Tag Archives: freedom

TDV Offshore

Posted: July 23, 2016 at 4:20 am

Im a long-term US expat, who has spent the majority of my adult life living, working and investing in numerous countries around the world, and on every inhabitable continent. Like so many of our clients, I long ago became aware of an alarming trend of rapidly declining levels of personal freedom, and our basic human right to personal privacy, in the rapidly declining industrialized world which I have happily left behind.

As it is my lifes passion, this quest for personal freedom, and our basic human right to personal privacy, I work to help others achieve those same goals, and to help their children avoid a lifetime of declining standards of living. With an apparent irreversible downward economic spiral currently in motion in North America and the European Union, not to mention Japan, the only way to avoid the negative effects of this degradation is through wide diversification. That means as to asset class, financial institutions, and jurisdiction.

I help our clients accomplish this by sharing the value of my personal experiences on a number of fronts, and obtained through years of experience in this arena. Recently, the changes have been quick, and mostly detrimental to our freedom. I work hard to stay ahead of this curve, and to help our clients do so as well.

What we do at TDV Offshore

Formation of offshore legal umbrellas in the form of an LLC or IBC

This is typically the first step in your diversification plan. We know that it takes a great deal of contemplation and soul-searching to take that first step, but history shows, that once that step is taken, our clients realize the benefits, and therefore increase their offshore foothold. The reasons to establish a company in a privacy-respecting jurisdiction are many, to name a few: 1) No recognition of foreign judgments 2) Names of owners are not public record 3) Creditors receive only charge order status in case that a local judgment has been obtained, etc etc

Bank, Brokerage and Precious Metals purchasing and storage

Now that you have a properly established structure to hold, and act as a legal umbrella for your assets, you need to move those assets to a similarly asset-protecting environment. Therefore, we will also help you to establish a bank or brokerage account in the name of the newly established company, and in one of these same jurisdictions, where sharing the names of the Ultimate Beneficial Owner (you) is also restricted by law. Of course, the name of your account will be your company name, and that company is registered in a different jurisdiction, and the disclosure of the UBOs of the company, in that separate jurisdiction, are also protected by law.

This will protect you from such threats as:

The fee to establish both an LLC, and an account in the name of the LLC, is $2,600 ($2,400 for TDV Premium subscribers). This includes apostille of company documents, delivery of the original documents to you, and our assistance in every aspect of both processes.

I stay available to you in the future to answer any questions you may have in which my experiences may be of value. Our network of clients are a group of like-minded people who are living in every corner of the globe. Im continuously connecting those who have joined our growing club to achieve a bit of synergy in our/their experiences, and on a growing number of topics.Self Directed IRA

For our US citizen clients only SD IRAs are Self-Directed tax-deferred retirement accounts. Actually, all IRAs are self-directed, but the IRS allows each administrator the opportunity to decide what types of investments to offer. As a result banks and brokerage houses only offer the products that they benefit from, like US stocks, CDs and mutual funds in which they can earn commissions from you. Under the plan we offer, there are no investment options offered, and therefore no bias nor restrictions to USD-based investments. Outside of a very few prohibited transactions, you can legally diversify your tax-deferred IRA assets out of the USD, and into foreign real estate, precious metals, foreign stocks etc, and legally maintain a qualified status and therefore stay tax-deferred, and protected from the imminent conversion to worthless government bonds.

We will assist you from start to finish to:

The fee to perform all of these steps is $3,200 ($2,900 for TDV Premium subscribers). You can be certain that your Senators and Representatives have already made this move. What are you waiting for?Trusts and Foundations

Trusts and Foundations are the best of all asset protection umbrellas for your lifes savings. With a Trust or Foundation, youre not only protected by the same privacy and anonymity laws as with companies, but have the added benefit of transferring ownership of assets to this legal vehicle, while maintaining 100% control of those assets.

As I prefer the foundation, let me use that as an example, as although the benefits of the trust and foundation are identical, the foundation has a bit more flexibility, and lower annual fees. Very briefly, the Council Members of the foundation, have a fiduciary responsibility to protect the assets for the future ownership of your named beneficiaries, but no control over those assets after we have correctly structured the ownership under an LLC with the foundation as sole member, and you would also be sole signatory on all accounts, etc.

If you would like to further discuss your specific situation, and which structure and jurisdiction(s) would best suit your needs, please complete the following contact form. I will then contact you by email in order to establish an appointment for a free consultation via either skype or by telephone.

For those who become clients, we can also discuss some ways to obtain citizenship in a new country, and obtain a more reliable travel document. There are also some ways to disengage from the US system legally if youre forced by circumstances to remain there.

See more here:

TDV Offshore

Posted in Offshore | Comments Off on TDV Offshore

Library : Transhumanism | Catholic Culture

Posted: July 18, 2016 at 3:32 pm

by Adrian Calderone

Mr. Adrian Calderone provides a thorough explanation of transhumanism, which attempts to free mankind from its biological limitations by employing such methods as genetic engineering. Calderone traces its foundations back to secular humanism the modern religion of the Western world.

Homiletic & Pastoral Review

28 31 & 41 43

Ignatius Press, San Francisco, CA, June 2008

The political philosopher Francis Fukuyama called it the world’s most dangerous idea.1 He was talking about transhumanism.

Just what is transhumanism and why is it so dangerous?

Like many other ideas, it can imply different things to different people. But generally, transhumanism refers to an attempt to free humanity from its biological limitations. Today, transhumanists advocate the use of various types of rapidly developing technology, especially bioengineering, to accomplish this purpose. Some transhumanists imagine the creation of a new type of human being. That is, a human being with biological features so far removed from natural human biology as to warrant classification as “post-human.”

Transhumanists hold firmly to Darwinian materialism. We know that Darwinian evolution is predicated upon the assumptions of random variation and natural selection. But suppose, through genetic engineering, we can create our own genetic variations perhaps with inheritable traits. The transhumanists hope to achieve an artificial, human-guided evolution, at least on the level of microevolution, as well as the creation of “post humans.”

Ask a person what he considers to be the most dangerous thing in the world and most probably the answer would be atomic weapons they can eradicate several hundred thousand human beings in a flash. But with transhumanism, you can displace nature with technology and subvert natural human biology.

Sir Julian Huxley is credited with coining the term transhumanism in 1957.2 He wrote:

As we shall see later, use of the term transhumanism predates Sir Julian Huxley by several centuries. Nevertheless, we can credit Sir Julian with putting the name to a modern movement that seeks to modify human beings through technological manipulation in order to transcend human biology. The technology can include genetic engineering and interfaces between the human body and machines.

One definition offered by the World Transhumanist Association3 is this:

Transhumanists see it as an ethical imperative to use technology to transcend physical barriers to human potentials, and to proceed with their project of humanly guided evolution.

What has happened in the past century is the development of science and technology at a pace so fast and in so many different specialties that one scarcely has the opportunity to understand one development before it is made obsolete by another development.

There are four areas especially in which we’ve seen such rapid advancement in the past twenty to thirty years: biotechnology, information technology, wireless technology and nanotechnology.

In biotechnology we see the genetic manipulation of life. In information technology we see the ever-expanding reach of digital information processing to the point where hardly any household in the developed world is without some type of personal computer. Artificial Intelligence (AI) enables computers to “learn” from experience and modify their own operational procedures without human intervention.

As for wireless, the Internet is accessible without land lines or physical hook-ups. Everywhere you turn there is someone talking on a cell phone. Nanotechnology deals with the manufacture and use of very small particles, which can include simple materials or even tiny machines with interacting parts machines, for example, that can be introduced into the human body to cut away arterial plaque or perform operations on a submicroscopic level. We still don’t know all of the potentials of nanotechnology. Keep in mind, also, that these technologies can be merged.

