As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Posts tagged as:

philosophy

16 comments

Email this article Email this article
Print this article Print this article

“What Works For You” Can Be a Trap

by Flexo on November 10, 2009

in Personal Finance

One of my favorite bloggers, and likely one of yours, is J.D. Roth. He has been writing about personal finance at Get Rich Slowly for some time now, and I was a fan of his writing at foldedspace when “blog” was still a new word. He is working on a book now, which I can’t wait to get my hands on (and read), and at the same time, he has been working on a blog series condensing his thoughts about personal finance into thirteen core tenets.

This is one of J.D.’s favorite mantras when offering financial advice or support: Do what works for you.

I think this is a great philosophy, and I can see how it is appealing to intelligent people who are capable of thinking independently, performing objective analysis, and making decisions based on empirical data and other established facts. It cuts directly to the core of personal finance: that money is personal and not every solution is universal. Different people require different answers, and what works for one person might not necessarily work for another.

The spirit of “What Works For You” is the important aspect: there are many paths to success and one should find the path that fits personally, using experimentation and consideration as a guide.

There are many open questions in personal finance but few concrete answers. What is a good investment? What will the stock market do tomorrow? Will I be able to afford college for my children in ten years? health care for myself next year? Uncertainty can lead to frustration, and when people don’t know what to do, they want to stick with something that feels comfortable.

I think it’s easy for the spirit of the “What Works For you” philosophy to be lost as one spreads the message, because the philosophy implies a search for comfort and is therefore subject to a number of psychological traps.

“What Works for You” grants a license to ignore criticism

itsatrapOne thing I remember about the time I was required to listen to a day-long Landmark Education seminar is the leader’s ability to silence anyone who didn’t accept their philosophy. If you disagreed with one aspect of their nonsense, a Landmark follower simply claimed you had a “racket” and you were immediately dismissed. The “What Works for You” argument does the same thing.

If you are focused on doing “What Works For You,” there is no room for opposing viewpoints. We are given the opportunity to selectively ignore facts that don’t fit our world view. Consider credit cards that offer rewards when you use them. I use a cash back credit card and never pay interest or late fees. That sounds like a great deal, and I often suggest this as a good way to make the credit card companies work for you. But according to consumer studies, on average, people like me spend more using credit cards than they would with cash. Even the rewards earned, particularly as credit card companies find ways to keep reducing these rewards, don’t make up the difference due to increased spending.

But many like me continue to use credit cards because it works for us. We say that we are spending less than we earn and we’re winning the battle with credit cards. But unless we have conducted our own experiments to determine how our own behavior, as an individual or family, is affected differently through using credit or cash, we have silenced criticism from cash-only advocates with a nothing more than a wave of the hand and the contentment that since we don’t see any surface damage on our finances, our behavior works for us.

“What Works For You” invites analysis that could be far too simple

Notice that the philosophy is not “What Works Best For You.” Whether something works is a binary state: either something works or something does not work. The only answers are yes or no. There is no gray area, no sliding scale, no room for judgment.

The Debt Snowball is often touted as the best method to pay off debt. There is no doubt this method, which calls for paying off your credit card debt from the card with the lowest balance to the highest, works for many people. And its popularity leads people to believe that it’s not worth considering another choice.

But many people who have succeeded paying off debt with the Debt Snowball would have succeeded with the Debt Avalanche, which offers similar psychological benefits but saves money and time. It’s important for someone embarking on the journey to pay off debt to be presented with options and be allowed to make their own decision. If you look only for “What Works For You,” you could be missing something that works better.

“What Works for You” accepts mediocrity as a way of life

I have been around enough high-achievers to be jaded with the constant strive for excellence and the endless desire to be the best in whatever activity happens to be involved. Determination to be the best is how some teams win world championships but others live in misery with failure. Thankfully we don’t all have to be the best in the world at what we do.

But that’s not an excuse for refusing to seek improvement. Since the 1970s, there has been a new focus on self-esteem, which after many years of filtering from psychologists through to popular culture, has resulted in an environment where “everybody is a winner.” Everyone in Little League gets trophies, even the team with the worst record. Consideration of self-esteem is important to a point, and the placement of that point is debatable; before too long, people should be rewarded for something more than just participation, something beyond just the minimum.

