Why You Don't Need Original Ideas — Morgan Housel

Just get to the point. Get to the

freaking point. That has always been the

case, but it's way more today. Morgan

Hel is one of the top non-fiction

writers in the world. He is most famous

for a book called The Psychology of

Money, which has now sold more than 8

million copies. But before he wrote the

book, he wrote more than 4,000 blog

posts for publications like the Wall

Street Journal, The Mly Fool, and that's

how he honed his craft. Now, this is my

second time having Morgan on the show.

The first time I just want to talk about

Morgan, how do you go about your work?

But this time I said, "Hey, tell me

about stories. How do you find stories?

How do you tell stories? How do you

think about the rhythm of stories?

That's why you've been able to sell

millions of books in the world of

psychology investing business because

of your ability to tell a really good

story." So, tell me about that.

>> What do you feel like you're looking for

in a good story?

>> You want to understand it instantly.

>> And I always say like, you know, there's

no points awarded for difficulty in

writing. And people will vary on this. I

know a lot of people watching will will

disagree with this, but I've often felt

if you're reading like uh particularly

for for older texts just because the

language was different back then. If you

have to reread the paragraph four times

because it's deep writing, it's not

bedtime writing.

That's that's not on you. That's that's

that's the author's fault. It's so it's

supposed to be easy to read

>> and you can be deep and insightful

>> and communicate well. And now a lot of

the philosophers and whatnot that's been

translated over the years and they were

not they were not the best writers.

They're very deep thinkers. You could

learn a tremendous amount from them. But

you really have to crank the gears in

your brain to get it. I think there's

other people who can tell a story that

can be equally profound that you can

just get one of the great examples of

this is the is the author Eric Larson

writes non-fiction stuff. Y

>> some what he does better than anyone is

that in his non-fiction books sometimes

there can be 200 chapters in the book.

Each chapter is a page and a half. The

reason he can do that is because he can

tell in a page and a half what would

take other historians 17 pages

>> or 46 pages. He can just get to the

point and he's not taking out any of the

of the meat. He's just getting to the

point. And I think I retain and most

people retain so much more to just get

to the point. Get to the freaking point.

That has always been the case, but it's

way more today because if you and I were

reading a book 50 years ago, that's

probably all we had. You had a book in

front of us, nothing else to do. Now you

got a phone in your pocket, a screen

over here, an iPad over there. If the

book's boring you, you're out. You're

done.

>> Open up your phone. Boom. I know a lot

of people I started doing this.

>> I have to put my my phone in a different

room when I read

>> 100%

>> because I'll pull it out and check it.

But also to to my to to to empathize

with the person reading,

>> you usually want to pull out your phone

when the author of that you are reading

is slowing, saying, doing a good job. So

yes, it is my impatience, but it's my

impatience is being triggered by me

being like, "What's the point? What's

the point?" Mark Twain wrote about this.

He used to read aloud to his wife and

kids. And he would watch their facial

expressions and when they leaned

forward, he'd be like, "Oh, I'm on I'm

on to something." And when he could see

them getting bored, he'd be like, "Got

to cut it. Got to cut it. Got to cut

it." And that's why some of that writing

is so good. It's very heavily curated to

get to the point.

>> I feel like you collect stories. I feel

like that's sort of if I were to think

about what do you do all day? One thing

has to be that you collect stories, you

watch things, you read things, you

listen to podcasts, and then there's

this method that you've developed of

collecting them, and then they end up in

the books.

>> Yeah. And there's a lot that don't end

up in the books. I've written three or

four blog posts titled some variation of

uh several short stories, little short

stories that I want, and those are

stories that I've collected over the

years. I couldn't figure out anything to

do with

>> that I eventually just dumped into that.

And I think a short story like that can

make a good anecdote into a book

chapter, but a great story can be three

lines and you don't you don't you don't

have to do anything with it's just a

good story in itself. And it's always

the case that you know a the best story

wins. We've talked about that before,

but it's always too that the person who

says the most in the fewest words wins.

>> And there are so many threeline stories

that are will stick with you forever

that they it doesn't need to be a long

elaborate thing.

>> Yeah. I as I was reading

the new book, there must be 140 stories

in 210 pages in that book.

>> That sounds that sounds about right. I

mean, most most non-fiction books,

particularly a book about right about

money or business. Um, if you're only

writing about money, even finance

professionals, you'll you'll put them to

sleep. You'll bore them. Even if you are

a finance nerd, let alone a lay person.

And so, if you're not telling stories,

you're out. You're gone. And so I've

always wanted to be a storyteller as an

author for two reasons. One, as a

survival technique. If I wrote about the

stock market by saying, "Here's what the

Dow Jones did this morning." You're

you're gone. You're dead. You're not

going to survive one day as an author.

