How To Be Manipulated By a Brand

There's an important tautology in the world of consumer branding that I was never able to put into words until now:

If you know a brand is trying to manipulate you, it completely loses its ability to manipulate you.

I know, I know. On some level it sounds obvious. But there's more than meets the eye to this sentence. What it really means is this: you can only be manipulated by branding if you're totally unaware that you're being manipulated. Or if you believe you're immune.

And yet almost all consumers sincerely believe they are immune to branding. I mean, it's kind of intellectually insulting to think otherwise, isn't it? Nobody wants to walk around thinking they're easy to manipulate.

And that's exactly why product branding works so well.

"I really like this brand, it's much higher quality." Sure it is. Have you actually blind-tested it against other brands to see for sure?

"I don't get trapped by all that branding and advertising stuff. I think for myself." No. That's your brain's ego-protection software kicking in. There are entire market segments designed specifically for independent thinkers like you.

"Look, I'm totally anti-consumerist. What I really care about is the environment." Guess what? There are brands for you too.

We talk often at Casual Kitchen how branding can mislead consumers into overpaying for products that don't deserve higher prices. Furthermore, branding is costly, and those extra costs are borne entirely by consumers--in the form of those same higher prices that we think make that brand worth it. It's incredibly circular logic that's incredibly profitable for the companies that sell branded products to us.

We all think we're immune to branding, but we're not. And we never will be.

And that's the key. Knowing you're not immune to branding actually empowers you as a consumer. It makes you more aware of the various forces acting on you when making a purchase.

And that makes you tougher to manipulate.


Related Posts:
The Do-Nothing Brand
Where Going Generic Works... And Where It Doesn't
Ten Thoughts On the Value of Brands
Still Sixteen Ounces
Brand Disloyalty


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

YMOYL Chapter 9, Part 3: Capital, Cushion and Cache

New readers: This is an in-depth, chapter by chapter review and analysis of the book Your Money Or Your Life. Join us! You can buy YMOYL here, and you can find the first post in the series here.
**********************

This week, we'll finally (finally!) tie up the last few loose ends of Chapter 9 with an analysis of Capital, Cushion and Cache. First a quick review:

* Capital is the primary nest egg that you'll use to generate investment income. This income will gradually replace your work income.
* Cushion is a separate account that contains a minimum six month cash reserve.
* Cache is a source of still more investment capital--beyond Capital and Cushion--that provides yet another layer of financial protection.

We've already discussed Capital, so we won't spend time on it here. After all, if you've been diligently following the YMOYL process like you should, then you've been tracking and aggressively adding to your Capital since Chapters 3 and 4.

Cushion
Your Cushion is essentially a garden-variety emergency fund. Everybody should have an emergency fund--it's perhaps the most elementary concept of personal finance. The question isn't whether to have one, the question is how many months' worth of expenses should I hold?

YMOYL's authors (as well as most personal finance experts) recommend six months. Laura and I keep one full year of expenses in our Cushion. For some, perhaps 18 or even 24 months might be appropriate. You'll have to decide what's right for you given the nature of your work, the reliability of your income, and what resonates with your personal sense of financial safety. I'd argue that six months of expenses is an absolute minimum, nine months is better and--for us, at least--twelve months is optimal.

It's probably best to keep your Cushion completely separate from your regular bank account, especially if you have a tendency to spend money that's too easy to get at. You may even want to set down, in writing, a list of clear and strict rules for when you would use this money. What kinds of emergencies is it for, specifically? Under what circumstances will you tap into this account?

Yes, I know. We've all sworn off gazingus pins by now. Still, it's only sensible to make it extra, extra difficult to spend your Cushion on something it was never intended for.

Finally, think about the tradeoffs you make by having a big versus a small emergency fund. Are you sacrificing money that could be prudently invested in your Capital account, earning passive income? Or is the peace of mind from having twelve (or more) months of cash sitting safely somewhere worth more than a small amount of foregone investment income? As always, it's up to you to decide, and there are no hard and fast rules here. But please remember: most people do not have emergency funds at all. You have a high-class problem just by virtue of the fact that you're deciding how big yours should be.

Cache
Now, onto Cache: First, a caveat: Cache is something you'll focus on much more after you reach the Crossover Point. If you're only just beginning your road to financial independence, don't worry about this concept yet. Just keep your head down, keep managing your Wall Chart and keep making income-generating investments.

Second, the authors do a suckola job describing the concept of Cache--no surprise given all the other problems with Chapter 9. It's almost funny how the book briefly introduces the idea on page 271, then drops it, and then randomly picks it up again twenty pages later. It's a sad oversight, because the concept is extremely useful.

Hmmm. I guess that's why I'm writing this series.

Here's how to think about Cache. Imagine yourself in your post-Crossover Point life. You're not working (or at least you're in a financial position where you don't need to work), and you're funding your expenses with income-generating investments in your Capital account. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?

Well, unless you decide to spontaneously forget all the principles of YMOYL, you'll still be living within your means after you've reached the Crossover Point. You'll still want to be sure your spending decisions are appropriate expenditures of your life energy.

Moreover, once you leave full time work, your monthly expenses are likely to go lower--possibly much lower. Remember all of those disturbingly high job-related costs you listed back in Chapter 2? Buh-bye.

There's more: it's highly plausible that you'll earn some side income from time to time. Maybe you'll start up a high-traffic food blog that earns you a few hundred bucks a month (*cough*). Maybe you'll do some consulting in your spare time for a local business. Maybe you'll learn a new profession and take on some part-time work just for fun.

Finally, you might on occasion receive windfalls like a bigger-than-expected tax refund. Remember, the tax code treats most forms of passive income far more favorably than regular salary income, so your post-Crossover Point tax expenses are likely to decline too.

All of this suggests you'll most likely continue to save and accumulate money even after you've stopped working. This money's gonna add up, and it's going to generate still more passive income. That's your Cache. That's why you don't need to worry unnecessarily about longer term issues like inflation, and that's how you'll protect yourself from any unexpected big-ticket expenses. You've inoculated yourself against these risks with extra Cache.

The bottom line: You are likely to have higher income and lower expenses than you expect once you reach your Crossover Point. Simply add that money to your financial resources, put it to work, and you'll have yet another layer of financial security.

Structuring your Capital, Cushion and Cache accounts
I'll close this week's post with some thoughts on different ways you can structure your Capital, Cushion and Cache accounts. As with most things, simple tends to be superior, so with that in mind I'll share a laughably simple model you can consider for your finances:

* A checking account to pay monthly expenses,
* A savings account to hold your Cushion/Emergency Fund,
* A brokerage account, containing your income-generating Capital,
* A separate brokerage account, where you can put any additional Cache.

I'm often asked what I think about IRAs and 401(k) accounts, or purpose-specific accounts like educational IRAs. My stock response is to tell people to take advantage of the things they want to take advantage of. If your company provides a generous 401(k) match, by all means take it. If you think setting up a separate educational IRA will really help you fund your kids' education, go for it. Do what works.