“What Works” is just the minimum. Do more than that. Do what works and look for something that works better. Don’t just stop buying daily $5 lattes, stop leasing expensive cars every three years. Don’t just start putting 5% of your salary into a savings account, put 10% into a great savings account, contribute the maximum to your Roth IRA, and get at least the maximum employer match in your 401(k).

It’s important, in dealing with personal finance, to just start somewhere but that’s not an excuse to stop doing or to stop thinking.

The spirit of “What Works For You” is a good philosophy. Personal finance is personal. You should be free to make your own choices based on the best information and experiences and find the path that works best for you. I will submit that it is also important that while searching for your personalized version of a financial plan that you don’t fall into the above traps.

{ 16 comments }



8 comments

Email this article Email this article
Print this article Print this article

Seven Zen Principles to Guide Your Money and Your Life

by Flexo on October 26, 2009

in Best Of, Personal Finance

A few years ago, I visited the Japanese Tea Garden in Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. Japanese gardens are designed precisely to appear natural, resulting in an interesting collision between nature and man. There is a set of principles or aesthetics that guide the creation of Japanese gardens, including the dry gardens commonly called “Zen gardens.”

The basis for these modern Japanese aesthetics has existed for thousands of years and is rooted in Buddhist writings and teachings. However, the full concept of aesthetics relating to these ancient ideas has been discussed only within the past two centuries, as the the traditional Japanese concepts have been infused with the Western idea of art and aesthetics.

These same Japanese aesthetics, the attributes that define a Japanese garden, can be further stretched by the Western mind to relate to other areas of thought. If you are particularly interested in personal finances, as we are here at Consumerism Commentary, you might attempt to apply these concepts to attitudes and behaviors surrounding interaction with money.

Here are seven aesthetics rooted in Japanese culture that can be drawn upon to make us think about the way we live with and deal with money, from personal expenses to investing.

kanso 簡素

Keep your finances simple. The extreme limit of necessity would be to have no other financial accounts but one checking account for paying your bills. Simplifying at this level may beyond the limit of practicality even if still possible. But there is no reason I should continue to have savings accounts at seven different banks, even if seven is an odd number, compliant with other aesthetics.

In addition to utilize as few banks as possible, simplify your investment accounts. Keep your investments in one account in one index fund or target retirement fund that matches your risk profile. This also makes it much easier to evaluate your asset allocation to ensure your investments on the whole match your tolerance for risk.

There is rarely a need to have more than one credit card for your personal matters. Zero is an even better number.

Simplicity in all financial matters is an attainable goal.

seijaku 静寂

Managers of actively managed mutual funds earn their pay by buying and selling investments frequently. Index funds take the opposite approach by matching a stock index, adding or removing stocks only when the index does, which is rarely. Index funds embody this concept of stillness. Unnecessary activity, like stock trading, makes the stock broker rich while you’re adding risk and decreasing your chance of beating an index fund’s performance.

Keeping your wealth still and motionless allows time to have a chance to cultivate it. The effect of compound interest increases when you let it work for decades.

If you’ve simplified your finances down to a small number of accounts, you can further keep your money motionless by removing the necessity of transferring funds from one place to another. The 0% balance transfer game or otherwise moving your credit card balances from one card to another is in direct conflict with this aesthetic.

datsuzoku 脱俗

Break free from your possessions. We buy things because they reflect who we are or who we want to be, but no thing can be a true reflection of a self. Not only do material possessions drain you of funds that could be spent on necessities, but you will have less money for sharing with others within and outside of your family.

Break free from conventional thought and following the bandwagon. You are free to be your own person and find your own path. You should never feel trapped in a job or a career. Even a steady bi-weekly paycheck is a pattern that could be broken without fear. With creativity, draw income to you through something unexpected.

Don’t confine yourself to your budget. The ultimate way to grow wealth is to spend less than you earn, so as long as that continues, you can break free from your budget and enjoy flexibility without too much worry.

koko 考古

Focus on the bare essentials. Add something to your life only if it has a functional purpose and fills a need. This concept is a nod to frugality and sparsity. For example, do you need three televisions, one for each large room in your house? Do you even need one television when you can find entertainment, including comedy, nature, and drama — possibly even crime-focused drama — for free, by sitting in a park and watching other people interact? Wouldn’t it be more fulfilling to visit a National Park than to sit on your couch and watch a documentary about it?