>> And also, I think it gets you closer to

the truth. Because when you tell a good

story, the reader can empathize their

they can contextualize their own life

and empathize with it. Where you read a

story about something that happened

maybe a thousand years ago, maybe even

it's non-fiction, it's science fiction,

>> but if it's a good story, you're like, I

can imagine myself in those shoes in a

way that you cannot come close to if

you're just giving a data dump. So for

non-fiction business books, it's

absolutely essential.

>> Yeah. Yeah, I was thinking a lot about

hooks and stories and

you could say, "Hey, you know,

there's a lot of really wealthy families

where people end up going broke and

you're like, "Yeah, yeah, David, come

on. Shut up. Like, I'm not interested in

that." Or you could say, "Hey, you know

what? The Vanderbilts,

>> they had the equivalent of $300

billion."

And within 60 years, they basically had

no money in the film.

>> Almost all of it was gone.

>> Which one are you going to read? Are you

going to read the first one or the

second one? That second hook is so much

more

>> it like like sucks you into the page.

>> Yeah. And I'd be willing to bet, maybe

I'm wrong about this, I'm making this up

on the spot, but I bet TMZ has more page

views than a lot of the big news outlets

because TMZ like the celebrity gossip.

And I would propose that it's not

because people like the gossip, even

though that's true, of course. is

because a website like TMZ is very very

good at hooking you in

>> at just being like here's what it is.

Now, a good noble news source w will not

do that. They they have the the morals

and the ethics to want to tell the

proper story and not the story that's

going to sell the most. But, you know,

some some people are extremely good at

being like, what's going to get your

attention? And I think there's a moral

way to do that. There is obviously an

immoral way to do that. And a lot of

people on social media and whatnot have

found that immoral way of just being so

hyperbolic that you've detached yourself

from the truth. But um you know if you

can if you can tell an interesting story

in a way that is uh honest and uh within

your own morals you're not trying to

fool anybody. You're not trying to be

you know so hyperbolic that it's false

but telling a good story that will hook

you in and keep you reading is is is the

key.

>> That Vanderbilt story was nuts.

>> It's one of the craziest stories of all

the Robert Baron families of the late

1800s. Uh the Rockefellers did a pretty

good job and the Carnegies did a pretty

good job at taking a step back and

saying we have this unbelievable

astronomical fortune. What do we do? How

can we use it for good, for our own good

and for the good of of society? The the

Rockefellers and the Carnegies did a

pretty good job. The Vanderbilts did by

far the worst. The money told them who

they could be, what their personality

could be, where they could live, whom

they could marry. Uh it completely

controlled everything. So, they had

financial independence, but no other

form of independence. Money completely

controlled their personality, and

they're all kind of miserable for it.

And this is now a a a well-known little

little nugget. But the first Vanderbilt

heir who didn't get any money when all

the trust funds were exhausted was

Anderson Cooper.

>> That's the craziest, right?

>> Vanderbilt. Yeah.

>> His mother was Gloria Vanderbilt, who

was kind of the last of the big heirs.

And Cooper was is not only the most

successful Vanderbilt heir in 150 years.

I would venture to say he's probably the

happiest having read about many of his

ancestors. His grandfather guy name

Reggie Vanderbilt was one of the most

miserable of just died a drunk and

gambled his money away and died a

horrific death drunk all the time. If

you read Reggie Vanderbilt's biography,

it's it's it's horrific.

>> And he was kind of the last ultra

wealthy Vanderbilt. And you you fast

forward to Anderson Cooper's life, who

I'm sure has not been in perfect is not

not not a perfect life by any means, but

it's almost like the he was mercilessly

let go of having money control his

personality.

>> And so back to your point, if you can

tell a story about that versus saying

something bland like having a lot of

money doesn't guarantee happiness, you

hooked people in and you've done it in

an honest way.

>> So how do you use chatbt? Do you use it

at all? Do you use it in writing? Do you

use it when you're reading to think

through things?

>> It like like virtually everyone else out

there. It's become my you know

>> I'd say 18 months ago I used it once a

week and now I feel like I use it twice

an hour or more kind of thing like that.

It just exploded out of the middle of

nowhere. That's not a unique story. Of

course I'm still uh and I I will remain

uh an old school writer of every word is

going to be every letter will be typed

by me. Of course, um it it obviously

feels like cheating if you're using it.

Even if you're taking the text that it

wrote and trying to put it in your own

voice, I think it strips away the true

meaning of writing, which is the process

of writing is what gets the author

thinking.

>> Like most people when they write a book,

they didn't have all that knowledge in

their head when they wrote it. They just

started out with one brave sentence and

then that taught them something. And

then they wrote a paragraph and they

said, "Oh, that reminds me of this." If

you're using any kind of LLM to do any

of the even the broad structure for you,

you're not actually thinking and so you

stripped out everything that was good

about writing. So, I'm always going to

remain old school there.