But my general view is complexity is the enemy. You will have only so much bandwidth to manage so many accounts. So it's probably best to keep things simple: keep a minimum of accounts and try to make the bulk of your income-generating investments in one primary investment account.

One final thought for readers regarding IRAs, Roth IRAs and 401(k)s. Don't get me wrong: these standard retirement account types have their advantages. However, recognize that by following this book, you are embracing a highly non-standard approach towards retirement. Depending on your age and how diligently you follow the YMOYL process, you may very well reach your Crossover Point years before you can enjoy penalty-free access to assets sitting in these standard retirement accounts.

Keep this in the front of your mind as you allocate and invest your Capital.

**************************************************
Appendix/Side Thoughts:
1) On the concept of enough: Readers, what is "enough" to you? I've seen estimates that Joe Dominguez reached his personal Crossover Point on a $300,000 investment portfolio. For him, three hundred grand was "enough." And if any of you have ever read Early Retirement Extreme (I've periodically linked to it in my Friday Links posts), that blog's author, Jacob, reached his crossover point on just $150,000.

Jacob's and Joe's ideas of "enough" may seem laughably low to you. But then again, I know people from my former career who don't feel they have "enough" even though they're sitting on nest eggs in the double-digit millions. If anything, this is just proof that the principles of Your Money Or Your Life can be effective across a truly vast range of income and net worth levels. But the principles will only work if you're willing to make them work.

2) The various personal anecdotes in Chapter 9 are worth rereading: Every reader will find something to identify with, or an example to learn from, in each of the anecdotes in the Chapter 9. Everyone has different ways of processing the emotions, risks and personal issues that emerge at each of the various stages of enlightenment with money.

"Rosemary," for example, recognized that she's ultra-conservative with money, so she chose to keep extra Cushion in place to assuage her concerns. "Clair and Mike" are going to have a real problem when their existing Treasury bonds mature--they will face the same reinvestment risk we discussed two weeks ago. "Carl" postponed leaving work until he learned to be more self-sufficient around the home. After all, he didn't want to waste life energy paying others for things he could do himself. "Ted and Martha" created an itemized list of every long-term liability they could think of and inoculated each expense with long term bond investments. "Alan and Tricia" took the most idiosyncratic path of all: they returned to work and then became FI all over again. And so on. There's an unlimited number of ways to walk the path of YMOYL.

3) For further reading on Cushion and Cache: Let me recommend yet another book I found extremely useful (despite its get-rich-quick-sounding title and cheesy-looking cover photo): Buckets of Money: How to Retire in Comfort and Safety by Ray Lucia. This book teaches a surprisingly elegant system of setting out various buckets (or caches, if you will) of capital to meet all of your financial needs. Very much worth a read.

4) Yes-butting and you: Note the quote on page 277 that says Watch out for those "Yes, but..." conversations in your head. Oh, how that warms my heart. I think I can say with total confidence that no one reading this series will allow themselves to get sucked into a yes-but conversation. Not on my watch.

5) Finally, some gratitude: It's vaguely embarrassing that it took me three posts to cover Chapter 9. But there's a lot to discuss here, including plenty of material that should be in this chapter but regrettably isn't. I'm grateful for my regular readers' patience with this series, and even more grateful to see so many new readers visiting these posts here at CK... despite their length. As always, thank you for your attention and interest.

Next week: Becoming a Knowledgeable and Sophisticated Investor: Six Tips






How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

CK Friday Links--Friday July 27, 2012

Here's yet another selection of interesting links from around the internet. As always, I welcome your thoughts and your feedback.

PS: Follow me on Twitter!

*************************
My husband lost more than 100 pounds. It was a lot to take in such a short period of time. (344 Pounds) Bonus post: By far the easiest technique to control portion size when eating out.

Proof of the USA's total dependence on corn. (Business Insider)

Grads: summer's almost over! Tips for furnishing a dorm room on a budget. (Being Frugal)

Just because a person eats out a lot doesn’t make them an expert on how to run a successful restaurant. (Food Woolf)

Recipe Links:
Wow. Just wow. Grilled Shrimp with Chile, Cilantro and Lime. (Dragon's Kitchen)

Laughably cheap, delicious and easy: One Pot Chicken, Corn Peppers and Onions. (Alosha's Kitchen)

What to do with that have an overabundance of zucchini? Make gluten-free Zuccaghetti with Lemon Caper Sauce. (Food and Fire)

Off-Topic Links:
The most revolutionary thing you can do for women right now is to stop celebrating women who choose to work 120 hours a week when they have a new baby. (Penelope Trunk)

Are you game for the 500 Words A Day Challenge? (Procrastinating Writers) Bonus Post: 10 ways to stimulate your creativity.

The post-masculine guide to wealth. (PostMasculine)


Do you have an interesting article or recipe that you'd like to see featured in Casual Kitchen's Food Links? Send me an email!


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

Ask CK: I'm Offended!

I get this comment all the time, in a variety of forms: 

Daniel: I've been a CK reader for a long time. I love your blog, but I was appalled to see you post a link to ______ blog on this week's Friday Links. That post was offensive/stupid/mysogynistic/ill-informed/dehumanizing/ ignorant/wrong.

I hope you reconsider promoting things like that in the future.


I've said it before and I'll say it again: I didn't create Friday Links so we could all sit around a cushy bubble and agree with each other all the time. And I certainly don't want us policing each others' thoughts.

Long-time CK readers know that I make a point of sharing links that I don't agree with in order to foster reasoned debate and discussion. To borrow a favorite quote from John Stuart Mill: "He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that."

Clearly, not every link is going to resonate with every reader. However, if you do find yourself experiencing a strong, visceral reaction to something you read at CK or anywhere else, I urge you to ask yourself "why am I reacting in this way, and where does my strong reaction come from?"

Quite often that's where you'll find the most important insights.


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

YMOYL Chapter 9, Part 2: Here's What To Do With Your Money: Alternatives to Treasury Bonds

New readers: This is an in-depth, chapter by chapter review and analysis of the book Your Money Or Your Life. Join us! You can buy YMOYL here, and you can find the first post in the series here.
**********************

Last week, we explained in ugly detail why we can't rely on Treasury bonds alone for our passive income needs. This week, we'll review a broad range of investment alternatives that will empower you to earn money from your investment capital.

First, however, a friendly warning and a few caveats. Today's post is long (more than 2,500 words) and packed with a lot of information. You're going to need to carve out 15 minutes at a minimum to ingest everything here.

Now for the caveats: Just as Joe Dominguez's advice to rely on Treasury bonds fails in the current era, some (or all) of the advice I give will also fail at various points in the future. Further, most of what you're about to read in this post is my opinion. Just that. And I'm wrong sometimes--heck, I'm wrong more often than I'd care to admit. As an empowered YMOYL reader, it's up to you to weigh the opinions of others, and then make your own investment decisions.

