Pete and Paula talk FI

[lhamo]

Nice recent chat between Pete and Paula Pant here on her podcast:

https://affordanything.com/episode349/

This is probably the best "interview" I have heard anyone do with him. Because as she makes clear, she was aiming for a deeper level discussion since we've all heard the standard soundbites at this point.  Nice to hear what he is up to, how things are going with his son, and some of his deeper thoughts on why he started this site and what he has learned from it.

[stoaX]

Thanks for sharing - I'm listening right now!

[nick663]

Thanks for the reminder.  I saw a post about this a few days ago but forgot to download it.  Downloading now.

[uniwelder]

I also saw it posted elsewhere on the forum and listened. It was nice to hear a bit of self reflection and enjoyed it.

[Dicey]

Thanks for posting this, @lhamo. I'm surfing during a bout of insomnia, so I'd better wait until DH wakes up. Oh, the anticipation!

[2sk22]

I loved this episode. Listening to Pete reminded me why I like his approach to life and became a member of this forum. If I hadn't stumbled across MMM, I would have probably remained at work becoming progressively more unhappy.

[Captain Cactus]

Yes this was a really good one.  In a way it's strange that this forum seems to be thriving so much even though Pete writes so little nowadays. 

As an aside, how much $ do you think the MMM website generates per year now?  I think I read something about it generating something like $400,000/year a few years back... do you think that number is still that high, higher, or has it declined since he's not writing as much?

[lhamo]

IIRC most of his income from the blog comes from ads and affiliate deals, especially the latter.  So as long as those stay current and he gets clickthroughs he probably is still making a decent amount.  The lack of fresh content is a drawback but he has a robust back catalog of material so there is still lots of useful information for people who are just finding the site.

[iris lily]

Thanks for posting this. I listened to part of it yesterday and will listen to the rest of it over the next couple days. I do wonder if she gets into the question of why this Canadian libtard* occupies space in our country.

* hahaha, That is how he refers to himself when they were talking about hate comment he receives

[talltexan]

I listened to the interview. Pete seemed to be speaking a different voice, perhaps because of the space, and it came across well for him.

I wish he'd spent more time talking about his desires for conservation, particularly as he acknowledged backpedaling on the face-punching.

[bmjohnson35]

It sounds like he's simply gotten older and wiser.  He's certainly more mellow than I expected, based on his earlier material on MMM. 

[MrThatsDifferent]

I love that he conducted this drunk.

[eyesonthehorizon]

I'd love for it to become something they reprise sporadically when the mood strikes. This + Mad Fientist both posting new content within a week or two of each other really felt nostalgic.

Likewise, I wish he'd expanded more on his hopes for how his work might change things for the better on a planetary scale, but wonder if he was trying to sidestep the crypto issue, since Paula's started nudging that direction with her investment diversification discussion & ads (yikes) - the truly astronomical numbers on crypto carbon emissions strike me as just the sort of thing Pete would quietly, vehemently detest, & MMM mock but not want to give airtime & controversial clicks to.

_{I hope she picks some new sponsors soon, no amount of squinting obscures the compound-interest scale of ecocide on display in that arena....}

[LD_TAndK]

I think his backpedalling on the facepunchy grating demeanor that made this blog popular is kinda silly. There's loads of other FIRE bloggers with different tones, Pete doesn't need to appeal to everyone.

I find the "no-excuses" "my way or the highway" attitude energizing and I'd argue Pete never would have changed so many lives with a more accepting attitude.

[the_gastropod]

I'd love for it to become something they reprise sporadically when the mood strikes. This + Mad Fientist both posting new content within a week or two of each other really felt nostalgic.

Likewise, I wish he'd expanded more on his hopes for how his work might change things for the better on a planetary scale, but wonder if he was trying to sidestep the crypto issue, since Paula's started nudging that direction with her investment diversification discussion & ads (yikes) - the truly astronomical numbers on crypto carbon emissions strike me as just the sort of thing Pete would quietly, vehemently detest, & MMM mock but not want to give airtime & controversial clicks to.

