≡ Menu
Debating FIRE: The believer vs the sceptic vs the drop-out (Round 1) post image

Welcome one and all to our finest seasonal tradition: the Monevator Christmas debate.

If you’re wondering why you’ve not experienced this wonderful institution before, it’s because we only hold it once every – ahem – six years!

But never mind that now… it’s time for us to make Christmas great again by painting ourselves with tribal colours and defending our positions to the death against people who are very similar to us, whose beliefs differ only marginally, which makes us want to destroy them all the more.

Sounds fun, no?

This year’s battleground is FIRE – the Financial Independence Retire Early movement, which shows the brave and willing how they can escape work years before the normies.

The debate will be a three-way:

  • In the red corner sits I, The Accumulatortrue FIRE believer who’s been on the path for over a decade now.
  • In the blue corner sits The Investorthe FIRE sceptic and arch-contrarian who seems to doubt every cause his own blog espouses.
  • And in the purple corner sits The Details Man – the only one of us to have actually tasted FIRE.

Ground rules are few: no gouging, no biting, though biting sarcasm is allowed.

In short, we’re looking for a spirited debate in the best Monevator tradition.

We’d like to hear from Monevator’s readers, too. We know that many of you are on the FIRE journey, while others have made it already. Yet more shun it as the devil’s work.

Once we’ve finished our multi-post ding-dong we’ll open up the comments for a general free-for-all that’ll hopefully spill out into the virtual pub car park.

Let’s go!

Ding-dong merrily on FIRE

The Accumulator: I’ll start by characterising (or possibly mischaracterising) our respective positions on FIRE.

I’m hanging my hat on FIRE being a massive inflection point in my life. Kinda like the giant asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs. I’m hurtling towards my date with destiny and I want my life afterwards to be very different from the days I spend now, fighting for survival in the corporate jungle.

I don’t expect FIRE to solve all my problems but, if I get it right, I do expect to be a lot happier in the new world.

TI, I think of you as a FIRE cynic. I think you’re down with the FI component but down on the RE. You may have even declared FI (kind of a soft launch) but you’ve also said you’ll work for the rest of your life. I understand why you might want to, but for me, the RE bit doesn’t mean you spend the rest of your life on the beach. You can still work but it should be intrinsically meaningful – the kind of work you’d do even if not paid. And that lies at the heart of my uncertainty about your position. Are you doing work you find meaningful? Is that even a goal for you? What is your endgame?

TDM, you’ve actually FIRE’d. You jacked in work. You explored other interests and blogged about your adventures. Then, one day, you ran back into the arms of The Man! From what I can tell, you didn’t find FIRE fulfilling and went back to the same kind of work you did when you had to earn a crust.

Why man, why? This is my nightmare scenario.

The Details Man: I think it’s important to separate out the Financial Independence and Retire Early parts of FIRE.

I feel that the ‘Financial Independence’ bit is about having the freedom to do what you want without a financial constraint. The ‘Retire Early’ bit is what follows for most people. Whether that’s escaping the physical toll of a manual labour job, or the lack of dignity in, and the soul-destroying nature of, much modern knowledge work.

For me, when I left my job several years ago, it was because I had been worn down by the ancillary aspects to what I did (valuing companies). Things like the annual appraisal, office politics, networking… I had the freedom to opt-out (at that point temporarily).

So I did, without much planning behind it.

Ultimately, I missed the ‘work’ bit of my job. It’s interesting, challenging, and rewarding. So I set about designing a way to try and keep the fun bits of my job and not the bits I didn’t like. Easier said than done, but at the moment I’m contracting part-time and it’s working.

The Investor comes out swinging

The Investor: I’d like to be permitted one strong opening statement: I really don’t claim to know what everyone should do, and I’m certainly not arguing against early retirement for anyone who really wants it.

What I take issue with is the implication – enshrined in the FIRE acronym – that everyone should want it or pursue it.