That said, an empowered investor should always be diversified in the broadest sense, so your job is to build a broad mix of income generating investments across every asset class. Thus, in addition to placing a portion of your capital into Treasury bonds, CDs and other low-yield, low-risk investments, you will also make investments across the entire risk spectrum, including:

* Tax-free municipal bonds issued by your state of residence.
* Preferred stocks, which in the current era yield as much as 5-8%.
* Corporate bonds, perhaps in the form of a low fee bond index fund.
* Consumer products stocks (examples: PEP, PG, UL, JNJ, etc.), which can be bought at yields ranging from 2.5-4.5%.
* Conservatively managed utility stocks (such as: ED, PPL, etc.) which can be bought at yields from 4-6%.
* Publicly traded REITs, yielding anywhere from 3-7%.
* Dividend-paying bank stocks based in the USA or Canada, now that our banking sector has stabilized. Yields here can range from 2.5-5%.
* Conservative, dividend-paying industrial stocks (RTN, HON, EMR, CAT, BA, and many more). Depending on their stock prices, yields can be as high as 3-4%.

Chapter 9 offers readers additional income generating investment ideas too, including:

* Mutual funds (which I generally hate because of their high fees and generally mediocre investment performance. Read Common Sense on Mutual Funds by Jack Bogle to wrap your mind around the drawbacks of these investment products).
* Index funds (which have far lower fees than traditional mutual funds, but which are usually not optimized for income generation).
* Lifecycle funds, such as Vanguard's low-fee LifeStrategy funds (I'm unfamiliar with these products, but they look intriguing).

Each of these investment categories has risks. Duh. Your job is to slowly experiment with each to see which meet your needs, which you feel comfortable with, and so on. Eventually, you'll want to own at least something in nearly all of the categories I've listed above as you build your broadly diversified income-generating investment portfolio.

Most importantly, you're going to rely on yourself, not on "experts." And when I say experts, I mean both those who make money selling financial products and those in the media who make money selling opinions on financial products. Finally, you're going to follow YMOYL's dictum about avoiding excessive fees and commissions and keeping your investment costs as low as possible. Do this, and you should be able to generate passive income from your investments that meets (and perhaps exceeds) the 4% hypothetical yield we discussed back in Chapter 8.

Readers just beginning their investing journey may have extremely basic questions at this point. How do you find these investments? Where do you go to buy them? How do I choose a stock? What do I even do? And so on.

There's really just one answer: Stop with all the questions and just get started. Go to Schwab.com, Fidelity.com or TDAmeritrade.com and open up a brokerage account. Get four or five well-regarded investing books (I've assembled an official YMOYL-specific reading list here which will make you better educated about investing than 95% of humanity), read them carefully, and then just start. Begin making some investments. Pick one or two, make a small investment of your capital, and keep reading and keep learning. You will learn and gain context as you go. Your success as an investor will depend on your willingness to learn by doing.

Scared? Intimidated? Afraid you'll make a mistake and lose some money? Irritated that this process seems difficult and that it might take a long time? These are all perfectly normal feelings. But, for goodness' sake, if those feelings stop you from taking action, you've somehow managed to learn nothing from the entire book. Reread Chapters 1 through 8, do all the exercises again--and this time do them for real. You haven't yet wrapped your mind around what it really means to be FI.

Create your personal list of investment criteria
We already know Chapter 9 has some flaws. But, once again, even a flawed chapter can still teach important fundamental principles. And pages 271-272 of Chapter 9--where the book outlines Joe D's personal investment criteria--is yet another exceptional example.

And just as Joe's one-dimensional "buy Treasury bonds" strategy doesn't function well in the modern era, his list of investment criteria has a few flops too. See, for example, criteria #2 (your capital must be absolutely safe) and #6 (your income must not fluctuate), both of which are unrealistic for investors who go beyond Treasury bonds for their income needs.

But the principle of establishing a list of personal investment criteria is incredibly sound. Create your own. Once you've shaped your own list of what specifically you're looking for in an investment, you'll better understand your true goals. You'll better understand your risk tolerance. And best of all, you'll have a checklist to help you filter and select specific investments that meet your needs.

As a reference for readers, here's Laura's and my personal investment criteria:

1) 90% or more of our investments must generate income.
2) Our investments must be well diversified across multiple asset classes (bonds, tax-free munis, stocks, preferred stocks, REITs, funds, cash).
3) Depending on the attractiveness of interest rates, we may invest in CDs or Treasury bonds.
4) Stocks should make up only 40-50% of our investment portfolio to help limit risk.
5) Nearly all of our stocks must pay regular dividends, and we must be diversified across industry sectors.
6) No single stock can be more than 5% of our total assets.
7) No one fund--either a mutual fund or bond fund--can exceed 15% of our assets.
8) We seek to minimize all fees and commissions.
9) We seek to minimize active trading, and seek to minimize short-term selling that triggers taxable gains.
10) We seek to make our investment income tax-efficient, which means emphasizing tax free municipal bonds and tax-favored income from dividend-paying stocks.
11) Around 5% of our investment assets is dedicated specifically to highly speculative investments.

If you're new to investing, you won't be able to make a list this long or with this kind of specificity. Don't worry. You'll shape your own list of criteria over time as you gain more and more experience. Get started, keep learning--and it will happen.

Dividend paying stocks
I'll close this week's post with a few observations about dividend-paying stocks. First and foremost: the best thing about stocks is that they can go down.

Yes, you read that right.

If you've purchased a stock with a safe, sustainable dividend and the stock declines, you now have the opportunity to purchase that same stream of dividend payments at a lower price. All else equal, the yield on a stock gets juicier as the stock price goes down.

In other words, YMOYL readers investing for income should be gloriously happy when the dividend-paying stocks they own go lower.

Here's another way to think about dividend paying stocks. The price of the stock doesn't really matter. If you own it for the dividend payments, and you have a reasonable degree of confidence in the safety of the dividend, what does it matter if the stock goes down or up? All you care about is the dividend, and now that same dividend can be had for less. Thinking about stocks in this way is enormously freeing.

The second best thing about dividend-paying stocks is this: Over time, the company can hike its dividend. An example: Laura and I bought our first shares of Coca-Cola [ticker: KO] back in 1999, right at the beginning of the so-called "lost decade" for stocks. It was a brilliantly-timed decision (uh, sarcasm), and if you were to consider the stock price and nothing else, it's been a mediocre investment at best. But over the 13 years that we've owned KO, the company increased its quarterly dividend from 16c per share to 51c per share. More than triple! Enterprising readers should be able to put two and two together here and see a rather obvious solution for managing inflation.

Let's say it once more, with feeling: All investments have risk. Dividends get cut. Interest rates go down. Stocks correct. And I (and you) don't have the foggiest idea what stock prices or interest rates will do over the next year, the next ten years or the next century. They may go up, down, or all around.

However, there have been precious few periods in modern economic history where so many stocks yielded so much more than "risk-free" government bonds. One such time was the mid-1930s, in the latter years of the Great Depression, when stocks were so universally loathed and reviled as an asset class that it was presumed that they needed to pay juicy dividends to compensate shareholders for their far greater risk.

