If you invest with an aim to "Shake Leg" one day, you will never become a Millionaire.

One of the interesting facet of my work as a trainer is that my work is, at best loosely, coupled with the Dr Wealth Marketing team. This means that I can only at best influence how that team markets my course. Consequently, I do not have the power to dictate what the marketing team does.  if you think about it, this makes a lot of sense given that I know very little about marketing to other people and the Dr Wealth team are pros at what they do.

Naturally, member of the Marketing team read this blog to determine how to pitch their message.

Just the other day, I tried to convince the team that by no means should the words "Shake Leg" appear in the marketing materials promoting my course. Objectively, I suppose "Shake Leg" is a powerful word that is attractive to the team because it is a bastardization of the Hokkien Words "Kio Kar" and it creates this image of not having a care in this world. Using it right can potentially raise the bottom-line.

For me, I actually think that it is quite crass. As my course depends on students who are motivated to get their hands dirty to analyse and read about investments, I can't really count on folks who invest simply for the aim of "shaking leg".

Putting that aside, I do not think that investing in dividends with the aim to shake leg meshes with my brand identity because if I am financially independent enough to "Shake leg", then it does not take a genius to ask why the fuck am I conducting investment courses in the first place ?

There are more rational ways to show that if you invest with the aim to "Shake Leg",  you would not achieve very much more in your lifetime.

If divide the Singaporean household expenses in 2018 by the number of headcount in each household, you will get a number between $1,500 to $1,600 per month. At $1,600 per month, expect to spend $19,200 a year.

For the folks who attended my class last week, we constructed a portfolio what yielded a forward yield of approximately 7.6% per annum unleveraged prior to injecting assets that lowered it's volatility.

So to generate $19,200 a year, you only need $252,631 to cover your basic expenses.

The gap between $252,631 and your first $1,000,000 represents one of the hidden ugly secrets of the FIRE movement that no blogger really likes to talk about. Between $252,631 and $1,000,000, even the best amongst us experience a significant drop in motivation to keep plugging it in the job market, which has become quite toxic of late.

One million dollars is a just a number. You don't really need a million to have your dividends pay for your basic meal and transport expenses, that kind of freedom is already quite sweet and you can FIRE your boss once you get used to living within your passive income.

Another words, you can "shake leg" for amounts way below that of a millionaire.

There are larger societal issues at hand when you design such a powerful financial solution for other people.

• Will a BBFA who can cover all his personal expenses have the motivation to start a family ? 
• Will a successful DINK couple bother having kids given that they can travel four times a year on their passive incomes ?

For me, I just want to use my FI to make a serious dent in the universe and find ways to disrupt this training industry. What truly sparks joy for me is seeing folks confident enough to invest on their own so they can eschew insurance products with a large investment component with subsequent losses in commissions for sales professionals.

Finding ways to motivate people post-FI is, unfortunately, not in my current pay grade.

So if your sole aim of dividends investing is to pay for a monthly VPN subscription  and Porn Hub membership, much power to you. I can only solve the financial component of your life.

Meaning is something you need to figure out for yourself.