July 10, 2025 • 33 mins
In this episode we answer emails from Ron, Michael, Jaime and Clare. We discuss all the generosity bestowed on us and our charity, including the McKenna Man portfolio, a listener's personal portfolio and two-year experience, portfolio longevity issues and common myths thereabout, tax considerations and how to really enjoy retirement after accumulation.
Links:
Father McKenna Center Donation Page: Donate - Father McKenna Center
Michael's Portfolio (unlevered) vs. a 70/30 since 2022: testfol.io/?s=fW46hjKw65M
Breathless AI-Bot Summary:
Money can buy you more wealth, but it can't buy you more time. This fundamental truth frames our deep dive into the stories of listeners who've transformed their financial futures through risk parity investing.
We begin with Ron's creative McKenna Man Portfolio – a 100% equity allocation that makes quarterly charitable distributions while still growing steadily. Michael shares his journey from traditional investing to a risk parity approach that delivers impressive returns with dramatically lower volatility, proving these principles work in real-world applications.
The heart of this episode tackles a question many struggle with: how to plan for extremely long retirement periods of 50+ years. Contrary to popular fear-mongering that suggests dramatically lower withdrawal rates, we explore research showing withdrawal rates tend to flatten over extended timeframes. Variable withdrawal strategies that adjust based on actual spending needs rather than rigid CPI increases can support withdrawal rates only slightly lower than traditional 30-year plans. For those concerned about longevity risk, slight adjustments to equity allocations or implementing rising equity glide paths provide additional security without sacrificing quality of life.
Perhaps most powerful is Claire's story of transitioning to a work-optional lifestyle at 56, using risk parity principles to escape a high-pressure career and create space for relationships and experiences. Her wisdom cuts through financial noise with crystal clarity: "Don't worry about running out of money, worry about running out of time."
When we reflect on Bronnie Ware's "Five Regrets of the Dying," none involve wishing for more wealth. They center on authentic relationships, self-expression, and allowing more happiness – precisely what proper financial planning should ultimately enable. The purpose isn't maximizing wealth, but confidently answering "how much is enough" so you can stop playing the accumulation game and start truly living.
What would your life look like if financial fears no longer dictated your choices? Join our community at riskparityradio.com to continue the conversation.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Mary and Voices (00:01):
A foolish consistency, is the hobgoblin of
little minds, adored by littlestatesmen and philosophers and
divines.
If a man does not keep pacewith his companions, perhaps it
is because he hears a differentdrummer.
A different drummer and now,coming to you from dead center,
(00:21):
on your dial.
Welcome to Risk Parity Radio,where we explore alternatives
and asset allocations for thedo-it-yourself investor,
broadcasting to you now from thecomfort of his easy chair.
Here is your host, frankVasquez.
Mostly Uncle Frank (00:37):
Thank you, Mary, and welcome to Risk Parity
Radio.
If you are new here and wonderwhat we are talking about, you
may wish to go back and listento some of the foundational
episodes for this program.
Mary and Voices (00:50):
Yeah, baby, yeah.
Mostly Uncle Frank (00:52):
And the basic foundational episodes are
episodes 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9.
Some of our listeners,including Karen and Chris, have
identified additional episodesthat you may consider
foundational, and those areepisodes 12, 14, 16, 19, 21, 56,
(01:13):
82, and 184.
Whoa, and you probably shouldcheck those out too, because we
have the finest podcast audienceavailable.
Mary and Voices (01:26):
Top drawer, really top drawer.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:31):
Along with a host named after a hot dog.
Lighten up, francis.
But now onward to episode 437.
Today, on Risk Parity Radio,we're just going to do what we
do best here, which is attend toyour emails.
Mary and Voices (01:48):
Ha ha, you fool .
You fell victim to one of theclassic blunders.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:52):
And so without further ado.
Mary and Voices (01:54):
Here I go once again with the email.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:58):
First off.
First off, we have an emailfrom Ron Bedtime for Bonzo,
Starring Ronald Regan, DianaLynn and Bonzo, that amazing
chimp.
Mary and Voices (02:10):
And Ron writes Hi Frank and Mary.
Here's the quarterly update forthe All Equity McKenna man
portfolio.
It was a good quarter.
The portfolio was up 8.6% forthe quarter, net growth of 6.4%
after the distribution.
We'll make a quarterlydistribution of $111 to the
Father McKenna Center and I madea note about the top of the T
(02:33):
push on the grant as well.
The portfolio is up 4.2% net ofwithdrawals year to date.
I hope you and Mary have awonderful 4th of July Cheers.
Mostly Uncle Frank (02:49):
Ron.
Now, ron happens to be one ofour favorite listeners here for
many reasons.
Are you mystified, bewilderedand puzzled?
You needn't be.
First off, he's a donor to theFather McKenna Center.
As most of you know, we do nothave any sponsors on this
program.
We do have a charity we support.
It's called the Father McKennaCenter and it supports hungry
(03:11):
and homeless people inWashington DC, and in fact, all
of the emailers in today havedonated to the Father McKenna
Center.
Yay, and I want to thank youall for doing that.
That is why you moved to thefront of the line.
That's the prize you get hereInconceivable.
(03:32):
As you know, we are running theTop of the T-Shirt campaign we
rolled out in episode 426.
Because one of our listeners isextremely generous Well, more
than one is, but one of ourlisteners Matthew 63, put up
$15,000 in matching funds andwe've been matching away since
(03:54):
then.
We'll continue to do thatthrough this month, I believe.
Now Ron has chose a particularlycreative way to donate to the
Father McKenna Center.
He has created a portfolio thatwe described in episode 399, if
you want to go back and listento that.
It is a 100% equity portfolio,but he's taking large
(04:15):
distributions out of it everyquarter and giving them to the
Father McKenna Center.
We are calling this the McKennaman portfolio.
Now, a McKenna man is somebodywho has reclaimed themselves
after being homeless andotherwise troubled and has come
through the center and become acontributor to the community
once again.
One of our most famous McKennamen, cortez, is retiring this
(04:39):
year after working a long timeat the center, over 10 years.
We're having a littleretirement party for him on July
19th actually.
But Cortez is the person whohad the idea of a McKenna man
and so we can attribute that tohim and celebrate all he has
done for the center over themany years.
(05:01):
I should mention there are twoways to give to the Father
McKenna Center.
You can do that through theFather McKenna website, which
I'll link to again in the shownotes, the donation page.
It's easy, it's fun.
Mention Risk Parity Radio whenyou donate by putting that in
the comment box.
Or you can become one of ourpatrons on Patreon, which you
(05:21):
can do through the support pageat wwwriskparityradiocom, and
give that way.
Either way, you get to go tothe front of the line and you
receive my eternal gratitude, aswe are bestowing on Ron today,
emotions running high.
Yes, thank you for yourwonderfully creative giving idea
and thank you for your email.
(05:43):
Second off.
