Overcoming the fear of going into business for yourself

[christiwilsonc]

I have to admit I am a bit scared of opening my own company. I am not as young and healthy as I once was and I am afraid that this will be a complete failure, on the other hand I have worked so hard to get well enough that I can even think about work, let alone my own company. I absolutely love the line of work I am in. I know I will be successful (well, not Bill Gates successful) but successful nonetheless. As long as I don't have unrealistic expectations, I think I will be just fine. This time next year I might just reread all of these post and just have a nice little chuckle. If I wasn't the tiniest bit scared, I wouldn't be being honest with myself. Back to reading, and again, thanks for all your assistance. It's nice to know that there still are people like you who help those who ask, and go beyond one liner vague comments.

This question has been split from another post or thread. This was done in order to address the topic more in depth, make it easier to find via forum searches, as well as prevent the other post/thread from going too far off-topic. Please continue this part of the conversation here. Thanks for understanding our tech Q&A policies.

[kpmedia]

I split the above text from another thread, because I really wanted to address this topic. (And I didn't want to totally derail the other technical topic with what's essentially an off-topic conversation.)

Let me tell you a short story ...


PBS Yesterday ...

I watched a program on PBS yesterday, and it happened completely by accident. I put a DVD into the player, put late dinner on the coffee table -- a bad habit, but I don't do it often -- and had full intention on watching a movie that I had rented over the weekend.

However, as soon as the TV was turned on, I could hear two men discussing the causes of the 2008 banking failures, and decided to listen. For a better part of the next hour, I listened to Bill Moyers discuss the failures of the 1990s-2000s banking industry with former Citigroup Chairman John Reed, and former Senator Byron Dorgan (D) of North Dakota.

Reed said something that I've firmly believed in for many years now, in that companies/corporations are NOT in business to make money. That corrupt ideology is a 1990s invention from Wall Street, and is tied to the idea of "shareholder value" (i.e, valuing stock investors more than customers). When you're in business to provide a product or service, or even to please the customer, then you have a set goal, and there are boundaries. When you're in business simply to make money, anything goes. And that's how this recession started -- large banks did their best to overturn the Glass–Steagall Act (Banking Act of 1933), which had been a government barrier to prevent "anything goes". That 1933 act was there to prevent a repeat of the Great Depression. With it gutted in the 90s, and further defaced in the 2000s, the banking industry shifted from providing quality banking/savings/loans to customers, to making money with whatever sheisty investment scheme it could come up with (i.e., toxic derivates, like the now-infamous credit default swaps). And not just making money, but making money for itself, its shareholders, its executives -- NOT the customers.

Reed discussed how he met and became friends with another banking industry big-wig, and was convinced to go to his operation. From the context of the conversation, I believe he meant his move to CitiGroup (merger of Citi and Travelers), after meeting Sandy Weill, another banking exec that pushed for the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Although Reed went along with the shenanigans, and was himself part of the reason our recession happened, he mentioned his uneasiness with bonuses after his move to Citi. He went from getting already-outrageous $3 million/year bonuses to getting $15 million/year, and nothing with his job had changed. He knew the customer was no longer the focus of their business.

Hearing Reed say the "not in business to make money" really made my day.


The Failed Business ...

A few years ago, I had a business partner (a now-former friend, somebody I'd met back in college) that wanted to finance and start up a website venture. It wasn't on a topic I understood fully, but my part wasn't going to be content creation anyway. I was tasked with the technical aspects (servers, hosting, domains, SEO, etc), as well as the public relations and marketing aspects (site design, branding, advertising, etc). It started out well enough, until I started to realize this guy was an "ideas person" about 6-12 months later. He wanted to get rich essentially sitting on his ass.

When technology didn't cater to his being lazy -- i.e., everything being one-click moron-friendly -- he became rude and vulgar.

He used to sneer at me that "our company only exists to make money" and didn't really care about the quality of information that was being put out there by the websites. He'd go so far as to plagiarize articles and content from other websites, which as a writer myself, I found wholly unacceptable and downright offensive. (I later learned that he made money on the side at an already-overpaid sales job by stealing from the company and selling the products through black market channels; so theft was not a new concept.) Worse yet, some of the swiped articles were narrowminded BS, and the rest of it was outdated and antiquated by the modernized 2000s online era. He couldn't even steal good stuff! And anything he wrote tended to be rambling mind vomit. Any attempts to confront him on this resulted in arguments.