>> I I've noticed that there's sometimes

I've done this a couple times just as an

experiment. I don't actually do this in

in practice, but if you upload a

manuscript or a chapter and say, "Give

me some feedback on this." Um, there's

sometimes where it can actually be

decent at like highlevel stuff about

being like, "Oh, your intro was a little

rambling." One of the most interesting

things is what I actually want it for is

like hunt for typos

>> and and grammar and punctuation. And at

least in my experience, it's actually

been very poor at that. It's actually

been not not that great of it. I'm sure

it'll improve over time, but hey, I

guess my point, everyone's going to be

different in this, but as a research

tool, as a Google on steroids, like like

unbelievable, incredible. Uh, as an

actually writing aid, both because I

don't want it to be and because I don't

think it is that great. I I I haven't

found much use for it.

>> When you say Google on steroids, what do

you mean?

>> Well, you know, rather than giving you a

data dump of links where you have to go

do it for yourself, just giving you the

answer. Now, I can't count how many

times everyone has experience with this

too. This is not the answer is wrong.

It's it's hallucinating something. It's

misreading uh you know the the sources

that it's going through. So, you can

never use it as as a crutch. But, uh

just speeding up. If you in the old

days, by which I mean like 18 months

ago, you know, if you were researching a

topic, Google would point you to a a a

PDF that was 387 pages

>> and you could spend the afternoon

sifting through it looking what you're

looking for. And now you can get that

just instantly. it just says here's what

you're looking for. And so the this the

speed to which research has increased in

the last 18 months is just profound. And

I I've experienced that as as as someone

you know some of the best anecdotes and

stories that I found my book happened

because I spent in some cases weeks

researching looking for these things. I

used to live in Washington DC and spent

quite a bit of time in the Library of

Congress reading old newspapers and

trying to find little anecdotes. And now

all that can be done instantly. It's

just boom, here here it is for you. I do

think there's something to be said that

when you take that process out, it's

gonna stifle your creativity as well.

>> If you just have a machine that can feed

you ideas,

>> you need I I think it's I think it's

integral that those ideas come to you

after hard work.

>> And maybe this is a a bad analogy, but

if we just had a pill that could just

give you muscle, you just swallow a pill

and like now we're all ripped.

>> A zenic for being like Schwarzenegger

>> for something like that. It wouldn't a

it would not be as meaningful and I'm

sure it wouldn't work as well if you

actually just went to the gym and did

reps. And so I think it's true for

research as well. When you're doing the

reps of research, it's going to hit you

in a different way.

>> Do you feel the same way as a consumer

as you do a producer? So a thought

experiment here would be say that

there's an author you really like and

they're like, "Hey, I use chatbt a lot

for this. Like I use it to help me

rewrite my sentences. I use it to do

research. I'm probably doing 50 60

queries a day. And like honestly at this

point it's hard for me to know what is

mine. What is Chat GBT? But then you

read the book and you're like okay this

is really good. This is really good

stuff. It doesn't feel like it's chatb.

you're like, "Wow, this this actually

feels more Bill Bryson or more Robert

Caro than what they were getting to

before Chat Gibbat." Are you like, "Ah,

that's annoying." Or are you like, "Show

me what you got." So much of what I love

about non-fiction and fiction books is

this feeling when you're reading it and

enjoying it that you're like, "Wow, a

fellow a fellow human wrote this. I

couldn't write this, but somebody else

has this skill to write this and do this

research that that I don't. So, Robert

Caro, turn every page.

>> He has the patience and the fortitude to

do that. I don't. And so, and and so

when I read it, when I come across an

amazing nugget that that he's written,

I'm like I I I can intuitively feel like

the effort that went into it. And I and

I love it. And I think if we strip away

that, you take away the allure of a good

book. The allure of a good book, whether

it's fiction or non-fiction, is like,

"Wow, somebody else did something that I

can't and that makes me feel good as a

reader." It's amazing. And I think like

if you just strip all that away, I think

in the same way, you know, the original

Star Wars movies

>> where the special effects were the first

time they'd ever done it, but also like

very like manually intensive, you know,

they're building like small models of

spaceships so they could and I I I think

that gave people more of a sense of

wonder. I remember reading this review.

I think it was on Amazon. It was an

Amazon review of a Cormack McCarthy

book.

>> Okay.

>> And this is a a year ago or so, not not

that long ago. And the review I just

went to a random review and they said

something along the lines of, "What I

love about reading Cormack McCarthy is

almost every sentence I stop and I think

to myself, how is it possible that you

came up with that sentence in your

head?"

