose people find it in a lot of different ways. I just don’t think buying a vehicle priced over $100-200K such as a Lamborghini or Ferrari will also easily allow for FIRE on a physician’s income. It may not be a conscious choice, but it’s a choice none the less. We all can die tomorrow though, and I also understand that. Choices and priorities. As previously discussed, balance matters too.
 
Successful people are used to work and have challenges. You don’t go from a hard worker to next day have nothing to do.

We are no the lazy, wake up anytime, watch tv til dusk kind of people. That would drive us crazy.

There has to always be some type of challenge, hobby, work to keep us happy.

I am close to FIRE and even if I got $10M, you bet I will be still working in some capacity if physically able.

waking up each morning having nothing to do/look forward to is depressing

Agree with you here. I will be doing SOMETHING, but I'm not going to risk my financial stability on any untested ventures. I might invest a few thousand here and there on a new project, but certainly not emptying out my 401K to start an urgent care. The best part of having your financial security is the freedom to seek out other projects where you have control. In three months I will have complete control of my schedule, and drop my work hours in half. I'm done working 140 hours/month for another person/company where I have no control.
 
I think you’re seeing the trees instead of the forest by taking an overly literal interpretation and misconstruing the different populations. Out of all physicians, many achieve financial independence in their lifetimes due to their hard work and earning potential. For the subgroup that doesn’t, especially the group that doesn’t achieve FIRE earlier on, I believe it is usually because they’ve lived beyond their means.

Maybe it will help you to see my point if I change the statement, “For many physicians, financial independence is defeated by over spending” to “For many of the physicians who don’t achieve FIRE, it is due to spending more than they save and invest early on.”
I see your point, but that's not what you said originally. Changing your point means that you are starting to see MY point 😉
 
I think this is the thing that many Type A people miss:

If you have enough money, you don't have to stop doing things and just sit around and watch Three's Company reruns. You should just stop doing the things that put you at risk of losing your money.

Instead, maybe you should start doing other things that don't involve losing money, or maybe even don't involve money at all.

I have about 500 things I want to do in life. No one's ever gonna pay me to do them. I just want to do them. So, that's why I want to FIRE.
 
Last edited:
Top