By Dr. David Graham, Guest Writer
I think The White Coat Investor should start managing money, even though all paths in the investment world eventually lead to AUM fees. As a WCI reader, I assume you know something about the business models for managing money; if you need some background, read how to find a good financial advisor.
Considering that WCI stands for the best financial treatment of physicians and other high-income professionals, is an AUM fee inevitable in case Dr. Jim Dahle starts offering financial advice to his readers? Or is there a better way to manage that?
Just to be clear, this is just a thought experiment. As far as I know, Jim has no plans to start providing financial advice or investment services. But let's continue with this experiment and play out the pros and cons of him charging an AUM fee for financial services.
WCI Objections to AUM Fees
Some of you will immediately react to the idea that WCI might charge an AUM, aka Assets Under Management, where an advisor will charge you a certain percentage of your portfolio (perhaps 1%). Despite what Jim has said, the AUM is inevitable. He objected to AUM fees in his 2022 piece on What Is a Financial Advisor.
He writes;
“The other three methods of paying an advisor are fee-only methods. If commissions are my least favorite way to pay an advisor, an AUM fee is my second-least favorite . . . While this is good in that it incentivizes the advisor to grow your assets, it's bad in that it incentivizes the advisor to recommend against anything that might reduce the size of your nest egg under the advisor's management . . . An advisor paid on AUM tends to become an asset gatherer. They're not paid to perform; they're paid to gather.”
Consider the criticism that AUM advisors are asset gatherers. Wait, why can’t you do AUM when you get paid to perform rather than paid to gather if performance means doing a better job than the “white glove” specialist firms charging 1%? For W-2 physicians who don’t want to mess with their brokerage accounts and 401(k) (which some white gloves won’t even touch), I bet Jim can give better advice that reduces the perverse incentives of AUM fees. Understand that 1099 folks are more complicated and might be best served by a specialist.
Next, he writes:
“An AUM fee is a perfectly acceptable way to pay for financial advice. It might even be the most common method of paying for advice among real, fee-only advisors. The AUM fee dilemma comes in when you start becoming more wealthy. The industry average AUM fee is around 1% per year. If you have a $100,000 portfolio, that works out to be $1,000 per year. I told you that a fair price for financial advice is a four-figure amount per year—$1,000-$10,000. Obviously, $1,000 is a screaming deal. However, what about when you have a $10 million portfolio? Now that 1% AUM fee is $100,000 per year. That's a massive rip-off.”
We can all agree that the logic is impeccable.
First of all, Jim wouldn’t have to charge AUM if he didn’t want to set up this (hypothetical) business. He could charge a flat fee and, as he likes to say, give you fair advice at a fair price. Or, like I’m arguing, he could charge AUM and put a cap on those fees. For someone in accumulation, they need help getting their plan set up and then will have life happen occasionally. Should the cap be $4,000 (plus a 4% yearly increase) in accumulation with access to everything WCI offers? Investing plus the full educational library. What is the right cap for AUM in accumulation? What is the standard for advice when you can get it set on automatic and let time work in your favor?
Who knows; let the market set the price. The cap on AUM fees can cover services and not be a rip-off. You can focus on quality if you do AUM. You can actually have real people help with advice who have your best interest at heart. See the Vision and Mission below.
We know that the WCI is not a charitable organization. Clearly, and with perfectly adequate disclosure, WCI currently makes money via advertising and other mechanisms. Charging AUM fees would not be “selling out.” It is providing a service between two consenting individuals that brings benefits to both. That’s what providing value in business means.
Finally, Jim writes that “if your advisor is not willing to bring those fees down significantly as your assets grow, you need to find another advisor that will.” WCI can do that while still charging AUM and without giving sub-standard advice.
The Vision and Mission of WCI
WCI discloses financial and other conflicts of interest. Jim's company has a clear Vision and Mission. So, how well do AUM fees fit into that Vision and Mission?
Vision of The White Coat Investor
The vision is to “serve as the most trusted, authoritative, and useful resource.” This applies to both financial information and services for the high-income earner. I see AUM as a service to many white coat investors; as we all know, there are many folks who, even though they know they could do so on their own, choose to use a service to invest. With adequate financial and other disclosures, I don’t see an AUM as contrary to the vision of WCI. It is a service Jim can provide to physician investors. I think WCI would disclose conflicts of interest and provide value at a better price.