Roll that over in your mind, and you might arrive at some interesting implications on the outlook for stocks in the coming years.

***************************
Appendix/Side Thoughts:
1) Czarist bonds: Joe D's habit of giving YMOYL students a yellowing Russian Czarist bond is a brilliant metaphor for understanding that nothing is certain. PS: Russia defaulted on its debt again in the late 1990s.

2) Don't confuse yield with return--and don't be unrealistic with your assumptions about returns: I can already anticipate some readers complaining: "Four percent? I don't want a stinking four percent! I want a return of at least 10% a year if not more."

First of all, let's review some terminology. Yield is the income that your investments throw off (remember our formula M x Y = PI?). Your return is the combination of your investment income plus any increase or decrease in the price of the investments you hold. An example: Let's say you own a $50 stock that pays a $2 annual dividend, and during 2012 the stock goes from $50 to $55. Your "yield" on that stock is 4% ($2 divided by $50), but your "return" was 14% ($2 in dividend plus $5 in appreciation divided by $50). Note that you can rely somewhat more heavily on your yield than you can rely on your return, because investments can (and regularly do) decline in value.

Last, a word of warning, and I'll try to phrase it gently: if you are counting on earning "10% if not more" on your investments, you need to grow up. We're not in the 1990s any more. There may be occasional periods in the future where stocks return 10% a year, but those periods are unlikely to be the norm. Never build your investment plans on unrealistically optimistic assumptions.

3) Here's where I make sure my readers are aware of all of the risks of owning stocks:

* Stocks can go down. A lot.
* Dividends can get cut, suspended or eliminated entirely. (They can also be hiked.)
* On occasion, you'll see a stock with dividend yield that looks too good to be true. It probably is. An unusually high dividend yield is often signal of a coming dividend cut.
* Never, ever reach for yield. I'll write more about this subject in the coming weeks.
* Entire sectors of the stock market can fall out of favor--for longer than you think.
* Things can happen that you never even thought of. Both good and bad.
* No one knows the future. Be humble about this, and be prepared to be wrong about your investments.

4) One final thought about stocks: Buying a stock and then getting mad that it doesn't go up right away is an act of supreme narcissism. Please keep in mind that the stock doesn't know you, and it doesn't care about your feelings.

5) Thoughts on the 2008-2009 credit crisis and aftermath: If there's one thing that has scared away (and scarred for life) many people who would otherwise have already started their journey towards freedom from work, it's the credit crisis that set off the 2008-2009 market crash.

A few thoughts: First, for a variety of reasons, credit crises tend to happen every 20 years or so (our last one here in the USA was the Savings and Loan crisis of 1989-1990). In the 2008-2009 crisis, which was a doozy, almost all major US banks (plus lots of other stocks in many other sectors) were forced to reduce or suspend stock dividends. Worse, quite a number of banks that looked like they had seemingly juicy dividends ended up failing and wiping out stockholders completely. (Again: never reach for yield--dividends that look too good to be true, probably are).

But remember: the credit crisis happened already. Now--more than three years after the crisis, and now that our country's financial sector is on extremely firm footing--it's time to pick through the rubble and look for good candidates for income-generating investments. Ironically, at exactly the time when banks are a truly hated sector of the stock market, you can find many well-managed banks (e.g., WFC, USB, JPM, plus dozens of smaller regional bank stocks) paying extremely attractive dividends, with lots of room for dividend increases. And don't forget: you may have as many as 15-20 years of runway until our next credit crisis.

6) Other, Unusual Investments: A few words regarding Chapter 9's What About Other Investments? section on pages 285-287. The authors address two types of "other" investments:

* Direct ownership of rental properties (which requires significant experience and expertise),
* Loaning money to friends and family (two words: no way).

Enter into both of these areas at your peril. A major problem with rental properties is this: a single property will likely make up a vast percent of your assets, which means you'll be undiversified. It may be safer and more profitable to invest in apartment REIT stocks instead.

As for loaning money to friends and family, perhaps one risk reduction strategy here might be to require any possible borrowers to read YMOYL as a pre-condition of receiving a loan.

7) Thoughts on risk tolerance: "Risk tolerance" is one of those finance euphemisms many people toss around without understanding. In almost every instance, people actually do not know their risk tolerance until it's too late.

Here's what's more typical: an investor thinks he knows his risk tolerance, and then has his investments cut in half during a 2008/2009-type stock market correction. Then and only then, he realizes his risk tolerance was way, way lower than he thought it was. This is a classic setup for an overconfident investor who gets blasted out of stocks at market bottoms.

I don't care who you are, how smart you are, how cool you are, or how experienced you think you are: your risk tolerance is lower than you think it is. For most people it takes a big and unexpected investment loss to drive this lesson home. Save yourself the losses and just learn it now.

8) "Experts" don't know either: Finally, if anybody tries to tell you they know what stocks or interest rates will do, they are lying. Remember this the next time you see some stock market pundit pontificating on CNBC, or the next time your read some authoritative-sounding article telling you to buy or sell.


Next Week: YMOYL Chapter 9, Part 3: Capital, Cushion and Cache





How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

CK Friday Links--Friday July 20, 2012

Here's yet another selection of interesting links from around the internet. As always, I welcome your thoughts and your feedback.

PS: Follow me on Twitter!

*************************
If a recipe calls for a box of cake mix, it is not a recipe. (Salty Seattle)

Why you should pay too much for stuff. (Allen Tucker)

How soft drink makers are "gently" fighting NYC's Big Beverage Ban. Readers: I haven't addressed this ban yet here at CK. What's your take on this debate? (USA Today)

Five tips to best protect your garden from drought conditions. (Grow. Cook. Eat.)

Recipe Links:
An unusual and easy Quick Broiled Salsa. (Cafe Johnsonia)

Make your own Homemade Yogurt for half the cost of store-bought stuff. (Budget Bytes)

A proper host should always have frozen margaritas at the ready. Canning Jar Margaritas. (Dad Cooks Dinner)

Off-Topic Links:
Keep your identity small and you'll have more and better ideas. (Paul Graham)

Be a creditor, not a debtor. (Brave New Life)

Is it morally wrong to attempt to become wealthy? Your response may unlock some intriguing limiting beliefs about money. (Steve Pavlina)

19 striking thoughts about finding your purpose. (In Over Your Head)


Do you have an interesting article or recipe that you'd like to see featured in Casual Kitchen's Food Links? Send me an email!


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

Thoughts On High-End Cookware

Long time CK readers can pretty much guess my opinion on paying for expensive, high-end cookware: Very, very few high-end kitchen items are worth a premium price.

And newer cooks, take heed: If you're new to cooking and looking to stock your first kitchen, you should always defer buying any high-end cooking gear. Wait a while.

Why? Because the real risk, especially when you're first starting to cook, is that you won't use the item enough to make it worthwhile. And having a $295 Signature Le Creuset Dutch Oven collecting dust in your cupboard, right next to that $130 Calphalon Egg-Poaching set you'll never use... well, just thinking about wasted purchases like this can suck the fun out of cooking for years.

