This is a guest post from

Chris Guillebeau, author of The $100 Startup, available from Amazon.com or your favorite local bookstore. You can also read his free blog at ChrisGuillebeau.com. Guillebeau is a long-time reader and supporter of GRS and one of J.D.’s good friends.

You’ve probably heard the line about following your passion to the bank. Just do something you love and cash in…right?

As an astute reader of Get Rich Slowly, chances are you also know that there’s more to it than that. Lots of people follow their passions and fail to make any money. Meanwhile, others are indeed able to craft a new life for themselves — and earn a lot of money — by pursuing something they love to do and finding a way to craft a business around it. What’s the difference between these two groups? What separates those who fail from those who succeed?

Well, it’s not about working less, manifesting riches, or waiting for wealth to arrive at your doorstep. It’s about making something that improves the state of the world — or at least the lives of a small group of people willing to pay for it. It’s about working more, but spending your time on the things you love to do.

In researching my new book, I discovered a not-so-secret formula. This formula isn’t found on the road to Bali or in the depths of a Mayan temple. Instead, it comes from the lessons of ordinary people who created a new future for themselves, using a small amount of money and the skills they already had.

Here’s the formula:

You can be passionate about all kinds of things that won’t actually pay you anything. But when you combine your passion with something that’s useful to the world, that’s where you’ll find synergy. And that’s how you can make some money.

The $100 Startup Model
I recently completed a multi-year study of 1500 people who had built “freedom businesses” by using the skills they already had. For the study, we didn’t want to hear from self-described entrepreneurs, billionaires, or even anyone who had much of a business background. Instead, we had a few specific criteria that everyone had to meet to be part of the study:

• At least $50,000/year in net income (many earned much more, but the average U.S. income of $50,000/year was the baseline)
• Full financial disclosure (respondents had to agree to share their annual income)
• Five employees or fewer (many of the studies in my book have no employees, by design)
• Low startup costs (most spent less than $1000, and one-third spent $100 or less)
• No special skills (or at least no skills that couldn’t be replicated by others)

From the initial group of 1500, we narrowed down to the top 70 stories. These stories appear in my new book, The $100 Startup. The goal was to craft a narrative around these “accidental entrepreneurs” to understand exactly how they did it, and to provide a blueprint that readers can follow as they pursue their own freedom.

A few of the stories include:

• Heather Allard, the “Mogul Mom” who built a business after making a blanket for her daughter. She later sold the business and now teaches other moms how to be self-employed.
• Gary Leff, who helps people book international plane tickets with their Frequent Flyer miles. Gary works full-time as a CFO, but this “side business” brings in more than $100,000 a year.
• Susannah Conway, a former journalist from England who got the surprise of her life when she earned more than $140,000 last year teaching photography.
• Sarah Young, who started a yarn shop in Portland, Oregon at the height at the recession. Two years later, business is booming and Sarah recently celebrated her first $10,000 day.
• Jen Adrion and Omar Noory, two young design students who started a map-making business from their Columbus, Ohio apartment. Within six months they had quit their day jobs to focus full-time on the business.

Each of these people found a way to apply the formula — they did something they were passionate about, but they also made sure to translate their passion into a valuable skill. These and other stories from the book combine to form a common message: The skills and the money you already have are all you need.

Many of the people I talked with didn’t consider themselves to be “entrepreneurs”; they were ordinary people who made a few specific choices. Some had been laid off or otherwise experienced a painful transition, but then crafted a new life for themselves as they engaged with their first customers or clients. More than one said, “Being let go was painful at the time, but it turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to me.”

Making the Leap

We live in exciting times. At the touch of a button, we can go online and connect with thousands of people all over the world. No matter our interests, we can instantly find other people who share the same values and concerns.

Most of us who read this blog are very well off, at least in comparison to the rest of the world. We have the resources to choose how we spend our money and how to structure our free time. We have tremendous opportunities to create, connect, and yes—to earn a good living.

What’s exciting is the timing and scale of it all. If you want to take the leap to working for yourself — or even if you just want to earn a healthy side income — there’s no longer any need to wait.

But don’t take it from me; take it from 1500 people from all different backgrounds and from all over the world. They found personal freedom by improving the lives of others.

This is a post from staff writer Robert Brokamp of The Motley Fool. Robert is a Certified Financial Planner and the adviser for The Motley Fool’s Rule Your Retirement service. He contributes one new article to Get Rich Slowly every two weeks.