_{I hope she picks some new sponsors soon, no amount of squinting obscures the compound-interest scale of ecocide on display in that arena....}

I’m glad I wasn’t alone in finding that rather distasteful. On top of that, the company she was advertising for (BlockFI) is under investigation by at least 2 states AG’s for fraud. It strikes me as extremely sleazy.

[MrThatsDifferent]

I think his backpedalling on the facepunchy grating demeanor that made this blog popular is kinda silly. There's loads of other FIRE bloggers with different tones, Pete doesn't need to appeal to everyone.

I find the "no-excuses" "my way or the highway" attitude energizing and I'd argue Pete never would have changed so many lives with a more accepting attitude.

I didn’t see it as backpedaling as much as his own evolution around raising his awareness to others and broadening his message so that he stays true to his own values, while recognizing that he can impact a more diverse group without necessarily being hyper-masculine and aggressive. I appreciate the recognition of his privilege as well. And to be fair, he doesn’t add nearly as much currently as he did before and his old posts are still around and many still have that tougher tone so anyone reading his work will get his original message. I wish we heard more from him and yet understand that he’s said most of what he wanted to in this space and he has far more things going on that he wants to use his energy for (and this makes him buckets of money and he has to do virtually nothing to maintain it, brilliant).

[eyesonthehorizon]

Yeah - if it were someone less intelligent I'd assume maybe she just didn't understand the way crypto works in practice, socially (the sleaze, the pyramid-shape of most of it, the scams & thefts, the way it's aggressively marketed at the poor) or on an energy basis, but she's so attentive to scams elsewhere I've been wondering if she's just hanging around enough people who think it's fine that it's a reality-distortion zone. It seems unlike her, to the extent you can claim to know someone through ... their carefully-produced media.

I think part of Pete's 'backpedaling' probably is just that MMM is not Pete. Pete's always been extremely mild-mannered, doesn't enjoy interpersonal conflict, etc. & always has said so in interviews. Performing a character like MMM would be energy-intensive for anybody, especially if you're a completely different personality yourself, especially as people continue to grow while characters don't. Experience also breeds circumspection & he's had millions of secondhand experiences of every exception to the rules hurled at him (sometimes all-caps, sometimes not) along with his own speedbumps in life for a decade; that could make performing the dogma just that bit less righteous-feeling & fun. What else is there to motivate him, money? (Ha.)

I do hope he doesn't retire the MMM character, though. I long for the reality-checking, first-principles design ethos he provides & I've always come here clutching my facepunch liability waiver like an excited kid on the field trip.

(MrThatsDifferent just beat me to it!)

[GodlessCommie]

Re: crypto and sponsors... Our brains have ability to go selectively blind. Almost no one does shitty things in full realization that they are doing shitty things. By the time you pull the plug, there's whole scaffolding in your mind of "it's actually not THAT bad", "everyone does it", "it's for the greater good" and so on. I'm pretty sure that's what's happening there.

But yeah, f crypto. From it's unique fit for the needs of criminals to the enormous CO2 footprint to the difficulty of regulation (which is bad being sold as good), it's a travesty.

[talltexan]

Regardless of what we conclude about crypto- here, we seem to be at a moment when a lot of eyeballs can be drawn from crypto- to these other brands. Warren Buffet himself acknowledged that it's popular, and didn't sound like he wanted to criticize it at this moment. If you're not yet Warren Buffet, you probably are trying to use "yes, and..." to draw people from momentarily popular things to your way of thinking.

[RWD]

Likewise, I wish he'd expanded more on his hopes for how his work might change things for the better on a planetary scale, but wonder if he was trying to sidestep the crypto issue, since Paula's started nudging that direction with her investment diversification discussion & ads (yikes) - the truly astronomical numbers on crypto carbon emissions strike me as just the sort of thing Pete would quietly, vehemently detest, & MMM mock but not want to give airtime & controversial clicks to.