These technologies enable us to do things inconceivable even a few decades ago. These new potentials present new dimensions of ethical dilemmas.

Suppose you can insert portions of the genetic material of one type of being into the genetic material of another type of being. In fact, this has been done. Who would have thought to introduce the genes of fireflies into a tobacco plant to create a plant that glows in the dark? Yet this was done over twenty years ago. The cloning of animals, transgenic plants and a host of other developments are historical events, not futuristic speculations. A U.S. patent application is on file detailing the creation of an artificial life form.4

Genetic engineering enables us to use living organisms bacteria for example as miniature drug factories to manufacture pharmaceuticals that otherwise could not be produced. Genetically modified viruses can be used to introduce modified DNA into target organisms.

But suppose one merges portions of human genetic material with portions of the genetic material of an animal an animal, say, with the genetic instructions for growth of human organs, or humans with animal features. What have we produced? And suppose that the chimerical being we’ve created can reproduce itself. What is the moral status of such beings? What is one to think about the deliberate creation of “subhuman beings” or “superhuman beings” through genetic engineering? We believe that the human soul does not arise from matter but that God creates and infuses a rational soul into a human being at conception. This is clear enough from human procreation. But what of the prospect of artificially assembling DNA, inserting that DNA into a cell, and letting that cell grow into an organism? How close do we have to be to the DNA characteristic of human beings for the organism to be considered human? Suppose a gorilla body can be combined with a human brain. Does God implant a human soul into it? How do we know unless we let the organism grow and see if it matures into a rational being? Does the possibility of salvation apply to homo artificialis as it does to homo Sapiens?

Yet genetic engineering can have legitimate therapeutic purposes, for example, to overcome naturally occurring genetic abnormalities, or to provide new cancer therapies.5 Genetic engineering and other technologies also might be used to enhance the genetic potential of healthy people, for example, to increase lifespan.

There is also now the possibility of implanting computer chips in the human brain. Neural implants, human-computer interfaces these are concepts that just a few years ago were the subjects of science fiction. Today, they are the subjects of U.S. patents.6 One should also consider the possibility of wireless communication between a neural computer implant and some remote control center. How do Catholic moral principles apply to such things? Until now, we’ve not had to think about a coherent moral position in the face of such possibilities. That’s changed.

It’s not only personal morality that needs to be addressed. We also have to think about social and political effects. One of the criticisms of all this genetic enhancement is that it will be available only to the wealthy. Will we have society stratified into classes of the “genetically enhanced” and the “genetically deprived”? What new weapons will be unleashed upon us in future wars?

As I stated earlier, Sir Julian was not the first person to conceive of a process of transhumanization. Let’s go back several centuries. Before there was a Julian Huxley there was a Dante Alighieri. Dante expressed the idea of transhumanization in Canto I of Paradiso, written sometime in the early 1300s. Dante wrote, “Transhumanizing cannot be signified in words therefore let the example suffice him for whom grace reserves the experience.”

Transhumanization is something ineffable, something beyond the ability of words to encompass. It can only be experienced, and that is a matter of grace. One can also refer to the Epistles, where St. Paul often talks about being a new creation in Christ and being sons of God through faith in Christ.7

Transhumanization is not a concept alien to Christianity. Quite the contrary, it is our Christian hope. But in Christianity transhumanization is a matter of God’s grace. Although we can begin the process of transhumanization in this life by living in the state of God’s grace, completion of the process is meant for a future life, an eternal life, of intimacy with God. In our present life in this world, grace does not destroy or change human nature, but works through human nature and perfects it. Through grace we are transformed into images of Christ. But we must await our resurrection for final transformation in the world to come. In the journey of our lives we must take as our companions the Christian virtues of patience and perseverance.

How, then, did we get from Christian transhumanization to biological transhumanism?

I want to offer a very cursory review of certain philosophical developments that have led up to secular humanism, which has become the de facto religion of the Western world. Transhumanism is an extension of secular humanism. If we use the image of a tree, secular humanism is the trunk, transhumanism one of the branches and the roots are planted in the soil of unbelief. This unbelief is not just ordinary atheist materialism. That’s been around for millennia. Rather, it is something just a few centuries old. It is not so much a non-God view as it is an anti-God view. More particularly, it is an anti-Christianity percolating through modern culture.

First, let’s turn to the Enlightenment, which is a foundation of modern secular humanism. The Enlightenment embraced a turning away from religion in general and Christianity in particular. The Enlightenment thinkers weren’t all atheists. Many were deists who believed in a creator, but one not personally involved with creation on an ongoing basis.

However, the question arises: if you don’t put your trust in a God who takes a personal interest in the world, then in what do you put your trust? Throughout history there runs the theme of salvation and the hope of it. In what do we place our trust? Where is our hope?

The Enlightenment thinker places his trust in the human potential to remake society by human reasoning and human will.8 The basis for hope is science and technology. Remember that the Enlightenment period of the 1700s was also a period of the rapid growth of scientific discovery. It must have been intoxicating. Here was the way to truth in the scientific method. One aspect, then, of the Enlightenment is positivism, a philosophy based upon sense experience and relying only on scientific observations for knowledge about the external world. Concomitantly, Enlightenment thought rejects tradition, the supernatural and revelation.

Now, social order cannot be achieved without values. So, where do values come from? The scientific method doesn’t provide values, only data. Also, for some time philosophy in Europe had been turning inward, away from the objectively knowable external world into the subjective operations of the mind. Eventually, there came from this a subjectivity with respect to values, or moral relativism.

A post-Enlightenment philosopher, Nietzsche, saw inherent weaknesses in Enlightenment liberalism. But, instead of turning back to the pre-modern, common sense philosophy of Aristotle and Aquinas, he followed the thread of modern philosophy to a logical end point. God is dead. What’s more, according to Nietzsche, we killed him. God and religion became our enemies by limiting our freedom. In the end there is nothing but will to power. We are what we will to be.

The twentieth century atheistic philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre was very influential in promoting existentialism.9 He was not an optimistic person. The concluding observation in one of his plays was, “Hell is other people.” Sartre defined existentialism by asserting the principle that existence precedes essence. This was the reversal of centuries of philosophical understanding that held that essence was first. This may seem like an academic issue of concern only to ivory tower philosophers, perhaps arguing over the matter at two o’clock in the morning in some cafe. But ideas have consequences, and one of the consequences of this idea is the slaughter of millions of unborn children each year.

Pro-lifers, for example, argue that the fertilized human ovum is, from the moment of conception, in essence, a human being. The attributes and powers we normally associate with fully developed humans a nervous system, the ability to move and think, self awareness, etc. are present in the human embryo as potentialities that, in the course of natural development, unfold or outwardly express themselves. In an ontological ordering essence precedes existence.

The pro-choice position, at least among some, is that an unborn child does not have the attributes and powers of a human being and is therefore not morally equivalent to a human being. In other words, existence precedes essence.

The dictum that existence precedes essence means that there is no human nature. According to Sartre, we invent and make ourselves. Sartre, like Aquinas, held that there can be no human nature unless there is a God who designs it. But Sartre took his atheism to its logical conclusion and denied the objective existence of human nature. If we do not believe that there is a human nature created by God, there is no level of dehumanization to which we cannot fall in our headlong rush to engineer human evolution.

We are running up against a wall of misconceptions, prejudices, faulty valuations and linguistic confusions firmly cemented together by existentialism. It takes great ingenuity and effort to render a population oblivious to common sense and reality. But our educational institutions, mass media and public officials have proven up to the task.