One of my jobs at The Motley Fool is to serve as the internal financial planner for Fool employees. Lately, however, I’ve been answering more questions my colleagues have about their parents — and it’s more likely about their mothers or mothers-in-law. The truth is, women face a more difficult task when it comes to retirement planning, for several reasons:

Women earn, and have, less. According to the Census Bureau, women earn just 77% of what men make. They are also more likely to interrupt their careers to raise children or take care of older relatives. According to the Social Security Administration, the typical woman spends 12 years out of the workforce. This results in lower retirement benefits and smaller portfolios. On average, a female’s 401(k) is 40% less than a male’s.

Women live longer. Generally, retirement begins when a person leaves the workplace and ends when life leaves the person. The longer someone lives, the longer retirement lasts — and the more assets will be needed. On average, gals live five years longer than guys, which means they tend to be retired longer. Add to this the fact that, with most couples, the wife is a few years younger than the husband, and you can see why most women should plan on spending their last few years on their own. Which leads us to…

Women are more likely to spend part of their lives single. Though my wife may not believe it, marriage enhances retirement security. According to a National Bureau of Economic Research study by Susann Rohwedder and Michael Hurd, 80% of married couples in the 66-69 age group are adequately prepared for retirement, whereas just 55% of single persons have enough resources. Unfortunately, more than twice as many older women are single than older men. According to the Census Bureau, 19% of men over the age of 65 live alone, compared to 40% of women in the same age group. More than two-thirds of 85-year-olds are women.

Women tend to retire earlier. According to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, the average retirement age for men is 64, whereas the typical woman retires at age 62. This is often because a wife will retire at the same time as her husband. It’s just another reason why women can be expected to fund a longer retirement than men.

Women often leave financial planning to their husbands. According to a survey from ING Direct and Dailyworth.com, 40% of married women leave retirement planning to their partners, and almost 30% say they don’t know what their main source of future retirement income will be. This leaves widows and divorcees vulnerable when they find themselves single again, and could contribute to a general lower knowledge about money matters. According to studies by Dr. Annamaria Lusardi, director of the Financial Literacy Center, women score 12 percentage points lower than men on tests about concepts such as inflation and diversification, as well as other measures of financial literacy.

What’s a Woman to Do?
While all those statistics can be discouraging, the good news is that there are plenty of solutions. Here are the steps all women (and the men who love them) can take.

Become a money master. Regardless of whether you’re single, married, or living in a hippie commune where no one bathes but someone has to pay the bills, make sure you keep learning about financial planning and have a hand in the household finances. According to a study from Hartford Financial Service and the MIT AgeLab, couples who share the financial housework are more prepared than couples that rely on just one member to do all the financial lifting; the former group is more likely to have saved more and developed a plan for what will happen when one spouse passes away. This doesn’t mean that each spouse must do everything together, but it does mean that each spouse should know enough about what’s going on, and how to manage the family finances in the case the other spouse becomes ill or passes away.

Manage the couple’s benefits with the survivor in mind. The timing of when one spouse begins receiving Social Security and pension benefits (if any) can affect the financial security of the other spouse. The questions to ask are: 1) Will the primary beneficiary receive a larger benefit for delaying, and 2) how much of the benefit will go to a surviving spouse? In the case of Social Security, the benefit does increase for each year of delaying, which can be very important source of income for a retiree whose lifetime earnings record is not as high as her or his spouse’s, because that higher benefit will continue to the lower-earning spouse when the higher-earning spouse passes away.

Be ready to be on your own. The last time I covered this topic in a GRS post, a reader linked to a New York Times article, written by a woman who had once been an advocate for stay-at-home motherhood:

So I was predictably stunned and devastated when, on our 40th wedding anniversary, my husband presented me with a divorce. I knew our first anniversary would be paper, but never expected the 40th would be papers, 16 of them meticulously detailing my faults and flaws, the reason our marriage, according to him, was over….

The judge had awarded me alimony that was less than I was used to getting for household expenses, and now I had to use that money to pay bills I’d never seen before: mortgage, taxes, insurance and car payments. And that princely sum was awarded for only four years, the judge suggesting that I go for job training when I turned 67. Not only was I unprepared for divorce itself, I was utterly lacking in skills to deal with the brutal aftermath.

I hate to be so cynical as to suggest every person should be ready to become single at any moment, but I do think everyone should have a Plan B at the ready.

Delay retirement until everyone is ready. The decision to retire should not be based solely on whether both spouses have enough money to cover expenses, but also on whether a surviving spouse would be secure should the other spouse pass away. According to the Hartford study, the typical widow sees her income drop 50% when the husband passes away, yet expenses drop just 20%. To make sure they have enough in their later years, people should continue to work — and save — until they have enough to survive on their own, and not retire just because their spouse does.