Mission of The White Coat Investor
The mission may be a bit trickier to make work. In part, it says “connecting white coat investors with best-in-class financial resources.” This is currently done via resources such as the Best Financial Advisors for Physicians page, which provides links to advisors who ‘’give good advice at a fair price.” But, Jim also notes that “I have yet to find a perfect advisor, and deciding who can and cannot be listed here is one of the most difficult things I do on this website.”
What if WCI connected physicians with an AUM service better than what is currently available? It might be a lower AUM or higher quality service. Instead of recommending good advice at a fair price, what about giving better advice at a better price? AUM leaves plenty of room for the advisor to make money. That’s why it is so popular. WCI can help physicians and grow its multiples.
I think WCI can stick with its mission of connecting white coat investors by being the best-in-class financial resource.
The drop in advertising revenue as WCI opens a service that competes directly with its advertisers won’t be significant because there is room for specialists. When you can provide more value than WCI, you are welcome to advertise because WCI would want the best for complicated scenarios. A solid business plan can predict the growth of AUM and determine how long (months, maybe years) it would take to grow an excellent service to white coat investor readers that will be financially renumerating and one that is done entirely above board and consistent with the vision and mission.
Why WCI Is the Perfect Financial Advisor
This is why WCI is the perfect financial advisor.
#1 A Fiduciary Duty
While fiduciary is nearly a meaningless term due to regulatory morass (it means that the person advising you must be acting in your best interests and not their own), it is a necessary starting place. I’m sure WCI will sign a fiduciary pledge without hesitation. Don’t work with someone that won’t.
#2 An Up-to-Date Academic Understanding of the Field
Table stakes for physicians. We understand evidence-based medicine.
#3 A Meaningful Designation
I took and passed the CFP (Certified Financial Planner) test in three months. It is about as hard as any one organ system you learned in med school. Education is necessary, and the CFP is, unfortunately, the best (basic) “degree” one can earn.
#4 A Clientele Just Like Me
A service by doctors for doctors. Sounds pretty good to me!
#5 A Reasonable Investing Strategy
Very reasonable!
#6 Unbiased
As we all know, there is no such thing as an unbiased advisor. Disclose and minimize. All advisors have conflicts of interest.
#7 Fairly Priced
This is interesting! Jim gives three reasons why he is not a fan of AUM. First, the advisor wants to keep your assets to manage, so they may not suggest appropriate strategies (such as paying off debt) as it reduces the assets they manage. In all my wisdom, I don’t see a way around this bias.
Next, you need to have assets for them to manage. High incomes without assets may be better served by a fixed or flat fee type model. If that is best practice, it can be done. You can do AUM and still have a flat fee option.
Finally, uncapped AUM fees become outrageous the more money you have. The solution is tiers and a cap. While a flat annual fee or a reasonable hourly rate is best, it doesn’t pay the bills. AUM pays the bills. And it can ensure that the advice is right and that the investments are evidence-based.
#8 Tied in with Other Services
Unless you have the money for a family-office-type arrangement, this is a bit of a pipe dream to me.
Physicians Helping Physicians
The strength of WCI is that it is physicians helping physicians. AUM is a decent model for the approximately two-thirds of physicians who would rather pay someone to mow their lawn and manage their money. These folks know they could manage their money if they really wanted to, but they've decided it is worth the fees to have someone else do it. You know you don’t want just anybody doing it, but there is trust in the WCI brand. It's physicians helping physicians, and it's high-income professionals sharing their experiences and getting the right services at the right price.
Many physicians are not well served by financial planners. They need help, and, for the right price, WCI can help them. Sure, if the portfolios are complicated, then a 1% specialist fee seems pretty good. That’s why there is a section of advertising from financial planners who help a specific group of high-income professionals. Specialists: we get that.
Moreover, I have met plenty of physicians who want to get their CFP or who want to educate their fellow physicians about money. It seems that putting together a cadre of physicians (supported by expert non-physicians) is a business model with legs. This is a win-win-win. The physician client wins, the physician advisor wins, and WCI wins. Isn’t this about education? Who knows how to learn and teach better than physicians?
Conclusion – Should the White Coat Investor Start an AUM Advisory Service?