>> Whoa.

>> And I was like, "Oh, that's that's cool.

I like that." And like that I think

that's that's the that's the allure of a

good book is you have this feeling of

how's it possible that another author

either did that or came up with that

sentence. And if we come to a point

where it's like no Chad GBT wrote this

some then you lose that magic and it's

less less amazing.

>> That's how I feel when I read David

Foster Wallace. A little bit different

of like this guy's brain is bizarre.

>> Yeah.

>> And I'm not sure I would want to live in

it.

>> Yeah. But I'm totally down to spend an

hour.

>> Totally. I I I get that with fiction a

lot, too. When you're reading just an

amazing story, an amazing plot line, I'm

like, how did you come up with this?

>> How did a fellow human who ostensibly

has the same brain that I do, but

clearly doesn't? The brain clearly looks

way different than than mine. That's

that's that's what you love about it.

Same with art. All art is like that. I

mean, that's why we, you know, the

famous painters and whatnot. uh you know

Chachi B Tegan shook out a picture that

is technically better technically

sharper and more detailed and whatnot

but yeah but a human didn't do it like

it's amazing when a human does it so

that's I think that's one of my worries

about chat GBT or any of the any of the

AI models is that it'll just strip the

strip the wow out of writing as you're

writing because there is an element of

teaching in your writing where you're

basically saying the art of spending

money here's what I've learned like a

lot of people they're they're

>> they're not so good at spending money

they might be fine at making it, but

sometimes even making money is inversely

correlated with how well you spend it.

So, how do you think about the

difference between being teachy and

being preachy? The biggest thing with

money, and it's true for a lot of

non-fiction topics, is that I don't know

you, the reader, and so who am I to tell

you how to live your life because I do a

lot of things that wouldn't work for

you, and vice versa. We're all so

different in this element. So, I can't

give you advice because I don't know

you. People understand that like with

doctors, like if a doctor went on TV and

said, "Everybody should take this pill."

You'd be like, "What?" You don't know

the patient. You got to know them first.

You can't you can't do that, right?

>> But with money, I think people don't

view it that way. And you're like, "Just

tell me how to do it. Just tell me what

stocks to buy." And you're like, "Well,

I don't I don't know you. I don't." It's

like, it's different for everybody. And

so, I don't want to be preachy from a

practical standpoint because that's not

how this advice works. I can give you

broad ideas about how the psychology of

dealing with money works, but then you

got to figure it out for yourself and

contextualize your own life. That's one

element. The other is nobody likes a

lecture. Nobody likes someone to,

particularly with finance, to basically

say, "Hey, idiot, you've done it wrong

the whole time, and if you had done it

my way, you'd be in a better spot."

Nobody wants to read that.

>> It's a It's too hard to read. Um, but

but if you can be like, "Hey, every

like, let me just tell you a little

story about psychology and how the weird

ways that people think about risk and

greed and envy and you can figure it out

for yourself. You can do whatever you

want with that information." There was a

time I used to write for the Wall Street

Journal 10 years ago or so, and um, it's

true for most traditional journalism.

They want you to finish every article uh

with something along the lines of and

therefore you should buy this mutual

fund.

>> They they want very concrete advice at

the end. And my point was always like no

you don't you don't need that. They

could like the reader can figure it out

for themselves. Like I don't know the

reader but like they can they can they

can just take the lesson from this and

figure it out in their own lives. I

don't need to give them any advice on

it. And so that was always my my

philosophy is like nobody likes a

lecture. Nobody likes to be shamed about

their mistakes, but if you give them

enough stories about psychology, they'll

figure it out for themselves. What is

the single worst piece of writing advice

that you often hear?

>> I I think it's it's the very common know

your reader.

>> Because I think the speed at which know

your reader becomes pander to your

reader. The ease at which you can

conflate those two things is astounding.

And I I I think it's true that virtually

everybody everybody in the world if

they're writing a diary that where where

they think no one else is going to read

this

>> is a good writer in that situation they

would write good pros.

>> They would write it well they get to the

point they tell a good story about what

happened today and the problems in their

life.

>> It's as soon as you think someone else

is going to read this that it clicks in

your head. Well, who's reading this

because I'm writing for them. What do

they want to hear? And in that

situation, the good pros in in in the

diary just falls apart and then you

start you just start getting structured.

You're like, "Oh, well, I need to

explain that deeper because they

probably don't understand it and

whatnot." I'll tell you a little thing

that is a no nothing thing and it's

obviously fine that they do it. The

Economist magazine, great magazine and

actually very good pros, very very good.

>> They will always say uh Goldman Sachs, a

bank, comma, and they keep going. And I

want to be like, how many economist

readers don't know that it's a bank? You

don't need to put that there. But if

they were writing a diary for

themselves, they would never do that.