Second off we have an emailfrom Michael.
Mary and Voices (06:00):
And Michael writes Hi, Uncle Frank, I just
made a donation to the.
Mostly Uncle Frank (06:02):
Father McKenna Center on the top of the
t-shirt campaign.
Mary and Voices (06:03):
Yes, it looks like a very worthy cause and I
was glad to help in its mission.
Note that I was also glad tosee that the organization scored
a 96 on Charity Navigator'sAccountability and Finance
Rating Report.
Kudos go to the treasurer ofthe organization for sure.
Who's saying you want a pieceof me?
I stumbled across your podcastin mid-2022 when I was getting
(06:25):
close to semi-retirement, andthe COVID market drop made me
realize that I did not have therisk tolerance that I used to
when I was younger and my stashwas smaller.
After a yearish of indecision, Imoved my portfolio into a risk
parity setup consisting of 25%large cap growth, 25% small cap
value, 15% long-term bond and15% gold, with the rest split
(06:50):
evenly between managed funds,commodities, reits and preferred
shares, and with a small amountof cash and a high-yield
savings account.
Then I leveraged the stocks andbonds just 10% each with SSO,
uwm, ubt and PFFL, because Ineeded to feed my gambling
problem, but not with a hideousexperiment.
(07:10):
You have a gambling problem.
Anyway, I'm happy to reportthat, almost two years later,
when comparing my portfolioagainst one with only a total
stock market fund and total bondmarket fund, mine has returned
as much as an 80-20, but with astandard deviation of a 50-50
and an ulcer index of a 55-45.
(07:32):
It's still obviously way tooearly to make any definitive
statements about the portfolio,but I'm pleased with it so far.
If you have any comments orsuggestions, I'd certainly be
glad to hear them.
Many thanks for everything youdo, michael.
Mostly Uncle Frank (07:54):
Well, thank you for being a donor to the
Father McKenna Center, Michael.
Mary and Voices (07:58):
The best, Jerry the best.
Mostly Uncle Frank (08:01):
As Michael has observed, we are a very
efficient charity because we donot pay for space, because we do
not pay for space and we do notpay for most of our labor,
which is provided by volunteers.
And so, yes, if you go to theCharity Navigator's
Accountability and FinanceRatings, you'll see we are at 96
out of 100.
I actually think that should be100 out of 100 because the only
(08:22):
thing we had been missing isthe update of our tax returns,
our 990s, which we also post onthe website so anybody can have
a look at those for our officialreporting.
But, as the treasurer andmember of the audit committee, I
have made sure that we are dulyputting those up on the website
(08:42):
if you ever want to look atthem.
But yes, we are very efficientand very effective, which I am
sure my audience of financenerds appreciates Nerds, nerds.
Mary and Voices (08:53):
Nerds, nerds what is a nerd?
Mostly Uncle Frank (08:59):
And it's very heartening for me to hear
that you've been able to takewhat you learned here and
implement it in your own way.
And that's honestly what Ireally like to see is not so
much that you adopt a sampleportfolio wholesale, but take it
and modify it for your ownpurposes and you get to own it,
and you are applying that adageof Bruce Lee, which is to take
(09:23):
what is useful, discard what isuseless and add something
uniquely your own.
I'm not sure I would have addedthese leveraged funds, but I
can't fault you there.
I did run a little version ofyour portfolio without any
(09:44):
leverage in test folio.
It looked very functional andvery useful, and I will link to
that in the show notes just ifanybody wants to check that out.
I don't really have anycomments other than make sure
you keep your gambling problemsunder wraps, or at least small
enough that they will not reallydisturb you if we have a really
(10:05):
bad downturn.
Mary and Voices (10:07):
You can't handle the gambling problem.
Mostly Uncle Frank (10:10):
But I don't think a small bump is going to
cause you too many troubles.
Stay in formation.
Target's just ahead.
Target should be clear.
If you're going low enough,you'll have to decide.
You'll have to decide, you'llhave to decide.
I will be interested to see howthings turn out in the next few
(10:32):
years, but I'm glad to havebeen of service.
Mary and Voices (10:57):
Thank you for your donations and thank you for
your email.
Next off, I have an email fromjames.
Hey, jim baby, I see youbrought up reinforcements.
Well, I'm waiting for you,jimmy boy.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:04):
Forcements.
Well, I'm waiting for you,jimmy boy, or, as he refers to
himself, uncle Jaime, and UncleJaime writes.
Mary and Voices (11:19):
Hi Frank and Mary, Thanks for the incredible
resource.
I stumbled onto your podcastvia portfolio charts and I'm
very grateful for the de-goblinideas.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:24):
Your tobacco company has turned this
beautiful specimen into ahorrible twisted freak.
Mary and Voices (11:32):
Who could love?
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:33):
me, the man's a goblin.
Mary and Voices (11:36):
My family and I took a travel sabbatical and I,
having the 4% or even 3.3% rulein my head, always assumed we'd
go back to work.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:45):
Forget about it.
Mary and Voices (11:46):
It turns out that not working is great.
It's good to be the king, andso when I learned about the
feasibility of a 5% withdrawalrate in risk parity style
portfolios, I realized we mightnot have to go back, but that
does mean my accumulationportfolio is suddenly not at all
(12:07):
what we need.
Stocks are at an all-time high,so it's a good time to
rebalance.
But I have two questions.
Question one I'm in my late 30sand, though I haven't gotten to
every single episode yet, I'mnot sure if I've heard any
specific guidance on portfoliosfor younger people who are
hoping to survive 50 plus yearsof drawdown.
For example, golden butterflyand golden ratio are both about
(12:29):
40% equity, but I was leaningtowards 50 to 55% equity, given
that we might need the long-termgrowth and because I'm
comfortable with finding sideincome or flexing expenses.
Any thoughts on this topic ingeneral?
Question two this decumulationportfolio allocation snuck up on
me.
I can't get all my rebalancingdone in tax-advantaged accounts,
(12:51):
nor can I buy when I'munderweight because there's no
more income coming.
Do you have any guidelines onhow aggressive someone should be
in taking taxable gains inorder to get to ideal
allocations?
How close is close enough?
Part of me wants to delay taxesas much as possible, but I also
know the taxable will get drawndown first.
(13:12):
Anyway, Thanks again for thegreat content.
Ps.
Thank you, Frank and Mary, alsofor your excellent enunciation.
You're one of the rare podcaststhat easily handles 1.6 times
speed on Spotify and it makesthe audio drops all the more
entertaining.
Also makes 400 plus episodesless daunting.
Mostly Uncle Frank (13:33):
All right, interesting questions, uncle
Jaime.
First one about longerretirement periods.
We have talked about thisbefore in various podcasts.
Places when this frequentlycomes up is when you have
somebody who looks at 4% rulecalculations or safe withdrawal
rate calculations and sees theyare set up for 30 years and
(13:56):
often makes the erroneousassumption that anything more
than 30 years is not describedor covered by the math of this
or that is something completelydifferent.