One day, I turned off the server, cancelled the hosting account, and quit replying to emails and phone calls. I'd had enough of his abuse.

After some very vulgar threats, I blocked him from my phone lines and email accounts.

The venture was also not something I wanted my reputation attached to, as I have a vested interest in being online long-term.

And it never made a dime.


The Take-Away ...

I'm of the opinion that people who only want to "make money" are immature children at their core. They lie, cheat, steal, screw people over ... whatever it takes. Anything goes. But they also kill themselves with stress, because most of them are very aware that they're crappy poor excuses for human beings. They worry not about making ends meet, but about not getting sued, arrested, etc, for the unsavory methods used to guarantee their personal wealth. They have what I call "bad fear". Some are borderline sociopaths, with little or no remorse for those they have harmed. They have no core values.

What you have is "good fear". You're worried about how to make it successful, while providing what you've decided is a quality product built on quality methods. You didn't look for the cheapest solution out there, and instead spent time wisely shopping for your tools; quality Windows VPS web hosting, in this case. You're also aware of your limitations, and willing to address them by using outside support; server management, in this case.

- You need to have faith in your methods.

It's the constant doubt and face-value appeal of shady solutions that causes most people to give in to unsavory methods. In the world of web hosting, that means spam, blackhat SEO methods, anti-consumerist business policies/practices, etc.

- You need values, and you have to stick to them.
- It's not always about making money.

The Digital FAQ has been around for a decade now, and started out as a simple handful of pages to share methods of capturing and encoding video. The core value has always been to share information, in the good will and spirit of the Internet, as it existed in the early 1990s when I first went online. The site you see now is actually a few merged sites at this point, and a forum was added.

Over time, it changed from being just a site to being part of a business, providing both digital video and web design/dev/admin services. The site that exists now has advertisers, earns commissions from certain suggest products (ethically!), and has premium services -- but at its core, it still provides free digital media information, because that's our core belief. Even after hearing competitors thank us for the info on our site (information that helped them get into business to even become our competitor!), we won't change our belief simply because of monetary reasons. This very moment, in fact, I see at least two known service competitors asking for advice in our forum. And they'll get it.

It's not always about money. Sometimes it's about the people, and providing what you feel are quality services.

Whether you're a good person with good intentions, or a complete money-grubbing dirtbag, the chances of failure are honestly the same. So put your efforts into what's good for yourself and your business, and not into worries of failure. If failure is the foremost thought on your mind, then that will be the outcome.

If you're talented and well-versed in your business industry, then trust that you know what you're doing.

Leave worrying to the quacks, charlatans and other wanna-be's online.

[NJRoadfan]

On the flip side, a small business has to make a profit in order to pay its bills and run its day to day operations. I used to work for a small business from 1998 to about 2005 or so (I'll expand later on this good/bad experience when time permits). Basically, its anything but easy, here are a few quick pointers.

1. Time: A small business owner's life is going to be taken up quite a bit by their business. Long hours are part of the gig, but some people enjoy being their own boss. Are you that type of person? Its WAY beyond the 40 hour work week, try 60-80 hours depending on the business if not more. Vacations can be tough to take depending on the work too.

2. Expenses: This various by regions, but factor in costs such as insurance (liability and workman's comp). This is particularly important if you plan on hiring employees and/or have a public storefront. Book keeping can be daunting too. Taxes can be a headache.

3. Income: Don't expect a ton of it when you are getting started. That paycheck of a set amount every two weeks doesn't exist anymore. It takes a lot of time and effort to build a reasonably profitable business. Ask any small business owner. I'm reminded of a story a friend told me when he started his car dealership. At one point he didn't have a penny to eat back when starting out, the owner of the diner next door was generous enough to feed him every evening after closing time.