Modern humanism, founded upon Enlightenment thought and modified by the influence of Nietzsche and Sartre, has several important features.

Add to these features of secularism the powers given to us by technology, and the result is transhumanism. Transhumanism is the new face of eugenics, with this difference: in the older conception of eugenics human biological reproduction is limited by law or social pressure to those deemed to have the physical and intellectual qualifications defined by the ruling elite. It is like breeding horses or dogs. But the biology of reproduction remains natural. With transhumanism the biology is engineered.

The Church has begun to deal with transhumanism. The 2002 document of the International Theological Commission entitled Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God addresses some of the issues I have mentioned. This document warns against mankind usurping the role of God. “Neither science nor technology are ends in themselves; what is technically possible is not necessarily also reasonable or ethical.”11 The document also deals with cloning, germ line genetic engineering, enhancement genetic engineering and therapeutic interventions.12

But there is an ethical labyrinth to journey through that becomes ever more complex. In trying to help students find their way through complex philosophical ideas, one philosophy teacher used the metaphor of the golden string given by Ariadne to Theseus to find his way through the labyrinth after killing the Minotaur.’13

What’s our golden thread? How do we find our way through the ethical labyrinth of transhumanism? It has to be the fundamental principles derived from our religion. What does it mean to be a human person? What is our mission and destiny as human beings? If you exclude God from consideration there is no way through the labyrinth, even for well-meaning secularist philosophers such as Fukuyama who do see the dangers ahead.

Through it all we have to remember that the world has lost sight of something precious a vision seen only through the eyes of faith the vision of something supernatural and eternal.14 There will always be a little flame of faith shining in the wilderness of this world. The spirits of darkness are afraid of it and try to snuff it out, because as long as it shines there is the potential for the world to catch fire and for the grace of God to illuminate everything. As Catholics we have to keep this vision always in sight for ourselves and continually present it to the world.

End Notes

Mr. Adrian Calderone graduated from Manhatten College with B. Ch. E. and M. E. degrees in chemical engineering. He spent more than three years living and traveling in Asia. Having earned his Juris Doctorate from New York Law School, he now practices intellectual property law. He and his wife Jo live in Brooklyn, New York and have three daughters. His last article in HPR appeared in October 2007.

Ignatius Press

This item 8384 digitally provided courtesy of CatholicCulture.org

Read the original:

Library : Transhumanism | Catholic Culture

Posted in Transhumanism | Comments Off on Library : Transhumanism | Catholic Culture

Supreme Court Declares That the Second Amendment … – NRA-ILA

Posted: at 3:30 pm

Supreme Court Declares That the Second AmendmentGuarantees an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms — June 26, 2008

Fairfax, VA Leaders of the National Rifle Association (NRA) praised the Supreme Courts historic ruling overturning Washington, D.C.s ban on handguns and on self-defense in the home, in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller.

This is a great moment in American history. It vindicates individual Americans all over this country who have always known that this is their freedom worth protecting, declared NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre. Our founding fathers wrote and intended the Second Amendment to be an individual right. The Supreme Court has now acknowledged it. The Second Amendment as an individual right now becomes a real permanent part of American Constitutional law.

Last year, the District of Columbia appealed a Court of Appeals ruling affirming that the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that the Districts bans on handguns, carrying firearms within the home and possession of functional firearms for self-defense violate that fundamental right.

Anti-gun politicians can no longer deny that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right, said NRA chief lobbyist Chris W. Cox. All law-abiding Americans have a fundamental, God-given right to defend themselves in their homes. Washington, D.C. must now respect that right.

Read the opinion (1 MB)

Highlights From The Heller Decision

On March 18, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Listen to the audio recording of the oral arguments (RealPlayer required)

View the transcript

The Court announced its decision to take the case in which plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of the District’sgun ban last Fall. The District of Columbia appealed a lower courts ruling last year affirming that the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that the Districts bans on handguns, carrying firearms within the home, and possession of loaded or operable firearms for self-defense violate that right.

In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that [T]he phrase the right of the people, when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual. The D.C. Circuit also rejected the claim that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because D.C. is not a state.

The case marks the first time a Second Amendment challenge to a firearm law has reached the Supreme Court since 1939.

Briefs filed on behalf of Heller and Washington D.C.

Amicus brief filed by the United States

Amicus briefs filed in support of Heller

Click the links below to read recently filed amicus briefs in support of Dick Anthony Heller in the upcoming case District of Columbia v. Heller.

Click the links below to read recently filed amicus briefs in support of Washington D.C.

Original post:
Supreme Court Declares That the Second Amendment … – NRA-ILA

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on Supreme Court Declares That the Second Amendment … – NRA-ILA

financial independence / early retirement – reddit

Posted: July 12, 2016 at 5:33 am

This is a place for people who are or want to become Financially Independent (FI), which means not having to work for money.

Before proceeding further, please read the Rules & FAQ.

Financial Independence is closely related to the concept of Early Retirement/Retiring Early (RE) – quitting your job/career and pursuing other activities with your time. This subreddit deals primarily with Financial Independence, but additionally with some concepts around “RE”.

At its core, FI/RE is about maximizing your savings rate (through less spending and/or higher income) to achieve FI and have the freedom to RE as fast as possible. The purpose of this subreddit is to discuss FI/RE strategies, techniques, and lifestyles no matter if you’re retired or not, or how old you are.

FI/RE is about:

Discovering and achieving life goals: What would I do with my life if I didn’t have to work for money?”

Simplifying and redesigning your lifestyle to reduce spending. Your wants and needs aren’t written in stone, and less spending is powerful at any income level.

Working to increase your income and income streams with projects, side-gigs, and additional effort

Striving to save a large percentage (generally more than 50%) of your income to accelerate achieving FI

Investing to make your money work for you, and learning to manage/optimize those investments for the unique nature of FI/RE

Retiring Early

FI/RE is NOT about:

Gaining wealth for the purpose of excessive consumption

Taking the slow road, or the traditional road to retirement

Becoming financially independent requires hard work and a healthy attitude towards money, but also a degree of privilege. When participating on this subreddit, please be mindful of the ways in which you are lucky.

Please read the FAQ and Rules above, then feel free to share your journey or ask for advice!

Blogs

Forums

More to read

Tools

Books / Resources

Reddit resources

Closely related subs

Regional FI/RE

Regional Personal Finance

Money subs

Lifestyle (frugal) subs

The rest is here:

financial independence / early retirement – reddit

Posted in Financial Independence | Comments Off on financial independence / early retirement – reddit

21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

Posted: July 5, 2016 at 11:48 pm

Work seems to have gotten a bad rap in PF blogs, as many are primarily focused on financial independence and early retirement. Is work really that bad? Has everyone caught the early retirement bug, or just a select few that have loud online voices?

To shed some light on this controversial topic,we decidedtointerview some excellent bloggers and ask them their views on financial independence, work, and everything in between.

We got a diverse set ofresponses,which makes for a great read.

So check out what all 19 had to say about financial independence and share your viewsin the comments below.

Jacob from theCash Cow Couple:

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

Financial independence (FI) is achieved when your passive income streams cover allyour living expenses. Most people include pensions, Social Security, portfolio income (stocks, bonds, etc), and things like rental income from real estate in the passive category.

Its more aboutfreedom than money. Ultimately, its freedom from the 9-5 constraints that plague most Americans.

Were only halfheartedly pursuing FI right now. Neither of us are making as much money as possible, but we do have a high savings rate. Our savings rate will almost always be above 75% for the foreseeable future.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

Even though I created this question, I dont know the answer because its not possible to simultaneouslyexperience both options. Ive definitely chosen the latter in my current situation and I think its a more desirable path (assuming its actually possible to find a career that you love).