>> Right?

>> They're like, there's part of me that's

like, don't explain it. Even if it's

even if your reader doesn't know this

thing, make them look it up. Make them

look it up. Don't just write for

yourself. And if they don't know it,

that's their problem. They can they can

they can just figure it out for

themselves. Nal has another little twist

on this. He's like, don't quote people.

Don't quote don't say like, oh, as David

Pearl said, blank blank blank. Even

though even though I do that, he was

like, just put it into your own words.

just find what they said and just just

phrase it yourself and move on because

you get so clunky when you deal with

quotes and and whatnot and doing it that

way.

>> Why don't you do that? You love to quote

people.

>> Uh I I I don't like the idea that I'm

pretending to be the smartest person on

the page. So I'm clearly not. I I I

think you actually get more authority as

a writer if you defer the wisdom to

other people.

>> I think I think that could be the the

case particularly non-fiction,

especially young writers early on.

There's nothing more aggravating than a

than a 22-year-old who thinks they

understand how the world works and wants

to tell you about it in their blog post.

But there's but it's but it actually be

a wonderful thing if a 22-y old is like

I did a bunch of research and he these

are the favorite gems that I've read

from other people who have more

experience than me. That's great. I'll

I'll read that. And so I I think I think

you have to be careful about uh there

there there's an inherent sense of ego

of saying I I understand this and I'm

the only person worth worth quoting

here.

>> You were talking about TMZ having a lot

of views. I think

People magazine, maybe not still, but at

one point it was the top magazine in the

entire world.

>> Yeah.

>> And so that's the other thing. Most of

your stories fundamentally are about a

person, you know? Yeah.

>> We could just Buffett, the Vanderbilts,

boom, boom, boom. And that seems to be

in terms of your flavor of stories.

You're really good at kind of finding a

person and then we can imagine ourselves

through that that person's life. So

maybe it comes down to the Joseph Stalin

quote of one death is a tragedy, one

million is a is a statistic. If you're

telling individual stories, again, it

makes it easier to be like that could be

me. If you're telling a story about

groups of people, then it's almost the

opposite. Then it's them.

>> It's why people in politics and all

kinds of endeavors can can very easily

discriminate against them,

>> them those guy, that group, those

people. But once it's an individual,

you're like, I think it becomes easier

to be like that could be me. I I I could

do that. That could be. And so that's

and anytime that you can allow the

reader to uh when they're reading a

story, realizing that they're actually

reading it in the mirror and they're

looking at themselves, I think you you

you have a much higher chance of hooking

them in.

>> I'm so interested in this sort of any

given Tuesday afternoon. Like you're

done with your writing, but then it's

still early enough. We're not playing

with your kids. You you don't have

meetings. Like you're kind of in this

kind of chill state. you're sort of just

browsing, looking at stuff, kind of

observing, and there's, you know, maybe

there's some data that you're looking

at, there's pieces that you're reading,

books, whatever it is, like what are

some of the things that you're doing to

not just collect stories, but also to

observe and make sense of the world?

Well, my wife has said this for for

years, and she says it half jokingly,

but only half jokingly, where she's

like, "I don't I don't think you

actually work because what I do all day,

forget any given Tuesdays, any given

Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday

Wednesday. This is all the time. Nothing

is structured for me." I know other

writers who will push back on this and

think differently about it, but I'm

like, I I can't structure creativity.

>> I just have to let myself go and trust

that it'll hit me eventually.

>> Good ideas can't be scheduled. cannot be

scheduled. And so the two biggest most

important ideas for my career was the

title the psychology of money and the

title the art of spending money. And I

remember when both of those hit me. I

remember walking down uh the streets of

New York here where I don't live. I just

happen to be here. I remember walking

down the street. This would have been

2017 and it just it just hit me. The

psychology of money.

>> Was that for the article or for the

book?

>> The article that but I remember the

psychology of money. I've talked about

this before. I shamelessly stole it from

Charlie Munger's uh speech, the

psychology of human misjudgment,

>> right?

>> And I remember thinking like that

format, the psychology of

>> and at first I was going to call it the

psychology of investing, but I realized

then it could actually be bigger and

broader than that. But I remember being

like that's a great form, the psychology

of money. It was like but I was just I

didn't I didn't sit down at my desk and

say I need to come up with a title. I

was just kind of like daydreaming

walking down the street and I was like

boom, okay, I'm turning this into I'm

going to run with this. And the art of

spending money. I remember I was on the

treadmill.

>> Remember I was on the treadmill just

zoning out and I was like, "Oh, the art

of spending money. That would make that

that would make a good piece. I should I

should run with that."

