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.

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?