Addressing Common Fears:

Benefits: This was a big one for me. Think about medical/dental/etc. benefits. If you are getting up in age they are an important...and expensive safety net. Its one reason why I continue my day job (even though I'm not old). If you have a spouse that has medical benefits coverage, then its a non-issue. The owner of the business I worked at, relied on his wife's plan because the costs were simply too high otherwise.

Income: It helps to have another member of the household working just in case the business hits a rough patch. Not every company is successful and it can be an important fall back. One key thing to do is regardless PROTECT YOUR ASSETS. Incorporate the business and keep its funds separate from your own personal accounts. If you have any lawyer friends, ask them about the different forms of corporations and the protections they provide.

With any big decision, ask questions and do research. If you know any small business owners, ask them about their personal experiences. This isn't expected to be a complete document, there is a lot more to running a business! Fears also vary by individual, I addressed my two biggest roadblocks to running my own business above, yours may be different.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NJRoadfan

On the flip side, a small business has to make a profit in order to pay its bills and run its day to day operations.

Very true. You need to earn enough profits to provide some liquidity for the business to operate on and grow, as well as reasonable take-home pay for yourself. But there's probably a difference between "making money" and "in business just to make money". The former is fine, while the latter is the source of contention mentioned earlier.

It's also about setting a reasonable living wage, and not pricing yourself to match faux "competition" in the market.

Take something as simple as logo creation, which is essentially custom graphic design. You can offer up $5 at Fiverr.com, and you'll likely get junk in return -- clipart, fonts that came with Windows/Mac, something designed in Paint. (Fiverr.com is a cesspool of mostly spammy garbage.*) Or you can spend $300+ at a place like DesignContest.com or DesignCrowd.com, and maybe receive something decent.

I won't even discuss logo work unless the person has a budget of $100+ to work with.

Professional big-city agencies easily command $1,000+ and some logos have run into millions of dollars due to the research that went into it. BP, as example, spent more than $4 million on their sunflower logo! The London Olympics spent $400k! (#source)

There's a non-stop stream of people asking for $25-50 work, and it's really just not feasible. At $25 each, working 7 days a week, making three logos per day -- unrealistic!!! -- you'd still be below the poverty line on annual income ($27k/year on three daily $25 logos). Some people just don't understand the foolishness of low prices. The same is true of idiot writers who accept $5/10/25/50 for writing articles -- you cannot live on that.

Not everybody is your customer. Price yourself for a target market.


* One amusing/sad thing about Fiverr.com is that a lot of offers are just people who steal your money. Because of how Paypal handles non-tangible services, it's hard to fight. And for only $5, it's not worth the effort. There's a whole stream of complaints on that site of how people just steal $5. Fools and their money are still easily parted, it seems.

[christiwilsonc]

Thank you everyone for you input, it is greatly appreciated. I do have support from family and friends as they believe in me and know what I stand for.They have all said they would help in anyway they could. SIL is CPA, BIL is Graphic artist, have former co-workers who will help with server management etc.

KP, thank you for post. Seems like you know what my core values are, that is sometimes hard to articulate over the internet. I know you have very high standards, it's why I sought you out.

Of course I want to earn money, but my reasons for really starting my own business is to keep my mind active.(I am only 43) It's the personal achievement and fulfillment that is what is driving me. I feel I am very fortunate that I found a way to do what I love and also make money doing it. A lot of people struggle their whole lives not knowing what they love and creating a job to do it. At my last place of employment we had a discussion on if we won the lottery would we still work. I said yes, what else would I do with my day? For me, you can only take so many vacations, especially when you have a minor child.

I have been busy writing my goals and expectations for myself. I am hoping I can "open for business" by May or June.

Again, much appreciated for everyone's input. All points are taken.

Christi

I would write more but the dang "e" button is sticking and others are just not working well. Time to clean the keyboard!

[kpmedia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by christiwilsonc

I would write more but the dang "e" button is sticking and others are just not working well. Time to clean the keyboard!

That never works. Just buy a new one for $20-25.

I like these:

• Micro Innovations: http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listi...&condition=new
• Compaq: http://www.ebay.com/itm/170709486456

[kristoffo]

Excuse my jumping in 1.5 years later. I was led to this discussion via the 'related discussions' listing at the bottom of all discussions. But this is a timeless and universal topic. So I would just like to post my 3 cents...