Financial Independence? Knock your heart out. I’d still caution against the blind pursuit at the expense of all else (I gave up perhaps more than I should have in the cause), but I see few downsides in achieving it. There’s no nobility in slavery, let alone poverty. Having the freedom to rewrite your script or just to turn your role into a walk-off part – if you need to – is almost priceless.

Financial independence for the win!

Early retirement is a different kettle of fish. For a start, I’d observe that few who can do it, actually do ‘retire’ early. We’ve abundant evidence from the blogosphere over the past few years that driven people who can achieve FIRE (a term I don’t like but will use here) seldom really retire.

I’m not coming at this from the ‘retirement police’ angle for the sake of it, but rather saying let’s call it what it is and learn from it.

If most of these financially independent, work-optional types create new businesses or entrepreneurial enterprises, or go back to work when they needn’t… well, they only have an awful lot in common with almost all the financially successful people I know – none of whom have hankered to quit work at 40, say. Let alone the evidence from the business world, of serial entrepreneurs and millionaires pursuing additional millions by way of new challenges.

It’s traditional in our realm to sneer at these people as hamsters on the hedonic treadmill but I’m not convinced. I think that better describes the financially un-free 40-something, wage slave.

I believe the people who could FIRE – and don’t – are telling us something about the nature of living a fulfilling, interesting, and socially comfortable life in 2019.

We might try to listen more!

After all it has implications. If smart, successful people don’t FIRE, and if many of those who achieve FIRE don’t FIRE, then maybe it would be better if we didn’t spend so much time talking – and planning – towards FIRE?

To give just one example, if you know you’re not going to ‘retire’, then maybe you can spend a few years manoeuvring into having skills and connections that might make you perhaps a quarter of your current salary on a couple of days a week work.

Let’s say this is £10,000 a year for you. That’s perhaps £250,000 worth of capital that you don’t have to save, to achieve a more flexible and less work-heavy lifestyle, much sooner. Or maybe you hit your FIRE number anyway but you now have £10,000 a year above the FIRE plan. You learn to sail instead of playing with model sailboats. You can holiday in Bermuda instead of Blackpool. The list goes on.

Alternatively, maybe you kick your financial independence date further out a few years and try to shift into paid work that you don’t hate doing for those few extra years.

Again, our community has a lot to say about not wasting your life in work, but it seems recklessly happy to front-load a lot of certain and often unpleasant work – and years – to get there.

TDM piles on

The Details Man: The ‘blind pursuit’ resonates. I don’t think that early retirement is a panacea. Generally speaking, pursuing a cause for a positive reason is far better than for a negative one.

For example, seeking FIRE to escape workplace miseries. You reach your FI number and escape. Those negative things go away. But soon enough they’ll be replaced with new ones.

I found this a few years after quitting. My railing against the corporate world was slowly replaced with annoyance at other things: delayed trains, people who walk too slowly, slow service in shops. You become grumpy very quickly. There’s a reason for the grumpy old man stereotype. 

I realised you need, or at least I need, a little bit of challenge, and some things more under my control to get annoyed about. 

Circling back, FI is beautifully simple: save more than you spend, invest it in a simple way and focus instead on what you want to achieve.

Is this the end for The Accumulator’s FIRE dream? Has he disappeared under the sheer weight of TDM’s and TI’s tag-team piledrivers?  Find out tomorrow in Round 2: the struggle for the soul of FIRE! Remember, comments are turned off until the final post.

{ 0 comments }

Weekend reading: Secret Santa

Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

Let’s end the year with a smile, or at least an ironic smirk. Here’s a bunch of things to put in your stocking or perhaps that of a significant other. (Mind out of the gutter…)

The Man Who Solved the Market
How Jim Simons Launched the Quant Revolution

I don’t think it’s been a banner year for great investing books, or perhaps I just missed them what with all the exciting politics. Either way, it’d be hard to beat the best I read – Gregory Zuckerman’s The Man Who Solved The Market. If you’re an active investor, you can delude yourself that it could be you. If you’re a passive investor weighing up the competition from Simons and genius crew, you’ll be glad you’re not so deluded…

Quacks of Quedlinburg

I’ve written about what I’ve learned from my love of board games on Monevator before. The game featured in that article – Dominion – is still a favourite, not least thanks to a dozen or so mostly excellent expansions. But diversification isn’t just for our portfolios. This year I’ve also been playing the award-winning Quacks of Quedlinburg. It’s very accessible, though like all these games it hides its simplicity under a daunting rule set. This is a game about probabilities. Learn to think fuzzy!

