The ERE Wheaton Scale

[ertyu]

The trick is to not get stuck inside it, because the table itself becomes a form of external motivation and you're isolated from what you actually desire as your own person.

good insight

[unemployable]

https://www.reddit.com/r/fijerk/comment ... r_wheaton/

Note that is a satire sub

[bostonimproper]

The r/financialindependence subreddit is also going through the ERE 21 day makeover right now, inviting similar commentary. My guess is that’s how some folks are discovering the blog/forum right now.

[PhoneticNachos]

Reminds me of Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Theory.

[JenniferW]

We are like level 7, leaving out the public authority part..we're modest but we do offer suggestions/advice to relatives and friends.

[black_son_of_gray]

The table is based on more than a decade of observing what could be called the main road from consumerism to post-consumerism in hundreds of journals and interactions. There are other roads, such as growing up like this already, but these are less common. The table is therefore not normative. You don't have to use this road. It is pretty rare to see someone jumping levels though. This is because it's not only about what you do but also how you think about what you're doing and that kind of rewiring can take many years. Whether you do it from age 4-16 or from age 24 to 36 is no matter. None of this is particularly complicated. It is complex though. As such WLs also contains an increasing development of internal complexity---more things to think about and more ways to think about them. What e.g. WL7 understand by using systems-theory is not how WL5 would think of it when hearing the word "system".

Unless it has changed, I'm seeing (ERE Wheaton table v2, 2021 ed.) that Level 10 is described as "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment", "infinite games".

I have a few interrelated questions/observations.

• Progressing up the ERE Wheaton Levels may move a person from consumerism to post-consumerism, but it doesn't move a person away from capitalism. At least, not for the vast majority of people here--probably the opposite.
• Is capitalism an infinite game? (I'm not asking about "in theory", I'm asking about how it actually manifests in the world right now. Also, I doubt that companies being "going concerns" qualifies their outlooks/orientations as "infinite", but feel free to argue that point.)
• If ERE Wheaton Level 8 focuses on waste and "closing the loops", why isn't having a gigantic wad of cash/investment considered a flaw of the system? Nature abhors a vacuum. But equally, it also abhors excess. Why isn't having too much money considered waste?
• Is having a gigantic wad of cash/investment benign from an "infinite game", "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment" perspective? In particular, I mean to say a giant stack of cash invested* in a corporation engaged in extractive, environmentally degrading, unsustainable, "finite game" behavior? Especially since, by this point in the high ERE Wheaton Levels, money is "irrelevant"?
• In ERE Wheaton Level 10, are the "embodied" philosophy and "virtues" assumed to be of the "infinite game" flavor?
• If it is easily possible to "opt out" of a system that may have or likely does have nasty knock-on effects, why wouldn't someone? Is it "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment" if the answer to that question is largely, "because it's convenient" or "because I benefit"?
• Is it more likely for someone at ERE Wheaton Level 10 to have $1MM+ dollars invested in various broad-market funds or for them to be (nearly?) fully divested? If divested, how much cash do they have/keep? *It doesn't even have to be kept in a bank account (a bank could make loans based on that). It could be just be cash in a safe deposit box.
• People more than 2 ERE Wheaton Levels away from 8-9-10 are likely to find people at 8-9-10 to be absolutely nuts.

*Investment in e.g. stocks, after all, can be equated in some sense to partial ownership.

If these kinds of questions have already been thoroughly discussed, could someone kindly link me to those threads?

[jacob]

Unless it has changed, I'm seeing (ERE Wheaton table v2, 2021 ed.) that Level 10 is described as "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment", "infinite games".

That's still the most recent version. The stages are described a bit in more detail here: https://wiki.earlyretirementextreme.com ... ton_Levels

• Progressing up the ERE Wheaton Levels may move a person from consumerism to post-consumerism, but it doesn't move a person away from capitalism. At least, not for the vast majority of people here--probably the opposite.

Just like having learned to walk doesn't move people away from using their legs. However, progressing up the WLs, money moves from #1 priority to one of several priorities to just an afterthought.

Basically, there comes a point where money becomes like tap water. Now, it might be that you're the rare bird who likes to measure out their tap water, tell other people about how to get water on tap, and blog about it for years and decades ... but I think the majority just start taking [the tap water money] for granted. It's just there when you need it and there's always enough of it.

• Is capitalism an infinite game? (I'm not asking about "in theory", I'm asking about how it actually manifests in the world right now. Also, I doubt that companies being "going concerns" qualifies their outlooks/orientations as "infinite", but feel free to argue that point.)

At its heart capitalism is just the [interobjective] idea that every individual (or their representatives) can own private property AND that they can profit from using it (personally or via others). This idea is by no means trivial!!

This [capitalism] idea is certainly infinite. If you're interested in finance and business, there are any number---an infinite number---of ways to privately own something and figuring out how to profit from it. Modern capitalism is in that sense one of the deepest reality-based games that humans have ever invented.

Zooming in to the level of the individual business [as a going concern], one could argue that the purpose of a business is to solve a problem and that once this problem is solved, the business should go out of business. This sometimes works. I would say that a particular business is semi-infinite or finite-but-large in that regard.