Decide what in your life is not essential and eliminate it. If something does not add value more than or equal to its expense, consider it a candidate for elimination. I think immediately of the interest that you pay on a credit card balance. Once you pay interest, you’ve paid more than the value of whatever you’ve purchased with the credit card. If you decide a $1,000 television brings $1,000 worth of value into your life, then it may be worthwhile. But if you put that on a credit card and pay the balance and interest over time, the new question is whether that $1,000 television added $2,000 worth of value into your life.

shizen 自然

You should represent yourself to the world truthfully and without pretense. There is no need to purchase expensive cars and houses when necessity allows for lesser purchases. Don’t concern yourself with “keeping up with the Joneses.” Without the need to show the world you have more money than you really have, you will lose the desire to buy more than you can afford. As a result, the chances of falling into the trap of debt from unnecessary spending will diminish.

My thoughts on this are drawn to people with public-facing careers. Real estate agents, for example, often want to project an aura of success. If clients believe that the agent is rich, the clients will then believe that they are successful agents. The natural conclusion is that these agents are successful because they represent clients fairly and offer quality houses. The same is true for lawyers whose business is representing clients in court trials. Lavish spending projects an image of wealth, which indicates to prospective customers a history of successful court appearances.

This is all show and all pretense. Anyone can look wealthy or successful thanks to the availability of credit. You can’t see what lurks beneath someone else’s surface.

Do not cover up all that is natural. Do not hide money or money-related problems from your partner or spouse. Finances should be part of a communication that is open and honest, not hidden beneath layers of creative stories.

fukinsei 不均整

Create a budget, a monthly spending plan that outlines your limits for expenses in a variety of categories that make sense for you. A budget by definition starts out the same each month but will look different by the month’s final day. Life’s asymmetry is natural, and your budget should reflect this asymmetry while maintaining balance. You spend more for gifts as the December holidays approach, so you might budget more for gifts in November and December than you might in June or July. In order for this asymmetry to be balanced, an increase in one category at one time should correspond with a decrease either in another category or at another time.

This flexibility is essential for creating a workable budget. A budget should free you, not trap you.

Balanced asymmetry appears elsewhere. “Work/life balance” is a relatively new concept that is based on this idea. When my employer talks about “work/life balance,” they are not trying to imply that we should spend an equal amount of hours in our life between our career and everything else we do. It is an asymmetrical approach to living a more fulfilled life.

yugen 幽玄

Whenever your personal financial issues are public rather than private, choose subtlety over directness. Do not brag about your successes. There is no need for you to have your latest business acquisition or marriage listed in your college’s alumni magazine. If you give charitably to an organization, you do not need to publicly list your name or the amount of money you donated.

In the business world, there is a movement towards personal branding. It is good for your career to find ways make yourself stand out among your colleagues or among a sea of job applicants. While I would agree that it’s important to protect your identity, particularly online, from anything that might damage your reputation, the best way to stand out is to be the best rather than to declare you are the best.

Let others declare it for you.

A guide, not a rule

While it would be great if all of the above could apply to our interactions with money all the time, I like to look at these aesthetic concepts as a guide. Just considering these ideas and allowing yourself to think about money in a different way can be enlightening. Perhaps you can strive to achieve several of these concepts in your own life, or perhaps you can appreciate this way of living even if you choose to relate with money in a different manner.

Simplifying my finances is one way I can start applying this approach to my life. As I mentioned above, I currently use seven accounts for my savings. Many of these I open so I can review them for Consumerism Commentary, but even the purely personal bank accounts number too many. Do you or would you apply any of these aesthetics to your finances?

Disclaimer: I am not an expert in Japanese philosophy or, for that matter, in personal finance. I drew the above concepts of Japanese aesthetics from a variety of sources.