Im currently in the middle of my PhD in financial planning/finance, getting paid much less than I could make elsewhere. But its a long term play. I should make a decent income when I graduate, and Ill always have numerous employment options because Im building human capital right now.

I was speaking to one of my professors a few days ago about this very subject. Hes a highly coveted speaker, writer, and consultant who makes good money outside of his academic position. He could leave academia at any time and find higher paid positions in industry, but is not interested in doing so. He told me that another pay increase is irrelevant. He already makes good money and can afford anything that interests him. When I asked about financial independence or early retirement, he chuckled and said something like this

I love what I do, and Id do the same things even if retired. Why would I give upmy currentincome to continue reading,writing, and speaking from home?

For individuals like him (and hopefully me), financial independence almost becomes irrelevant.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

The common rule of thumb that youll hear repeated is the 4% rule. This rule is based on academic research from several years back which suggested that a portfolio could sustain a 4% withdrawal rate for 30 years time, without being depleted. So a $1 million portfolio could provide $40,000 of income each year (adjusted for inflation),for30 years, without being completely depleted.

There are a couple of problems with this, but Ill try to keep it brief. First of all, most of the people talking about the 4% rule on the internet are attempting to retire in their 30s or 40s. If someone is retiring at age 40, they should plan on their portfolio lasting 50+ years. The original research on the 4% rule was based on a 30 year retirement horizon. The portfolio would have been depleted many times with a 50+ year horizon, and the person would be forced back into work.

The second problem is the fact that many experts dont expect equity (stock) returns to continue being close to 10% each year. Some think the equity premium is lowering, and that the stock market is overpriced with respect to company earnings. The result would either be a large correction (less likely, I think) or a period of lower returns moving forward (more likely).

If both of these facts are true (and they might not be),4% is too optimisticwhen designing an early retirement portfolio. Id feel much safer around a 3% withdrawal rate. The result is a rather large increase in required principle. Instead of $1 million, you now need roughly $1.33 million to support that same $40,000 of income.

(the math is easy, just multiply yearly expense by 25 to get required savings for 4%, or multiply by 33.33 to get required savings for a 3% withdrawal rate)

But herein also lies the beauty of frugality. If you can manage tolive on roughly $10,000 as year like us, you only need $333,000 to call yourself financially independent.Even annual expenses of $20k per year only require $665,000.

Of course, living on $10k is shocking to some people, but I think somewhere between $10k and $20k is entirely doable in a low cost of living area, without a mortgage payment. Therefore at the current time, Id consider us financially independent when we are mortgage free, and our investments reach $500,000.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

The same things that I do now, which is why Id rather choose to work a fulfilling career over many years. I enjoy reading, writing, teaching, hanging out with my wife and family, and traveling. I also like being productive, and believe that some form of work is a very healthy thing.

If I do decide to retire from my first career, Id like to sell used cars. I love buying and reselling in general, but used cars can have great margins and they are always in demand.

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Understand financial independence before pursuing it. I think many people get caught up in the sexy story of FI, but they dont actually think it through. Sure, having a high savings rate is always recommended. Thats a good part of this blog. But socking away money is completely different than choosing a career based on earning potential alone, or waking up one day and deciding that its time to quit your job simply because you have enough assets to cover your living expenses.

Those are major life decisions, and in complete honesty, I dont think its healthy for some people to stop working. They dont have sufficient hobbies to fill the time and are left void of purpose. This is the dark side of financial independence and the reason that people should do a little soul searching before they make these huge decisions.

There isnt any one size fits all approach to reaching financial independence, but there is a superior path. Figure out what brings you satisfaction and joy in life, then try to design a lifestyle around that. Work doesnt have to be soul crushing. If your current position makes you miserable, save enough to take a year or two off, so that you can find a way to make money doing what you enjoy. Its not all rainbows and butterflies, but I think its possible to find meaningful work and still achieve financial independence along the way.

James fromRetirement Savvy

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

I equatewealthywith financial independence; and I define wealthy as being able to live your chosen lifestyle on passive (e.g. income from defined benefit plans , Social Security benefits, rental property, etc.) income and portfolio income (e.g. defined contribution plans such as 401(k)s, IRAs, etc.) and do not require earned (labor) income. Therefore, I am wealthy when I am financially independent.

Currently, the savings/investment rate in my household on an income of $190,000 is 39%.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

I dont know that it is necessarily a case of choosing one or the other. At least that has not been my experience. My experience is that most people end up in a profession or on a career path through circumstances, some factors within their control, others not.

My suggestion to younger people, Im 47, is to learn and/or receive formal education in two disciplines (my undergraduate degree is a dual major in business administration and communications technology and I also possess an MBA) and pursue a career that you believe you will enjoy. However, recognize that life has a way of throwing many curveballs, hence the suggestion for multiple disciplines. Dont spend too many years chasing a dream job or career. It probably is not as great as you think it will be and you have to be careful not to waste too much time in the pursuit.

Most of us will end up in jobs that we are good at, or at least capable of performing moderately well, and will find sufficient pleasure in that job. I believe most people will be much better served by just going with the flow with respect to which career path they end up on and spend much more energy in cultivating rewarding relationships and attaining personal finance literacy. They both will pay significantly better dividends than a career that you love.

I believe it is a lot better to be sufficiently satisfied with your career and have significant, deep-rooted relationships and financial independence. That way, when you do walk away from the career which will happen at some point, either through choice or circumstances you are in a position to enjoy the relationships and the comfort that comes with being wealthy.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

A quick example, discounting inflation for the moment. Assume a family decides that they want to retire in 20 years and have an annual income of $120,000. Assume, that like me, one spouse is retired from the military and is currently receiving a $20,000/yr. pension; which they project will be $25,000/yr. (COLA increases) in 20 years. Further assume the following factors: neither has a job with a defined benefit plan (traditional pension) and they project that their Social Security benefits will equal $35,000. That gives them a projected income of $60,000 from passive sources.

That leaves them with $60,000 they will need from portfolio income. How large does their portfolio need to be to support withdrawing $60,000 a year and not run out for ~ 30 years? We turn to the 4% rule. That 60,000 x 25 (or 60,000 / .04) gives us an answer of $1,500,000.

Assume they currently have $50,000 in various retirement accounts. The question then becomes, how much do they need to save on a monthly basis (most of us operate financially on a monthly basis) to reach their goal?

Current Principal $50,000

Years Until Retirement 20

Annual Rate of Return Lets assume they are assuming 5%

Annual Contributions $39,390

Result = $1,500,256.21

This family would need to contribute $3,282.50 (39,390 / 12) monthly to reach their goal. Of course, if they change any of the factors, everything changes. Running ahead of pace? Contribute less. Get much better rate of return for a few years? You can lessen the requirement going forward.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Travel, golf, travel, lift weights, travel, ride bike, travel, hike, volunteer.

Kali fromCommon Sense Millennial

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

To me, financial independence means the ability to live off your investments and assets without being required to draw a paycheck. Ill be financially independent the day I can withdraw enough from my investments to cover my expenses in such a way that I wont outlive that nest egg Im pulling from.

Im saving everything I can, but Im not strongly motivated by the idea of financial independence or at least, Im not in a rush to get there. Ilikeearning an income. I like working, being productive, and having a career.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

Id choose working a career I loved for many years all day, every day. I thrive off challenging myself and feeling useful and productive. If I found ten million dollars tomorrow, I wouldnt just stop working. Sure, maybe the nature of the work would change because I wouldnt berequiredto earn X amount every month, but I would still work.I love what I do.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I dont know. Again, Im not that worried about reaching financial independence by a certain age. Im in wealth-building mode and will be for the next ten years or so (Im 24). My plan is to save all I can now and start crunching numbers later.