Get a free share from Freetrade

This neat deal is still running. Sign up to Freetrade via this link, fund your account with £1, and we’ll both get a free share in our Freetrade accounts. Lots of Monevator readers have reported what free share they got in the comments on my original article, which also contains more details about the offer. The giveaway shares are typically around £5, but potentially much more. Which you can get for free!

Harriman House discount code

Thanks to John Kingham – aka UK Value Investor – for flagging up this one on Twitter. Financial book publisher Harriman House is running a special offer, where you can get 25% off its books until the end of January with the discount code FESTIVE25.

Investor Island: A free mobile game from The Motley Fool

This computer game is pretty bonkers, like a mash-up between a dozen of those infuriating free-to-play mobile games we’ve all had a spell of playing at 3am for three nights on the trot and, well, CNBC and The Motley Fool. It’s US, but relevant. Sort of. Heck, it’s free! A time sink, but less damaging than day-trading. (I’m not sure how to link to it, but search for Investor Island on the iOS app store).

Well there you have it, a very random assortment of fun in the best tradition of Secret Santa.

At least you didn’t get socks.

No more Weekend Readings until 2020, but do look out for the return of our Christmas debates next week!

Our last one, in – ahem – 2011 – was all about active investing. In this latest round, me, The Accumulator, and The Details Man turn our attention and rhetorical weapons on FIRE.

You won’t want to miss this. Particularly if the alternative is the Queen’s Speech.

Have a great Christmas and I hope a happy 2020.

[continue reading…]

{ 25 comments }
A graph showing how young people voted more for Labour, older more for Conservatives.

Fair warning: Feel free to skip this LONG post. I have tried to focus on the investing ramifications of the general election. However I do make statements that will strike some as political, if not excessive. That is the nature of politics currently, which I really would love to fade from this website.

Today I’ll explore what stance investors should take post-election, given where we are and where we seem to be going.

I won’t be rehashing (much) how I believe the country should have voted in the Referendum or in last week’s election, though inevitably I’ll reference both.

Remain is lost. The Tories have won a big majority.

If you applaud this outcome then I’m not going to change your mind. And if you’re a Remainer who has watched the rise of Leave, Boris Johnson, and what it represents with dread, it’s still time to take stock and be prepared.

Hard Labour risk off the table

It’s already clear from the data that Brexit was the biggest of several swing factors that won it for Johnson.

However from the market’s perspective, taking a Jeremy Corbyn Labour win off the board is by far the bigger win.

That’s true from the perspective of the individual personal finances, too, for anyone with chunky assets and/or a good-to-high income.

Catastrophic defeat for Labour and Corbyn means no outright nationalisation issues, no State-forced dilution of shareholder assets via 10% share giveaways, far less regulatory threat, probably a stronger pound, probably stronger gilts (and thus cheaper government borrowing), and no windfall or wealth taxes or outright Tobin-style taxes on financial transactions, or anything similar that Corbyn and McDonnell might have come up with.

UK shares warrant higher multiples

All of that is very good for UK markets. Britain looks set to remain an Anglo-Saxon style capitalist country. Shareholders will enjoy strong property rights, and other ongoing regulatory and legal protections.

The immediate beneficiaries are obviously those companies that were directly in Corbyn’s sights – utilities, travel firms, and telecoms for instance.