I like to say there's a lot offear-mongering about portfolios
turning into a pumpkin after 30years.
Human sacrifice, dogs and catsliving together, mass hysteria,
but that's not how the mathworks at all.
Mary and Voices (14:18):
That's not how it works.
That's not how any of thisworks.
Mostly Uncle Frank (14:22):
So, first of all, you can test these
portfolios at PortfolioVisualizer or at Portfolio
Charts on the safe withdrawalrate calculator and go out 40,
45, 50 years.
What you'll see there, and whatyou'll see in any kind of safe
withdrawal rate calculation, isthat the withdrawal rate tends
to flatten out over time.
(14:43):
It does not continue to go downat a steep level and in fact
comes out to a flattish level.
This is described at portfoliocharts as a long-term withdrawal
rate.
Another way of describing it isa perpetual withdrawal rate,
but that is really even moreconservative in that it's trying
to come up with the rate atwhich you would not lose money
(15:05):
in the portfolio for anysignificant time at all.
Anyway, what you learn from this, from the work of Bill Bangan
and others that for mostportfolios, if you take the
30-year safe withdrawal rate,that is an inflation-adjusted
situation where you areincreasing the withdrawals for
inflation every year CPIinflation, not personal
inflation.
(15:29):
Year CPI inflation, not personalinflation you find that if you
go out 50 years or forever, ifyou subtract 0.6 from the
original 30-year withdrawal rate, that is kind of the forever
withdrawal rate.
Now how can you get that back?
You can get that back simply byusing a variable withdrawal
instead of automaticallyincreasing your withdrawals by
(15:50):
the CPI rate of inflation.
If you just increase it by whatpeople actually do on average,
which is less than the CPI onaverage for most retirees, then
you're going to get back between0.5 and 1.
And that's from one or more ofthese Morningstar analyses that
come out every year where theyhave analyzed various mechanisms
(16:11):
for doing variable withdrawalsto check out how they affected
the safe withdrawal rate for aforever withdrawal rate with a
variable withdrawal system thatis based on simply taking your
actual personal inflation andnot a CPI rate of inflation.
(16:34):
Or you could do something morecomplicated, involving
guardrails or things like that,which would add even more to the
safe withdrawal rate.
But that's the gist of it.
Mary and Voices (16:45):
That's the fact , Jack.
That's the fact, Jack.
That's the fact, Jack.
Mostly Uncle Frank (16:49):
The time length will take some away.
It won't take as much as peopleoften think.
Oftentimes I hear peoplesubtracting 1% for every extra
10 years and that's just wrong,Wrong.
There's no basis in math oranything else for doing
something like that.
Forget about it.
When people are doing thingslike that, they're just
(17:10):
fear-mongering and hoardingRivers and seas, boiling Forty
years of darkness, earthquakesvolcanoes, the dead rising from
the grave.
Or perhaps protecting their AUMfees.
If it's coming from a financialadvisor, a mice straw reaches
across the room and starts todrink your milkshake.
(17:33):
I drink your milkshake.
I drink it up.
Now, that being said, there area couple of additions here.
I don't know that younecessarily need to increase the
amount of equities in theportfolio from the golden
butterfly or golden ratio,although those are on the
(17:54):
conservative end, particularlythe golden butterfly.
But, as Bill Bangan has foundand many others have found, you
are going to be in that sweetspot anywhere between about 40
and 75 percent or somewherearound there.
So if you want to increase theequity allocations from those
sample portfolios, you shouldfeel free to go ahead and do
(18:15):
that and in fact, I would behappy to see you do things like
that In the golden butterfly.
If you're going to do somethinglike that, you can chop down
that 20% allocation toshort-term bonds.
That's a very conservativelyset up portfolio and you can
certainly take pieces of thatout, put it into equities or
(18:35):
even take some of the gold awayfrom the 20% allocation and put
that in the equities.
The golden ratio is actuallyset up to allow people to do
things like this, because youstart with 42% in equities, but
you have those two smallerallocations, the 10 and the 6,
which could also be put intoequities if you don't want to
hold any cash or you don't wantto hold another alternative In
(18:58):
some respects, when you'reholding 16% in gold and 10% in
managed futures, that is stillgiving you risk asset kind of
allocations in terms ofvolatility.
So it is almost akin to holdinganother 10% in equities in
terms of how it plays.
The other choice being oftenmade in that portfolio is if you
(19:20):
are going out to the large capgrowth and the small cap value.
Both of those have slightlyhigher betas than one.
Beta is the market risk factor,and so those individual
allocations are taking more thanregular market risk, which
bumps up their returns over time.
But since they're welldiversified, you end up only
(19:44):
taking the equivalent of marketrisk.
You end up only taking theequivalent of market risk.
Now, lastly, in Bill Bengen'snew book that's coming out in
August, and also in some of thework of Michael Kitsis and
others, they've talked about theidea of having a rising equity
glide path over time, and I'llbe interested to see that
research because I haven't donea whole lot in this area.
(20:04):
But that is another way youmight consider approaching this.
It would take more work and bemore annoying, but you could
create something that looks likea golden butterfly or golden
ratio but then have it rise inequity over time.
I don't have any researchshowing how that would perform,
but I'm hoping to learnsomething when I read Bill
(20:25):
Bengen's new book.
So you are definitely on theright track and, yes, you can do
that sort of thing, but I don'tthink you actually necessarily
need to for a longer retirementperiod if you're using any kind
of a variable withdrawal system,all right.
Question two about doing somereallocating, but dealing with
(20:46):
tax issues, and are there anygeneral guidelines?
Well, the short answer is notreally, because this is so
idiosyncratic to everybody'sindividual tax situation, not
only accounting for what is thebracket they're in, both for
ordinary income and for capitalgains, and then also how much do
(21:07):
they have in each of theiraccounts and what is the taxable
gain on the portions that havebeen sitting there for however
long they've been sitting there.
Generally, the best way toapproach taxes is, as a
long-term idea, that you don'twant to pay too much in one year
, either by delaying it too longand not paying any, or by doing
(21:30):
it all up front in one go.
So I would try to spread it outunder more than one tax year
and then also use the concept oftax lots that you can sell the
more recently purchased shares.
They'll have lower capitalgains and then if you've got any
tax losses, obviously you canharvest those as well.
(21:53):
But you mentioned also quoteideal allocations.
I would push back against thatbecause there are no quote ideal
allocations unquote, becausewhat is an ideal allocation in
one decade is certainly notgoing to be an ideal allocation
in another decade.
What you're really just tryingto do is get something that is
in a ballpark, which is whybeing a few percentages off with
(22:17):
any particular allocationreally isn't going to be a big
deal for the most part.
But you can always just runtests on these things.