>> And so, and but also whenever I come up

with uh or thought about stories and

hooks to tying in, it's never when I've

been trying to do it.

>> It's in the shower. It's walking my dog.

It's waking up at 2 a.m. and and

wrestling around bed. It's like it's

it's always in the unstructured moments.

And so, I go out of my way. I like I

structure unstructuredness

>> of like I I if I have a list of things

to do, I'm like, well, there's I'm not

gonna do anything productive today. Then

I'm gonna have my most productive day

when I'm on a sweat when I'm in my

sweatpants sitting on the couch

>> hanging out and my wife says, what are

you doing?

>> And I can't convince her of this even

after 20 years. I'm like, this is this

is everything. I'm doing the most

productive thing I can right now. And I

think a lot of why I think most good

writers, there are many of exceptions to

this. This is not black and white, but

it's rare that you're going to find, I'd

say rarer that you will find a really

great author who works for a publication

and has to go to an office and sit at

his or her cubicle and dress up in

corporate attire and go to the Monday

morning's all hands and then go back to

their cubicle and their editor says, "Be

creative."

>> Right.

>> Like that almost never happens. We

again, we could probably think of a

couple.

>> Yeah. But most great writers I think are

just kind of wanderers and they can't

they have to be independent unstructured

wanderers because that's when you

actually get good thinking done.

>> Tell me about the idea of setting

looking wide but setting tight filters.

>> I think I I got this idea from Patrick

Onessy

>> where he was like for for books you want

a wide funnel and a tight filter, right?

And when he said that, I was like, "Oh,

I I didn't put it into words." But I

think that's always how I've read books

of I will start reading any book that

looks 1% interesting. It doesn't have to

be like, "Oh, that that book looks

amazing." Be like, "Oh, that's that's

kind of a curious topic topic. Let's

give it a try." And you can get a free

Kindle sample for any book. Kindle will

give you 10% of any book for free. So,

you have no excuse not to do this

>> and start reading it. But then be

merciless about if it's not working for

you. and the writing style is doesn't

fit for you, then just slam it shut and

go to the next one.

>> And so I finish a very small percentage

of the books that I start, single-digit

percentage points of the books that I

start. And I think most people who have

who say I I I I'm who say they're not a

good reader or like they don't like to

read, it's because they force themselves

to read bad books. And when I say bad

books, I usually mean books that are not

right for you. They might be right for

somebody else.

>> I don't I I think I think any author who

can get to the end of the page and

publish deserves praise. But a lot of

books are not right for me and not right

for you. But if you force yourself to

finish, you think you have a moral

obligation to finish it or you think

it's your character flaw that you're

bored in the middle of the book. Uh I

think that's a problem. So I just slam

it shut and move on to the next one.

Wide funnel, tight filter.

>> Yeah.

Well, one of the things of the art of

spending money is that there is a style

and a method that works best for you.

And it's the same thing with writing.

Like there is now such a Morgan Hel

style. And what's funny is that now you

have figured that out. Part of what you

figured out is I'm just going to kind of

chill on the couch, but for years you're

writing what four, five, six pieces a

day.

>> It was a lot.

>> And how much do you feel that your style

emerged from reps versus something else?

>> That's a good question. I uh I think

during my rep years when I was writing

multiple pieces per day, the thing that

was most helpful for me and it was

torturous at the time was this was

during the day when blogs had comment

sections

>> and people of course are just absolutely

vicious in the comment sections and I

had I had wor Oh, it's the worst. My

wife would always she'd come home from

work and she could just take a step in

the door and look at my face and she'd

be like bad promise today. you you could

tell. But what it did, I didn't like it

at the time, but what it did is, and you

know, in any endeavor, what you need is

is feedback.

>> Yeah.

>> And the blog comment section, as

terrible as it was, it was feedback. And

and it's true that if you write a bad

piece, people will let you know less

often, but does happen. If you write a

good piece, they'll let you know like,

"Oh, this is great. I really liked it."

And I was writing so I wrote 4,000 blog

posts. And so when you write that much,

there was so much feedback of like,

"This worked, this didn't, this worked,

this didn't." And it was just a constant

honing of that and also wanting to be

like, "Yeah, but I got to figure out my

own voice, too. I I I can't just be

taking directions from the barking crowd

>> and and doing what they say. I have to

figure out my own voice." But I thought

this was really good, but nobody liked

it. And I thought this was kind of

crazy, but a lot of people liked it. And

it was just if you do that 4,000 times,

it pushes you in that direction. So part

of it was if I look back with a little

sense of shame, I had a thin skin of

just like when people said bad things, I

was like, "Ah, it makes me feel so bad."

Other writers are like, "I don't care. I

don't care what other people think." I I

was not that. I cared what people

thought. But in hindsight, looking back,

I was like, it just the feedback pushed

me towards something that uh that that

I'm proud of now.