Not to mention for the combined price of those two items you could have cooked all 25 of Casual Kitchen's Best Laughably Cheap Recipes four times over. And fed 400 people.

And yet it shouldn't be a surprise that department stores and cookware retailers want you to believe that paying double, triple or more for high-end cookware will somehow make your food taste better. Remember: high-priced aspirational products are extremely profitable. Which is why retailers so badly want to sell them to you.

Granted, some expensive kitchen items may end up being worth it. One example from our kitchen: we held off on buying expensive knives for a few years until we were confident we would use them heavily, and until we had developed sufficient knife skills to make a high-end knife purchase a truly worthwhile investment. We saved ourselves money and quite a bit of resentment by waiting until there was no risk that this expensive purchase would go unused.

My favorite way to think about high end cookware is to use tennis racquets as an analogy. If you're a beginner at tennis, you should always start with a less-expensive racquet. Be honest with yourself: you don't even really know yet how serious a player you intend to be. Learn proper form and technique. Get some practice and see how much you like playing. See how good you get--or see how good you don't get. Hey, you might even want to smash that cheaper racquet in frustration at some point!

The bottom line: you can always make a decision later on a more expensive racquet. And even then you still might decide to pass. Heck, I still play with a $45 racquet--and I almost always win against Laura.

So, with cooking, start small and start modest. See if you can borrow or even "inherit" some cookware and tools from others. Go low-end or mid-range with the pots and pans you buy at first (I'm a gigantic fan of sturdy mid-range brands like Revere--my full set of Revere pots and pans is still going strong after more than 20 years). See what recipes you tend to like to make, and how broad and wide your cookware needs really will be. If you stumble onto a recipe you really want to make that requires some unusual cookware item, see if you can borrow it on your first try. And avoid, at all costs, overpriced celebrity-endorsed cookware. Don't pay your own hard-earned cash for extra branding that provides minimal value to you as a consumer.

One final thought. There is nothing more pitiful than the guy at the tennis club who brags about his new $400 racquet when he can't even hit the ball. Don't be the person with thousands of dollars of kitchen equipment who can't really cook.

Readers, what's your take? What do you think about extremely high-priced cookware and appliances?



A variation of this post appeared on A Life Of Spice several months ago.

Related Posts:
Why Spices Are a Complete Rip-Off and What You Can Do About It
A Recession-Proof Guide to Saving Money on Food
How to Enjoy Wine On A Budget
Does Healthy Eating Really Cost Too Much? A Blogger Roundtable
Spending to Save: Frugality and Expensive Food


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

YMOYL Chapter 9, Part 1: The Fatal Problem with Chapter 9

New readers: This is an in-depth, chapter by chapter review and analysis of the book Your Money Or Your Life. Join us! You can buy YMOYL here, and you can find the first post in the series here.
**********************

Your Money or Your Life is a nearly flawless guide for dominating your personal finances. Seriously, all you have to do is read it, complete the exercises, and you will systematically accumulate money.

What YMOYL is not, however, is a flawless guide for dominating investing. And Chapter 9 proves it.

The problem with Chapter 9 dates back to the book's first edition. When Joe Dominguez wrote it, he offered readers a deceivingly simple, one-size-fits-all solution for what to do with our money: invest exclusively in US Treasury bonds.

As we're about to see, this is a solution from another era--when interest rates were far higher--and it cannot be your only solution today. In its day, however, Joe D's idea worked, and it was so clean and simple that he could thoroughly explain it in just one chapter.

Which left the authors in a terrible bind when it came time to revise the book in 2008. It's not like they could shoot down Joe's idea and leave readers hanging with nothing to replace it: Sorry, but rates are too low in the current era to rely solely on Treasury bonds. Joe's idea won't really work any more. Too bad. Good luck transforming your relationship with money!

And so the authors tried to make Chapter 9 into a broader investment resource so readers could go beyond Treasury bonds for their passive income needs. What they actually created, however, is a crappy and superficial chapter that attempts to cram the entire investing industry into thirty-two pages. In other words, what used to be a simple chapter explaining Treasury bonds evolved into a messy chapter explaining everything. Badly.

Look, no book is perfect. And (up until the end of Chapter 8 at least) few books are as life-changing as this one. So, we're going take the good from Chapter 9, and we're going to learn from what it gets wrong.

Why Treasury bonds won't work
Okay. Let's first go over why it's a horrendous challenge today to fund a post FI-life exclusively with Treasury bonds. I'll explain with a quick example:

Let's assume your expenses are $3,000 a month ($36,000 a year) and you're living in an era of 6% Treasury yields. How much capital in total will you need to be FI?

Remember our formula: Money x Yield = Passive Income, or M x Y = PI for short.

Then, plug in the numbers: M x 6% = $36,000 a year. Solve for M, and you arrive at $600,000 in capital needed to fund your post-FI life: $600,000 x 6% = $36,000.

That's dandy, except for the sad fact that we're not alive in an era of 6% Treasury yields. We're alive now, when the 10 year Treasury yields a paltry 1.6%, the 5 year Treasury yields a pitiful 0.62% and the 2 year Treasury yields a pathetic 0.24%. Even the 30 year Treasury, the US government's longest-dated debt instrument, yields a sorry-ass 2.58%.

So how much capital does it take now, in an era of 1.6% Treasury yields? Once again, here's your formula: M x 1.6% = $36,000. Solve for M, and we come up with $2,250,000.

Yes, you read that right: $2.25 million. To generate thirty-six grand.

And of course, the math is worse if you run a higher expense line. What if you had expenses of $50,000 a year? You'd need $3.125 million in capital. At $100,000 in expenses, you'd need $6.25 million. You get the picture.

A simplified way to think about it is this: if interest rates are roughly a quarter of what they were two decades ago, you're gonna need roughly four times the capital to fund the same level of expenses. Therefore, if you use Treasury investments--and nothing else--to fund your post-FI life, you're gonna need far more capital now than you would have needed back in Joe Dominguez's day.

So, what does this all mean? It means you're going to have to figure out a way to meet your needs differently. You will not be able to fund your post FI life with one single, easy investment solution like Treasury bonds. That solution was a historical artifact of Joe Dominguez's time, and it's simply not an attractive option in the modern era with interest rates where they are.

One last thought: if you're jealous of the readers who lucked out and discovered YMOYL during a high interest rate era, think again. Even those investors faced risk, and most of them had no idea it was coming.

What risk did they face? Reinvestment risk.

Remember, bonds eventually mature. Imagine if you were totally lucky, and you managed to buy a bunch of 30 year Treasury bonds back in 1982 when yields were at a scrumptious, all-time high of 11-12%. Well, guess what? Those bonds would be maturing right now in 2012. Which means you'd get your all your principal back, and you'd have to reinvest it now at today's crappy rates. Think about it. Even those investors were exposed to the risks of declining interest rates--they just didn't know it until now.

The bottom line: the idea that there ought to be investments that pay juicy yields yet are free of all risk is a childish fiction. Everything has risk. It's time to grow up, embrace that risk, and find alternatives. That's what we'll discuss next week.