Photo credits: semihundido, laRuth, DieselDemon, 田中十洋

{ 8 comments }



18 comments

Email this article Email this article
Print this article Print this article

The Path to Mediocrity: Doing What Works For You and Other Self-Limiting Philosophies

by Flexo on August 20, 2008

in Financial Advice and Advisers

General advice for an imaginary average person

Personal finance advice comes in many forms, running the gamut from Dave Ramsey’s philosophies on getting out of debt to Suze Orman’s no-nonsense anti-stupidity spending advice. Opinions vary wildly as you stroll down the promenade from the broker, a salesperson, to the financial planner paid by the hour rather than commission. Mass media, by definition, must appeal to the masses, so unless you’re working individually with a professional, the advice you hear is geared towards the “average” individual.

I don’t know any average individuals. This concept is a fictional statistical human being, an amalgamation of a sample population, with no defining characteristics. Mass advice cannot cater to the most diligent or intelligent of the crowd, because invariably less apt individuals overestimate their abilities, attempt techniques designed for the more able, and fail. Thus, advice is often “dumbed down” or simplified to meet the lower qualifications of a larger group.

Take, for example, the case of the best way to pay off credit card debt. I call it the “Debt Avalanche” but it certainly wasn’t my invention. While there are exceptions, this method of debt repayment calls for credit card debt always being paid off by focusing on the debt with the highest interest rate first. But people don’t always want to take this approach. They may receive more “satisfaction” by paying off the debt with the lowest balance first, which they believe will motivate them to continue paying off debt. Money, after all, is emotional more than it is mathematical.

Unfortunately, it’s this mindset which helps many people fall into debt in the first place (or repeatedly), and it is not correct. The best way of reaching a specific financial goal will always be the mathematical way. If not, your true goal is not purely financial. For example, is your true goal to get out of debt quickly and efficiently or is it to feel good about your debt situation? You will feel better in the end knowing you took less time and spent less money to get out of debt. If not, then perhaps you haven’t learned much from the experience and will find yourself succumbing to the “emotions” of money again and perhaps falling back into debt.

There are legitimate places for emotions when dealing with money, but debt reduction is not one.

Self-limiting philosophies and beliefs

You may hear that “doing what works for you” is the best way to approach a financial situation, but it’s often not a good idea. Doing what works the best mathematically is the ultimate approach. Other approaches may help you reach your goal, but not in the best way possible. “Doing what works for you” is an admission that you feel you have no need to improve yourself. This philosophy tells the world that you’ve learned everything you need to learn and are satisfied with your choice, even though you know it may not be the best. Or worse, if you have not learned all you need to know about your situation, you may not even realize that what you’re doing is in fact “not working.”

“Doing what works for you” is one of a number of self-limiting philosophies, excuses that people will use to convince themselves that they don’t need to strive for excellence. Here are some others:

“Luck and chance affect me more than my effort and skills.” Do you attribute a missed career opportunity to bad luck or not enough hard work? When you received a good grade on a college exam, was it due to the ease of the test or your preparedness? Those who attain their goals are more likely to be those who believe their own decisions and actions affect outcomes, good or bad. Those whose philosophy of outcomes is built around an internal locus of control have been shown to reach their goals more often.

The locus of control is one way psychology pays a significant role in your goals, financial or otherwise.

“Anything is better than nothing.” When it comes to saving, reducing debt, and investing and planning for the future, I agree. You have to start somewhere, but it is only a start. But if you believe that your financial condition in the future is important, the minimum is not enough. Don’t stop at “anything,” even if it is better than “nothing.” This is like saying it’s fine to feed your children one meal a day because one meal is better than no meals. Everyone is busy, but if the minimum is all you have time for, don’t expect results.

“At least I’m better than average.” The New York Times recently cited the Federal Reserve Board with an “average household credit card debt” figure of $8,565. Owe less than that and you’re in good shape, right? It’s unclear how that figure is determined. It may in fact be the average credit card debt of only households that have credit card debt. Include debt-free households in the calculation and the figure will drop. A number this high lulls many people into a false sense of security with the belief that with their balance of $6,000 in credit card debt, they’re “doing better” than most of the country.

This “security” leads to inaction and, in this case, to the glee of credit card providers, merchants, and manufacturers around the world.