Everyone should know the team. If you use any financial-services professionals — accountants, advisors, attorneys — both spouses should know at least enough to know what they do for you, and how to contact them. If you don’t use pros because one spouse does the work, you may want to begin assembling a team in your later years to smooth the transition in case that one spouse is no longer able to do the job. You can start with a fee-only financial planner, such as those who belong to the Garrett Planning Network or the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors.

The Times, They Are A-changin’
These kinds of posts can be tricky, since they’re based on generalizations that obviously don’t apply to every woman or couple, and can come off as sexist. To be sure, I know plenty of couples in which the wife is in charge of the household finances. These folks tend to be younger, which is why I think the difference in retirement prospects for women and men is partially a generational issue. It’s certainly my experience that women in their 70s — like my mother, who found herself divorced and re-entering the workforce in her 50s — are more comfortable leaving all the financial housekeeping to their husbands, and also less comfortable talking about money. Maybe that’s just my personal experience. But I do hope, as the income gap between men and women shrinks, and more men share in the child-raising responsibilities (for example, The Motley Fool offers paternity leave to new dads), that a post like this will be largely unnecessary several years from now.

This post is by staff writer Sarah Gilbert.

Your friends may be marketing to you.

I know: I’m taking the internet-shocking tactic I hate seeing elsewhere, but if I didn’t have evidence in my very inbox from (as I’m writing this post) three minutes ago, not to mention The New York Times and other well-regarded media, I would still have all the stuff that’s not headline material. You probably know it as “keeping up with the Joneses” or “being cool”; it’s the reason I carried a screen-printed canvas Esprit tote bag in high school even though I had extremely limited disposable income and the tote bag was a really uncomfortable way to lug my books, and the reason I used those over-sized butterfly clips in junior high even though they made me look more “insane human-alien love child” than “supercool Valley Girl.”

The word-of-mouth feel-good cycle
Often your friends are marketing to you by word-of-mouth marketing, every small business owner’s or corporate marketer’s wildest dream. “This Dove makes my skin so soft!” is what the corporate folks are hoping to coach you to say. “The service at Open Space Coffee is amazing!” is what the local folks are prompting you to say with their kind ways.

And the thing is that this is kind of an ethical trap. Great service notwithstanding (I stand firm in my endorsement for the coffee shop, they really are super nice), we’re getting a high when we tell our friends about a product’s positive characteristics. We’re saying through our glowing reviews of a skincare product or a diaper or a brand of energy bar, “I’m informed about this topic and I am someone whose opinion people seek out and I’m willing to share my opinion with you.” We’re saying when we listen to a friend or buy on a friend’s recommendation, “I have smart friends and I care about their opinions and I am going to be more like the people I admire when I spend money like they do.”

The reason this is an ethical trap is that we are both buying into the belief that our consumption habits are integral to our personhood and that imitating consumption habits will transform us to someone else (even if that transformation is slight).

Marketing is about selling a new you
This is now obvious to most of us but still a pretty big deal, in my opinion: what marketing is selling is not a product but a new you the product will make out of the existing you. You know the one. It’s the you whose skin is not perfectly soft and smelling of “botanicals,” whose hair does not always bounce and glow and shine, whose kids do not clap their hands gleefully every time you serve them a snack in the back seat of your clean, comfortable, dual-DVD-equipped minivan.

(Side note: A few years back, J.D. posted this guest post about “Personal Marketing”, using advertising tools to convince yourself to save. What a great way to create the new you that you really want!)

The thing is that, more and more often, the you that you want to be is not an actress on a commercial but a friend of yours — either a real-life friend, or a “friend” whose blog you read and you’ve come to think of as a friend. (As a long-time blogger, I have blurred the line between these two categories; I actually have lots of real-life friends who started out as people-whose-blog-I-read, so for me this is, as they say, a “meta” phenomenon.)

The new you is the author of a blog
As The New York Times pointed out last weekend and I’ve certainly observed myself over the past few years, corporations have really keyed in to the fact that the blogger (especially women bloggers, and especially women bloggers who are moms) is the new influencer. The mom blogger is the new you you want to be — if you’re a mom, of course, and often if you’re a young woman who hopes to be a mom one day. She’s very seductive, as she’s able to create a world populated by the best bits of her life with her kids (most of us don’t take photos of the kids refusing to eat kale chips or the mess in our minivan’s back seat).

And the reason even the men among the readership should take note is that this does not, by any means, occur just among females; it’s just in sharpest relief with mom bloggers, who are first making their blogs into mini-businesses (or not-so-mini) and then second being recognized for their role as a highly critical and powerful market force. Even in the age of two-income families and the at-home dad revolution, it’s still women who make more purchase decisions for their household.

