I haven't read every financial book out there, and don't claim to be all-knowledgeable... but some of the conclusions I've read out there seem contrary to what I've learned -- not alarming, but intriguing. Both sides seem terribly reasonable, depending on how you look at them. Comments on Kiyosaki seemed almost vitriolic in nature. Warren Buffet seems to get good reviews. At times it seems as though you could draw a line in the sand between the "Real Estate Investment Camp" and the "Stock/Money/Mutual Fund Camp." In short... you find a wide range of opinions as you follow threads discussing the teachings of Richard G. Allen all the way to Zig Ziglar. Everyone has their own spin on things :-)
Here's the core matter of this post -- it seems reasonable to judge a method by the results it produces -- irregardless of personal penchants. If successful financial planning is the goal... who in this group can claim success while attempting it? Who among this group has attained 'financial independence' (defined here as self- sufficiency... enough cash/net worth at present to satisfy all debts, and perpetuate the current standard of living without need of full- time employment)? Numerical amounts don't apply here... a man who lives on modest means may require a modest retirement income to remain financially independent.
I ask for two reasons:
1) I like to back up success theories with successful results.
2) Time is very much on my side at this point -- course corrections can be easily made.
"There is wishful thinking in Hell as well as on Earth." - C. S. Lewis