Next Week: YMOYL Chapter 9, Part 2: Here's What To Do With Your Money: Alternatives to Treasury Bonds


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

CK Friday Links--Friday July 13, 2012

Here's yet another selection of interesting links from around the internet. As always, I welcome your thoughts and your feedback.

PS: Follow me on Twitter!

*************************
Is the paleo diet healthy? (Dietriffic)

It’s time to reacquaint ourselves with minimally processed carbs. (A Sweet Life)

Six reasons you can go back to loving butter. (Stonesoup)

Recipe Links:
A brilliant and unusual Pecan Milanesas with Corn and Blueberry Salsa recipe from the author of The New Southern-Latino Table. (Christie's Corner)

Just 60c a serving! Sweet Potato Corn Cakes. (Budget Bytes)

Need a respite from (*shudder*) mayo-based potato salads? Try this Pesto Potato Salad with Green Beans instead. (Marcus Samuelsson, via Eats Well With Others)

Off-Topic Links:
Ten science fiction novels you really should read--and why you should read them. (io9) PS: Totally agreed on Cryptonomicon. Great novel.

The people who have said the worst things to me about being single are the ones in the most dysfunctional relationships. (Role/Reboot)

Do you rely on vanity metrics to feel better about yourself? (Dragos Roua)

What chained elephants can tell us about the power of beliefs. (Rachel Rofe)




Do you have an interesting article or recipe that you'd like to see featured in Casual Kitchen's Food Links? Send me an email!


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

Discovering Spicy Food For the First Time

Readers, a confession: I was born in Syracuse, New York, and I was raised by parents who grew up in Ohio. In other words, I didn't learn about the existence of spicy food until adulthood.

We thought onions were spicy. Black pepper--an incredibly powerful spice--had to be used with great care. There was even a joke back then that says it all about my childhood food environment:

Q: What's the definition of a long and successful marriage?
A: When you've opened your second bottle of Tabasco sauce.


And they were referring to the tiny 2-ounce sized bottle.

And then my lifetime bubble of blandness imploded during a visit to Dallas, Texas. My older sister had just moved there, so I paid her a visit during Thanksgiving weekend. I was maybe 18. She wanted to introduce me to Tex-Mex cuisine, we went to local restaurant, and I saw something on the menu that changed my life forever: a dish called "The 911 Hotplate."

I don't even remember what was in it. It was probably a mixed sampler plate with a burrito, a chile relleno and a taco or something like that. It doesn't matter. All I remember is how my entire mouth was so burned out with all the spice that I literally couldn't taste anything for the next four days.

Which was unfortunate, because this was the night before Thanksgiving dinner. Which meant that the turkey, the stuffing--even the apple pie--all tasted like Styrofoam to me.

To someone born and raised on bland cuisine, it was practically incomprehensible--even vaguely kinky--to learn that people could actually find pleasure in spicy food. More importantly, I felt like a complete pansy when I couldn't take the heat. I was determined to learn to like it.

That mouth-searing Tex-Mex meal had me hooked. And over the next few years, I made a point of sampling hot, spicy food wherever and whenever I could. It took a few years, but I eventually adjusted. Now, in Indian restaurants, I order the vindaloo without fear. I add cayenne pepper, chipotle pepper, and hot curry powder to spice up everything. And by now Laura and I are well past our hundredth bottle of Tabasco.

I'm not sure what that says about our marriage, but I'm pretty sure it means we've both adapted to spicy food.

Readers, what was your first experience with hot, spicy food? Share in the comments!

Related Posts:
Road Eats Secrets: How to Find the Best Local Food When You're On the Road
Shrimp Creole, Paul Prudhomme Style
Curried Corn
On Spice Fade, And the Utter Insanity of Throwing Spices Out After Six Months
The 911 Frittata
Fiery Sausage and Split Pea Soup


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

YMOYL Chapter 8: The Crossover Point

New readers: This is an in-depth, chapter by chapter review and analysis of the book Your Money Or Your Life. Join us! You can buy YMOYL here, and you can find the first post in the series here.
**********************

We've got just two more chapters to go, and just a few transitions left to make in our thinking about money. And the key mental shift readers make in Chapter 8 is to change how we think about savings:

Before FI thinking takes over, a "normal" person might regard savings as earmarked for a splurge in the future--a down payment on a bigger house or a whizbang vacation towards the ends of the earth. (p. 236)

This quote is only partly right. Most "normal" people don't save any money at all, so when they "regard savings" it's only logical that it would be an exercise in pure fantasy.

Your case, however, is different. Now that you're executing the steps of YMOYL, you're consistently saving excess cash every month. It's a regular habit for you.

But even people who have built a habit saving money can slip into being what I call vague savers: people who save money inconsistently, who periodically vaporize their savings on big splurges, or who save in an undirected way without clear and concrete goals. Don't get me wrong: vague saving beats not saving at all, but it's still a wage-slave based approach to handling your wealth. I want readers here to aim higher.

And that's why YMOYL uses a different word for that money you're socking away every month. They call it capital.

Savings are funds put aside from time to time and kept unexpended. Capital, however, is money that makes you more money. Capital is money that keeps working for you, that produces an income as surely as your job produces income. (p. 237)

You're probably already nodding your head at the concept, so let's go over an example: Let's say that after months of patiently applying the YMOYL steps, you amass a savings cache of $20,000. Again, the proverbial "normal person" might see that money as a kickass family trip to New Zealand, or (slightly more responsibly) as a big step towards a down payment on a big new house.

As a financially savvy YMOYL reader, you might also choose either of those options--but only if that choice provided fulfillment and value in proportion to life energy spent. Furthermore, you grasp instinctively that neither a big new house nor an overpriced trip to New Zealand gets you any closer to freedom from work-spend.

However--and this is the important part--if you invested that $20,000 at a hypothetical 4% yield, you'd create $800 a year (or $67 a month) in brand new income. Forever.

In other words, YMOYL readers instinctively view sums of money using this formula:

Money   x   Yield   =   Potential Passive Income

Thus in our example of $20,000, we'd have:

$20,000   x   4%   =   $800 per year, or $67 per month.

One more important insight: when you piss away your capital on some splurge-related expense, you don't just bear the direct cost of the thing you splurged on. You also bear the opportunity cost of forgoing all future income you could have earned on that money. You lose out twice: you lose the twenty grand, and you also lose that yearly $800 in future passive income.

Train yourself to think about money this way. If you can make spending decisions with an eye to the opportunity cost of your capital, it will be only a matter of time before you become wealthy.

Problems and Pitfalls With The Long Term Interest Rate
Now, let's spend a moment addressing how Chapter 8 lays out the concept of "Monthly Investment Income." Remember, in this chapter you're adding an extra element to your Wall Chart: income from your investments. And to start off tracking this number, the authors give readers a shortcut: just take the capital you've currently saved, multiply it by 4%, and put that number on your chart. Next month, add in any new money you've saved, and apply 4% to that number. And so on.