>> And how do you reconcile that with the

idea of selfish writing?

>> It I think selfish writing came later.

That was a later insight. And so I've

been a writer for 20 years. So there

have been several different eras, let's

say. And so early on, the era of read

every comment and and take that

feedback. That was an important era.

There was also another important era

when I realized I can't please

everybody. And no matter what I do,

there's always going to be people who

say, "I didn't like this. You're wrong

about that." Blah blah blah. No matter

what it is. So I might as well try to

appease if if I can't appease everybody,

I might as well try to appease one

person or one one group of audience. And

I figured that was me.

>> I just want to appease myself. And I

thought I did my best work when I

realized when I was writing it. I was

like, I don't I'm not even thinking

about the audience. I'm not even

thinking I just like it's just like I

like this. And you know, there's only

been a couple times in my career where

I've worked with an editor. It's

actually been very rare. You know, I bet

1% of what I've written has been edited

by somebody else. And I I would I would

go through moments even with editors who

I really liked and were skillful were

skillful where an editor would say, "I I

I don't like this sentence. And I would

be like, but but I do like it's

subjective and I think it's cool. I

think it's great. I'm sorry you don't

like it, but like it's this is all

subjective. This is not math. And so I I

really had to just lean on the idea that

like writing is subjective. There is no

right answer. And so uh what's great to

one person will be garbage to another.

So I might as well just do what I want.

>> And I think a lot of other artists think

that way. You know, painters don't have

editors. Most musicians don't have

editors or maybe to some degree. Uh

sculptors usually don't have editors

because they know it's subjective. You

just have to do it for yourself. And

when uh when the great painters or the

great musicians were doing their work, I

guarantee you they were not asking will

the audience like this. They were just

well

they like it. They they So I feel like

every artist does their best work when

they're doing it for themselves.

>> I was talking to a big YouTuber and he

was like, "Yeah, I don't look at the

data." And like this very big prominent

YouTuber. He's like, "Yeah, I don't look

at the data anymore." And I was like,

"Anymore? What do you mean?" He's like,

"Oh, I spent 10 years and all I did was

look at YouTube data." Like, I was in

it, in it, in it, in it. And now I can

just look at a video and I can tell you

instantly based off the packaging,

what's the click-through rate going to

be? What's the retention timeline going

to be? And he's like, I'm post data.

>> Yeah.

>> You know what I mean?

>> I feel I feel like I've gained a little

bit of that with books. I would bet that

I can read three pages of a book and

tell you how many copies it sold. I

mean, not not actually like not not

actually, but like I bet I can be

directionally pretty good with that. I

remember when I read Atomic Habits, the

James Clear.

>> I I I remember reading three pages and

being like it it's a you can't you can't

stop reading that book. And so it's it

gets pretty clear and there's a lot of

like

>> deep non-fiction history that you read

one page and you're like this like I I I

can tell you this is not going to be a

book that people near the end are going

to call their friend and say you have to

read this. Yeah,

>> it just it's there's a there's a

storytelling cache that you can pick up.

>> What do you feel is the value of writing

books as opposed to articles? Obviously,

you've written so many of those. Um, and

then also as opposed to this new world

of chat, GBT and AI that we're in now.

What makes you be like, okay, I'm going

to stake my career on this craft of

writing books? I always felt like social

media was uh was spring training.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh uh writing blogs was like a regular

season game and books are the Super

Bowl. It's just the stakes get so much

higher. And you know for for an athlete

if you if you mess up in spring training

it doesn't matter. So if you writer you

you write a bad tweet doesn't matter.

Who

>> cares?

>> And uh if if you lose a regular season

game like not great but the world goes

on.

>> If you fumble the Super Bowl that's

that's a scar. Bill Barkman. You ever

seen that clip? Okay. It's like the Red

Sox first baseman. It's the World Series

and he gets this easiest ground ball and

it goes through his legs and it's just

like, oh my goodness, disaster.

>> Bill Brookner or something like that.

>> I uh a little humble brag. I went to the

Super Bowl in 2014.

>> Okay.

>> Uh Broncos Seattle and there's a picture

of Pton Manning. I think it was the

first the first play where the ball

snaps and it just hits him in the helmet

and there and there's a picture of him

being like uh and that's another thing

like in regular season game like people

would look past that Super Bowl you're

like you can't be doing this. So the the

analogy is like books are the Super Bowl

for the author. The stakes are so much

higher and if you fumble it it's going

to be a mark on your career and that's

that's always how I I viewed it and I

didn't think you know most of my career

I thought blogging was where I would

end. I was just going to end as a

blogger. I didn't think I'd ever write

books and that was true when I was you

know 15 years in my career. I didn't

think I'd ever write a book. And so I

always thought that was the end and that

was the most important thing. But I also

knew that if I wrote a blog bad blog

post and I've written many of them,

there's always next week.