I'm pretty sure the ads were added afterwards and were not live with the conversation. So Pete wouldn't have been prompted to talk about it.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

I was a turned off by the impromptu design of merch, capped off by 'this is what you do when you don't have a job!' (starting @33:10).  Sheesh, even if the proceeds go to charity, the world does not need more throwaway tee shirts with a dumb quote...  I really hope they don't follow through on that.

The rest of the chat was pretty good, definitely unscripted.  I still find it funny that he calls himself retired, his idea of leisure always sounds like hard work.  I follow people on YouTube and Twitch that play video games for a living that are more retired than Pete.  That's the interesting 'meta' about the modern ways of making a living online, maybe the next generations of people will 'retire' earlier in life but also never really retire at all...  It's tricky, because you can turn almost anything into a profitable enterprise with a little bit of work (e.g. travel blogger and vloggers), but also ruin the enjoyment of it if you're not careful.

[Retire-Canada]

I listened to the whole interview less the ads which I skipped. If I had a do-over I'd skip the whole thing. I didn't find anything particularly new or interesting in their discussion that I cared about. I'm not a huge fan [nor a huge hater] of either of them so just hearing them ramble didn't do anything for me.

[FireLane]

Thanks for posting this! It was a really good interview.

Articles and interviews about the basic principles of FIRE are repetitive and boring to me, not to mention pointless since I already quit my job. But I find it very valuable to hear from Pete and other people who've been FIREd longer than me. I like to know what their lives are like - how they spend their time and what challenges they face. That sort of "advanced FIRE" content is just what I want to hear about, and there's not nearly enough of it.

But yes, that notwithstanding, Paula Pant running ads shilling for crypto is sleazy and unappealing.

[Kris]

I had never heard of Paula Pant. I listened to some of it, and skipped through a lot of it. Something about her rubbed me the wrong way, but I'm not quite sure what it was.

[Extramedium]

I enjoyed this, definitely.  It was interesting to hear her describe how she didn't like him for awhile, and his total acceptance of that.

[Retire-Canada]

I had never heard of Paula Pant. I listened to some of it, and skipped through a lot of it. Something about her rubbed me the wrong way, but I'm not quite sure what it was.

She's got an annoying quality for sure. If the content/interview is excellent I can get past it. If not I can't listen.

[turketron]

I had never heard of Paula Pant. I listened to some of it, and skipped through a lot of it. Something about her rubbed me the wrong way, but I'm not quite sure what it was.

She was a guest on a "How to Money" episode a couple years ago and I had a similar reaction to her at the time. While listening to this interview with MMM I couldn't recall what it was that I didn't like, but I just remembered that it rubbed me the wrong way for some reason. I actually didn't get quite the same impression from her this time around, and thought she was ok, I guess? But maybe that's due to being the interviewer rather than interviewee.

[talltexan]

Paula is a significant upgrade from Dave Ramsey in most dimensions (exception is the crypto-acceptance).

[less4success]

I didn't realize Paula Pant now endorses crypto. That's disappointing... I used to like some of her interviews (e.g. with Mad Fientist).

[2sk22]

I loved this episode. Listening to Pete reminded me why I like his approach to life and became a member of this forum.

Same, I do wish some of his Optimism was still more prevalent around the Boards here. Seems like a lot of doom and gloom last few years compared to the early days; but maybe it's just me.

I liked how he answered his question about not really having any fears, living in the present, etc.

Indeed, I think that the reason that MMM resonates with me is that he is fundamentally an optimist.

Morgan Housel has a whole chapter dedicated to this in his book "The psychology of money". He writes in chapter 17:

Optimism is the best bet for most people because the world tends to get better for most people most of the time. But pessimism holds a special place in our hearts. Pessimism isn't just more common than optimism. It also sounds smarter. It's intellectually captivating and its paid more attention than optimism, which is often viewed as being oblivious to risk.