I mean, take your idealallocation and then take a more
tax-efficient allocation, if youwill, and just compare them and
see whether there's reallysignificant differences in them
when you run Monte Carlosimulations on them, and if
(22:38):
they're not, then you prettymuch have a good answer to that
question and I guess if there'san overall comment to leave you
with, it's just that the way wethink you should approach
portfolio construction is byusing principles.
The three principles we usehere are the Holy Grail
principle, the macro allocationprinciple and the simplicity
principle.
(22:59):
And then look at some guidelinesfor what you're trying to do
here to have a high safewithdrawal rate, and the history
and data have shown that thereare basically four guidelines,
which I'm not going to repeathere.
But I am going to direct you tothe most recent interview I had
on Afford Anything with PaulaPant, not only for that
(23:20):
interview, but also because shecreated a blueprint kind of
cheat sheet with these rules ofthumb in them, of cheat sheet
with these rules of thumb inthem, so you can see whether you
have a portfolio that is likelyto have a high safe withdrawal
rate by keeping the variousallocations within certain
ranges.
Now, yes, you do end up havingto pick a specific formula in
(23:43):
the end because you need to havesomething to rebalance to, but
it is certainly not as formulaicas you would hear or read if
you were reading things aboutportfolios 10, 15, 20 years ago
where everybody seemed to have aspecific formula for something.
We don't need no stinkingformulas, bodges.
(24:04):
We don't need no stinkingbodges.
Mary and Voices (24:07):
Oh no.
Mostly Uncle Frank (24:10):
Anyway, hope all that helps.
Thank you for being a donor tothe Father McKenna Center and
thank you for your email Lastoff any way without my gun and
(24:38):
go quick.
Last off, last off, we have anemail from Claire.
She came from planet Earth, Iknow she came from there.
Mary and Voices (24:57):
And Claire writes Dear Frank, I've made a
donation to your campaign today.
No question for you, but justwanted to let you know how much
I appreciate you.
I've been listening for a whileand recently also heard you on
Paula Pant's show and theStacking Benjamin show.
You seem like a great guy toget a beer with.
Give us a bottle of your finestchampagne, five shrimp
(25:20):
cocktails and some bread.
For my brother we have a DomPerignon 71 at $120.
That'll be fine, pal.
Mostly Uncle Frank (25:32):
Probably the same.
Please, I appreciate it.
Mary and Voices (25:36):
Wrong glass sir but I was really moved this
morning after your email fromBob about fear of running out of
money.
I've been semi-retired foralmost two years now, age 56.
I left my very high pressurenon-profit job and I'm now just
(25:58):
taking short consulting or gigtype work when it fits my
schedule and appeals to me.
So I guess I'm more workoptional than retired.
I moved to a risk parityportfolio right before retiring
and I'm lucky that my timingworked out.
Since I did it so late, Ididn't find you till then.
(26:19):
My life is so much better andricher than it used to be.
I'm spending a lot of time withmy friends and my five-year-old
grandson, as well as travelingwith my husband.
You're so right Don't worryabout running out of money,
worry about running out of time.
Thanks for all you do.
I hope many folks listen totoday's podcast and take your
words to heart, claire.
Mostly Uncle Frank (26:40):
Well, thank you so much for your kind words,
claire, and your donation.
I think what often does get lostin popular personal finance is
the overall purpose of goingthrough these exercises and
learning this material andorganizing your assets in a
particular way, because mostpopular personal finance books
(27:02):
and materials are directed atpeople who are just starting out
or somewhere in the middle oftheir journey, trying to figure
out how to accumulate wealth,and there is an implicit
assumption in there that themore wealth you have, the better
off you are, and so it's a goalunto itself, which is a good
(27:38):
goal for starting out and atmany points along the way, but
at a certain point you do haveto sit down and say, all right,
let's compare my level of wealthwith my level of time left on
this earth, because once you'vewon the accumulation game,
you're supposed to stop playingand start playing other games in
life, ones that maximize yourwell-being and your
relationships for the time youhave left.
Because we know from BronnieWare's Five Regrets of the Dying
(28:00):
, nobody wishes they would havespent more time at the office or
accumulated 10% more than theyactually accumulated.
Mary and Voices (28:08):
Time is money boy.
Mostly Uncle Frank (28:11):
What they regret is poverty in
relationships and not having achance to have expressed
themselves in more personal ways, either just being able to say
what they thought withoutfearing reprisal from some group
or some employer or something,or just being able to pursue
creative outlets and make themfeel happy, whether that's
(28:32):
painting or skiing or biking orcooking or any other activities
that people often find joy in.
But you can't really maximizethat until you sit down and
figure out how much is enoughwealth or enough money for you,
because if there's no limit tothat answer, then there's
(28:53):
probably a lot of limits on youractual ability to pursue
well-being through relationshipsand other activities that are
likely to cost money and makeyou poorer as opposed to make
you money all we need to do isget your confidence back so you
can make me more money and formost people, trying to monetize
(29:17):
everything in their life isn't avery satisfactory solution
either.
Then you're just going from ahoarder culture to a hustle
culture.
I don't care about the children, I just care about their
parents' money, which can alsohave its own drawbacks and
limitations.
But it really sounds like yougot the memo and that you're
(29:37):
really enjoying life, and I'mvery happy for you.
Mary is too, and I'll go aheadand make sure you get another
copy of that memo.
Okay, and rest assured thatyou're not only doing the right
thing by you and your family,but you are also setting a good
example, because we do need moregood examples of people who
(29:59):
have stopped playingaccumulation games and are
really trying to live their bestlives in the time they have
remaining.
And if you are listening tothis and have your own Claire
story, I'd love to hear about it.
Mary and Voices (30:12):
It's top drawer , really top drawer.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:16):
So thank you for your donation, thank you
for your inspiration and thankyou for your email.
Mary and Voices (30:26):
How much for the little girl, the women, how
much for the women, what yourwomen?
I want to buy your women, thelittle girl, your daughters.
Sell them to me, sell me yourchildren, mayrudy, mayrudy but
now I see our signal isbeginning to fade.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:44):
Just one announcement There'll be no
podcast this weekend.
Not gonna do it Wouldn't beprudent at this juncture.
I'm off to New York to goofaround with some old friends.
Mary and Voices (30:56):
Camelot.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:58):
We're knights of the round table.
We dance whenever able, we doroutines and call the scenes
With footwork impeccable.
We dine well here in Camelot weeat ham and jam and spam a lot.
We're going to go to somebaseball games and we understand
(31:19):
there's an obscene statue orart exhibit in Highline Park.
We may have to check that outtoo.
Snap, snap grin, grin, wink,wink, nudge, nudge.
Sign them all.
Good times will be had by all.
You're too stupid to have agood turn.
I will update the website atsome point, but you'll have to
(31:39):
wait at least until the middleof next week before you hear
from me again.
In the meantime but you'll haveto wait at least until the
middle of next week before youhear from me again.