My younger brother (now deceased via airline accident) was a Harvard student, social misfit and computer geek way back in the 70's. All we hear about is the success stories like Microsoft. But for every Microsoft, there were maybe 10 or 100 costly flops. Even Bill Gates almost went broke and got lucky. My brother signed up for a fledgling computer-related company with a dormitory facility in MA. He ended up staying there for months and never getting paid. However he was able to list the substantial "salary" (which was never received) on future resumes, thereby helping him to get good salaries.

I myself was a back-to-nature type, totally opposed to anything computer-related until the late 1990's. I actually got involved in the internet only because a multilevel-marketing friend was talking about something called "Stockgeneration." This turned out to be the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Run by lowlife Russian mobster types, it also was like a replay of Nazi germany. A forum was started by a member that became the major source of communication. Fanatical followers proclaimed that Stockgeneration would make everybody rich forever. They methodically sought out and denounced any messages by anybody that was less enthusiastic.

But Stockgeneration taught me several things.

1. Even a business with $0 behind it and 0 credibility can acquire $1,000,000 every day for a year.
2. Even though Stockgeneration is now one of the most notorious Ponzi schemes in history--it only caused a few people to lose a few thousand dollars. Because even the worst lunatics still knew that this was not the type of thing in which to put tens of thousands.
3. Meanwhile the damage done to people by the "real" stock market was far, far worse. Precisely because it is supposedly "real." But it is not.
4. Think about it. Why the heck should anybody pay for a stock a price that is 10x to 100x what a company is worth? And yet this is "normal" and "reputable."
5. Think about it. Why the heck should the stock market exist?

Supposedly the stock market speeds up technology and helps to pull developing countries into the modern era. Sometimes temporily it does, like China. But other times it raises their hopes and population and expectations only to dash them on the rocks like Indonesia and Thailand. In addition to direct untold suffering, first of all this causes the currency of those countries to lose 1/2 their value every 10 years or so. I.e., there is no safe way to save money or invest for the average person in those countries. The post-911 regulations have made this even more difficult. This in turn fuels anti-IMF and anti-US sentiment and terrorism.

Michael Milkin the so-called "junk bond king" of the 1990's remains controversial, on a level with Madeoff, but also has his supporters. Milkin is credited with creating huge support for new fields of technology that led to the modern techno-era. And please note, he did this with BONDS--not with stocks. Milkin also proved that bonds can cause a lot of damage and shenanigans. However the capability of bonds to destabilize the planet is much more limited than the capability of stocks.

I used to think that Las Vegas was the epitomy of evil. However I now believe that the stock market should be converted into a Las Vegas type of entity--where a lot of people can go to roll dice and destroy themselves--but not to roll dice with the planet and destroy the planet.

I also learned the following after thinking about Stockgeneration.