I think this approach works for us because we dont think, okay, we need X amount to have this big of a net worth by this age. Instead, its more like, what we make expenses small amount for discretionary spending = what goes into investments every month. And were always working to increase income so that leftover number is bigger.. which means what we put away is greater.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Travel more. Experiment with different businesses or income streams. Id love to have the financial freedom to raise, sell, and train horses (its a financially risky venture, which is why I dont do it now). Find our forever home, which for us would be a piece of property somewhere out in the middle of no where that we can run as a small farm. (Yup, Laurie from The Frugal Farmer inspires me!)

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Dont make it complicated. If youre living below your means, youre doing a good job and youre on the right track to success.

Similarly, dont beat yourself up for not getting to financial independence in 10 years or less. No matter what Mr. Money Mustache says, the fact is he and his wife made solid six figures and lived off about $30,000 for 7 years to hit financial independence. Thats not an average income so it wont be an average timeframe to FI.

If you and your spouse are making $80,000 stillverygood money and much more than lots of people its not necessarily realistic to think youll be able to put away $70,000 or more for year after year after year for 7 years in the same way.

Thats not said to bash MMM I think his site is a valuable resource but itisto say, dont let anyone elses bravado bum you out and make you feel like youre not good enough or cant make your financial dreams into realities. Be patient with yourself! Start where you are, do what you can with what you have, always work to improve, and you will find your financial success.

1.What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

Financial independence is a tricky one for me. I believe this concept is a consequence of cuts to welfare and powerful economic troubles of the last three decades. People are being forced to take more responsibility for their wealth for better and for worse. Im not pursuing financial independence; rather, financial comfort. As I pay off increasing amounts debt, my only concern is feeling free from debt.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

This is a great question. I would say Im pursuing the latter. If you are looking to reach rapid financial independence, that sets you up with a select number of jobs. Youre looking at finance, oil, or some sort of massive industrial complex. None of these avenues inspire me right now. As such, Im pursuing an advanced degree in psychology and making next to nothing doing it. I wouldnt have it any other way.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I guess my question would be: Why would you stop working if you love what you do? No wealth level could make me stop Now, if I wasnt pursuing this career path, Id like need to see a number in the tens of millions to stop working and consider myself financially independent. That amount would cover moves, housing, transportation, children, and college educations for my kids.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Again, thats not necessarily my first goal. Im interested in being free from debt. After Im done with that goal, Ill continue to save and work. My dream is not to be without work just without financial insecurity.

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

The termindependentmeans to be free from outside control; not depending on anothers authority. In that regard, a person cant be financially independent until they are completely free from the constraints of debt. Until all consumer debt, school loans, the mortgage and any other debts are retired a person is not technically independent, even if they have vast wealth. They are still beholden to another party and have obligations that require their money go in a certain direction.

Once those obligations are gone, the individual has total freedom to use their money in any way they desire. That is what my wife and I have found now that we have eliminated all our debts. Financial independence means the freedom to pursue anything you desire with money that is 100% yours.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

The desire and capacity to work is something built into our nature as humans. There can be pleasure and fulfillment found in our work. For me, no amount of money would be worth the job that I dreaded going to each morning when the alarm clock sounded.

There is something to be said for the process of building money over time. Quick fixes dont satisfy in the long run. The stack of money will taste sweeter and will be appreciated more through the effort of consistent and diligent work that a person loves and feels called to.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I prefer not to use specific dollar amounts. Instead, I see it summed up this way: When the money a person has saved and invested makes more for them in a year than they make for themselves in a year at their job, they are financially independent. (The caveat being of course they have no outstanding debt as I said earlier.)

However, just because a person reaches this point doesnt mean they should automatically stop working. There are other life situations to consider including years to formal retirement age, ones health, lifestyle and future plans.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

My wife and I have really focused and worked hard over the past decade to budget properly, eliminate our debt and grow our investments. Part of that effort included my wife transitioning careers from high school math teacher to CPA. For her that dream career presented an opportunity to earn more and speed up the possibility of becoming financially independent.

The result of all these efforts is that, after 17 years of teaching high school students myself, Ive been able to transition to stay at home dad and personal finance blogger. Because we have reached a level of financial independence, it allowed me, and us, to invest more time in the lives of our four kids.

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Only that financial independence isnt the end-all to life. All the money in the world wont cure the emotional or spiritual hurts present in our lives. Nor will it bring true happiness and contentment. Only God can meet those needs in a persons life.

Dee fromColor Me Frugal

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

To us, financial independence means being able to choose when and how we work. Wed like to develop enough passive income streams so that wed have the freedom to choose to quit our relatively well-paying but stressful jobs and pursue a less stressed out life. We are aggressively saving and working hard to pay off our debt to achieve this goal. We live on a small percentage of our income. Currently we put about 15% of our post-tax income into savings, but right now a whopping 40% of our income is going toward our debt repayment because we want to be debt-free so badly (darn student loans!) We also heavily contribute to retirement accounts.

Visit link:

21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

Posted in Financial Independence | Comments Off on 21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

Posted: July 3, 2016 at 6:44 pm

Work seems to have gotten a bad rap in PF blogs, as many are primarily focused on financial independence and early retirement. Is work really that bad? Has everyone caught the early retirement bug, or just a select few that have loud online voices?

To shed some light on this controversial topic,we decidedtointerview some excellent bloggers and ask them their views on financial independence, work, and everything in between.

We got a diverse set ofresponses,which makes for a great read.

So check out what all 19 had to say about financial independence and share your viewsin the comments below.

Jacob from theCash Cow Couple:

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

Financial independence (FI) is achieved when your passive income streams cover allyour living expenses. Most people include pensions, Social Security, portfolio income (stocks, bonds, etc), and things like rental income from real estate in the passive category.

Its more aboutfreedom than money. Ultimately, its freedom from the 9-5 constraints that plague most Americans.

Were only halfheartedly pursuing FI right now. Neither of us are making as much money as possible, but we do have a high savings rate. Our savings rate will almost always be above 75% for the foreseeable future.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

Even though I created this question, I dont know the answer because its not possible to simultaneouslyexperience both options. Ive definitely chosen the latter in my current situation and I think its a more desirable path (assuming its actually possible to find a career that you love).

Im currently in the middle of my PhD in financial planning/finance, getting paid much less than I could make elsewhere. But its a long term play. I should make a decent income when I graduate, and Ill always have numerous employment options because Im building human capital right now.

I was speaking to one of my professors a few days ago about this very subject. Hes a highly coveted speaker, writer, and consultant who makes good money outside of his academic position. He could leave academia at any time and find higher paid positions in industry, but is not interested in doing so. He told me that another pay increase is irrelevant. He already makes good money and can afford anything that interests him. When I asked about financial independence or early retirement, he chuckled and said something like this

I love what I do, and Id do the same things even if retired. Why would I give upmy currentincome to continue reading,writing, and speaking from home?

For individuals like him (and hopefully me), financial independence almost becomes irrelevant.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

The common rule of thumb that youll hear repeated is the 4% rule. This rule is based on academic research from several years back which suggested that a portfolio could sustain a 4% withdrawal rate for 30 years time, without being depleted. So a $1 million portfolio could provide $40,000 of income each year (adjusted for inflation),for30 years, without being completely depleted.