In the meantime, if you havecomments or questions for me,
please send them to frank atriskpartyraidercom.
That email is frank atriskpartyraidercom.
Or you can go to the website,wwwriskpartyraidercom, put your
message into the contact formand I'll get it that way.
I have a number of donor emailscoming up, so if you're not a
(32:04):
donor, you're going to have towait.
No pressure, show me the money.
If you haven't had a chance todo it, please go to your
favorite podcast provider andlike subscribe.
Give me some stars, a follow, areview.
That would be great.
Mary and Voices (32:22):
Okay.
Mostly Uncle Frank (32:24):
Thank you once again for tuning in.
This is Frank Vasquez with RiskParty Radio Signing off.
She came from Planet Claire.
She came from Planet Claire.
Mary and Voices (33:16):
She came from Planet Claire.
The Risk Parody Radio Show ishosted by Frank Vasquez.
The content provided is forentertainment and informational
purposes only and does notconstitute financial investment
tax or legal advice.
Please consult with your ownadvisors before taking any
actions based on any informationyou have heard here, making
(33:37):
sure to take into account yourown personal circumstances.
A foolish consistency, is the hobgoblin of
little minds, adored by littlestatesmen and philosophers and
divines.
If a man does not keep pacewith his companions, perhaps it
is because he hears a differentdrummer.
A different drummer and now,coming to you from dead center,
(00:21):
on your dial.
Welcome to Risk Parity Radio,where we explore alternatives
and asset allocations for thedo-it-yourself investor,
broadcasting to you now from thecomfort of his easy chair.
Here is your host, frankVasquez.
Mostly Uncle Frank (00:37):
Thank you, Mary, and welcome to Risk Parity
Radio.
If you are new here and wonderwhat we are talking about, you
may wish to go back and listento some of the foundational
episodes for this program.
Mary and Voices (00:50):
Yeah, baby, yeah.
Mostly Uncle Frank (00:52):
And the basic foundational episodes are
episodes 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9.
Some of our listeners,including Karen and Chris, have
identified additional episodesthat you may consider
foundational, and those areepisodes 12, 14, 16, 19, 21, 56,
(01:13):
82, and 184.
Whoa, and you probably shouldcheck those out too, because we
have the finest podcast audienceavailable.
Mary and Voices (01:26):
Top drawer, really top drawer.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:31):
Along with a host named after a hot dog.
Lighten up, francis.
But now onward to episode 437.
Today, on Risk Parity Radio,we're just going to do what we
do best here, which is attend toyour emails.
Mary and Voices (01:48):
Ha ha, you fool .
You fell victim to one of theclassic blunders.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:52):
And so without further ado.
Mary and Voices (01:54):
Here I go once again with the email.
Mostly Uncle Frank (01:58):
First off.
First off, we have an emailfrom Ron Bedtime for Bonzo,
Starring Ronald Regan, DianaLynn and Bonzo, that amazing
chimp.
Mary and Voices (02:10):
And Ron writes Hi Frank and Mary.
Here's the quarterly update forthe All Equity McKenna man
portfolio.
It was a good quarter.
The portfolio was up 8.6% forthe quarter, net growth of 6.4%
after the distribution.
We'll make a quarterlydistribution of $111 to the
Father McKenna Center and I madea note about the top of the T
(02:33):
push on the grant as well.
The portfolio is up 4.2% net ofwithdrawals year to date.
I hope you and Mary have awonderful 4th of July Cheers.
Mostly Uncle Frank (02:49):
Ron.
Now, ron happens to be one ofour favorite listeners here for
many reasons.
Are you mystified, bewilderedand puzzled?
You needn't be.
First off, he's a donor to theFather McKenna Center.
As most of you know, we do nothave any sponsors on this
program.
We do have a charity we support.
It's called the Father McKennaCenter and it supports hungry
(03:11):
and homeless people inWashington DC, and in fact, all
of the emailers in today havedonated to the Father McKenna
Center.
Yay, and I want to thank youall for doing that.
That is why you moved to thefront of the line.
That's the prize you get hereInconceivable.
(03:32):
As you know, we are running theTop of the T-Shirt campaign we
rolled out in episode 426.
Because one of our listeners isextremely generous Well, more
than one is, but one of ourlisteners Matthew 63, put up
$15,000 in matching funds andwe've been matching away since
(03:54):
then.
We'll continue to do thatthrough this month, I believe.
Now Ron has chose a particularlycreative way to donate to the
Father McKenna Center.
He has created a portfolio thatwe described in episode 399, if
you want to go back and listento that.
It is a 100% equity portfolio,but he's taking large
(04:15):
distributions out of it everyquarter and giving them to the
Father McKenna Center.
We are calling this the McKennaman portfolio.
Now, a McKenna man is somebodywho has reclaimed themselves
after being homeless andotherwise troubled and has come
through the center and become acontributor to the community
once again.
One of our most famous McKennamen, cortez, is retiring this
(04:39):
year after working a long timeat the center, over 10 years.
We're having a littleretirement party for him on July
19th actually.
But Cortez is the person whohad the idea of a McKenna man
and so we can attribute that tohim and celebrate all he has
done for the center over themany years.
(05:01):
I should mention there are twoways to give to the Father
McKenna Center.
You can do that through theFather McKenna website, which
I'll link to again in the shownotes, the donation page.
It's easy, it's fun.
Mention Risk Parity Radio whenyou donate by putting that in
the comment box.
Or you can become one of ourpatrons on Patreon, which you
(05:21):
can do through the support pageat wwwriskparityradiocom, and
give that way.
Either way, you get to go tothe front of the line and you
receive my eternal gratitude, aswe are bestowing on Ron today,
emotions running high.
Yes, thank you for yourwonderfully creative giving idea
and thank you for your email.
(05:43):
Second off.
Second off we have an emailfrom Michael.
Mary and Voices (06:00):
And Michael writes Hi, Uncle Frank, I just
made a donation to the.
Mostly Uncle Frank (06:02):
Father McKenna Center on the top of the
t-shirt campaign.
Mary and Voices (06:03):
Yes, it looks like a very worthy cause and I
was glad to help in its mission.
Note that I was also glad tosee that the organization scored
a 96 on Charity Navigator'sAccountability and Finance
Rating Report.
Kudos go to the treasurer ofthe organization for sure.
Who's saying you want a pieceof me?
I stumbled across your podcastin mid-2022 when I was getting
(06:25):
close to semi-retirement, andthe COVID market drop made me
realize that I did not have therisk tolerance that I used to
when I was younger and my stashwas smaller.
After a yearish of indecision, Imoved my portfolio into a risk
parity setup consisting of 25%large cap growth, 25% small cap
value, 15% long-term bond and15% gold, with the rest split
(06:50):
evenly between managed funds,commodities, reits and preferred
shares, and with a small amountof cash and a high-yield
savings account.