A wise man once said that by the time you understand the different models that financial advisors use, you probably can manage the money yourself. While that is true, many docs don’t want to manage their money. They can go to a robo advisor or VTSAX and chill, or they can trust The White Coat Investor like we trust the writing, podcasting, conferences, and other forms of educational content you find here. You know it is better than all the other alternatives, at least most of the time. WCI says the advertisers are the good guys; why can’t WCI be the good guy in AUM?
If you don’t want to manage your money—and most doctors don’t—why not support the mission of The White Coat Investor to educate high-income professionals and give them a fair shake at Wall Street? WCI is making a difference, and financially independent physicians provide better patient care, set boundaries with administration, and have space to improve how healthcare gets delivered. Why can't it do the same with financial planning?
If you want to hire somebody who actually does this for a living, our list of recommended financial advisors can help you design a portfolio to reach your investing goals! They offer good advice at a fair price.
What do you think? Should WCI start managing money via AUM? Would you trust WCI as much as you do now if Jim was more closely associated with AUM? Or is this really something WCI should avoid? Comment below!
[Editor's Note: David Graham is an MD who retired from clinical medicine at the age of 48. He completed a Certified Financial Planner certificate, blogs at FiPhysician.com, and offers advice-only retirement planning. This article was submitted and approved according to our Guest Post Policy. We have no financial relationship.]
Hey- I don’t think David has completed a CFP certificate. On his website, he lists that he passed the exam. However, to get certified as a CFP, you need to have a certain number of hours in practice. I think David may be still working on those, as if you search for him on the CFP website, he doesn’t appear in the results. Hope this is helpful.
Thanks for your comment. I met the work experience requirements in 2021. I didn’t write them a $655 check required to use the CFP marks because an MD is a terminal degree, IMHO. I did not plan to write MD, CFP(r) after my name.
Funny, the last time I took my “10-year” medical board recertification exam, the year after I passed, they started charging yearly maintenance of certification fees. I chose not to participate. Seems as if many physicians are discontent with the recertification process, and there are allegations of financial misadventures by some of those “non-profit” boards. The CFP mark is neither a degree nor designation but rather a certification from a “non-profit” organization and suffers from similar issues as the medical specialty boards.
Why not do it donation-based? There was a yoga studio in my last town that was donation based and did fine. Offer services for free and give a suggested (but not required) donation. I believe Dr. Dahle has said that, in financial advice, you get what you don’t pay for. So…. Don’t pay for it unless you decide it’s good/worthwhile. I am considering such a thing for my own retirement.
WCI with a Not-for-Profit financial advisory unit that works on a fixed, hourly fee?
That is something that would have credibility with me.
The post is well-written and organized, but a bit goofy.
As an advisor, WCI would get bored and annoyed if he had to deal with the drama of individual clients.
Thanks Bev! I actually enjoy having my blog described as goofy. Or at least I can live with it.
But of course, WCI wouldn’t be an actual advisor. He’d just own and operate it and have other people be the advisors! Thanks for commenting!
Thanks for a provocative post. I actually think an AUM with a cap is a reasonably fair model (especially since you could make the cap as low as appropriate) but the other problem with AUM’s is getting them to cover accounts or assets (e.g. many retirement accounts but also insider company stock, physical art, most real estate, etc.) that the advisor can’t control or have under their asset umbrella and those can be very substantial while the advisor needs to give advice that takes into account their existence and return characteristics.
But I think the real unmet need for the knowledgeable do-it-yourself investor on WCI or Bogleheads is the fear of your spouse succumbing to some predatory financial salesperson after you die. I wouldn’t mind my wife remarrying or going wild with dating after I’m gone but I’d hate to see her lose the portfolio we’ve built for her and our kids to a series of bad financial actors.
Thanks, your fear is not uncommon. For folks with funds at Vanguard, I most commonly suggest that the widow consider Vanguard Personal Advisors. Otherwise, it is a reason to consider a White Glove 1% AUM fiduciary service.
I have advised doctors, dentists and other professionals, like attorneys and accountants, as well as small to mid size business owners for over 40 years. As an independent RIA, regulated by the SEC, we offer advice on an AUM basis but do negotiate fees, especially above $2,000,000. A $5,000,000 client might be at a flat 0.40% annually. Included in this fee is financial and estate planning oversight and coordination, tax planning and CPA interfacing, insurance reviews and advice, and long term care planning, including social security and Medicare assistance. Every situation is different and family issues can add great complexity. Many illiquid alternatives in private real estate, private credit and private equity can only be accessed via an independent RIA. Wealth management is not just asset management.
