From: Brian Phillips (deepbluehalo@earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Feb 17 2002 - 11:05:28 MST
"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote
<Now, given the genetic technologies I expect will develop within
this decade, there is a reasonable chance that we will be able
to give everyone the benefits of the Methuselah gene. If so
we will be bumping average longevity from ~75 to ~90 within
this decade, or ~15 years / decade.>>
<If that proves to be the case, then the expected longevity of
everyone on the list under the age of ~65 just became *much*
greater!>
That's certainly the assumption I'm working on.
<Now, the "harsh" reality of this brings up an interesting question.
I've always thought that there should be a fundamental shift
in personal economic planning that takes place when people begin
to realize they are likely to live hundreds of years. I call
this "The no-brainer strategy to becoming wealthy". It requires
taking $100-$1000 and depositing it in a savings account or
mutual fund and never withdrawing any funds from the account
until the annual increase in the account value exceeds what
one reasonably needs to live in the world. It is based on
the idea that it doesn't require sophisticated investment
strategies to become wealthy, it simply requires living long
enough.>
This rather goes without saying.
<It would seem that Extropians/Transhumanists should be the first
to recognize the paradigm shift and adopt this strategy. But
I don't see any evidence that any of these individuals that I
know have done so. So the "interesting question" is "Why
is this the case?">
Querry. How would you know? The sorts of uberlong-term
finance decisons one would be making as a potential methuseleh
are not that different from the ones a rational person makes
anyway.
<Possible explanations I can think of are:
a) We don't really believe lifespan extension of more than 1 yr/yr
is feasible;>
This is a ridiculous assumption..at least till the extension reachs
a point we call "indefinite" then who knows?
<b) We believe the NanoSantas will make all wealth creation strategies
irrelevant;>
I happen to think there will be groups/govs/corps restricting the
spread of bionano, and drextech may take a century to actualize.
In this case ... wealth creation is not especially irrelevant.
<c) We believe the SysOp AI will make all wealth creation strategies
irrelevant;>
I believe in God the Father Maker of Heaven and Earth and in...
<d) We belive the singularity will so totally disrupt things that
all wealth creation strategies are irrelevant.>
This might happen. But one should plan for the event that
poverty is possible post-singularity, and so is wealth...
in the happy event this doesn't happen..well that's just
peachy.
<There are probably some others but I think this may cover
most of the positions.>
You forgot laziness, denial, and lack of focus.
<We could have a long discussion about the synergistic effects
of biomedical technology, computers, Moore's Law, AI, etc.
that make it impossible to disentangle lifespan extension
from NanoSantas from SysOps from singularities, but in
the end the question would remain -- Do you want to bet
your future survivability on the requirement that the
Nanosantas, Sysops or singularities manifest themselves?>
I may be a fool, but not a great fool.
<Does one want to be in a position in 30-50 years of
having an extended lifespan (through in-the-trenches
advances in medical technology) but not have the ability
to live independently and dedicate ones resources to
such things as the development of NanoSantas or SysOps
or Singularities?>
Nope. Which means "due diligence" :)
<To my mind, what may be needed is the establishment of
an "I-Will-One-Day-Be-A-Millionaire Foundation" for people
who adopt and promote this perspective. It is a fundamental
shift from the:>
Why a Foundation? People do this with their portfolios
already, or should. Why does uberlongterm fiscal prudence
need public advocacy?
<Who wants to join the
"I-Will-One-Day-Be-A-Millionaire Foundation?"
and is willing to walk their talk?>
What's up with the advocacy thing?
Basic outlines of a plan. Best to have a mortgage-free
residence, preferably isolated from major population centers,
best Net access tech can affordably supply, with off-the-grid
power and water, and a half-years rations and reprovisioning
ability in the form of a multi-use conservatory. Make sure
the structure is stone, or one of those eco-domes that
lasts forever with no maintainance. (these can be financed
rather inexpensively actually). Passive/active solar etc.
(This is referred to around one's relations as the "vacation
home/cabin I'm going to retire to".). Get something on the beach
somewhere remote if possible.
The core funds should (IMHO) be placed in Swiss anuities,
as this is a (effectively) a legal way to save funds and acrue
interest on them, and not tell Uncle Sam about them without
breaking the US tax code. In 50-100 years you might cash
out...deal with the tax implications then. But no reporting
requirements till then. Rates are not as good as mutuals but
it's in a reserve currency (francs) with metal backing.
3-8% plus no inflation ain't bad.
Obviously nano might make this backing irrelevant but
you hedge your bets. If the swiss go belly up half the world's
f**ked anyway.
I'd just dovetail it with your cryo-funding you know?
Make the annuities' beneficary the panamanian foundation
who owns the house. Make the PF perpetual so the house is
waiting on you when you thaw. Course this sort of arrangement
has to be irrevocable but that's rather the point of uberlong
fiscal prudence yes?
Obviously other sorts of investments might have tax implications
which of course opens up a whole nother can of worms,
dealing with the IRS, etc. which is of course something you'd
discuss with a JD or CPA right? I'm thinking in terms of
keeping it simple, clearly legal, and idiot-proof.
I need to swallow my bile and get a degree in finance! lol.
regards,
Brian
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:39 MST