Then I leveraged the stocks andbonds just 10% each with SSO,
uwm, ubt and PFFL, because Ineeded to feed my gambling
problem, but not with a hideousexperiment.
(07:10):
You have a gambling problem.
Anyway, I'm happy to reportthat, almost two years later,
when comparing my portfolioagainst one with only a total
stock market fund and total bondmarket fund, mine has returned
as much as an 80-20, but with astandard deviation of a 50-50
and an ulcer index of a 55-45.
(07:32):
It's still obviously way tooearly to make any definitive
statements about the portfolio,but I'm pleased with it so far.
If you have any comments orsuggestions, I'd certainly be
glad to hear them.
Many thanks for everything youdo, michael.
Mostly Uncle Frank (07:54):
Well, thank you for being a donor to the
Father McKenna Center, Michael.
Mary and Voices (07:58):
The best, Jerry the best.
Mostly Uncle Frank (08:01):
As Michael has observed, we are a very
efficient charity because we donot pay for space, because we do
not pay for space and we do notpay for most of our labor,
which is provided by volunteers.
And so, yes, if you go to theCharity Navigator's
Accountability and FinanceRatings, you'll see we are at 96
out of 100.
I actually think that should be100 out of 100 because the only
(08:22):
thing we had been missing isthe update of our tax returns,
our 990s, which we also post onthe website so anybody can have
a look at those for our officialreporting.
But, as the treasurer andmember of the audit committee, I
have made sure that we are dulyputting those up on the website
(08:42):
if you ever want to look atthem.
But yes, we are very efficientand very effective, which I am
sure my audience of financenerds appreciates Nerds, nerds.
Mary and Voices (08:53):
Nerds, nerds what is a nerd?
Mostly Uncle Frank (08:59):
And it's very heartening for me to hear
that you've been able to takewhat you learned here and
implement it in your own way.
And that's honestly what Ireally like to see is not so
much that you adopt a sampleportfolio wholesale, but take it
and modify it for your ownpurposes and you get to own it,
and you are applying that adageof Bruce Lee, which is to take
(09:23):
what is useful, discard what isuseless and add something
uniquely your own.
I'm not sure I would have addedthese leveraged funds, but I
can't fault you there.
I did run a little version ofyour portfolio without any
(09:44):
leverage in test folio.
It looked very functional andvery useful, and I will link to
that in the show notes just ifanybody wants to check that out.
I don't really have anycomments other than make sure
you keep your gambling problemsunder wraps, or at least small
enough that they will not reallydisturb you if we have a really
(10:05):
bad downturn.
Mary and Voices (10:07):
You can't handle the gambling problem.
Mostly Uncle Frank (10:10):
But I don't think a small bump is going to
cause you too many troubles.
Stay in formation.
Target's just ahead.
Target should be clear.
If you're going low enough,you'll have to decide.
You'll have to decide, you'llhave to decide.
I will be interested to see howthings turn out in the next few
(10:32):
years, but I'm glad to havebeen of service.
Mary and Voices (10:57):
Thank you for your donations and thank you for
your email.
Next off, I have an email fromjames.
Hey, jim baby, I see youbrought up reinforcements.
Well, I'm waiting for you,jimmy boy.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:04):
Forcements.
Well, I'm waiting for you,jimmy boy, or, as he refers to
himself, uncle Jaime, and UncleJaime writes.
Mary and Voices (11:19):
Hi Frank and Mary, Thanks for the incredible
resource.
I stumbled onto your podcastvia portfolio charts and I'm
very grateful for the de-goblinideas.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:24):
Your tobacco company has turned this
beautiful specimen into ahorrible twisted freak.
Mary and Voices (11:32):
Who could love?
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:33):
me, the man's a goblin.
Mary and Voices (11:36):
My family and I took a travel sabbatical and I,
having the 4% or even 3.3% rulein my head, always assumed we'd
go back to work.
Mostly Uncle Frank (11:45):
Forget about it.
Mary and Voices (11:46):
It turns out that not working is great.
It's good to be the king, andso when I learned about the
feasibility of a 5% withdrawalrate in risk parity style
portfolios, I realized we mightnot have to go back, but that
does mean my accumulationportfolio is suddenly not at all
(12:07):
what we need.
Stocks are at an all-time high,so it's a good time to
rebalance.
But I have two questions.
Question one I'm in my late 30sand, though I haven't gotten to
every single episode yet, I'mnot sure if I've heard any
specific guidance on portfoliosfor younger people who are
hoping to survive 50 plus yearsof drawdown.
For example, golden butterflyand golden ratio are both about
(12:29):
40% equity, but I was leaningtowards 50 to 55% equity, given
that we might need the long-termgrowth and because I'm
comfortable with finding sideincome or flexing expenses.
Any thoughts on this topic ingeneral?
Question two this decumulationportfolio allocation snuck up on
me.
I can't get all my rebalancingdone in tax-advantaged accounts,
(12:51):
nor can I buy when I'munderweight because there's no
more income coming.
Do you have any guidelines onhow aggressive someone should be
in taking taxable gains inorder to get to ideal
allocations?
How close is close enough?
Part of me wants to delay taxesas much as possible, but I also
know the taxable will get drawndown first.
(13:12):
Anyway, Thanks again for thegreat content.
Ps.
Thank you, Frank and Mary, alsofor your excellent enunciation.
You're one of the rare podcaststhat easily handles 1.6 times
speed on Spotify and it makesthe audio drops all the more
entertaining.
Also makes 400 plus episodesless daunting.
Mostly Uncle Frank (13:33):
All right, interesting questions, uncle
Jaime.
First one about longerretirement periods.
We have talked about thisbefore in various podcasts.
Places when this frequentlycomes up is when you have
somebody who looks at 4% rulecalculations or safe withdrawal
rate calculations and sees theyare set up for 30 years and
(13:56):
often makes the erroneousassumption that anything more
than 30 years is not describedor covered by the math of this
or that is something completelydifferent.
I like to say there's a lot offear-mongering about portfolios
turning into a pumpkin after 30years.
Human sacrifice, dogs and catsliving together, mass hysteria,
but that's not how the mathworks at all.
Mary and Voices (14:18):
That's not how it works.
That's not how any of thisworks.
Mostly Uncle Frank (14:22):
So, first of all, you can test these
portfolios at PortfolioVisualizer or at Portfolio
Charts on the safe withdrawalrate calculator and go out 40,
45, 50 years.
What you'll see there, and whatyou'll see in any kind of safe
withdrawal rate calculation, isthat the withdrawal rate tends
to flatten out over time.
(14:43):
It does not continue to go downat a steep level and in fact
comes out to a flattish level.
This is described at portfoliocharts as a long-term withdrawal
rate.
Another way of describing it isa perpetual withdrawal rate,
but that is really even moreconservative in that it's trying
to come up with the rate atwhich you would not lose money
(15:05):
in the portfolio for anysignificant time at all.