1. At first I said to myself, why are those Stockgeneration people so stupid as to be so blatent about ripping people off? All they had to do was to stop making wild promises and Stockgeneration could have continued for decades, albeit with periodic "crashes" like the stock market.
2. However, later it occurred to me, perhaps the Stockgeneration mobsters were not so stupid after all. Why work for decades to build something that lasts so that you can make a piddling few million? When instead you can build up tens of millions by creating a feeding frenzy, then skip town?
3. Originally, the inventors of automobiles were aristocratic types who vied with each other for the highest quality and most long lasting machine. Today, each automobile is an expensive gadget that uses up a lot of valuable materials and becomes total trash after 10 years. Mercedes is one of the few that has a reputation for durability. But Mercedes itself has been bought-and-sold several times. And my point is that the type of reputation that Mercedes has earned over past decades would be impossible to build up today.
4. In summary, "making money" in the modern era does not mean making a better mousetrap or a long lasting shoe. "Making money" means building up a temporary Ponzi-type hysteria of putting money into stocks. Then selling the business and moving on to another. That is how you make billions instead of millions.
5. In the 1970's, "millionaire" was a big word. The Beatles were big news partly because they made $10 million. Today, nobody is anybody in business news unless they are a "billionaire." People like Paris Hilton routinely receive adulation and congratulation from others (and from themselves) for "working hard" to "earn" that money.
6. But how the heck can anybody "earn" a million dollars, let alone a billion dollars? The vast majority of people in this country--let alone in poor country--work very, very hard digging ditches or peddling trishaws and never even get any kind of security for it.
7. Meanwhile, if you are concerned about safe non-GMO food or a sustainable environment, you must spend millions of man-hours and get millions of people to sign petitions and write letters. And who are you up against? Firstly, you are up against corporations that are LEGALLY REQUIRED to 'serve their stockholders' by pumping up the prices of their stocks by whatever means legally allowed, including paying for lobbyists to change the laws. Secondly, you are up against billionaires who can write one single check to create a Mexican standoff against millions of grassroots organizers. Thirdly, as soon as the stock market goes down, you are up against the majority of voters who only understand the fact that they cannot afford to pay the price for gasoline at the pump--and will be clamoring the repeal of all that environmental legislation for which you might have put together over the decades.
8. Fourthly, and most difficult of all, you are up against yourselves. Because in order for organization like Greenpeace to exist, they are certainly not able to say that we should question the very nature of the stock market. Instead, they are forced to pat themselves on the back and pretend that they are making wonderful progress. In spite of the fact that every decade, more species go extinct, we have gone from 4 billion people to 7 billion people who must be sustained by the unsustainable, and the situation becomes every more irreversible.

However, there is slight hope in the fact that, if only people realize this, the stock market is increasingly dependent on corporations like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Ebay and Facebook that have $0 in real value, and for whom everything that they have is easily imitated for pennies on the dollar. All that is needed is for a few people to realize this, and we just might alter the inevitable destuction of this planet.

For example, suppose somebody started something like Google named Poogle--but instead of getting financed by stock market money, simply gave back profits to users who had medical emergencies. To avoid red tape, this would operate something like a Ponzi scheme, in that no promise is made. However instead of being a money-sucking machine like Google, every user can sign up for free. And then simply because of signing up, you become eligible for free emergency assistance. And no assistance is guaranteed. But it is sort of like a free lottery ticket. And instead of one person receiving ten million dollars that is not needed, thousands of people receive thousands of dollars that is needed. Those who win the lottery are not paid directly, but instead we pay to your doctor part of what is needed.

Eventually, everyone might realize, why should I use Google when I can be using Poogle? And, simply by using Poogle, I might receive free emergency funding for medical needs? Instead of receiving absolutely nothing except disrespect from Google--which is only there to make money out of my activity--and send that money into the stock market--where investors play something like a poker game that eventually ends up with a few people getting all the chips.

Instead for example, people's idea of "doing something" is to camp out on Wall Street and pee on the bushes. While doing so, they no doubt exchange Facebook addresses. Meanwhile they are supported by highly skilled hackers called "Anonymous," whose focus is to do things that will get them long prison sentences.

The same people could very easily start their own Facebook for about 2 cents. I went to OccupyWallStreet forums and also to software forums and talked about this. I only managed to attract disdain or comments from lunatics with visionary plans to build spaceships etc.

So right now, I am just starting to build some online businesses which later can utilize my "alternatives to Wall Street" business plans. I believe that as soon as people experience this in operation, it will become far more popular and powerful than the "Occupy Wall Street" movement. However I have zero illusions about getting anybody to understand my ideas until they see them in operation. Explaining to a human being an idea that is not yet "popular" is like explaining democracy to a monkey, no matter how simple or obvious or logical that idea is.

In fact, the more simple and obvious and logical an idea is, the less people are likely to be interested.

Protest the stock market by coming to Wall Street and peeing on the bushes. Hooray! You will have millions of supporters.

Protest the stock market by starting a non-stock-market alternative to Amazon, Google, Facebook and Ebay? Boo! You are automatically presumed to be some kind of certifiable nut case.

And so, with the so-called "intelligent" people having this level of so-called intelligence, what is the hope for this world? Nonetheless I persist and will at least earn financial security myself, if only because everybody else is so relatively clueless.