But all UK shares should be marked higher on this risk going away, to whatever extent a potential Labour win had previously weighed them down. A multinational that earns only 5% of its revenue in the UK and was thus fairly immune to the UK economy, say, still faced outright threats from some Corbyn proposals. That risk is now gone.

With that said, the bounciest companies in the immediate post-election rally were UK domestics, such as housebuilders and UK banks.

This is also logical, but only so far.

On the one hand it makes sense if you feel that Corbyn’s domestic agenda threatened such company’s profits as well as potentially hitting their assets directly through, say, mandatory share distributions.

Higher unionism and government regulation loomed larger under Corbyn, for example.

Many will feel too that UK economic activity will be stronger under a Tory government than under Corbyn’s version of Labour. I’d say that’s true, leaving aside thorny longer-term issues about generational inequality or wealth distribution.

Remember though that any State stimulus-driven boom that happens under the Tories would have been equally enjoyed under Labour.

Moreover the Conservatives come with far higher Hard Brexit risks baked-in. That to my mind remains a big danger to the UK economy. (See below).

On balance I’m minded to continue to hold slightly more UK assets than before the likely result of the election had become clear, but fewer than if Hard/no-deal Brexit was finally ruled out.

Remember a UK home is a UK investment and an asset. If you’re a homeowner with an average-sized investment portfolio, you’re already very exposed to the UK economy. Even more so if you have a job here.

Tax shelters, personal allowances, and pensions – as you were

There is little reason to believe the UK’s very generous tax sheltering regime is going away under this Tory government.

ISA allowances, higher-rate relief for pensions, and the ability to put large amounts of money into those pensions will almost certainly all remain intact, if not improve.

Capital gains tax allowance shouldn’t change, either.

In the election run-up the Tories talked about revisiting the annual allowance taper. This problem is most acute from a societal perspective in the NHS. However it would be more coherent for a Conservative government to ‘fix’ this problem universally. So if anything, the potential of pensions as wealth-amassing vehicles could get even better.

I can see inheritance taxes being simplified, too. The main residence nil-rate band is confusing. Illogically to my mind, most people hate inheritance tax (IHT) even if they don’t pay it. But anyway, the number who do pay has been rising. Perhaps Johnson will use his majority to scrap the current system and instead aim for the £1m IHT-free threshold the Tories mooted a few years ago.

Personal tax allowances should rise a little, but I wouldn’t hold your breath for big income tax cuts. Not given the likely scale of State spending. Possibly the additional rate band could be scrapped as a simplification measure. That would make some sense.

Bottom line is if you have assets and you’re an average-to-high earner, you’re alright Jack.

Wealth preservation should be straightforward (ignoring currency fluctuations!)

What if you’re just starting out?

If you don’t have assets or a decent income, you need to try to fix that if you can. Pronto.

State spending increases will be directed towards infrastructure and investment, rather than welfare payments or even in-work benefits. I see little respite for the bottom rungs hit by austerity over the past ten years. So get off those rungs if you can.

Talented individuals of any age and class should do better financially in a looser and probably more vibrant Tory-run economy than under a Corbyn Statist equivalent. But the aggregate wins will continue to be skewed towards the haves, rather than the have-nots – continuing what we’ve seen post-Gordon Brown.

Run this forward ten to 15 years, and there’s a case for Monevator readers making even more self-provision.

For instance I don’t believe Johnson intends to dismantle the NHS – I’d argue there’s even more of a consensus around it being a public good than in the 1980s – but I could see nips and tucks. If you are concerned about NHS waiting lists today, I don’t see the situation improving. It might be worth thinking about private healthcare, or at least self-insurance in the form of a far higher-than-otherwise emergency fund.

Ditto education, vocational training, your kids’ university courses, and similar state provisions. I’m not hysterically claiming state support for such is going away tomorrow. However there’s no reason to think it’ll be improved much, beyond some catch-up anti-austerity spending.

What about housing? Well, if you’re young, you’re not already a home owner, and you’re not likely to be a high-earner, you’re probably screwed re: housing. At least in the more prosperous areas of the country where most of the best jobs tend to be.

