Actualization!- Level 7 towards level 8

[AxelHeyst]

Reading through recent comments here I realized I’d been thinking about ‘money is on tap’ wrong for years. I thought the implication was that at WL8 you’re so good at multiple capitals that you can spin up any kind of income generating scheme on short notice if you want without trying very hard. And while that might be true of the skill level implicit at wl8, and might be how a semiERE wl8 operates, that’s not what was meant. What was meant was that all of the activities associated with generating, managing, controlling, etc $$ are so unconsciously competent that to the wl8 individual it just feels like it’s there without effort. (And may appear that way to external observation.) The unconscious competence piece is what I was missing.*

The reason this is powerful is that most people consume a large portion of their cognitive bandwidth dealing either with money or with the consequences of not dealing with money. Achieving unconscious competence unlocks this cognitive bandwidth in ways that ‘just’ FIRE doesn’t because, as bsog pointed out, the FIREd person still has to spend conscious effort and time to deal with it.


*I think unconscious competence at income generation is sort of what I was trying to achieve with my ‘money is purely an incidental yield’ schemes. I now don’t necessarily think that that approach couldn’t work, but I do see that for most people the hit it and quit it traditional approach of accumulate>FIRE is way more slam dunk.

[7Wannabe5]

WL5 - MHC 11 (optimization is the peak of analytical thought)
WL6 - MHC 11.5
WL7 - MHC 12
WL8 - MHC 12.5
WL9 - MHC 13

Yes, I grok the MHC. I have something like an abbreviated form of it clipped to my math tutoring clipboard. I got an A+ in Abstract Algebra, so likely I could touch Level 12 on a good day. What I was weakly attempting to communicate is that I agree with Hanzi's ("The Listening Society") take that other scales such as Emotional Depth should also be considered. IOW, considering it from an overly academic, mathematical perspective is too "dry." Humans are also "juicy." The second painting below is not just more complex; it also conveys more emotional depth.