There are a couple of problems with this, but Ill try to keep it brief. First of all, most of the people talking about the 4% rule on the internet are attempting to retire in their 30s or 40s. If someone is retiring at age 40, they should plan on their portfolio lasting 50+ years. The original research on the 4% rule was based on a 30 year retirement horizon. The portfolio would have been depleted many times with a 50+ year horizon, and the person would be forced back into work.

The second problem is the fact that many experts dont expect equity (stock) returns to continue being close to 10% each year. Some think the equity premium is lowering, and that the stock market is overpriced with respect to company earnings. The result would either be a large correction (less likely, I think) or a period of lower returns moving forward (more likely).

If both of these facts are true (and they might not be),4% is too optimisticwhen designing an early retirement portfolio. Id feel much safer around a 3% withdrawal rate. The result is a rather large increase in required principle. Instead of $1 million, you now need roughly $1.33 million to support that same $40,000 of income.

(the math is easy, just multiply yearly expense by 25 to get required savings for 4%, or multiply by 33.33 to get required savings for a 3% withdrawal rate)

But herein also lies the beauty of frugality. If you can manage tolive on roughly $10,000 as year like us, you only need $333,000 to call yourself financially independent.Even annual expenses of $20k per year only require $665,000.

Of course, living on $10k is shocking to some people, but I think somewhere between $10k and $20k is entirely doable in a low cost of living area, without a mortgage payment. Therefore at the current time, Id consider us financially independent when we are mortgage free, and our investments reach $500,000.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

The same things that I do now, which is why Id rather choose to work a fulfilling career over many years. I enjoy reading, writing, teaching, hanging out with my wife and family, and traveling. I also like being productive, and believe that some form of work is a very healthy thing.

If I do decide to retire from my first career, Id like to sell used cars. I love buying and reselling in general, but used cars can have great margins and they are always in demand.

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Understand financial independence before pursuing it. I think many people get caught up in the sexy story of FI, but they dont actually think it through. Sure, having a high savings rate is always recommended. Thats a good part of this blog. But socking away money is completely different than choosing a career based on earning potential alone, or waking up one day and deciding that its time to quit your job simply because you have enough assets to cover your living expenses.

Those are major life decisions, and in complete honesty, I dont think its healthy for some people to stop working. They dont have sufficient hobbies to fill the time and are left void of purpose. This is the dark side of financial independence and the reason that people should do a little soul searching before they make these huge decisions.

There isnt any one size fits all approach to reaching financial independence, but there is a superior path. Figure out what brings you satisfaction and joy in life, then try to design a lifestyle around that. Work doesnt have to be soul crushing. If your current position makes you miserable, save enough to take a year or two off, so that you can find a way to make money doing what you enjoy. Its not all rainbows and butterflies, but I think its possible to find meaningful work and still achieve financial independence along the way.

James fromRetirement Savvy

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

I equatewealthywith financial independence; and I define wealthy as being able to live your chosen lifestyle on passive (e.g. income fro
m defined benefit plans , Social Security benefits, rental property, etc.) income and portfolio income (e.g. defined contribution plans such as 401(k)s, IRAs, etc.) and do not require earned (labor) income. Therefore, I am wealthy when I am financially independent.

Currently, the savings/investment rate in my household on an income of $190,000 is 39%.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

I dont know that it is necessarily a case of choosing one or the other. At least that has not been my experience. My experience is that most people end up in a profession or on a career path through circumstances, some factors within their control, others not.

My suggestion to younger people, Im 47, is to learn and/or receive formal education in two disciplines (my undergraduate degree is a dual major in business administration and communications technology and I also possess an MBA) and pursue a career that you believe you will enjoy. However, recognize that life has a way of throwing many curveballs, hence the suggestion for multiple disciplines. Dont spend too many years chasing a dream job or career. It probably is not as great as you think it will be and you have to be careful not to waste too much time in the pursuit.

Most of us will end up in jobs that we are good at, or at least capable of performing moderately well, and will find sufficient pleasure in that job. I believe most people will be much better served by just going with the flow with respect to which career path they end up on and spend much more energy in cultivating rewarding relationships and attaining personal finance literacy. They both will pay significantly better dividends than a career that you love.

I believe it is a lot better to be sufficiently satisfied with your career and have significant, deep-rooted relationships and financial independence. That way, when you do walk away from the career which will happen at some point, either through choice or circumstances you are in a position to enjoy the relationships and the comfort that comes with being wealthy.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

A quick example, discounting inflation for the moment. Assume a family decides that they want to retire in 20 years and have an annual income of $120,000. Assume, that like me, one spouse is retired from the military and is currently receiving a $20,000/yr. pension; which they project will be $25,000/yr. (COLA increases) in 20 years. Further assume the following factors: neither has a job with a defined benefit plan (traditional pension) and they project that their Social Security benefits will equal $35,000. That gives them a projected income of $60,000 from passive sources.

That leaves them with $60,000 they will need from portfolio income. How large does their portfolio need to be to support withdrawing $60,000 a year and not run out for ~ 30 years? We turn to the 4% rule. That 60,000 x 25 (or 60,000 / .04) gives us an answer of $1,500,000.

Assume they currently have $50,000 in various retirement accounts. The question then becomes, how much do they need to save on a monthly basis (most of us operate financially on a monthly basis) to reach their goal?

Current Principal $50,000

Years Until Retirement 20

Annual Rate of Return Lets assume they are assuming 5%

Annual Contributions $39,390

Result = $1,500,256.21

This family would need to contribute $3,282.50 (39,390 / 12) monthly to reach their goal. Of course, if they change any of the factors, everything changes. Running ahead of pace? Contribute less. Get much better rate of return for a few years? You can lessen the requirement going forward.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Travel, golf, travel, lift weights, travel, ride bike, travel, hike, volunteer.

Kali fromCommon Sense Millennial

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

To me, financial independence means the ability to live off your investments and assets without being required to draw a paycheck. Ill be financially independent the day I can withdraw enough from my investments to cover my expenses in such a way that I wont outlive that nest egg Im pulling from.

Im saving everything I can, but Im not strongly motivated by the idea of financial independence or at least, Im not in a rush to get there. Ilikeearning an income. I like working, being productive, and having a career.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

Id choose working a career I loved for many years all day, every day. I thrive off challenging myself and feeling useful and productive. If I found ten million dollars tomorrow, I wouldnt just stop working. Sure, maybe the nature of the work would change because I wouldnt berequiredto earn X amount every month, but I would still work.I love what I do.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I dont know. Again, Im not that worried about reaching financial independence by a certain age. Im in wealth-building mode and will be for the next ten years or so (Im 24). My plan is to save all I can now and start crunching numbers later.

I think this approach works for us because we dont think, okay, we need X amount to have this big of a net worth by this age. Instead, its more like, what we make expenses small amount for discretionary spending = what goes into investments every month. And were always working to increase income so that leftover number is bigger.. which means what we put away is greater.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Travel more. Experiment with different businesses or income streams. Id love to have the financial freedom to raise, sell, and train horses (its a financially risky venture, which is why I dont do it now). Find our forever home, which for us would be a piece of property somewhere out in the middle of no where that we can run as a small farm. (Yup, Laurie from The Frugal Farmer inspires me!)

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Dont make it complicated. If youre living below your means, youre doing a good job and youre on the right track to success.

Similarly, dont beat yourself up for not getting to financial independence in 10 years or less. No matter what Mr. Money Mustache says, the fact is he and his wife made solid six figures and lived off about $30,000 for 7 years to hit financial independence. Thats not an average income so it wont be an average timeframe to FI.

If you and your spouse are making $80,000 stillverygood money and much more than lots of people its not necessarily realistic to think youll be able to put away $70,000 or more for year after year after year for 7 years in the same way.