Getting over it

The result of a lifetime with these beliefs is guaranteed mediocrity. While removing self-limiting philosophies doesn’t guarantee excellence and the ability to reach every goal, keeping these philosophies guarantees that you will not do your best. I do not know any man or woman with children who is satisfied with being anything but the best father or mother he or she could possibly be, so why are so many people satisfied with being an average personal financial officer?

There is usually a perfect mathematical solution to financial goals, like the Debt Avalanche mentioned above. Although Dave Ramsey says that most people have more success with a different, more expensive and time-consuming technique, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t strive for the better solution. Just because perfection is not always attainable doesn’t mean that it’s worthwhile to stop striving for that approach and settle for lackluster results, especially if the better approach is not more difficult than the alternatives.

If you’ve found something that “works for you,” don’t assume that there isn’t something else that works better for you. Follow the best examples, not examples set by the fictional average individual. If your financial security is important to you, don’t settle for mediocrity. You won’t always reach your highest goals or always be excellent, but you’ll never be excellent if you limit yourself.

{ 18 comments }

17 comments

Email this article Email this article
Print this article Print this article

Following Your Bliss: Good Advice or Bunk?

by Flexo on April 20, 2008

in Best Of, People

One of my favorite musical “acts” is Blue Man Group. The Blue Man Group explores, with primitively modern musical instruments, society, detachment, and collectivism. You may remember them from Intel’s old Pentium commercials. You may also remember them from the television show Arrested Development, in which the character Tobias, played by David Cross, auditioned for the show and failed, later declaring, “I blue myself.” Blue Man Group has shows in New York City, Boston, Las Vegas, and a few other cities, as well as a touring rock show, with each show similar but not identical to the others.

I recently picked up the latest Blue Man Group CD and DVD combination package, How to Be a Megastar! and watched the program. It includes fantastic music and visual performances as I expected, but I am equally intrigued by the special features, including a documentary-style interview with the creators of Blue Man Group, Phil Stanton, Chris Wink, and Matt Goldman.

When originally devising the concept of the Blue Man, the creators struggled at first. These three percussionists, who were working day-jobs as caterers in New York City, were ready to abandon their vision. At the right time, they received a sign. While watching television, they came across an interview with an expert on religion and philosophy. In this interview, the expert was asked to summarize the prevailing philosophical thought across the world, to which he answered: “Follow your bliss.”

Stanton, Wink and Goldman then knew that despite their difficulties, they must continue to create their vision through completion, even if success would never come. Thankfully for them, success did come, and Blue Man Group is now a cultural phenomenon. But the interview made me think about this particular philosophical idea.

First of all, what is “bliss?” Wordnet defines the word’s most common sense: a state of extreme happiness. The true path is the path that leads you towards a state of extreme happiness. In fact, in the interview, the creators of Blue Man Group went on to say that the journey is more important than the destination.

Am I following my bliss? I’m not sure. There was a time when I thought I had my life planned out, but year by year, I allowed this path to change. I’m now quite far from what I thought I would be doing with my life by this point, the age of 32. My job is fine, but it’s not intellectually, emotionally, or artistically stimulating. I like writing for Consumerism Commentary, but I’m not a particularly good writer. I enjoy building online communities, and that may be my personal strength for the moment, but is it my “bliss?”

Who should follow this advice, to follow one’s bliss? Perhaps not everyone has the luxury of doing so. The world needs janitors, truck drivers, bus boys, and others who perform thankless jobs — the jobs children often don’t think of when they are asked what they’d like to be when they grow up. But then again, are we sure that these individuals are not following their bliss? Perhaps their “extreme happiness” is satisfied simply by providing for their family in any manner possible.

In the case of the creators of the Blue Man Group, they needed to complete their project before they could be satisfied. With success, it seems their project may never be complete; shows are revised, new tours are initiated, and new audiences are born constantly.

After leaving the arts world, I thought my goal would be to volunteer for causes about which I feel strongly or become a to philanthropist as much as my budget allows. It seems I may be too picky to do so at the level at which I would be making a difference, and in some cases, to do so at all. Even though the organization closest to meeting my requirements is strongly involved in the activity I wish to support, having been close to that organization with intimate knowledge of its administration, I’d prefer not to do business with them. Unfortunately, no other organization is similar.

Do you follow your bliss?

{ 17 comments }