If you've only just begun saving money, feel free to use this shortcut. But please recognize that this 4% is hypothetical. To paraphrase a Wall Street saying: you can't eat a hypothetical yield. At some point--soon, I hope--you'll want to begin making income-generating investments and earning actual income.

If you're a more advanced reader who's already earning investment income in the form of dividends, interest and so on, skip this step and just plot your actual earnings.

One other point. Some readers may consider the "4% shortcut" misleading. After all, there's no real explanation anywhere in the chapter about how to generate this hypothetical 4%--and worse, now that we're in a bizarre low interest rate environment, risk-free investments like bank CDs and long-term government bonds pay way less than 4%.

All true. Frankly, this is a flaw in the book's investment strategy: it simply isn't designed for periods of ultra-low interest rates. Fortunately, this flaw--which we'll discuss in much more depth next chapter--isn't fatal. It's still reasonable to earn a 4%-ish yield (or perhaps even better) with a diversified, conservative portfolio of dividend-paying stocks, preferred stocks, municipal bonds and bond funds. You'll have to take on some risk, but not a terrible amount of risk. More on this next week.

For now, just remember that interest rates fluctuate, and eventually, we will return to a more "normal" interest rate environment. Most importantly, don't let worries about interest rates sidetrack you from the central point of Chapter 8: Think of your swiftly-growing pile of savings as capital, and use it to generate income. This is the key step that will eventually free you from dependency on work.

The Crossover Point
Okay. The final concept of Chapter 8 is the Crossover Point.

You've already wrapped your mind around the strategy of making money from your money. Now, simply let the months go by while you patiently and relentlessly execute the YMOYL process.

What you'll start to see is rapid and accelerating growth of your capital as you steadily add savings each and every month. Start putting that money to work, and you'll begin to see similarly accelerating growth in income from your investments. With a combination of investment compounding and disciplined execution of the steps, your "Income from Investments" line on your Wall Chart will gradually and inexorably rise, until it approaches your "Total Monthly Expenses" line.

This process will unfold over time and, at first, things will move slowly. But you never know what the future may bring. You're highly likely to increase your job-related income. You might also drive your expenses far lower as you seek creative ways to align your spending with your values. Combine both, and this process may move more quickly than you ever imagined.

The Crossover Point provides us with our final definition of Financial Independence. At the crossover point, where monthly investment income crosses above monthly expenses, you will be financially independent in the traditional sense of the term. You will have a safe, steady income for life from a source other than a job. (p. 241)

Do you see what you've been building towards? Can you now visualize your progression towards financial independence as you stay patient and continue to follow the steps?

If I know my readers, I'm betting there are some very bright lightbulbs going on and off in your brains right now as the reality of The Crossover Point sinks in. You don't necessarily have to start laughing and crying at the same time like "Steve" the carpenter (p. 245!), but be sure to take some time to enjoy the insights and implications of this process. You will be working for a finite time. Remember this, and remember how far you've come in your journey to take back your power over money.

*******************
Appendix/Side Thoughts:
1) "I'll never get to the Crossover Point. This is just too depressing to think about." Some readers might feel like they're so far away from the Crossover Point that they dread even getting started. I empathize.

But indulge me for a moment and consider another perspective: You've allowed yourself to become pre-emptively depressed about something that you're too defeatist to try. Reread that sentence and think about its hideous circularity.

Forget what's in the distance, and just start earning some money from your money. Just start. Don't worry that it's a small amount. Don't worry that your "Income from Investments" line is literally a mile below your "Total Monthly Expenses" line. And don't worry that the process might take a long time. That's all fear and ego. Forget all that. Keep it simple, keep doing the YMOYL steps, and keep plotting numbers on your Wall Chart. It all will happen in time. Don't get ahead of yourself.

One final thought: if you're still seriously getting depressed thinking about the Crossover Point, consider the possibility that you either haven't paid close enough attention while reading the book or you haven't sincerely done the exercises. Read the book again--and this time do the exercises. Commit to it. And if I may offer a prediction: you'll be astonished at how much faster the process goes than you currently think it will.

2) On subjective reality and money: This point is related to Side Thought #1. Reality can be surprisingly subjective. If you believe you won't ever save up enough money to become independent from work, you won't. However, if you do believe you'll reach this goal--and if you take steady and concrete steps to accomplish it--you will. Never permit pre-emptive defeat.

3) Scale benefits of passive income: The best part about passive income is its near-frictionless scalability. Consider two FI-ers, one with $10,000 in capital saved and another with $20,000. Both will do exactly the same amount of "work" investing their capital--yet the investor with twenty grand earns double the investment income from her capital.

This scalability exists at nearly every level of personal net worth: it takes about the same amount of effort to manage a diversified portfolio of stocks whether you have a million dollars or tens of millions of dollars. And this concept holds true in the institutional investment world too: oddly enough, it's actually somewhat easier to manage a multi-billion dollar stock portfolio than a stock portfolio in the $10-100 million dollar range. (Extra credit for readers who can reason through why this might be.)

Here's the point: Once you start saving aggressively and putting your money to work for you, you can earn surprisingly meaningful amounts of passive income for very little incremental effort. Take advantage of it.

4) "For those wishing to go all the way to Financial Independence" Note the nuance in this quote, which appears in the middle of page 245. Just because financial independence seems preposterously far into the future doesn't mean you can't use this process to achieve other important goals. You can use YMOYL to get on top of your debts, to find more breathing room between your income and your spending, to rethink your work and your life, and to put your spending and consumption in alignment with your values. And so on. It doesn't all have to be geared toward financial independence alone.

Moreover, as the book says, "financial independence is the by-product of following the steps. You don't need to have financial self-sufficiency as your goal in order to arrive there." (p. 247).

Most importantly, don't throw the book across the room and miss out on all the value in it just because financial independence seems too far off to bother with. That's no different from our acquaintance who threw the book away after some blurb about cutting her own hair set her off.

5) "This doesn't mean you must stop working for money." (p. 251): Yet another nuance: just because you earn enough money from investments to quit work doesn't mean you have to. In fact, you might keep right on working--and enjoy your work far more. After all, you're there by choice.

6) A personal note on re-reading YMOYL: I've mentioned before that when Laura and I first read YMOYL ten years ago, the book had an enormous impact on us. But it's been an even bigger surprise to experience this book's impact on us now that we're reading it a second time.

I wonder if we got a little bit financially overconfident, and allowed some of the principles of this book to "wear off" and slip away over time. Certainly our spending slipped out of alignment with our values over the past few years, and--no coincidence--we've had more disputes and disagreements about money in the past few years than is normal for us.

But this re-reading of YMOYL is helping bring things back into focus. Our spending is now in far better alignment with our values. Laura and I have successfully hashed out quite a few money issues as we've re-read the book together. And we're back to saving money each month, nearly effortlessly--despite the fact that I'm now retired, and Laura's only working part time.