[talltexan]

I loved this episode. Listening to Pete reminded me why I like his approach to life and became a member of this forum.

Same, I do wish some of his Optimism was still more prevalent around the Boards here. Seems like a lot of doom and gloom last few years compared to the early days; but maybe it's just me.

I liked how he answered his question about not really having any fears, living in the present, etc.

I think 90% of the pessimism around here is in the "off topic" section.

We are building a movement in which people can reduce consumption and be happier for it in order to save the planet. What's the downside, exactly?

[eyesonthehorizon]

I'm pretty sure the ads were added afterwards and were not live with the conversation. So Pete wouldn't have been prompted to talk about it.

She's been doing crypto ads for at least some months... when I came back to her podcast earlier this year (I'd stopped listening to podcasts much when covid meant I stopped commuting) I was really offput by that, it came up first in her discussion of her own assets before the ads cropped up. Her interview episodes are usually the better stuff - advice-giving gets predictable, but she does a good job of actually researching before she talks to someone, journalist training at work. For the same reason that she usually does her homework, I was floored.

I loved this episode. Listening to Pete reminded me why I like his approach to life and became a member of this forum.

Same, I do wish some of his Optimism was still more prevalent around the Boards here. Seems like a lot of doom and gloom last few years compared to the early days; but maybe it's just me.

I liked how he answered his question about not really having any fears, living in the present, etc.

I think 90% of the pessimism around here is in the "off topic" section.

We are building a movement in which people can reduce consumption and be happier for it in order to save the planet. What's the downside, exactly?

All of this. It's really nice to see people promote a framework in which human self-interest converges back again with planetary interest, which should seem like a no-brainer when we evolved to live here. It's when humans are so eager to one-up each other that they accept broad misery as collateral damage that we get to be a massive problem for the planet, funny how that works. I really appreciate his fundamental humanism & sense of abundance.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

I loved this episode. Listening to Pete reminded me why I like his approach to life and became a member of this forum.

Same, I do wish some of his Optimism was still more prevalent around the Boards here. Seems like a lot of doom and gloom last few years compared to the early days; but maybe it's just me.

I liked how he answered his question about not really having any fears, living in the present, etc.

I was quite surprised that his 'Outrageous Optimism' post was his favorite.  All I remember about it was how oxymoronic an 'optimism gun' sounded, but I'll have to go back and refresh myself.  Optimism definitely needs a boost these days and I'm a little surprised he didn't post more about it, it would've been a really great topic to have revisited.

Personally, I'd have thought his most popular posts (e.g. Getting Rich:  From Zero to Hero in One Blog Post) or controversial posts (e.g. Safety is an Expensive Illusion - where he argues biking is something like 20 - 100x safer than driving) would've been his favorites...

[elysianfields]

I'd love for it to become something they reprise sporadically when the mood strikes. This + Mad Fientist both posting new content within a week or two of each other really felt nostalgic.

Likewise, I wish he'd expanded more on his hopes for how his work might change things for the better on a planetary scale, but wonder if he was trying to sidestep the crypto issue, since Paula's started nudging that direction with her investment diversification discussion & ads (yikes) - the truly astronomical numbers on crypto carbon emissions strike me as just the sort of thing Pete would quietly, vehemently detest, & MMM mock but not want to give airtime & controversial clicks to.

_{I hope she picks some new sponsors soon, no amount of squinting obscures the compound-interest scale of ecocide on display in that arena....}

I’ve made it a habit to skip over ads on my podcast, unless my hands are full of something that keeps me from touching my device, so I’m glad I missed these.

Pete has already discussed crypto here: https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2018/01/02/why-bitcoin-is-stupid/.  The comment section is particularly enlightening.

[fuzzy math]

I had never heard of Paula Pant. I listened to some of it, and skipped through a lot of it. Something about her rubbed me the wrong way, but I'm not quite sure what it was.