Joe,
Wow, you sound competent. Would you do me a favor? Could you reply to a comment down a ways? It is Afan | May 26, 2023 at 5:25 pm MST
Thanks in advance!
I think there are 2 separate issues:
1. the Financial Advisor with AUM concept in isolation vs
2. The WCI place in our medical financial culture.
1. I have followed WCI since almost its beginnings. Jim has taught me countless strategies and I’ve implemented them over the years. I retired from EM 4 years ago at the age of 50 and prior to that had 5+ years of having the freedom of scheduling and working with great flexibility. WCI played no small part in that. I TRUST Jim and his advice. Even using the dreaded AUM model, as long as it was capped at Jim’s 4-figure max for financial advice, I would VERY SERIOUSLY consider signing up. But……
2. WCI has always been near unimpeachable because of Jim’s dedication to maintaining impartiality and abhorring conflict of interest. Even with advertising on the site he is extremely transparent and often times even describes his thoughts on potential conflicts of interest with any sponsors etc. As a result, one of the MAIN hallmarks of WCI is the principle that it is a source of advice and education that is not easily swayed or corrupted by taking financial advantage of its audience. It is ingrained in the minds of its faithful as a stalwart of open source financial education that has made its fortunes, to be sure, but not from the pockets of its audience. Becoming a FA would forever alter the very character of WCI and how it is perceived in the medical community. Is that bad? Maybe not. But sometimes your legacy, what you are remembered for, outweighs other things you might also want.
So basically, I can’t deny that I love the possibility of having WCI act as my FA as long as all the previous articles hold true regarding reasonable total cost etc. But it would also be a bit of a sad day to see that change in the landscape of medical financial advice as the one, iconic, set-apart source of info became……I don’t know… no longer “set apart”?
Jim is already rich enough, I don’t think he has any need to do this unless he wants to regularly start flying net jets.
Private Jets are pretty tempting… Plus, if he ever sells WCI, don’t you think whoever buys it will go AUM? WCI should do it!
Well this is obviously a pointless exercise. If Dr. Dahle wanted to establish a financial relationship with clients, he would’ve gone into primary care. The closest thing to emergency medicine would be a fee only advisor – one and done. I can already hear him say it, this is the advice you need, go implement the your investment policy and get out of my ED, hahaha.
I think Dr. Dahle should do it (although I am not married to the specific details proposed above). Financial Education only goes so far, most of us have significant behavioral biases that can lead to our financial undoing, and physicians are busy. For many it would dramatically improve their financial outcomes and be well worth the expense.
I think the key would be to acknowledge the potential for conflicts of interest, then hire oversight people to periodically report on the WCI website on the issues they see, how they are being resolved, and make recommendations for how the RIA could be improved, all so that those who wear the white coat can continue to get a fair shake.
Thank you, Philip! I agree, and you initiated a string of positive posts as well!
Though now retired, several years ago I looked at Edelman Financial Services as a possible planner to use because I liked Ric Edelman’s educational podcasts. Although I liked their company, I decided not to go with them simply because I could not get around the AUM fees which have become almost an industry standard for financial planners. So 1% of assets from 1 million up to 3 million can range from $15,000 to $29,000 annually. But when you start looking at assets greater than 10 million, the fee percentage does drop at those levels, but not by very much. So from $10 million to $25 million in assets, fees go from $75,000 to $145,000 a year! Ouch! I’m sorry, but it doesn’t take that much more to manage a $15 million portfolio than a $3 or $5 million portfolio. The principles are still pretty much the same.
So I walked away as I could simply not justify the cost. So I’m still a do-it-your-selfer, comfortable doing so, and likely much better off than I would have been. I do have a contingency plan for my wife as she is quite likely to outlive me and doesn’t have the interest in personal finances that I do. Make sure you have all the facts before you make major decisions. AUM with a cap or a very steep drop-off might be OK, but these are few and far between in my experience. I think Dr. Dahle’s advice is still sound. Paying a fee is OK, just as long as it is reasonable.
– Dr. Scott
This article really got me thinking, it’s got some solid points on why our guy, Jimbo, aka the White Coat Inventor, might wanna think about becoming a financial advisor.