Thats not said to bash MMM I think his site is a valuable resource but itisto say, dont let anyone elses bravado bum you out and make you feel like youre not good enough or cant make you
r financial dreams into realities. Be patient with yourself! Start where you are, do what you can with what you have, always work to improve, and you will find your financial success.

1.What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

Financial independence is a tricky one for me. I believe this concept is a consequence of cuts to welfare and powerful economic troubles of the last three decades. People are being forced to take more responsibility for their wealth for better and for worse. Im not pursuing financial independence; rather, financial comfort. As I pay off increasing amounts debt, my only concern is feeling free from debt.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

This is a great question. I would say Im pursuing the latter. If you are looking to reach rapid financial independence, that sets you up with a select number of jobs. Youre looking at finance, oil, or some sort of massive industrial complex. None of these avenues inspire me right now. As such, Im pursuing an advanced degree in psychology and making next to nothing doing it. I wouldnt have it any other way.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I guess my question would be: Why would you stop working if you love what you do? No wealth level could make me stop Now, if I wasnt pursuing this career path, Id like need to see a number in the tens of millions to stop working and consider myself financially independent. That amount would cover moves, housing, transportation, children, and college educations for my kids.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

Again, thats not necessarily my first goal. Im interested in being free from debt. After Im done with that goal, Ill continue to save and work. My dream is not to be without work just without financial insecurity.

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

The termindependentmeans to be free from outside control; not depending on anothers authority. In that regard, a person cant be financially independent until they are completely free from the constraints of debt. Until all consumer debt, school loans, the mortgage and any other debts are retired a person is not technically independent, even if they have vast wealth. They are still beholden to another party and have obligations that require their money go in a certain direction.

Once those obligations are gone, the individual has total freedom to use their money in any way they desire. That is what my wife and I have found now that we have eliminated all our debts. Financial independence means the freedom to pursue anything you desire with money that is 100% yours.

2. Would you rather quickly reach financial independence working a job that you hate or pursue a career that you love and work for many more years?

The desire and capacity to work is something built into our nature as humans. There can be pleasure and fulfillment found in our work. For me, no amount of money would be worth the job that I dreaded going to each morning when the alarm clock sounded.

There is something to be said for the process of building money over time. Quick fixes dont satisfy in the long run. The stack of money will taste sweeter and will be appreciated more through the effort of consistent and diligent work that a person loves and feels called to.

3. How much money would you need to stop working and call yourself financially independent? How did you arrive at that amount?

I prefer not to use specific dollar amounts. Instead, I see it summed up this way: When the money a person has saved and invested makes more for them in a year than they make for themselves in a year at their job, they are financially independent. (The caveat being of course they have no outstanding debt as I said earlier.)

However, just because a person reaches this point doesnt mean they should automatically stop working. There are other life situations to consider including years to formal retirement age, ones health, lifestyle and future plans.

4. What will you do after you are financially independent and free from the constraints of a job?

My wife and I have really focused and worked hard over the past decade to budget properly, eliminate our debt and grow our investments. Part of that effort included my wife transitioning careers from high school math teacher to CPA. For her that dream career presented an opportunity to earn more and speed up the possibility of becoming financially independent.

The result of all these efforts is that, after 17 years of teaching high school students myself, Ive been able to transition to stay at home dad and personal finance blogger. Because we have reached a level of financial independence, it allowed me, and us, to invest more time in the lives of our four kids.

5. Any other relevant thoughts or advice on the topic?

Only that financial independence isnt the end-all to life. All the money in the world wont cure the emotional or spiritual hurts present in our lives. Nor will it bring true happiness and contentment. Only God can meet those needs in a persons life.

Dee fromColor Me Frugal

1. What does financial independence mean to you and how are you pursuing it?

To us, financial independence means being able to choose when and how we work. Wed like to develop enough passive income streams so that wed have the freedom to choose to quit our relatively well-paying but stressful jobs and pursue a less stressed out life. We are aggressively saving and working hard to pay off our debt to achieve this goal. We live on a small percentage of our income. Currently we put about 15% of our post-tax income into savings, but right now a whopping 40% of our income is going toward our debt repayment because we want to be debt-free so badly (darn student loans!) We also heavily contribute to retirement accounts.

Go here to see the original:

21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

Posted in Financial Independence | Comments Off on 21 Experts Chatting About Financial Independence | Cash …

Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman Terrorist in New Video …

Posted: June 29, 2016 at 6:20 pm

A character resembling radio talk show host Alex Jones is cast as a terrorist leader in an upcoming video game about a war between humans and cyborgs.

The latest installment of the Deus Ex video game series, entitled Mankind Divided, portrays a future world in which a segment of humanity is augmented with mechanical limbs.

After a hacker takes over the populations limbs, augmented people across the world were forced to violently attack those around them, according to a synopsis of the game found at DeusEx.Wikia.com.

The public is outraged by this event and they therefore aggressively oppose mechanical augmentation. This results in a divided world, where mechanically augmented humans are forcibly separated from non-augmented ones.

In a cinematic trailer for the game, the character resembling Alex Jones who seeks equal rights for augmented people is interviewed on a television program, and recites rhetoric similar to remarks Jones made on CNN in 2013.

It doesnt matter how many idiots you get out there on the street, a voiceover from the Jones-esque character says. We will not relinquish our limbs. Do you understand?

Here are Jones actual words from CNNs Piers Morgan Live on Jan. 7, 2013:

Im here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! It doesnt matter how many lemmings you get out there on the street, begging to have their guns taken. We will not relinquish them! Do you understand? Jones said on Piers Morgan live three years ago.

Another scene from the trailer shows the Jones-like person asking, What do they have planned for us? Why are they building concentration camps? Whats going on out there?

A lot of people died, now you want to take away our freedom? the person portraying Jones asks. You will pay for it in blood, he says, as the scene cuts to large explosions going off in an urban setting.

Media commentator Mark Dice thinks its no coincidence.

This new video game is both interesting and disturbing and it raises some serious questions about the coming transhumanist technology, Dice said in a recent analysis. But it also appears to depict Alex Jones from Infowars.com as a transhumanist terrorist whos behind a series of truck bombs that are designed to attack humans who are trying to round up the augs and put them in concentration camps because their technology is malfunctioning, causing them to become a danger to others.

While the concept of the game does raise some serious and realistic concerns about the coming transhumanist technology I do think its despicable that theyre depicting Alex Jones as a transhumanist terrorist at least thats what it looks like in the trailer.

Moreover, Dice says, It also appears to be trying to promote sympathy for the transhumanists in depicting regular humans who dont want to go along with the agenda as being bigoted and prejudiced afraid of the new technology.

A previous version of the game, Deus Ex: Human Revolution released in 2011, also featured an radio broadcast from a host named Lazarus who, similar to Jones, speaks out against the Bilderberg group, the Council of Five (a take on the Council on Foreign Relations) and the Trilateral Commission.

View post:
Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman Terrorist in New Video …

Posted in Transhuman News | Comments Off on Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman Terrorist in New Video …

Prison Planet.com Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman …

Posted: June 27, 2016 at 6:20 am

Video game due out this fall appears to base character on radio talk show host

Adan Salazar Prison Planet.com May 27, 2016

A character resembling radio talk show host Alex Jones is cast as a terrorist leader in an upcoming video game about a war between humans and cyborgs.

The latest installment of the Deus Ex video game series, entitled Mankind Divided, portrays a future world in which a segment of humanity is augmented with mechanical limbs.

After a hacker takes over the populations limbs, augmented people across the world were forced to violently attack those around them, according to a synopsis of the game found at DeusEx.Wikia.com.