The Conservatives say they’ll build more homes, but I don’t expect them to build in their core voters’ prosperous backyards. Also, it won’t be social housing, it will be new homes for the next generation of young professionals. So anything the Conservatives do to deliver their million home pledge will likely be done through relaxing planning or further boosting incentives and support for builders and buyers. We can probably also expect some sort of new Help to Buy type scheme eventually.

This means house prices will go up – assuming no hard Brexit.

Again great for those of us who own a home already, not so much if you don’t.

Honestly, if you’re a 20-something Remainer – especially if you’re in a non-high-paying field (say teaching, nursing, general admin) – then it might be worth moving somewhere like Lisbon or Valencia or maybe non-mega-city Canada or Australia and building a new life there. It could be a big quality of life arbitrage.

Brexit isn’t done yet

Okay, let’s dial up the controversy a tad. I’m still trying to look at this from a practical perspective, but clearly it will reflect my views.

We are going to leave the European Union. However I believe this becoming a certainty with Johnson’s elevation didn’t have much to do with the immediate rise in the pound or the relief rally in UK assets, despite the spin. I think that’s nearly all about Labour being out of the picture.

With that said, the size of the Conservative majority is important. We now have a government that can get through its legislative agenda without fear of internal revolt or external coalitions.

For investors, the multi-dimensional problem of Brexit politics has become easier. It’s now ‘only’ about what the Conservative party and the EU each want and will accept. Other hitherto important players (opposition MPs, soft Brexit Tories, Remainers at large) have at a stroke become irrelevant to the calculus.

This should make it easier to assess the trajectory of Brexit than before – but note that easier does not mean easy!

For instance, just last week I was opining in the Monevator comments that Johnson’s ego would encourage him to sidestep a very hard or no-deal Brexit, if he wants a strong economy for the next five years.

Even if you’re a Leaver who believes in national economic benefits from Brexit – superior trade deals, reduced regulation improving competitiveness – such alleged benefits won’t be front-loaded. (I am setting aside any ‘pent-up demand’ business or foreign investment we might see over the next few months, which would have happened with-knobs-on if we’d instead had the certainty of Remain.)

So avoiding a no-deal Brexit remains short-term important, from an economic perspective, even you’d think for Johnson. But already it’s been cast back into doubt.

Johnson is apparently looking to impose a new ‘cliff edge’ at the end of the current transition period. While this will give the UK some negotiating leverage, it does the same for the EU, who can now test the UK’s tolerance to go through with a no-deal Brexit by dragging their feet.

The result is the stakes have been raised again.

Brexit uncertainty is certain to continue for at least the next year. You can see this in the pound, which has already slipped back to where it was before the election!

And this is not to even go into future Union-related issues concerning Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Most observers, including me, still believe it’s likeliest we’ll have an extended transition period and a long debate about a trade deal, which could go on for many years. This is economically perhaps the best outcome from here (leaving aside a soft ‘Brexit in name only’) but it will still be an indefinite economic friction, which will continue to see the UK economy trading below where it would otherwise.

Judging by the past few years, the electorate won’t care politically, but they will remain a bit more hesitant, and this will continue to dampen consumer spending, house prices, and so on.

The question will be how much the enthusiasm for Johnson and his new Tory government and also Remain being off the agenda – and the spending the Tories are likely to unleash to reverse their own austerity – can be translated into what we used to call a ‘feel good factor’ that will rev up animal spirits to counter that ongoing Brexit drag.

Active versus passive responses to ongoing Brexit gyrations

Personally as an active investor I’ll be nimble in the face of these Brexit shifts. The past week or so was great for me – I was up about 5% in a week as I’d tilted heavily towards the result I didn’t want but seemed inevitable – but even as the rally roared I started dialing back that tilt, selling some UK property assets to buy international earner Diageo, for example.

There is a cost to this. Not just trading costs, but also the opportunity cost of continually trimming winners, adding to losers, hedging against increased or decreased political risk and so on.