Jimbo knows his stuff when it comes to money matters, he gets what doctors and other big earners are up against, and he’s all about helping folks make smart choices with their cash. All these things make him a pretty good fit for a financial advisor.
But let’s chat about this whole AUM fee deal. Sure, AUM fees are the norm in the biz and could keep the money rolling in. But we gotta remember that Jimbo’s not so keen on this model, especially ’cause of the conflict of interest it can cause and how the fee can go through the roof as a client gets richer.
Jimbo might wanna look into different ways to price his services, like a set fee, hourly rate, or even a subscription. These might line up better with his thing about giving “fair advice at a fair price”. And like the article says, an AUM model with levels and a cap could be a good compromise, keeping the good stuff from the AUM model without the bad.
Whether Jimbo decides to become a financial advisor or not, it’s obvious he’s dedicated to giving top-notch financial tips and tools to his followers. If he’s gonna give personal financial advice, it’s gotta jive with his goals, values, and what his peeps need and want.
I cannot see paying an AUM fee for financial advice.
Even a very low fee as a percent- say 10 basis points- adds up. On a $10M portfolio, that is $10,000 every year. I can easily go 5 years without seeking financial advice. So I would have spent $50,000 quite literally for nothing at all. That is hardly a sound financial plan.
It is not possible for one advisor to be sufficiently expert in the range of issues that a client might need.
If I need estate planning advice, I need an attorney who is an expert in estate planning. In my state. A national “financial planner” probably does not know the laws of any state. Definitely would not know the laws of every state. They would be useless.
That attorney would probably also be an expert in tax, since many estate planning lawyers have masters degrees in tax and practice tax as well as estate planning law. But a tax attorney is overkill on price for routine tax advice.
So let’s go to an enrolled agent or to a CPA who specializes in individual tax (there are many other things that CPAs do and many CPAs are mot experts in individual taxes at all).
Is my financial planner a JD, LLM and an EA or CPA? If so, they are going to be very expensive. If they are not both, then I need at least one other professional on my team.
Do I pay AUM fees to both of them? Even in years when I need nothing from either of them?
Let’s keep going. Occasionally, I may need advice about insurance- health, life, property and casualty… That is not a topic on which I expect expertise from an attorney or a tax person. Perhaps the estate planning attorney could give some general guidance about liability exposure, but I would need someone else to help with the details of shopping for a policy. Of course, I am not going to buy my insurance policy from someone who is giving advice. Hopeless conflict of interest.
Now I am paying AUM to 3 people.
Some other examples above included planning about art collections. None of the above advisors would have anything to offer.
And we have not even discussed investments. For that, I would want someone with at least a masters in finance or who held the chartered financial analyst credential.
Preferably both.
Make that 4 AUM fees.
As best I can tell, a CFP certificate does not require expertise in any of these areas. I am not sure on what they would be prepared to offer advice, but none of the above.
So I pay $10,000 every year and still need to hire and pay these 4 other professionals when they do something.
“Managing” a portfolio is a few minutes of work a year. Even if I were willing to pay something for the trivial effort, it would be more like $100, not $10,000. And for that $10,000, I would get someone who may not be qualified to offer advice on any of the things I need.
Since they feature portfolio management, I would fear that this would get the lion’s share of their attention, even though that is the easiest and least important of the tasks. I also gear that they would have no incentive, time, or expert knowledge to provide the advice I need.
When I need estate planning advice, I hire an expert estate planning attorney, pay them for the work they do, and do mot speak with them again for years.
It should be the same way with other financial advice.
Hey Afan,
Thanks so much for your comment. Could you do me a favor a reply to a post above? Hey, thanks in advance! The comment is by Joe Gordon | May 26, 2023 at 6:41 am MST
Without specifics about the statements to which you want me to reply, I am guessing that it is this
” Included in this fee is financial and estate planning oversight and coordination, tax planning and CPA interfacing, insurance reviews and advice, and long term care planning, including social security and Medicare assistance.”
My reply is
“If your advisor is an estate planning attorney, then it is reasonable to pay them for estate planning advice. If they are not an estate planning attorney, then I do not know what “estate planning oversight and coordination” means. I would think the planning and oversight of the planning is what the attorney should be doing.
If your adviser is an enrolled agent or a CPA who is expert in taxation, then it is reasonable to pay them for doing tax planning and preparation. If the advisor is not an EA or CPA, then I do not know why you would need someone who is not an expert to “interface” with the EA or CPA.