She's got an annoying quality for sure. If the content/interview is excellent I can get past it. If not I can't listen.

She's a very hard seller of things. Like at the end of this podcast where she had to reference every joke they made, and how good of friends they are because they make jokes. Its almost like a robot impersonating a human. I used to read her blog posts, she did really well flipping real estate but something similarly turned me off about it.

[Kris]

I had never heard of Paula Pant. I listened to some of it, and skipped through a lot of it. Something about her rubbed me the wrong way, but I'm not quite sure what it was.

She's got an annoying quality for sure. If the content/interview is excellent I can get past it. If not I can't listen.

She's a very hard seller of things. Like at the end of this podcast where she had to reference every joke they made, and how good of friends they are because they make jokes. Its almost like a robot impersonating a human. I used to read her blog posts, she did really well flipping real estate but something similarly turned me off about it.

Yeah, that's not a bad observation. That's kind of how she makes me feel. A little unheimlich.

[MrThatsDifferent]

I won’t lie, I hated the sponsor interruptions and it didn’t matter what the content was, I don’t like the flow of the conversation interrupted as I listen. That said, all I could think of was: go you! She’s drunkenly talking with her buddy at a conference, recorded that and is getting multiple sponsorships paying her money. Easiest money ever. I wish I got paid for my chats with friends. Bemoan her, call her a robot or whatever you want to subtly denigrate her, she’s smart to monetize what she’s doing. Will I listen to anything else of hers? Probably not but I’ve given her numbers for this piece of content. Slow clap to her because getting sponsors when there’s so many to podcasts isn’t easy.

[Retire-Canada]

Looking at it from another perspective if she's FAT FI and an extra dollar has no incremental value to her what's the point of taking on shitty sponsors?

[Kris]

I won’t lie, I hated the sponsor interruptions and it didn’t matter what the content was, I don’t like the flow of the conversation interrupted as I listen. That said, all I could think of was: go you! She’s drunkenly talking with her buddy at a conference, recorded that and is getting multiple sponsorships paying her money. Easiest money ever. I wish I got paid for my chats with friends. Bemoan her, call her a robot or whatever you want to subtly denigrate her, she’s smart to monetize what she’s doing. Will I listen to anything else of hers? Probably not but I’ve given her numbers for this piece of content. Slow clap to her because getting sponsors when there’s so many to podcasts isn’t easy.

Sure. There are lots of people who are smart to monetize what they're doing.

[seattlecyclone]

Looking at it from another perspective if she's FAT FI and an extra dollar has no incremental value to her what's the point of taking on shitty sponsors?

Gives you more surplus resources to divert to good causes of your choosing.

[GodlessCommie]

Looking at it from another perspective if she's FAT FI and an extra dollar has no incremental value to her what's the point of taking on shitty sponsors?

Gives you more surplus resources to divert to good causes of your choosing.

See? It's for the greater good!

/s

[eyesonthehorizon]

I remember her appealing (rather emotionally, in fact) to her audience a couple years back for feedback as to whether it was appropriate to take on sponsors at all, & she's said she's engaged in crypto personally, so I think it's less that she's picking slimy sponsorships so much as engaged with a slimy product for whatever reason & therefore the sponsorship wasn't inconsistent with her own views. But I wish she'd reconsider. FI folks are the best-positioned to take a stand against things that harm people + planet with the sole promised upside of "money," & she's shown before she's not too proud to backpedal & admit if she learns she's wrong.

[MrThatsDifferent]

I remember her appealing (rather emotionally, in fact) to her audience a couple years back for feedback as to whether it was appropriate to take on sponsors at all, & she's said she's engaged in crypto personally, so I think it's less that she's picking slimy sponsorships so much as engaged with a slimy product for whatever reason & therefore the sponsorship wasn't inconsistent with her own views. But I wish she'd reconsider. FI folks are the best-positioned to take a stand against things that harm people + planet with the sole promised upside of "money," & she's shown before she's not too proud to backpedal & admit if she learns she's wrong.