Here’s how McDonald’s thinks of you and your mom blogger icons
“Bloggers, and specifically mom bloggers, talk a lot about McDonald’s,” says Rick Wion, director of social media for McDonald’s USA, told The New York Times. “They’re customers. They’re going to restaurants… We identified them and said, ‘These are our key customers. These are our influencers for our brand.’ We need to make sure we’re working with them.”

They’re working “with” them by working through them. It’s a savvy ploy, and I’ve been watching this for years, thanks to my aforementioned real-life blogging buddies/buddies who are bloggers. McDonald’s, or another company — I just got a persuasive email from Pampers; a few months ago I went to a fancy blogger shindig for Whole Foods — does not necessarily pay bloggers to write blog posts about them. That can be illegal and it can also create bad “buzz.”

What the corporations do is to butter up the bloggers by inviting them (I feel special!) to fancy events and one-on-one chats with high-up managers and celebrities (I feel listened to!) and then send them links and offer resources “in case” they want to write about their experiences, with a request that they send links after the posts go up (I think I might even get a new audience!). As that New York Times story said of the McDonald’s headquarters boondoggle, “The posts that followed — each accompanied by a disclaimer noting their sponsorship by McDonald’s — were overwhelmingly positive.”

Why would the mom bloggers — and your friends — talk pretty about big brands?
The reason mom bloggers and the people you meet at an investment club meeting or coffee shop talk up the big brands is for a lot of reasons, but I think there are three main psychological cues at work here:

1. After having a personal experience with a company, we don’t want to let anyone down. I’ve been in this very situation and can say that I worry about what the marketing rep or PR agent or social media outreach person will think of me if I accept an invite or a free product and don’t write positively about it. I also worry about their feelings.
2. If we get something good, we subconsciously react in a way that will ensure we keep on getting that good stuff. Whether that “good stuff” is freebies, or fancy trips to corporate headquarters, or lunch invitations, or very positive feedback, we’re going to want it to happen again and we’re going to act in a way we think will keep it coming.
3. We want to be associated with the thing we admire. Even if we started out with a somewhat critical opinion — say of McDonald’s marketing to kids, or the high expense of a brand of soap — once we meet an admirable executive connected to the company or are persuaded that the soap makes our skin so soft and fragrant, we want to be thought of as possessing these admirable qualities. Presto: we talk nice about the brand, subconsciously thinking that the admirable qualities will automatically rub off on us.

Hidden Valley Ranch and Knorr and how I said to myself, “no.”
I have an MBA and just am interested in product marketing, so I am automatically skeptical about such things. I am not shy about expressing delight in things I love, with or without freebies (I’m still hoping, though, that Theo Chocolates or Icebreaker will see my gushing over them and send me some promotional goodies), but I do try to hold myself back if I am indeed still critical after a brand’s full-court-press.

Two examples of packaged food (salad dressing and chicken stock, in this case) blogger outreach are, I think, a perfect case in point. At BlogHer’s 2011 conference in August, I was invited to cook with a celebrity chef. We made asparagus risotto, coached by Marco Pierre White, and were sent home with coupons and cookbooks. In another occasion, several friends of mine were invited to a very fancy several-course dinner utilizing Hidden Valley ingredients. One afternoon I sat in a coffee shop (ironically, the shop is connected to the farmer-direct food buying club of which I’m a loyal member) watching two of my friends tweet and Instagram the beautifully-presented concoctions some California chef had whipped up with this rather non-gourmet ingredient.

The fact is that, in both cases, I didn’t think the prepared ingredients were any better (and certainly not cheaper) than my own homemade variety. And in both cases, I said to myself, “this is just not good.” And I did not “like” the photos — even though they were gorgeous! — and I decided not to blog a word about Knorr’s cooking class.

Observe and abstain
The best way to deal with this, when your friends get caught up in marketing — going on a “Twitter tour” for some brand or bringing home freebies to share or having a giveaway for something you wouldn’t ever buy, is to first observe. “This is clearly an effort to influence me,” you can say to yourself, and think about where it started, probably the Midwestern office complex of some huge corporation in a conference room filled with my business school classmates. And how your friend is the unwitting passer-on and buyer-into this quest to make a new him or her.

And just say (in your own brain), “no.” I suggest not getting angry or trying to convert your friend or writing a blog post about how insidious this brand is. I suggest not taking photos of the package or using the hashtag the brand asks you to. I suggest not commenting on the blog posts or entering the contest. Just say, “no,” to yourself, and go on spending your time in a way you value. Learn a language. Study up for your investment club. Make chicken stock. Earn $20 selling your old CD collection on eBay.

