Why is my top two-leading model not a retirement myth, but a high-risk cash-flow experiment?
The first reaction of many people who heard of the "Presidency Two" was:
"You want to retire on over a million dollars?"
"Are you crazy?"
"This is a gamble."
Actually, I never wrapped it into a retirement myth.
For me, this model is closer to a high-risk, cash-flow experiment.
It's not about "Buy Two and Lie Down" but:
In recognition of the high level of the market, a set of rules has been devised to link the capital, the cash pool and the cost of living.
My model is not brainless.
It has several points:
First, the cash pool starts with life.
Second, there is a monthly ceiling.
Thirdly, when assets are withdrawn, they will be reduced.
Fourth, the recovery starts when the cash pool is short.
Fifth, it's not right to admit that the pressure on the model is getting bigger, not hard.
The real danger is never positive.
They are:
No cash pool.
No rules.
No exit conditions.
No psychological preparation.
But I think I can live a life of love.
So I wouldn't say it suits everyone.
It's not for people who are afraid of waves.
It's not for people without cash.
It's not for people who can't sleep when they fall.
It is not appropriate to treat investment as a job escaper.
But I still believe:
For some who are willing to take the initiative, to abide by the rules, and to continue to amend the rules, the assets do not have to wait until they retire.
It can also be designed as a cash-flow system.
This is not a retirement myth.
This is an experimental route I built for myself between middle-aged transition, family responsibility and market risk.
Don't promise to relax.
It's not guaranteed.
But at least life is not being pushed away without preparation.
———
The sword points to the heaven, and there shall be no change in fear.
Zhou Myung-ming, Daniel Zhou, the sword master.
The first reaction of many people who heard of the "Presidency Two" was:
"You want to retire on over a million dollars?"
"Are you crazy?"
"This is a gamble."
Actually, I never wrapped it into a retirement myth.
For me, this model is closer to a high-risk, cash-flow experiment.
It's not about "Buy Two and Lie Down" but:
In recognition of the high level of the market, a set of rules has been devised to link the capital, the cash pool and the cost of living.
My model is not brainless.
It has several points:
First, the cash pool starts with life.
Second, there is a monthly ceiling.
Thirdly, when assets are withdrawn, they will be reduced.
Fourth, the recovery starts when the cash pool is short.
Fifth, it's not right to admit that the pressure on the model is getting bigger, not hard.
The real danger is never positive.
They are:
No cash pool.
No rules.
No exit conditions.
No psychological preparation.
But I think I can live a life of love.
So I wouldn't say it suits everyone.
It's not for people who are afraid of waves.
It's not for people without cash.
It's not for people who can't sleep when they fall.
It is not appropriate to treat investment as a job escaper.
But I still believe:
For some who are willing to take the initiative, to abide by the rules, and to continue to amend the rules, the assets do not have to wait until they retire.
It can also be designed as a cash-flow system.
This is not a retirement myth.
This is an experimental route I built for myself between middle-aged transition, family responsibility and market risk.
Don't promise to relax.
It's not guaranteed.
But at least life is not being pushed away without preparation.
———
The sword points to the heaven, and there shall be no change in fear.
Zhou Myung-ming, Daniel Zhou, the sword master.
Send messages