I have done fine in 2018 but I have lagged my benchmarks. I see this as the price I have paid for avoiding a No Deal calamity, if we’d seen it, while retaining the opportunity to benefit from other outcomes.

Passive investors are well-advised to stay clear of all this. Just owning global trackers and some bonds and letting Brexit shout itself out in the corner has been a boon since the EU Referendum.

True, you will be thwacked if we do see a deal reached and the pound truly rally. Your overwhelmingly overseas holdings will fall in value.

But remember two things:

First, they were previously juiced up by the collapse in the pound after the Referendum.

Second, it’s anyway extremely difficult to trade the existential politics of Brexit to post a net gain that’s worth your time.

It’s easy to look in a paper and say “I saw that coming!” But you probably didn’t, and even if you did you often won’t get the market reaction right. And even if you did see that, are you sure you know where you’d be all told if you’d steered clear of trading altogether?

For example the UK domestic shares that have rallied so much in the past few weeks were in the dumpster just a couple of months before that. That plunge was what set the stage for their recent sharp recovery.

What does Johnson’s government stand for?

Okay, from here it’s big picture navel-gazing – possibly the most important questions, but also the muddiest answers.

Like most of the developed world, Britain is going through convulsions.

As best I can tell it is being driven by technological change, the advent and polarization of social media, globalization, the financial crisis and its uncertain, austerity-dominated aftermath, a backlash against the overreach of identity politics, and decades of self-selecting regrouping around people who think like us and our particular friends – aided by moving (or not) to a few big cities, marrying our peers, and the waning of all sorts of mixed social spaces, from churches to old-style ‘you get all sorts in there’ local pubs.

However unlike most of the rest of the world, the UK hasn’t been the calm one carrying on, as we might have expected.

Instead it’s embraced Brexit – overturning its long-established political and trading relationships, and voluntary casting overboard various rights enjoyed by its citizens, in exchange for less ‘foreign’ oversight of those citizens.

And it’s now delivered a general election that’s smashed our preconceptions of class and the political geography of this country.

The best that can be said is that if the world is changing, we’re doing something about it rather than passively sitting back. (Albeit I think the wrong thing.)

One might also argue that the swing to the Tories in Leave-voting towns – and the evident disquiet if not disgust in many of those places for what Corbyn’s Labour represented – shows a final flowering of Thatcherism. After all, Thatcher – whom on balance I admired – wanted working class people to throw off preconceptions of where they came from and aspire to be middle-class types, just like traditional Tory voters.

Haven’t they done just that? Well that discussion is for another day, and another website.

From my perspective here, the issue for our net worth is the country is in flux and it’s not clear where we’re going. To me the UK is ‘in play’.

The new government will set the tone, of course. What can we say about its ideological convictions, beyond ‘getting Brexit done’?

I believe Boris Johnson’s only absolute conviction is Boris Johnson. Before you shake your fist, consider that we knew him first as the globalist, liberal-ish London mayor. He then went on to recast himself as the leader of a nationalistic and subsequently populist project, and latterly he’s been trying on the robes of a one nation ‘King of the North’.

If you find these shifts consistent, you’ll reach your own conclusions. I don’t and so I’m inclined to discount anything he says. I’d rather look at what he seeks to gain, which is re-election, in assessing his motives.

Dominic Cummings has been cast as the closest this Conservative government has to an intellectual wing. What does he stand for, and how should we prepare?

The short answer is read his blog. You’ll find long screeds against government and paeans in favour of technology, science, cleverness, and the markets. If you’ve less time on your hands, this New Statesman article is reasonably non-partisan.

My take is that Cummings is more an arsonist than a firefighter. He seems angry, he’s against a lot of things, and so far we’ve seen how effectively he can take things down but not what he can build. I think he believes the market, science, and data can do a better job of coming up with solutions than government anyway, and he has expressed a deep antipathy towards establishment politics.

