I've been talking for a little while about the strategy of not putting all you eggs in the same nest (talking about work and occupying a day job). That one must diversify one's sources of income because if your employer get rid of you. Then you will at least have another source of income. And you can walk out with you head high, a slight smile on your face and the assurance that your financial life is not doomed.
I am not the inventor of this principle. Far from it. But I find that so few people practice it. The standard model I see in the world is: a married couple, borrowed to their neck to get the house, two cars, two kids, an education and a dog... the American dream. Both work a day job. Both live from pay check to pay check. And both are exposed dramatically if one of them loose their job.
I'm advocating another way of life. One with no debt. But also one with multiple sources of income. And I think we are still too few living like that. But not for actor Ashton Kutcher.
The guy is not only a famous actor through his role on "That '70 Show" and "Dude, Where's my Car?" But he is also on of the most insightful investor according to David Lee, co-founder of a Silicon Valley investment firm. He invest into Silicon Valley start ups. And he takes his investments seriously. He's in there to make money. Which is good.
So the guy is clever enough to know that a job in the acting industry comes and go. And one must not rely on it. And it gets worst when you age... So he decided to... diversify. And that is exactly what I mean when I talk about the multiple revenue income philosophy. But he is not alone. I've seen it quite a few times with actors and comedians. I know one diversified in real-estate. I know another that bought an entire stores chain. One again started a magazine. And I know a singer that started a baby food company with her husband aside of her singing career.
So what is it that artists understood that others didn't in the remaining industries? They understood that work is precarious and one must see to one's self for one's future income needs. But why is it that artists understood that and the rest of us don't? Is it because they are smarter? I don't think so. Its because of the nature of their industry. It goes by the contracts. So you never know what contract will be next or if there will be a contract at all. So you plan ahead. But we, day jobbers, we are paid by the week. A steady weekly salary. So after a while we tend to assume that the regular pay check will continue to come without interuption indefinitivelly. Until the day we come to work and hit a closed door with a statement pinned on it:"OUT OF BUSINESS".
Never get asleep my friends. If you do have a day job, that's good. It is very rare these days with the state of the economy. But be smart. Think farther than that: live below your mean; be frugal; accelerate you debts payments; get at least two other means of income (without killing yourself at work). Never be dependable of anyone. That is the recepe of true freedom.
Beging for a job, that is not freedom. Sending hundreds of resumes and receiving may be two or three refusal letters, this is not freedom. Being selected (by HR), that is not freedom. That's worst. That's below dignity. And asking permission for two weeks vacation, that is not freedom.
Are you proud of the fact that you don't need your parents' allowance to live anymore? Then why are you proud of depending on your company's weekly allowance?
Get clever. Like Ashton Kutcher.
No comments:
Post a Comment