[kpmedia]

A lot of stock market fat-cats can be summed up with this sentence above:

Quote:

He wanted to get rich essentially sitting on his ass.

That's what they are. They want to amass tons of money doing nothing. What they do (either directly or indirectly) is screw the whole economy, by demanding record-setting profits at the sacrifice of wages, benefits, and the availability of jobs. Long-term, the whole thing is going to collapse. You can't have a business that ALWAYS sells more, yet not pay the people (would be customers!) enough to partake in it. There's a huge problem with income distribution, and it starts with the stock market. Indeed, it's more like Vegas now, and it harms everybody in the process.

Some fields have been entirely gutted, which is why more folks are looking online to make income.

[kristoffo]

Maybe your ex-partner was ahead of his time, haha.

But consider this. In the recent past we had millionaires, today we have billionaires. They are not really more wealthy. After the first $100 million, there is only so much you can buy. And all that money does not really exist. The fact that they control those numbers merely drives down the value of money owned by all the rest of us.

Also consider this. An office of 10 people in 1990 has been replaced by 1 person with a computer today. And does that 1 person make 10 times the money or even 2 times the money? No. Generally that office worker makes the same salary as before and can buy less with it. What has happened to the salaries of the other 9 people? The stock market and inevitably, the person who before had 1 billion and now has 2 billion, take away all the money. And everything about the system totally protects them at everyone else's expense.

Consider this. Today is July 4, 2013. President Obama made a speech about the "brave visionaries who challenged the status quo where kings and queens owned the world." But how is that different from today? How is that different from corporations and billionaires owning the world?

Also consider this. You will constantly hear PhD economists in the news whining that "the RATE of growth has slowed," and warning that this is extremely dangerous. Think about it. A company that made $1 million last year must not only make $1.1 million this year--but the RATE of increase must speed up constantly--or it is the ASSUMPTION of every PhD economists that we are in huge trouble.

Think about it. Last year you sold $1 million dollars in toys or food or whatever. This year you sell $1 million. Every year you sell $1 million. What should be the problem?

The answer is that the value of stocks stops growing, so investors stop bothering to hold them, so there is a huge plummet in the stock market, so housing prices plummet, etc., etc. So then there is huge suffering for everyone. And obviously it is NECESSARY for this to happen every 10-20 years because obviously the whole thing is a Ponzi scheme.

Think about this. Hundreds of years ago, the ancient Hawaiians perfected methods of trapping fish. So every day, they went to their fish traps and ate fish. Then did dances and went surfing. Their economy had only one glitch, no birth control methods. They solved this glitch with a little ritual head-hunting. If this does not appeal to you, then you can replace head-hunting with birth control, and you have the perfect paradise forever.

Think about this. Numerous TED type visionaries are predicting wonderful new sources of energy--or nuclear power as we now have it--will save the world. Meanwhile, not one of these geniuses even seems to recognize that we HAD virtually free unlimited energy for 200 years. It was called oil. The price was about 15 cents per gallon for decades. That was virtually free. Now somehow, these so-called geniuses assume that a new source of almost-free energy will solve our problems. Baloney. It did not work in the past but somehow everyone believes it is going to work next time around. What suckers we all are.

Nonetheless on a personal level, nothing is solved by copping out, living in a teepee and driving a VW a la 1960's hippies.

Inflation is invisible taxation. We are literally required to invest in the stock market or else be left behind with money that is 1/2 its value every 10 years. I have specialized recently in studying low-risk mutual funds that enable anyone to keep up with the stock market while not risking stock market losses. I am not selling anything. This is free information with no kickbacks to me. Click here for the best low-risk mutual funds 2013.

These mutual funds have one weakness, they rely on "insurance derivatives." Therefore I caution people not to invest more than 2/5 to 3/5 in the stock market, even with these funds. The only thing that is relatively safe is individually purchased (!) inflation-protected US Treasury TIPS. (Not TIPS mutual funds.) If you maintain 2/5 of portolio in TIPS, then in the event of a crash, you may lose value but will be relatively more well-off than most people. That is what counts.

I am also working on a system that works the same as those low-risk funds, but without derivatives. If anyone is interested in that, follow my blog at Stocknectar.org.

