Giving Short Shrift To F.I.R.E & Fire IN The Belly

Giving Short Shrift To F.I.R.E & Fire IN The Belly

By F.I.R.E.brand Jim Schwartz

First they ignore, then they ridicule, and finally take credit for the idea

          There are good reasons, real reasons, and real good real reasons. The objections to F.I.R.E. concept – in particular sequence of rate of return risk – is a good reason. Still one can only wonder, given no offered solutions (but plenty or dismissal), if the real reason questioning F.I.R.E is so called planners protecting their already systemically compressing AUM (assets under management) compensation model.

          Stipulating to giving the benefit of the doubt to the objection is but a ‘good reason’ rather than a Trojan Horse for the real reason, the objectors and ankle biters are missing the point at the heart of the matter: meaning.

The will to meaning

Viktor Frankel

          Personal Financial Planning is a misnomer. It is really financial planning of personally assets with a winkie winkie –to ‘personal’ for  marketing reasons. The ‘personal’ doesn’t pay when the compensation model is based to the intangible financial assets – especially in the AUM model. In effect AUM  makes second class citizens out of asset protection (risk management), estate planning etc. When the emphasis is managing assets instead of managing goals – the reality is financial planning of personally held assets not personal financial planning.

          Personal financial planning – better yet – personal financial life planning (to borrow a phrase coined by Mitch Anthony) goes to the question of aligning personal resources to life goals – meaning. Per my Enough definition personal financial life planning is ‘healing personal financial anxiety, putting money in its place, to transcend, elevate, align & connect to one’s significance/assignment (meaning) – what one was meant to do; meant to be - enough to live for, enough to live on.’©

         

          Notice the phrase one’s significance/assignment (meaning)

          F.I.R.E., in great part, is a reaction to the lack of meaning particularly for millennials – who wish to move on from their less than meaningful compensated endeavors.

          Both F.I.R.E. and systemically (regardless of compensation method) personal financial planners (who have forgot the calling of ‘personal’ in personal financial planning) haven’t given commensurate focus to meaning IN one’s life.

F.I.R.E may cultivate the right thing (becoming personally financial independent) but inefficiently (if not coupled to one’s significance/assignment). So what if one no longer has ‘the man’s’ boot or the woman’s high heel’ on his or her neck, if the spouse is complaining ‘for better or worse but not for lunch?’ So what if another spouse in kvetching, “put him or her back to work, he or she is putting my spices in alphabetical order.” (True story). Without defining meaning/assignment/significance – there is LACK (Lacktose intolerance) and not unusual recycling back to habituated more for more’s sake which is the ideology of a cancer cell (Edward Abbey) and more, better, now has a habit of becoming less, worse, later

          So systemically the financial planning (notice the omission of personal) have failed to enable FIRE IN the belly let alone reduce the ‘is that all there is’ (per Peggy Lee Song) let alone healing personal financial anxiety – putting money in its place to connect and align to client’s significance assignment/meaning – to sell more, more, more – and try to put out the F.I.R.E with objections..

          Now the roots of F.I.R.E. one can dispute. By way of full disclosure, while the first edition of my book Enough was 1992 (second edition) 1995, I was writing on Enough from 1977 with at the first what was to be NAPFA conference (for which I am one of the co founders with John Sestina and the late Bob Underwood) in 1985. The organizers had to run down 3 or 4 times to make more copies of my More vs Enough and what would be titled The Personal Prospectus when my books were published.

          Joe Dominquez (Vicki Robin was his co writer second billing) beat me to the punch on enough but our enoughs are quite different. Consider a continuum from more at one end to frugality at the other (shining one’s shoes with a banana peel as one Kiplinger’s cover had it during that time). Joe’s enough and gzingis pins etc was towards frugality, whereas my approach is ‘one man’s floor is another man’s ceiling.’ Another key difference – was getting to and focusing on meaning IN one’s life for which the assets are aligned to support.

          The question of meaning & how to is beyond the scope of this essay – but it is certainly not the ‘life planning’ of ‘I’m your friend’ to keep the AUM percentage from compression. Hint – there has to be an empirical basis – not hope (hopeium) wishes, and wet dreams.

          The responses to F.I.R.E therefore are defensive rather than self reflective, not speaking to sequence of rate of return to assist, and fail to take responsibility in part for financial planning masquerading in ‘personal’ clothing – not addressing – rather just winking – what FIRE is a reaction to – for utilizing personal assets for one’s will to meaning and values.