Banks and Reefers

Becoming Your Own BankerR. Nelson NashThis is the second time I’ve read Nash’s book. I first picked it up after being introduced to the infinite banking concept by a financial planner.Nelson’s work is deeply counter-intuitive, especially if your intuition is Dave Ramsey-inflected. The conventional wisdom on life insurance is to buy as much as you can for as cheap as you can, and then invest. For this strategy, term life is the only option. But Nash advocates—strongly—for cash-value whole life.His argument centers around the idea that your need for finance is far greater, over the course of your life, than the need for life insurance. And purchasing a relatively small whole life policy and overfunding it with the “over” payments going to paid-up riders basically allows you to turbo-charge your savings, creating a pool of your own money from which you can access necessary capital. Hence, you become your own bank. Need a car? Don’t take a bank loan. Take a loan against your policy, and then—here comes the key—pay it back at market interest. By doing this, you are capturing the profit of financing, rather than the finance company doing so.I find Nash’s concept compelling. The math is hard to argue—half the book is spreadsheets!—I think most of the critics I’ve read online haven’t really digested his argument. But this clearly is meant to be a long-term strategy. Which is part of what I find convincing (Prov 13:11).​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Devoured by CannabisDouglas WilsonA clear, succinct argument as to why Cannabis use is categorically different from alcohol use, and why society should treat the two substances differently.Wilson argues the obvious: the #1 only use for recreational pot—mind distortion and alteration—is the one use prohibited to consumers of alcohol in Scripture (drunkenness). Therefore, marijuana is biblically off-limits. He makes short work of favorite stoner verses—“every green herb” means eat your salad, not smoke a joint.The most carefully reasoned part of the book, and useful for strengthening my thought process, was his case for why society has a right to protect itself from the likely effects of drug use. Again, it’s analogous to drunkenness. Do drunk drivers make it home safely most of the time? Sure do. They’re still far more likely than a sober driver to harm themselves and others. So we censure that behavior. Why? Society has a right—a collective responsibility even—to prohibit that kind of risk-taking.Likewise, THC alters the minds of users (especially the young) in a way that increases the likelihood of mental health problems, makes it more difficult to regulate your emotions in socially healthy ways, and—to return to our drunkenness comparison—impairs motor ability. These risks are borne by society as a whole, not merely the individual. This reality means that as weed laws liberalize, we should not see it as an expansion of freedom, but of bondage, and frankly, societal disintegration.(Someone needs to write a similar book for mobile gambling.)Stopping to Think is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit willdole.substack.com/subscribe