Anyway, what you learn from this, from the work of Bill Bangan
and others that for mostportfolios, if you take the
30-year safe withdrawal rate,that is an inflation-adjusted
situation where you areincreasing the withdrawals for
inflation every year CPIinflation, not personal
inflation.
(15:29):
Year CPI inflation, not personalinflation you find that if you
go out 50 years or forever, ifyou subtract 0.6 from the
original 30-year withdrawal rate, that is kind of the forever
withdrawal rate.
Now how can you get that back?
You can get that back simply byusing a variable withdrawal
instead of automaticallyincreasing your withdrawals by
(15:50):
the CPI rate of inflation.
If you just increase it by whatpeople actually do on average,
which is less than the CPI onaverage for most retirees, then
you're going to get back between0.5 and 1.
And that's from one or more ofthese Morningstar analyses that
come out every year where theyhave analyzed various mechanisms
(16:11):
for doing variable withdrawalsto check out how they affected
the safe withdrawal rate for aforever withdrawal rate with a
variable withdrawal system thatis based on simply taking your
actual personal inflation andnot a CPI rate of inflation.
(16:34):
Or you could do something morecomplicated, involving
guardrails or things like that,which would add even more to the
safe withdrawal rate.
But that's the gist of it.
Mary and Voices (16:45):
That's the fact , Jack.
That's the fact, Jack.
That's the fact, Jack.
Mostly Uncle Frank (16:49):
The time length will take some away.
It won't take as much as peopleoften think.
Oftentimes I hear peoplesubtracting 1% for every extra
10 years and that's just wrong,Wrong.
There's no basis in math oranything else for doing
something like that.
Forget about it.
When people are doing thingslike that, they're just
(17:10):
fear-mongering and hoardingRivers and seas, boiling Forty
years of darkness, earthquakesvolcanoes, the dead rising from
the grave.
Or perhaps protecting their AUMfees.
If it's coming from a financialadvisor, a mice straw reaches
across the room and starts todrink your milkshake.
(17:33):
I drink your milkshake.
I drink it up.
Now, that being said, there area couple of additions here.
I don't know that younecessarily need to increase the
amount of equities in theportfolio from the golden
butterfly or golden ratio,although those are on the
(17:54):
conservative end, particularlythe golden butterfly.
But, as Bill Bangan has foundand many others have found, you
are going to be in that sweetspot anywhere between about 40
and 75 percent or somewherearound there.
So if you want to increase theequity allocations from those
sample portfolios, you shouldfeel free to go ahead and do
(18:15):
that and in fact, I would behappy to see you do things like
that In the golden butterfly.
If you're going to do somethinglike that, you can chop down
that 20% allocation toshort-term bonds.
That's a very conservativelyset up portfolio and you can
certainly take pieces of thatout, put it into equities or
(18:35):
even take some of the gold awayfrom the 20% allocation and put
that in the equities.
The golden ratio is actuallyset up to allow people to do
things like this, because youstart with 42% in equities, but
you have those two smallerallocations, the 10 and the 6,
which could also be put intoequities if you don't want to
hold any cash or you don't wantto hold another alternative In
(18:58):
some respects, when you'reholding 16% in gold and 10% in
managed futures, that is stillgiving you risk asset kind of
allocations in terms ofvolatility.
So it is almost akin to holdinganother 10% in equities in
terms of how it plays.
The other choice being oftenmade in that portfolio is if you
(19:20):
are going out to the large capgrowth and the small cap value.
Both of those have slightlyhigher betas than one.
Beta is the market risk factor,and so those individual
allocations are taking more thanregular market risk, which
bumps up their returns over time.
But since they're welldiversified, you end up only
(19:44):
taking the equivalent of marketrisk.
You end up only taking theequivalent of market risk.
Now, lastly, in Bill Bengen'snew book that's coming out in
August, and also in some of thework of Michael Kitsis and
others, they've talked about theidea of having a rising equity
glide path over time, and I'llbe interested to see that
research because I haven't donea whole lot in this area.
(20:04):
But that is another way youmight consider approaching this.
It would take more work and bemore annoying, but you could
create something that looks likea golden butterfly or golden
ratio but then have it rise inequity over time.
I don't have any researchshowing how that would perform,
but I'm hoping to learnsomething when I read Bill
(20:25):
Bengen's new book.
So you are definitely on theright track and, yes, you can do
that sort of thing, but I don'tthink you actually necessarily
need to for a longer retirementperiod if you're using any kind
of a variable withdrawal system,all right.
Question two about doing somereallocating, but dealing with
(20:46):
tax issues, and are there anygeneral guidelines?
Well, the short answer is notreally, because this is so
idiosyncratic to everybody'sindividual tax situation, not
only accounting for what is thebracket they're in, both for
ordinary income and for capitalgains, and then also how much do
(21:07):
they have in each of theiraccounts and what is the taxable
gain on the portions that havebeen sitting there for however
long they've been sitting there.
Generally, the best way toapproach taxes is, as a
long-term idea, that you don'twant to pay too much in one year
, either by delaying it too longand not paying any, or by doing
(21:30):
it all up front in one go.
So I would try to spread it outunder more than one tax year
and then also use the concept oftax lots that you can sell the
more recently purchased shares.
They'll have lower capitalgains and then if you've got any
tax losses, obviously you canharvest those as well.
(21:53):
But you mentioned also quoteideal allocations.
I would push back against thatbecause there are no quote ideal
allocations unquote, becausewhat is an ideal allocation in
one decade is certainly notgoing to be an ideal allocation
in another decade.
What you're really just tryingto do is get something that is
in a ballpark, which is whybeing a few percentages off with
(22:17):
any particular allocationreally isn't going to be a big
deal for the most part.
But you can always just runtests on these things.
I mean, take your idealallocation and then take a more
tax-efficient allocation, if youwill, and just compare them and
see whether there's reallysignificant differences in them
when you run Monte Carlosimulations on them, and if
(22:38):
they're not, then you prettymuch have a good answer to that
question and I guess if there'san overall comment to leave you
with, it's just that the way wethink you should approach
portfolio construction is byusing principles.
The three principles we usehere are the Holy Grail
principle, the macro allocationprinciple and the simplicity
principle.
(22:59):
And then look at some guidelinesfor what you're trying to do
here to have a high safewithdrawal rate, and the history
and data have shown that thereare basically four guidelines,
which I'm not going to repeathere.
But I am going to direct you tothe most recent interview I had
on Afford Anything with PaulaPant, not only for that
(23:20):
interview, but also because shecreated a blueprint kind of
cheat sheet with these rules ofthumb in them, of cheat sheet
with these rules of thumb inthem, so you can see whether you
have a portfolio that is likelyto have a high safe withdrawal
rate by keeping the variousallocations within certain
ranges.
Now, yes, you do end up havingto pick a specific formula in
(23:43):
the end because you need to havesomething to rebalance to, but
it is certainly not as formulaicas you would hear or read if
you were reading things aboutportfolios 10, 15, 20 years ago
where everybody seemed to have aspecific formula for something.