[kpmedia]

I think the biggest problem of investing in stocks is the initial investment that's required. We just don't have it these days. So if you're out of the system, it's hard to get into it.

Therefore the rest of us have to work even harder to get ahead. And it takes smarts ... and the ability to overcome fear if in business for yourself.

Those that cannot do that are doomed to work 9-5 for slave wages. Or more likely, just part-time for slave wages.

[kristoffo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpmedia

I think the biggest problem of investing in stocks is the initial investment that's required... Those that cannot do that are doomed to work 9-5 for slave wages. Or more likely, just part-time for slave wages.

I think I agree with you exactly KP.

However in America, an additional problem is that we have two different cultures: one for the rich, one for the poor.

Rich people generally have no qualms about creating trust fund babies spoon-fed for life.

Poor and middle class Americans often have the extreme opposite ethos, believing their children are like animals to be "released into the wild" at age 21. Many Americans completely lack the idea that financial security is a multi-generational effort.

Also, during the time that middle-class children spend with their parents, nobody mentions to them the idea of spending only 1/2 your allowance or whatever you earn. Anyone who is spending more than 1/2 what they earn is at the mercy of the latest economic turmoil and is not prepared for retirement or medical needs.

In addition, many children who are under 21 have children themselves. I think everyone who wants a child should have one child. But you really need to be rich to properly take care of two.

If your grandparents had been taught this way, then even if they only had working class incomes, they probably would have left behind so much savings that it would have been a cinch for your parents to live on 1/2 their total salary+investment income. They could probably have afforded 2 children and to leave those children with a similarly comfortable boost to their life savings.

And then as for you? If your grandparents had properly understood economics as just explained--then you would not need to work at all. Nonetheless you would work to continue the sitation of security for your grandchildren. And if many people followed this pattern, then very few people would need government assistance.

Instead, the US government and educational system encourage the exact opposite--a "consumer economy" that considers saving money to be detrimental. Because it is only by getting people to spend money that the current political leaders can take credit for a booming stock market. This of course is exactly what causes the next stock market crash because eventually nobody has anything left to spend. But the boom-and-bust cycle is ultimately desirable for the super-rich. It is the crash cycle that enables them eventually to own everything at pennies on the dollar.

There are ways out of this. For one thing you need to stop thinking like the poor who live only for the next day. Instead start thinking like the Medici who built up immense wealth by thinking about the next generation.

Rent is a huge expense for most people. Living with parents can be a drag but there are other options, such as living in a large camper in the backyard.

In many countries, it is typical for two generations to live in one apartment. And even so, it is hopeless for people to earn enough money to earn a substantial safety net. For farmers, it is also traditional to have at least 2 children if not four--and either to divide the farm between them or to give everything to the eldest son. Small wonder that we have huge seething and desperate populations ending up in numerous capitals such as Jakarta, Cairo and Mexico City.

In America, any kind of job can enable substantial savings, if only you can eliminate rent and automobile payments. It is problematic but it can be done. A young couple or two buddies who both have jobs can live frugally and do well if they do not have children.

In summary, you cannot expect a paradise for yourself but you can expect a paradise for your children simply by planning your life shrewdly and teaching your children to do the same. This includes possibly not having more than one child unless you are financially above average.

Or even more ideally, have no children and instead consider your nephews and nieces to be your shared responsibility. The extra bonus about that is that you can take a pass on the responsibility if they seem to be worthless people, and instead try to help society in general.

Also, there are online brokers that charge only $5 per trade and take deposits as low as $500. There is an ETF mutual fund PHDG that does well most times and actually goes up in value if there is a stock market crash. This kind of opportunity is not available in most countries but it is available in America.

Much of my thinking was inspired by the self-help book, "Get Rich Slowly." The essence of this book is, budgets don't work. What works is, take some part of any money that comes in, put it directly into savings, and consider it to be not yours to spend. Whether this be $1,000 or $100 or $10 or $1 monthly, just start doing it. Then as soon as you have $500, put that money into PHDG. Every time you get another $500 put it in again. Then if you are able to save $10,000 or more, divide it among the best low-risk mutual funds.