Just observe, and abstain.

Have you been marketed to by your friends, either aggressively or with every well meaning in the world? How have you responded?

Last week, I was complaining to my Spanish tutor (who, by the way, thinks I always complain). “Ideally, I’d be writing less,” I told her. “I want to have more time to learn Spanish and to focus on other passions. But I just got an offer to write a couple more articles per week. And I would get paid for the work!”

My tutor shook her head. “Por la plata baila el mono,” she told me: The monkey dances for money. She didn’t have to explain what she meant. It was obvious. Money makes us do things we wouldn’t do otherwise; it turns us into puppets.

Although my tutor had a point, it’s not as simple as that. Yes, we sometimes do things we don’t want to do in order to earn money. But sometimes doing these things allows us to get money so that we can pursue our passions later.

“I write a monthly column for a magazine,” I said (in Spanish, of course). “The amount I earn from that column each month is exactly the same as what I pay you each month. Every month, I tell myself that I’m writing the column so that I can learn Spanish. That keeps me motivated to do it.”

Personal Currencies
This conversation reminded me of personal currencies, which I first mentioned four years ago. At the time, I wrote:

Money is an abstract concept. It really represents time and labor, and those are hard to visualize. By finding something concrete to use as a measure of value instead, it’s easier to visualize how much something is really worth to you.

For example, my wife sometimes measures things in lattés. If she sees something in a store, she’ll stop and consider: “That vase is three lattés” or “Those shoes are ten lattés” or “That book is two lattés”. By looking at things in this way, she’s able to figure out how much they’re actually worth.

Our friend Marla measures things in Saturns. She loves her car (a Saturn, naturally), and so whenever somebody mentions something expensive, she’s able to compute its value to her. A fancy plasma TV might be one-fifth of a Saturn, for example. A house might be ten or twenty Saturns.

Last night at dinner, I mentioned this notion to our friends Mike and Rhonda. “Oh, we used to do that all the time,” Rhonda said. “When we were first married, we lived near a sushi place. We loved their rainbow rolls, but they were kind of expensive. Whenever we got paid, we’d convert the dollars to rainbow rolls.”

Obviously these sort of personal currencies aren’t sophisticated financial tools. They are, however, quick and easy ways for each of us to measure the relative value of the things we buy.

This notion of personal currencies — and my mental equation in which writing a magazine column pays for Spanish lessons — is another way to look at life energy, which many of you will know from the classic Your Money or Your Life.

Trading Time for Money
In Your Money or Your Life, the central point that Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin try to convey to readers is this: Money is something we choose to trade our time for. (Except that the authors don’t call it “time”, they call it “life energy”.) They write:

Our life energy is our allotment of time here on earth, the hours of precious life available to us. When we go to our jobs we are trading our life energy for money. This truth, while simple, is profound.

[...]

Our life energy is more real in our actual experience than money. You could even say money equals our life energy. So, while money has no intrinsic value, our life energy does — at least to us. It’s tangible, and it’s finite. Life energy is all we have. It is precious because it is limited and irretrievable and because our choices about how we use it express the meaning and purpose of our time here on earth.

[...]

Ultimately you are the one who determines what money is worth to you. It is your life energy. You “pay” for money with your time. You choose how to spend it.

In a very real way, time is money. For most of us to be happy, we have to find a balance between trading our time for money. And, at times, trading money for time. We need both. Over the past few months, I’ve found that balance. I’ve achieved it. I’ve been reluctant to mess with it, yet now I’m tempted.

Or am I?

Finding Enough
Over the past week, as I’ve debated whether I should take on the additional workload to earn more money, I actually turned to my own book for advice. In Your Money: The Missing Manual, I briefly explore the concept of Enough (something that’s also covered in Your Money or Your Life). In my book, I write:

Knowing that you have Enough can be better than having billions of dollars. If you’re obscenely rich but aren’t happy, what good is your money? [...] If you don’t know why you’re earning and spending money, then you can’t say when you have Enough. So take time to really think about what Enough means to you. [...] If you don’t have an end in sight, you’re at greater risk of getting stuck in the rat race.

Or, to use the words of my Spanish tutor, you’re at greater risk of being a monkey that dances for money.

And so I have to ask myself why? Why do I want to take on this extra work? It’s not for the money, so what is it? Do I really think I’m going to improve my life by writing two extra columns per week? Where will I even find the time to do that? And what is it that I really want to be doing?

I don’t know the answers to all of these questions just yet, but I do know the answers to some. And, in fact, those answers may hint at the direction my life could take in the future. For now, one thing is sure: This monkey has decided he won’t be dancing for money — at least not this time.