We don't need no stinkingformulas, bodges.
(24:04):
We don't need no stinkingbodges.
Mary and Voices (24:07):
Oh no.
Mostly Uncle Frank (24:10):
Anyway, hope all that helps.
Thank you for being a donor tothe Father McKenna Center and
thank you for your email Lastoff any way without my gun and
(24:38):
go quick.
Last off, last off, we have anemail from Claire.
She came from planet Earth, Iknow she came from there.
Mary and Voices (24:57):
And Claire writes Dear Frank, I've made a
donation to your campaign today.
No question for you, but justwanted to let you know how much
I appreciate you.
I've been listening for a whileand recently also heard you on
Paula Pant's show and theStacking Benjamin show.
You seem like a great guy toget a beer with.
Give us a bottle of your finestchampagne, five shrimp
(25:20):
cocktails and some bread.
For my brother we have a DomPerignon 71 at $120.
That'll be fine, pal.
Mostly Uncle Frank (25:32):
Probably the same.
Please, I appreciate it.
Mary and Voices (25:36):
Wrong glass sir but I was really moved this
morning after your email fromBob about fear of running out of
money.
I've been semi-retired foralmost two years now, age 56.
I left my very high pressurenon-profit job and I'm now just
(25:58):
taking short consulting or gigtype work when it fits my
schedule and appeals to me.
So I guess I'm more workoptional than retired.
I moved to a risk parityportfolio right before retiring
and I'm lucky that my timingworked out.
Since I did it so late, Ididn't find you till then.
(26:19):
My life is so much better andricher than it used to be.
I'm spending a lot of time withmy friends and my five-year-old
grandson, as well as travelingwith my husband.
You're so right Don't worryabout running out of money,
worry about running out of time.
Thanks for all you do.
I hope many folks listen totoday's podcast and take your
words to heart, claire.
Mostly Uncle Frank (26:40):
Well, thank you so much for your kind words,
claire, and your donation.
I think what often does get lostin popular personal finance is
the overall purpose of goingthrough these exercises and
learning this material andorganizing your assets in a
particular way, because mostpopular personal finance books
(27:02):
and materials are directed atpeople who are just starting out
or somewhere in the middle oftheir journey, trying to figure
out how to accumulate wealth,and there is an implicit
assumption in there that themore wealth you have, the better
off you are, and so it's a goalunto itself, which is a good
(27:38):
goal for starting out and atmany points along the way, but
at a certain point you do haveto sit down and say, all right,
let's compare my level of wealthwith my level of time left on
this earth, because once you'vewon the accumulation game,
you're supposed to stop playingand start playing other games in
life, ones that maximize yourwell-being and your
relationships for the time youhave left.
Because we know from BronnieWare's Five Regrets of the Dying
(28:00):
, nobody wishes they would havespent more time at the office or
accumulated 10% more than theyactually accumulated.
Mary and Voices (28:08):
Time is money boy.
Mostly Uncle Frank (28:11):
What they regret is poverty in
relationships and not having achance to have expressed
themselves in more personal ways, either just being able to say
what they thought withoutfearing reprisal from some group
or some employer or something,or just being able to pursue
creative outlets and make themfeel happy, whether that's
(28:32):
painting or skiing or biking orcooking or any other activities
that people often find joy in.
But you can't really maximizethat until you sit down and
figure out how much is enoughwealth or enough money for you,
because if there's no limit tothat answer, then there's
(28:53):
probably a lot of limits on youractual ability to pursue
well-being through relationshipsand other activities that are
likely to cost money and makeyou poorer as opposed to make
you money all we need to do isget your confidence back so you
can make me more money and formost people, trying to monetize
(29:17):
everything in their life isn't avery satisfactory solution
either.
Then you're just going from ahoarder culture to a hustle
culture.
I don't care about the children, I just care about their
parents' money, which can alsohave its own drawbacks and
limitations.
But it really sounds like yougot the memo and that you're
(29:37):
really enjoying life, and I'mvery happy for you.
Mary is too, and I'll go aheadand make sure you get another
copy of that memo.
Okay, and rest assured thatyou're not only doing the right
thing by you and your family,but you are also setting a good
example, because we do need moregood examples of people who
(29:59):
have stopped playingaccumulation games and are
really trying to live their bestlives in the time they have
remaining.
And if you are listening tothis and have your own Claire
story, I'd love to hear about it.
Mary and Voices (30:12):
It's top drawer , really top drawer.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:16):
So thank you for your donation, thank you
for your inspiration and thankyou for your email.
Mary and Voices (30:26):
How much for the little girl, the women, how
much for the women, what yourwomen?
I want to buy your women, thelittle girl, your daughters.
Sell them to me, sell me yourchildren, mayrudy, mayrudy but
now I see our signal isbeginning to fade.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:44):
Just one announcement There'll be no
podcast this weekend.
Not gonna do it Wouldn't beprudent at this juncture.
I'm off to New York to goofaround with some old friends.
Mary and Voices (30:56):
Camelot.
Mostly Uncle Frank (30:58):
We're knights of the round table.
We dance whenever able, we doroutines and call the scenes
With footwork impeccable.
We dine well here in Camelot weeat ham and jam and spam a lot.
We're going to go to somebaseball games and we understand
(31:19):
there's an obscene statue orart exhibit in Highline Park.
We may have to check that outtoo.
Snap, snap grin, grin, wink,wink, nudge, nudge.
Sign them all.
Good times will be had by all.
You're too stupid to have agood turn.
I will update the website atsome point, but you'll have to
(31:39):
wait at least until the middleof next week before you hear
from me again.
In the meantime but you'll haveto wait at least until the
middle of next week before youhear from me again.
In the meantime, if you havecomments or questions for me,
please send them to frank atriskpartyraidercom.
That email is frank atriskpartyraidercom.
Or you can go to the website,wwwriskpartyraidercom, put your
message into the contact formand I'll get it that way.
I have a number of donor emailscoming up, so if you're not a
(32:04):
donor, you're going to have towait.
No pressure, show me the money.
If you haven't had a chance todo it, please go to your
favorite podcast provider andlike subscribe.
Give me some stars, a follow, areview.
That would be great.
Mary and Voices (32:22):
Okay.
Mostly Uncle Frank (32:24):
Thank you once again for tuning in.
This is Frank Vasquez with RiskParty Radio Signing off.
She came from Planet Claire.
She came from Planet Claire.
Mary and Voices (33:16):
She came from Planet Claire.
The Risk Parody Radio Show ishosted by Frank Vasquez.
The content provided is forentertainment and informational
purposes only and does notconstitute financial investment
tax or legal advice.
Please consult with your ownadvisors before taking any
actions based on any informationyou have heard here, making
(33:37):
sure to take into account yourown personal circumstances.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.