@mindrust @bitserve
Its always very difficult how much a person should net worth need to be living whit out worries.... Like parts of the world, metropolitan cities, cheap countries or what ever
Here on how would it be for a poker player, interesting discussion on how much would a poker player need for net income a year to be living and playing the game as a profession....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO4ZNsTOpRE&t=1765sOn who's side would you chose?? Staples or Polk?
They also talk many points you both have said ....
The whole video is about 1 hour 20 minutes, and a bit more than the first half seems to be batting around ideas regarding how much you need to make in order to be sustainable in a poker profession, and also to be considered a poker professional.
I agree that some of the discussion points are similar, but I think that generally, you do not need as much money to retire (or to say "fuck you") in the event that you are also NOT involved in having an activity (such as poker playing). So if your income requires you to continue to engage in some kind of activity, you are going to have additional considerations regarding sustaining that activity and your overhead costs in respects to both money and/or time necessary to spend on that activity.
With an income that comes from building up to a certain level of assets (in this case referring to the number of bitcoins accumulated to be sustainable), the ONLY real activity that should be required is figuring out how to manage your asset in terms of storing, transporting, converting and accounting... which might also involve some decision-making regarding timing of cashing out, in the event that you do not figure out some kind of blind reverse dollar cost averaging approach - which could also work in some circumstances - presuming that you are using the money/bitcoins on a periodic basis to pay for some expenses and/or to convert into dollars in order to pay for various expenses that cannot be easily paid through bitcoin.
I think that each of them make very good points in terms of attempting to account for expenses in which might come about, even though some of their back and forth might have devolved into a kind of a definitional concern about what constitutes a professional poker player, which I tended towards agreeing more with Polk regarding that in order to call yourself a "professional" anything, you should be attempting to sustain yourself through the income of that thing that you are proclaiming "professional" status.