Zooming in to the level of the individual, capitalism is only useful for achieving financial independence. FI is very much a finite game with a goal and a process. Once the FI is achieved, there's really not much left to do. I think this is also why people who are FI tend to stop talking about money and most lose interest in accumulating more. If they do get wealthier, it's not because they're trying but simply because the market goes up.

• If ERE Wheaton Level 8 focuses on waste and "closing the loops", why isn't having a gigantic wad of cash/investment considered a flaw of the system? Nature abhors a vacuum. But equally, it also abhors excess. Why isn't having too much money considered waste?

Sort of depends on the situation. This reminds me of the argument that "billionaires" should pay for everything "because they have so much money". However, billionaires rarely have all that much money. Instead what they have is control over money (and sometimes they don't even really have that---it's in-name-only). Now, running a portfolio of $1M or $1B is not all that different than running a portfolio of $100k or $10k. As such the effort is the same.

(I see it as a feature rather than a bug that those who are good at controlling equity gets to control more of it. I'm an elitist meritocrat who do believe in capitalism.)

I think the only way that the waste argument could be made is if one was running a real-estate "empire" personally managing 30 houses making $30,000 each month but only needing $500/month to live on. Presuming this takes a lot of effort, all that effort would indeed be a waste if it was done for the purpose of making more tap water. That's basically the "one more year"-syndrome writ-large. That's not a problem of capitalism as it is a problem of more wanting more.

• Is having a gigantic wad of cash/investment benign from an "infinite game", "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment" perspective? In particular, I mean to say a giant stack of cash invested* in a corporation engaged in extractive, environmentally degrading, unsustainable, "finite game" behavior? Especially since, by this point in the high ERE Wheaton Levels, money is "irrelevant"?

I would say it's neutral. You can use it for good or evil but you are responsible. (I do wonder if it would be a good idea if shareholders were liable for more than their actual investment. It would certainly change the nature of the game. The fact that shareholders aren't is an arbitrary legal decision.)

• In ERE Wheaton Level 10, are the "embodied" philosophy and "virtues" assumed to be of the "infinite game" flavor?

Never really thought about it. Keep in mind that WL9 and WL10 are only there because "we" realized that there's more to life than reaching WL8. My current perspective is that one's [embodied] philosophy and virtues better make it possible to pursue infinite games.

When I ponder WL9 and WL10 I mainly look outside the forum to see what happened in similar movements. I consider myself a solid 8 by now. I think @AH is closer to 9 than I am. I think Vicki Robin is a 9. As noted in the wiki, 10 is just a place holder "to be figured out".

• If it is easily possible to "opt out" of a system that may have or likely does have nasty knock-on effects, why wouldn't someone? Is it "embodying philosophy, leading by example, virtuous fulfillment" if the answer to that question is largely, "because it's convenient" or "because I benefit"?

In practice it's not that easy. This where the "render unto Caesar's what Caesar is"-argument comes from. The government(s) want their taxes paid in dollars. I don't get to pay taxes in pounds of zucchini, nor will they let me skip payment because "I'm a unique beautiful person" or somesuch. Even "moneyless" people like Mark Boyle only succeeded in pushing out the money problem to those he interacted with.

As far as I can tell, once people cross WL6, their spending goes down and becomes detached from their NW or actual cash flows. (The Tap Water metaphor.)

This is conceivably because I suffer from selection bias and those who decide to go fatFIRE as they get wealthy disappear from the ERE forum. As far as the table is concerned, fatFIRE is stuck somewhere around WL3-5. They don't build bigger WL7 systems... they just buy bigger beach houses and fancier cars.

• Is it more likely for someone at ERE Wheaton Level 10 to have $1MM+ dollars invested in various broad-market funds or for them to be (nearly?) fully divested? If divested, how much cash do they have/keep? *It doesn't even have to be kept in a bank account (a bank could make loans based on that). It could be just be cash in a safe deposit box.

Yeah, so the number of people are WL9 or 10 is very small, so this is all speculation. We're nowhere near having the N(umbers) to talk about likelihoods.

However, I think the main difference between someone at WL9-10 (actually, anyone at WL6+) will be much less focused on $$$ as a framework than someone from WL1-5. After WL6, money is simply one other tool in the toolbox, whereas before it is pretty much the only one. At WL6 is realized that "not everything worth having/doing" can be bought from money. As such, the idea framing the world in terms of what's affordable falls away. It's no longer about how much money you have but how skilled and creative you are. At that point money is only useful to resolve various frictions in the general design [of your own making].

From WL6 onward you also have an abundance of other capitals, like social, technical, ... The focus of WL9 essentially turns to connecting these capitals to other people instead of hoarding them for yourself.

Basically, at WL9 one operates from an extreme level of privilege. One can therefore afford to be magnanimous.

• People more than 2 ERE Wheaton Levels away from 8-9-10 are likely to find people at 8-9-10 to be absolutely nuts.

This [underlying structure] holds at all the levels. It's part of the design.