There are a couple of major takeaways here. One big one: YMOYL works over a vast range of income levels. It worked when I was making medium-sized money on Wall Street, and it works just as well now at a fraction of our prior peak income. Another key takeaway, at least for me: it pays to stay humble about maintaining a lifestyle that's consistent with your principles. Things can slip out of alignment more easily than you might think, especially since we're all literally surrounded by a culture of consumerism. It's all too easy to slip back into old, unconscious patterns and habits.

Hmmm. Something tells me we may want to re-read it again--in ten more years.


Next Week: The Fatal Problem with Chapter 9

How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

CK Friday Links--Friday July 6, 2012

Here's yet another selection of interesting links from around the internet. As always, I welcome your thoughts and your feedback.

PS: Follow me on Twitter!

*************************
You've reached your goal weight. Now what? (344 Pounds)

Locavorism is elitist, increases food prices and worsens food insecurity. Strong words from the authors of The Locavore's Dilemma. (Grist)

You can put that in your dishwasher? (Real Simple)

An incredibly useful (and suprisingly non-snarky) Reddit post answering "What is Obamacare and what did it change?" (Reddit)

Recipe Links:
Get ready for summer and fresh corn! Summer Corn Chowder. (Bibberche)

Aloo Matar ... for non-vegetarians. (Alosha's Kitchen)

Wow. Just wow. Savory Strawberry Pizza. (Closet Cooking, via Eats Well With Others)

Off-Topic Links:
The secret of life. (A Country Doctor Writes)

Self-sufficiency. Some people just don't get it. (Brave New Life)

How to talk to human beings. (Coding Horror)

Nine lessons from studying with a monk. (Wake Up World, via Aaron Neilson-Belman)




Do you have an interesting article or recipe that you'd like to see featured in Casual Kitchen's Food Links? Send me an email!


How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!

The Judgment of Paris: The Blind Wine Tasting That Changed the World

Today's post is about a 1976 winetasting competition that made a roomful of French wine judges look like fools.

It used to be an article of faith among wine experts that the world's greatest wine came from one place: France. Back in the 1970s, for example, winegrowing regions like Napa and Sonoma California were thought of as producers of decent jug wines and not much more. And if you were to flip through a typical wine guide back then, you'd see barely any mention of Australia, South Africa, New Zealand or Chile.

Never mind that several leading winemakers in California were already making world-class wine. Nobody knew or cared. The best wines came from France, and that was that. This was the received wisdom of the world's wine authorities.

Until 1976. That's when a minor British wine merchant named Steven Spurrier held a winetasting event that changed everything. Spurrier was looking to publicize a Paris-based wine store he had recently purchased, and he dreamed up a seemingly ridiculous idea: invite a group of well-known French judges to blind taste France's best wines against several relatively unknown wines from California.

Spurrier thought he might be able to show the Paris wine community that some of these up-and-coming California wines could hold their own against the world's best. But of course the California wines would lose. Duh. If anything, the French judges would easily recognize their own wines--and probably score them higher out of pride.

And then the impossible happened. The California wines won. The French judges chose them over their own wines.

Today, we take for granted the idea that California's best wines are as good as any. But back then? The idea was laughable. But even more laughable was the fact that the judges at this tasting--among them some of the foremost tastemakers in French culture--literally could not tell which wines were from where. There's an amusing passage from George Taber's book Judgment of Paris that lays out the scene:

Raymond Oliver, the owner and chef of the Grand Vefour restaurant in Paris, one of the temples of French haute cuisine, swirled a white wine in his glass, held it up to the light to examine the pale straw color, smelled it, and then tasted it. After a pause he said, "Ah, back to France!" I checked my liste of wines twice to be sure, but Oliver had in fact just tasted a 1972 Freemark Abbey Chardonnay from California's Napa Valley.

Soon after, Claude Dubois-Millot of GaultMillau, a publisher of French food and wine books and magazines, tasted another white wine and said with great confidence, "That is definitely California. It has no nose." But the wine was really a 1973 Batard-Montrachet Ramonet-Prudhon, one of Burgundy's finest products.


Things went downhill from there. After the tasting was over and it was hideously apparent that these French wine "experts" had betrayed their own country's finest wines, they did what any self-respecting French person would do. They complained. One of the judges, Odette Kahn, furiously demanded her ballot back--once she learned she'd awarded her highest scores to two California reds.

Later, the entire French wine industry retaliated by banning Steven Spurrier from industry events and wine tours. And several of the judges refused to talk about the event at all--even after years had passed. It was too painful to discuss.

All of which raises a question: why would grown adults behave like this?

Think about it this way: if your ego was entirely invested in the success of your own country's wine, and you saw your precious national wines defeated in front of your eyes--and by your own hand!--you'd probably be capable of embarrassing and immature acts of rationalization too.

And the French wine community continued to rationalize. Later, they argued that the contest unfairly pitted "young" French wines against "less young" California wines. This actually wasn't true--all the wines were from similar vintages.

However, this complaint did raise the entirely valid question of which regions' wines would age better. Which is why Wine Spectator magazine ran an anniversary tasting ten years later with the same wines.

And the California wines won again--by an increased margin of victory.

So what is this story really about? Well, first, it's evidence of how blind-tastings can make even world-renowned wine experts look like dopes. More importantly, it's proof that we as consumers should drink what we like and never let experts tell us what to like.

Finally, it's about how our egos can go to embarrassingly great lengths to protect us from the truth. Here's what the now-infamous Odette Kahn--our wine judge who demanded her ballot back--later wrote in a French wine magazine:

The only lesson to be drawn from this tasting, in my opinion, is that certain winegrowers in California can produce (in small quantity, if my information is correct) wines of good quality, agreeable to taste.... I believe it is interesting for the French wine world to know this, but from this to proclaim (or to fear it to be proclaimed) that the California wines 'beat' our great wines, that is a leap, a very great leap.

This must be what they mean by "backhanded compliment."


For Further Reading/Viewing:
1)
Judgment of Paris: California vs. France and the Historic 1976 Paris Tasting That Revolutionized Wine One of the best books I've ever read about wine, and the definitive history of this event.
2)
Bottle Shock: A 2008 film dramatizing the 1976 tasting.
3) An excellent article from The Guardian
about the tasting and its aftermath.
4)
Wikipedia on Odette Kahn.

One quick postscript for readers: I simply have to share one more scene from Judgment of Paris, where a French customs agent refuses to clear five cases of English wine into France. With the wine sitting on the floor in front of him, Steven Spurrier angrily asks the agent why he won't stamp the importation papers:

"Because English wine does not exist," the customs agent replied. "Here is my list of goods that can be exported from England to France. There is no wine. There is no such thing as English wine, so I cannot clear it through customs. I cannot clear what doesn't exist."





How can I support Casual Kitchen?
If you enjoy reading Casual Kitchen, tell a friend and spread the word! You can also support me by purchasing items from Amazon.com via links on this site, or by linking to me or subscribing to my RSS feed. Finally, you can consider submitting this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to bookmarking sites like del.icio.us, digg or stumbleupon. Thank you for your support!