In more normal times I’d actually expect to sit more on his side of the room. But we’d be on the fringes, where radicals belong, gestating ideas to be cautiously cherry-picked, not at the heart of government, swinging an axe.

So there’s the potential here for disconcerting levels of change – as if Brexit wasn’t change enough for a generation.

You might say bring it on, after all you wanted Brexit. But what if the next institution the axe targets is your legal protections through the courts, or mandatory vaccinations, or the BBC, or national service, or food standards, or the House of Lords, or the armed forces, or the benefits system, or the promise of a state pension?

I’m just throwing out examples, not making predictions. The point is revolutionaries are by definition agents of change. You might not get the change you wished for.

Incidentally, the defeated Labour party manifesto shows traces of the same trends. In place of the pragmatic social democracy of Blair and Brown, we had a Hard Left manifesto from the early 1980s, albeit stripped of the guff about state control of car makers and so on.

Remember, something like half of people under 45 voted for Corbyn’s Labour manifesto.

Tory voters are dying, Labour voters are still being born.

So again, be careful what you wish for. Who is to say the next lurch won’t be back from a harder right-wing government to a harder left one?

As someone who believes this election was hugely influenced by Leave/Remain, I certainly don’t write off Corbynism. Nor will Johnson, so we can expect to see some efforts to shore up his new base in the formerly Labour-voting regions.

A tinfoil hat bit to conclude: Have a ‘bug out’ plan

The point for me is that you need a Plan B. I believe there’s a non-trivial chance you may want to get out of the UK in the next five to 20 years.

Before I get screamed at – or this post referenced in ten years as ludicrous – I’m only talking perhaps a 5-10% chance as things stand. So it’s a small chance, but it might happen. That’s the way probability works.

Probably we won’t spiral down into some hard-right / hard-left Dystopian nightmare. Perhaps having these modest populist convulsions today will see off deeper problems that other countries will need to face in the years to come? That was one argument made by some Leave voters, who felt we’d be more flexible outside of the EU.

The point is this prospect of national calamity was effectively non-existent 20 years ago. The UK was one of the most politically stable countries on the planet. This is no longer the case.

So get your F-off fund. In a worse-case scenario you may need to deploy it against more than just an unpleasant boss. Consider using some of that fund to explore and if needed secure the potential for a life in an alternative jurisdiction.

I made sure my Plan B was solid in the weeks after the Referendum. I suggest you do, too.

Think I’m being hysterical? As I said, I’d guess it’s only a 5-10% chance I’ll need it, gut feel. But it’s the sort of thing that if you need it, you really need it.

While I don’t claim to be a fortune teller, I’ve long warned there’d be societal consequences from the financial crisis, such as in this post back in 2012.

We are certainly not yet off that train. I’m not even sure we’ve left the station.

——–

Note: If you’d like to comment please try to focus as much as possible on money and investing consequences. I understand I’ve strayed a bit above, but that’s my prerogative as this blog’s owner and waffler-in-chief! 🙂 For the sake of a good conversation, if you like the Johnson agenda it’d be better to focus on what tax and spending benefits you see. If not so much better to focus on what practical steps you’re taking to mitigate any downsides.

Please stay polite. I didn’t delete a single comment on the post-election Weekend Reading, and it’d be great to avoid doing so again today.

[Source and larger version of voting poll in top-right: Paul Lewis via Twitter.]

{ 130 comments }
Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

Naturalists have been surprised by the sight of thousands of 10-inch pulsating penis-like creatures wriggling about on a windswept beach.

The story was originally reported in the journal By Nature, which shared a photograph of one of the worms:

In taking up the story, the Guardian explains:

These penile figures typically burrow under the sand, far beneath the feet of beachgoers.

But the recent storms brought on some waves that swept away the layers, leaving them exposed.

Here’s a photo from Instagram, which gives a sense of the landslide:

Pretty disgusting, eh? Hope you weren’t eating!

Have a great weekend.

[continue reading…]

{ 88 comments }