I think that it is this mentally that will hold people back from reaching a feeling of satisfaction, a feeling of happiness.But the truth of it is...enough is Never enough
What's your "number"?
- Thread starter globalarbtrader
- Start date
The fact that you will have to give up quality of life to reach that amount.
But to realize that you should first reach that point. People who dream about making millions are in general even not able to be consistently profitable. They are in the first stage of becoming a (profitable???) trader.
Priority lists change depending on your actual situation. If tomorrow they tell you that you have cancer, you will not think about money anymore but about health. At that moment you will prefer to be poor but healthy. Making millions will then be the last of your worries.
Here's a sad yet profound article on what can happen when your priorities get out of wack despite success.
Please, read it and take it to heart
Surf
https://www.wsj.com/articles/wall-s...-and-rich-but-happiness-eluded-him-1491764063
Sent from my iPhone
Please, read it and take it to heart
Surf
https://www.wsj.com/articles/wall-s...-and-rich-but-happiness-eluded-him-1491764063
Sent from my iPhone
The general actuarial approach is to take your desired income times X and that would be your target number. Historically, X is anywhere between 20 (aggressive) to 30 (conservative) - the idea is that with some confidence you would never run out of money, even if you have to dip into the principal. Obviously, you assume some degree of diversification, some degree of risk aversion etc - I actually was so interested in that question that I've built a calculator that re-sampled the concurrent historical total returns to arrive at the answer with Nth percentile confidence.
My conclusion was that 30 is definitely enough to make it with 95% confidence. So, if you need a 50k per year, you are looking at 1.5 million as your target number.
PS. it gets especially interesting if you go and try to include foreign data for this simulation - e.g. would you include Japan into your scenario set?
My conclusion was that 30 is definitely enough to make it with 95% confidence. So, if you need a 50k per year, you are looking at 1.5 million as your target number.
PS. it gets especially interesting if you go and try to include foreign data for this simulation - e.g. would you include Japan into your scenario set?
What a ridiculous first sentence. Many folks make $20k plus per day in passive income. No need to give up anything.
But you are surely NOT one of them. How can you judge on something you don't know anything about? Blowing up a fund that's what you have a lot of experience in.
Go beat the machines. LOL.
And traders make ACTIVE income not passive income you are speaking about. For active income you need to spent time.
Actually traders should make passive income as well when they start putting aside some of their trading gains. Aren't you a proponent of not compounding indefinetely ? What do you do with the extra cash ?
I'm not there healthwise but I doubt folks stop having money worries once they get sick. Past a certain point one's motivation to get more money has more to do with giving it out later, one's life efforts don't need to disappear over bad health, although they might seem futile than, and poverty won't help anyway, on the contrary, one better have plenty of extra cash available if they want the best care and most confortable clinics to spend their last years/days, even moreso without hitting too hard on the estate.
Last edited:
Im not talking about IRS definitions of passive vs active.
Ever hear of a little something called automation? do you still live in the 1970's?
Trading is active, I speak only about the active part. The passive one does not need much attention.
I put money aside because of two reasons:
- capital and risk management
- quality of life by spending less time trading, and reducing stress to the absolute minimum.