If the adviser is an expert in insurance (life/health? Property/casualty? Liability? All of these???) then I would ask their qualifications and training but would accept that some people could use help for this.
I would have the same question about long term care, healthcare and Social Security planning. Expert in all these fields? An elder law attorney???
As you can gather, I reject the idea that there exist individuals who are experts in all these areas. Therefore, one would need multiple advisers. Once you start hiring these experts, there is not much left for the general adviser to do.
Certainly nothing to pay an ongoing fee, perhaps for years when no advice is needed.”
I believe one of the reasons WCI was started, was to help people avoid those aum fees. When he started doing seminars and selling online courses i was a bit puzzled. I guess it was ok since he put it all together in one place. I would not pay aum to anyone. The information he is giving is straight forward. Invest in index funds, avoid high cost life insurance, rebalance, tax loss harvest etc. That is 95% of it. You can buy one fund that will do it all for you. So why woulf you pay someone an annual fee? He does not have a magic pill. No one does. If there is something you need specific help with, pay a one time fee per hour for that.
Good point. Here’s the Jim secret sauce in 30 words:
diversify investments (ie low-cost index funds), avoid high fees (in high cost insurance products, mutual funds, or services), regular rebalancing (maintain allocation), and tax efficiency (tax loss harvesting, asset location)
If you pay too much fees for the Jim formula paradoxically you are then breaching the avoid high fees mantra!
Yes – the KISS principle. No need to muddy the waters with complex financial advisors 😬
Not that I would want any of these things, but there could br a logic in paying AUM if one were to seek private equity, private real estate, hedge funds, venture capital and other investments that are not easily accessed with index funds. Then finding someone to manage this mess would at least accomplish something.
But if you have a more rational portfolio of stock and bond index funds, maybe some Treasurys or TIPS, then it is crazy to pay even 10 basis points, let alone the much higher prices someone actually would charge.
Financial advice should be fee for service. Pay for what you need when you need it. If you do not need any advice, don’t buy any and don’t pay for any.
Should the White Coat Investor Become a Financial Advisor?
Uh, he already is. Have you taken the ‘fire your advisor’ course? So perhaps he is not in the traditional RIA sense you describe, but perhaps he is as a person who provides advice to others on matters of finance and investment. Now, if you are asking should he be an investment portfolio manager—only if he finds it rewarding.
And charge AUM? I’m pretty sure his current business model is working well enough. Taking in AUM will likely damage his credibility among us WCI followers unless he significantly undercuts the big investment asset management firms and shakes up the entire industry with very low costs. But then he’s competing with Vanguard’s model and their $8+ Trillion of assets. Probably not worth the hassle.
Oh. And if you have a specific question regarding your own personal finances, he’ll answer your question on the podcast—for FREE!
Dr. Dahle, keep up the great work! It has saved (and earned) doctors around the globe millions and millions of dollars. Thank you!
Paying an AUM fee is foolish. All one needs is a 3 Fund Boglehead Portfolio and rebalance yearly
Stocks=110 minus age as your %
this is not medical science
AFAN,
There are many ways to skin a cat so if you want to pay a CFP generalist for planning, you will find they have expertise but are a generalist in most areas unless they have specific training in something else they disclose.
As all of you medical doctors know, there are great doctors and there are mediocre doctors. It is best to shop around and interview a few but even then get in writing your expectations.
For example, I have specific knowledge in implementing cash balance plans on top of existing 401(k) plans and have done over 100 of these since 2002. But, I use the analogy that I am like a cardiologist, and that the last 10-15% can kill you so a great actuary to get over the finish line is why the cardiologist refers in the heart surgeon.
It’s funny that this comes out right now, because it’s like touts in sports gambling after a hot streak. Now, Jimbo isn’t anywhere near that. He’s a solid guy and has done a lot of work and helped those who have also helped themselves by being well directed by him in many fashions. Here’s the problem: The era of index/passive is OVER. I’ve explained why in many other posts, so I won’t get into it. I’m too high risk for people or else I’d do this, but the larger point is that you don’t get the returns of the 1% unless you aren’t the 99%. Think about that. Major degradation and a bleak future for people who haven’t done their homework is coming. Taxing and privacy issues will turn America (it already is) into China in ways few are aware.
Do your homework. Now.