Umm, I’d imagine people are able to do their own research and make adult decisions about how to spend their money. Our morality and values need not be there’s. There are thousands of commercials you listen to that don’t compel you buy the product. I personally don’t care what she’s shilling, it’s all noise to me.

[AccidentialMustache]

There's some irony with the forums needs more optimisim right next to crypto sucks and is ruining the world.

[Telecaster]

Umm, I’d imagine people are able to do their own research and make adult decisions about how to spend their money. Our morality and values need not be there’s. There are thousands of commercials you listen to that don’t compel you buy the product. I personally don’t care what she’s shilling, it’s all noise to me.

Understood. But if you use your name, image, and likeness to support a product, there is a reasonable expectation that people think you support that product.  That is why they are paying you, after all. 

Part of the appeal of the FI movement is that you don't have to make deals with the devil.  That's the point of FI.   Paula getting into bed with sleazey crypto companies dilutes the brand.  It is her brand, her choice.  But for sure it looks sleazey.

[MrThatsDifferent]

Umm, I’d imagine people are able to do their own research and make adult decisions about how to spend their money. Our morality and values need not be there’s. There are thousands of commercials you listen to that don’t compel you buy the product. I personally don’t care what she’s shilling, it’s all noise to me.

Understood. But if you use your name, image, and likeness to support a product, there is a reasonable expectation that people think you support that product.  That is why they are paying you, after all. 

Part of the appeal of the FI movement is that you don't have to make deals with the devil.  That's the point of FI.   Paula getting into bed with sleazey crypto companies dilutes the brand.  It is her brand, her choice.  But for sure it looks sleazey.

Sure, as long you keep in mind that’s your judgement of sleazy. Someone else may not judge them as sleazy. Your judgement doesn’t trump theirs. Clearly she doesn’t seem to think they’re sleazy so it’s not violating her values.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Umm, I’d imagine people are able to do their own research and make adult decisions about how to spend their money. Our morality and values need not be there’s. There are thousands of commercials you listen to that don’t compel you buy the product. I personally don’t care what she’s shilling, it’s all noise to me.

Understood. But if you use your name, image, and likeness to support a product, there is a reasonable expectation that people think you support that product.  That is why they are paying you, after all. 

Part of the appeal of the FI movement is that you don't have to make deals with the devil.  That's the point of FI.   Paula getting into bed with sleazey crypto companies dilutes the brand.  It is her brand, her choice.  But for sure it looks sleazey.

Let's not overlook the fact MMM also has credit card offers, SoFi lending offers, and even shilled for Betterment pretty hard at one point.  For a guy that can live on $40k/year, he's clearly FI enough to cut all ties with advertisers and sponsors and cut all conflicts of interest...  I personally love it when someone supports something and is not sponsored (which is why I like Vanguard, they don't have to pay for sponsorship).  So only if Paula said she had no sponsorship then also supported crypto, would I actually be convinced that she supported crypto personally...

[GodlessCommie]

Credit card companies are nowhere near as bad as crypto. I would even argue that if one uses a credit card from a major bank, they have no standing to critique others getting CC referrals.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Credit card companies are nowhere near as bad as crypto. I would even argue that if one uses a credit card from a major bank, they have no standing to critique others getting CC referrals.

I think it's fine for MMM to recommend credit cards in general, and he does disclose his associations (since he could be opening himself up to lawsuits) - I'm just pointing out that the reader can't be sure that bloggers who have financial incentives to push a certain card are doing that because it is the best card offer that they know of.  Pete's CC referrals aren't always the best ones I'm aware of (I do my own research), and he's now outsourced all of it to 'CardRatings.com'.  Just highlighting it as dubious.  If I tell you about the latest card I applied for, it's because I love it, not because I'm expecting a kickback.

[talltexan]

It's so great to see "I've done my own research" used in a context that is totally unrelated to public health or politics!