The public is outraged by this event and they therefore aggressively oppose mechanical augmentation. This results in a divided world, where mechanically augmented humans are forcibly separated from non-augmented ones.

In a cinematic trailer for the game, the character resembling Alex Jones who seeks equal rights for augmented people is interviewed on a television program, and recites rhetoric similar to remarks Jones made on CNN in 2013.

It doesnt matter how many idiots you get out there on the street, a voiceover from the Jones-esque character says. We will not relinquish our limbs. Do you understand?

Here are Jones actual words from CNNs Piers Morgan Live on Jan. 7, 2013:

Im here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! It doesnt matter how many lemmings you get out there on the street, begging to have their guns taken. We will not relinquish them! Do you understand? Jones said on Piers Morgan live three years ago.

Another scene from the trailer shows the Jones-like person asking, What do they have planned for us? Why are they building concentration camps? Whats going on out there?

A lot of people died, now you want to take away our freedom? the person portraying Jones asks. You will pay for it in blood, he says, as the scene cuts to large explosions going off in an urban setting.

Media commentator Mark Dice thinks its no coincidence.

This new video game is both interesting and disturbing and it raises some serious questions about the coming transhumanist technology, Dice said in a recent analysis. But it also appears to depict Alex Jones from Infowars.com as a transhumanist terrorist whos behind a series of truck bombs that are designed to attack humans who are trying to round up the augs and put them in concentration camps because their technology is malfunctioning, causing them to become a danger to others.

While the concept of the game does raise some serious and realistic concerns about the coming transhumanist technology I do think its despicable that theyre depicting Alex Jones as a transhumanist terrorist at least thats what it looks like in the trailer.

Moreover, Dice says, It also appears to be trying to promote sympathy for the transhumanists in depicting regular humans who dont want to go along with the agenda as being bigoted and prejudiced afraid of the new technology.

This article was posted: Friday, May 27, 2016 at 12:48 pm

More:
Prison Planet.com Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman …

Posted in Transhuman News | Comments Off on Prison Planet.com Alex Jones Depicted as Transhuman …

Freedom Synonyms, Freedom Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

Posted: June 22, 2016 at 11:33 pm

It’s awful to be chained, especially for a dog like me that loves his freedom.

We’ve got to work not so much for equality in freedom as for equality in responsibility to the nation.

We are with them when they enlist in the great army of freedom.

So petty and local was Ziliotto’s party, with no idea of the world or of freedom.

But freedom was not absolute; it was to be dependent on the moral law.

How fared the spirit of Lafayette during this debauchery in the name of freedom?

She should get her freedom there, where she had forbidden him to come.

Soldier of freedom, thou camest to us in the time of our greatest need.

In all lands it was hailed as the end of despotism and the triumph of democracy and freedom.

There was no watch kept, and the captives had no indication that they were abridged of their freedom.

Read the original here:

Freedom Synonyms, Freedom Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

Posted in Freedom | Comments Off on Freedom Synonyms, Freedom Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

Political freedom – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted: June 21, 2016 at 6:34 am

Political freedom (also known as a political autonomy or political agency) is a central concept in history and political thought and one of the most important features of democratic societies.[1] It was described as freedom from oppression[2] or coercion,[3] the absence of disabling conditions for an individual and the fulfillment of enabling conditions,[4] or the absence of life conditions of compulsion, e.g. economic compulsion, in a society.[5] Although political freedom is often interpreted negatively as the freedom from unreasonable external constraints on action,[6] it can also refer to the positive exercise of rights, capacities and possibilities for action, and the exercise of social or group rights.[7] The concept can also include freedom from “internal” constraints on political action or speech (e.g. social conformity, consistency, or “inauthentic” behaviour).[8] The concept of political freedom is closely connected with the concepts of civil liberties and human rights, which in democratic societies are usually afforded legal protection from the state.

Various groups along the political spectrum naturally differ on what they believe constitutes “true” political freedom.

Left wing political philosophy generally couples the notion of freedom with that of positive liberty, or the enabling of a group or individual to determine their own life or realize their own potential. Freedom, in this sense, may include freedom from poverty, starvation, treatable disease, and oppression, as well as freedom from force and coercion, from whomever they may issue.

Friedrich Hayek, a well-known classical liberal, criticized this as a misconception of freedom:

[T]he use of “liberty” to describe the physical “ability to do what I want”, the power to satisfy our wishes, or the extent of the choice of alternatives open to us… has been deliberately fostered as part of the socialist argument… the notion of collective power over circumstances has been substituted for that of individual liberty.[9]

Anarcho-socialists see negative and positive liberty as complementary concepts of freedom. Such a view of rights may require utilitarian trade-offs, such as sacrificing the right to the product of one’s labor or freedom of association for less racial discrimination or more subsidies for housing. Social anarchists describe the negative liberty-centric view endorsed by capitalism as “selfish freedom”.[10]

Anarcho-capitalists see negative rights as a consistent system. Ayn Rand described it as “a moral principle defining and sanctioning a mans freedom of action in a social context. To such libertarians, positive liberty is contradictory, since so-called rights must be traded off against each other, debasing legitimate rights which, by definition, trump other moral considerations. Any alleged “right” which calls for an end result (e.g. housing, education, medical services) produced by people is, in effect, a purported “right” to enslave others.[citation needed]

Some notable philosophers, such as Alasdair MacIntyre, have theorized freedom in terms of our social interdependence with other people.[11]

According to political philosopher Nikolas Kompridis, the pursuit of freedom in the modern era can be broadly divided into two motivating ideals: freedom as autonomy or independence; and freedom as the ability to cooperatively initiate a new beginning.[12]

Political freedom has also been theorized in its opposition to (and a condition of) “power relations”, or the power of “action upon actions,” by Michel Foucault.[13] It has also been closely identified with certain kinds of artistic and cultural practice by Cornelius Castoriadis, Antonio Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, Jacques Ranciere, and Theodor Adorno.

Environmentalists often argue that political freedoms should include some constraint on use of ecosystems. They maintain there is no such thing, for instance, as “freedom to pollute” or “freedom to deforest” given that such activities create negative externalities. The popularity of SUVs, golf, and urban sprawl has been used as evidence that some ideas of freedom and ecological conservation can clash. This leads at times to serious confrontations and clashes of values reflected in advertising campaigns, e.g. that of PETA regarding fur.

John Dalberg-Acton stated that “The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.”[14]

Hannah Arendt traces the origins of the concept of freedom to the practice of politics in ancient Greece. According to her study, the concept of freedom was historically inseparable from political action. Politics could only be practiced by those who had freed themselves from the necessities of life, so that they could attend to the realm of political affairs. According to Arendt, the concept of freedom became associated with the Christian notion of freedom of the will, or inner freedom, around the 5th century C.E. and since then, freedom as a form of political action has been neglected, even though, as she says, freedom is “the raison d’tre of politics.”[15]

Arendt says that political freedom is historically opposed to sovereignty or will-power, since in ancient Greece and Rome, the concept of freedom was inseparable from performance, and did not arise as a conflict between the “will” and the “self.” Similarly, the idea of freedom as freedom from politics is a notion that developed in modern times. This is opposed to the idea of freedom as the capacity to “begin anew,” which Arendt sees as a corollary to the innate human condition of natality, or our nature as “new beginnings and hence beginners.”[citation needed]

In Arendt’s view, political action is an interruption of automatic process, either natural or historical. The freedom to begin anew is thus an extension of “the freedom to call something into being which did not exist before, which was not given, not even as an object of cognition or imagination, and which therefore, strictly speaking, could not be known.”[citation needed]

Read the rest here:

Political freedom – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted in Freedom | Comments Off on Political freedom – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia