[edited out]
The problem with life expectancy is that it is just that... an "expectancy". It is very rare cases when you know what your real "limits" are. For example, I could die tomorrow, in ten years, or even in 30-40 years. Heck, maybe there is a little chance for 50 more years (not unheard of in my family).
Yeah, but not all health situation or changes in the health condition are created equally. Some are more obviously life changing (shortening) than others. Of course, there are going to be a decent amount of instances (perhaps even anecdotal) that change the odds, and sure we might not want to lose hope if such a change in circumstance (referring to health) comes upon any of us, so my point is that sometimes there is a decent amount of objective probabilities that are way the fuck out of your control that give a pretty damned solid number that might be shorter than you wished and is hard to beat, even if it is NOT exactly set in stone.
That doesn't help to really change investment behaviour.
Of course, if you are not really sure, then you are not really sure, but you have to kind of attempt to ballpark it, otherwise, you might really NOT enjoy any of your accumulated wealth by expecting to live until 120 or some other ridiculous number and then the actual happening causes you to only live until 52 or 64 or 78 or some other age that ends up being way the hell less than you had anticipated or acted upon.
Sure, the opposite is true, too. You surely don't want to spend all your wealth by the time that you are 52, and then you end up living until 120 or some other age that was much beyond your expectation(s). Sometimes, also, your employment options might become a bit screwed too, depending on how well you planned or prepared, and you might not be wanting to either retrain or even do some kind of work that you deem to be "beneath" you when you are 52, for example.
I mean, if I knew I only got 10 years left. Well, then I got more than enough to cover that with considerable better lifestyle/spending habits than I currently have. Without working. But what If live 30-40 years more? Then I don't have enough, so it is for that scenario that I need to keep making money.
Sure, even with a prior heart attack, you (or anyone else) might still NOT be sure the extent such incident might have substantially and materially changed your expectations.. yet there are some kinds of heart attacks that might give you a pretty damned clear idea about what the change is, even if that changed number is not quite concrete, it still might be clear and convincing evidence that you should not be ignoring to your own peril if you do.
Also, even if you have it all perfectly covered, sometimes shit happens. Like... you know, the tax agency (or an accident) decides there is reason to seize all your banking money and assets.
We make these kinds of choices all of the time, and surely some people are better at them than others. We don't always want to blame people for their own perils, but surely you are likely to know of examples of people who have taken really inadequate preparation measures and then end up kind of in a negative predicament that they had seemed to have largely caused. Maybe not completely, but they might have a lot of culpability in their own perilousness. We might still have some compassion for some of these people, of course, but there might ONLY be so much that we are willing to do in terms of our own chosen charity actions.
Then there's the having some money outside the grid that I was talking in the post in the BSV thread.
Sure. A "bug out bag" that might not end up being used, but not a bad preparation plan. Of course, you are likely on a spectrum of decently prepared peeps if you have a kind of "bug out bag," but sometimes even your "bug out bag" might inadequately prepare you if you were to end up being a dumbass like roach (if we somewhat believe him for what he says that he does) who puts a decently high expectation that PMs such as gold/silver need to be in his "bug out bag", and if we believe him, it really appears that he may have put way the fuck too much preparation in an event that might have a 1% chance of playing out in a way that would have caused his "bug out bag" to be reasonable.
Of course, each of us have to decide what is reasonable for our "bug out bag" and we might not get it right, exactly, either but we just do our best based on what we know and believe.
So the thing is you never know how much money is "enough", even if you are not particularly "greedy". But, even if you already reached that point... there is still a solid reason to keep some (or even most) in an asset like Bitcoin.
If you have led a life in which you constantly have striven towards living within your means, then you likely have pretty decent ideas about which items are luxuries and which items are basic necessities.
So, in that regard, perhaps each of us builds and builds and builds our reserves (and even a cushion), and at some point, we likely realize that we have sufficiently enough and even perhaps a bit of an overkill that is reasonably enough.
Sure, there are people who want more and more and more, and never can get enough; however, that goes back to my point regarding attempting to establish a life long practice of living within reasonable means, so there is considerable awareness of that.
There are people who describe how to get rich and to retire when you are 30 or some other decently low age, and a lot of those techniques have to do with living within your means.. and thus when it comes time to pull the trigger (and become jobless) the passive amount of income that is guaranteed is more than enough to account for the level of expenses, and perhaps even continuing to build, without eating into principle, if the retirement age is so low that there is a large number of years that the nest egg has to end up sustaining itself, even with the various kinds of known unknowns and unknown unknowns that can end up playing out in various future scenarios... and no one, who has retired based on passive income principles, really wants to come out of retirement because they inadequately prepared, unless the unknown unknown ended up being so damned extreme that the "coming out of retirement" becomes completely and reasonably justified (a kind of one in a million situation rather than a 1/100.. anyhow, your "early" retirement should nearly completely prepare for the overwhelming majority of the 1/100 -type situations.).
Yeah, it would help to have a more precise live expectancy figure to be able to plan your financials...
Do you really want to know? Probably it would not be a good thing to actually know, especially if the number ends up being a lot smaller than you expected. In other words, there is some truth to the expression about being careful what you wish for.
but that's not how life works.
true dat.
Maybe there are some pension/insurance funds that you could use (at a cost) that would cover you in case you end living much more than your statistical expectancy... but that's something I have not really looked into, yet.
You can probably do better on your own; however, there are a lot of people who do get into various kinds of annuities that pay out no matter what, and hopefully they end up upholding their end of the bargain... It is similar to pensions and government plans... they likely have decent odds of paying out, but sometimes they might not end up paying out, so good to have back up plans in case some of those plans end up renegging on their part of what you had thought was the deal....
So, yeah, you can add up the various kinds of income that you have that might not really be as clear until you start to draw upon them, and there might also be some lacking in clarity regarding when you are going to decide to draw upon them, and in the end, there may be some situations in which all of the income streams that you are expecting to get (upon old age or disability or whatever) are not really adding up to enough feelings of security regarding income or maybe they are too correlated in terms of their risk, and in that regard, there can be some desires to establish another non-correlated source that is somewhat more guaranteed. and bitcoin might not be that, either, even though bitcoin could still be one of the sources that are NOT correlated but there is a certain amount of cushion that is there, and surely need to have a certain amount of security too in terms of losing access, third party interference attempts and things like that, assuming that you have sufficiently calculated the other going to zero risks and reasonable considerations like that.
Poll