>> There's always next week to just to just

come back. Whereas a book, if you if you

write a great book that can that can

stick with you for life, but if you

write a bad book, it won't stick with

you for life, but you'll never be

remembered for it, of course.

>> Right.

Yeah. It's definitely something that

I've

come to see the light on over the years.

I think at the beginning I was like,

well books are going to go out of style.

Like everyone can write online now and

that's free. Why is everyone going to

have a book? And there's just a cultural

significance to a book in the same way

that there's a cultural significance to

a Tarantino movie that doesn't apply to

a YouTube video. You know what I mean?

And I've now been friends with enough

people who have written successful books

and it just totally changes their lives

in a way where you could write something

like how all this happened a piece they

wrote I want to say 2018 2019 and like

it'll go viral but you're not going to

move because of that piece. You're not

going to be able to move houses because

it's so successful. You know what I

mean?

>> Totally. But I also think from the

reader's perspective, um, if you write a

dull blog post, people will give you

three seconds and they're like, I'm I'm

done. I'm done. If you don't catch your

attention in 3 seconds, I do think the

reader will give you a little bit more

patience in a book.

>> Yeah.

>> If you paid 25 bucks for it and you're

holding something physical, you will

have a higher chance of uh of the of the

reader sticking with it.

>> I think it's about as long as the Kindle

sample rate. Now, it would be short and

shorter than it was. But I do think

there is something to be said that you

do have a little bit more flexibility as

an author to stretch your legs and tell

a little bit of a deeper story because

you're going to have a little a

marginally higher patience tolerance.

>> I had Mitch Albam on the show who wrote

Tuesdays with my

um it's so funny that the two of you are

so similar like he is the two you guys

are so similar. Um you guys will be

great friends and that's exactly what he

said. who was a columnist at the one of

the big Detroit newspapers and being a

columnist there he just got to the point

got to like got to the point and he was

writing his first book trying to do that

and someone said to him exactly that

dude they'll give you 8 to 10 pages no

problem and he was just like

>> but it's true in in in a tweet they'll

give you three words in an article

they'll give you a line or two in a book

they might give you eight pages yeah so

you just have a higher threat patient

stress threshold told, which allows you

to tell a deeper story. And I always

whenever I write, even even though it is

selfish writing, I'm writing for myself,

I still have a little bird in my head

being like, you got to get to the point.

Got you got to go. You're you're you're

stumbling here. You got to wrap this up.

That I I think that that little bird is

still there in my head when I'm writing

a book. But I but I also know like,

yeah, but this is a book. And I I I

think I can like I'm not rambling. This

is a good story, but I think I can go a

little bit deeper than it would have in

a blog. with the psychology of money you

had written for 14 years before you

published that book and

a lot of that book is stuff that you had

written about that then you repurpose

you repackage and stuff like that. So

now when you publish the book a much

higher percentage is things that you

haven't written.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> How has that changed your process?

>> Uh a you know I think it's unavoidable

that that's a that's a that's a problem.

It was it was great when I could write

4,000 blog posts and then go back and be

like, "What were the best ideas that I

could put?" That was great. I do think

there's something to be said that you

get better. I don't want to say you get

good, but you get better at knowing

what's going to work and what's not.

>> And again, I I would not say I'm good at

that, but I'm better than I was 10 years

ago.

>> Um, and 10 or 15 years ago, I would

write something that I really thought

was good and and nobody else thought it

was good. And I think I have a lower

risk of doing that today. It's not zero,

but it but it's lower.

>> What do you think you learned?

>> Uh the power of storytelling, how to

tell a good story, what's going to

capture, and also I think this is where

I came into my selfish writing era of

like I'm not trying to impress other

people anymore. I'm not trying to write

for other people. I'm definitely not

going to try to pander to other people.

Do I like the story? Does that joke make

me laugh? Okay, then it's good enough.

Let's just go with it. Let's just go

with it.

>> Right.

The other thing that you've definitely

developed is, and I've noticed this as

your writing has gotten more popular,

and maybe it's just part of it is people

share what they read in your books, but

you've become the king of the maxim.

>> I think I think social media turned a

lot of people in a very good, healthy

way into maxim writers because it was,

hey, you've got 240 characters, whatever

it was, to make your point. And it was

the exact opposite of how most people

learned to write historically, which was

their fifth grade teacher saying five

pages minimum

>> min like you had a minimum. Uh you have

to fill five pages where social media

was like 240 charact.

>> So it forced people to be like what's

your point? Give it to me very brief.

You you could say that turned people

impatient and that turned writers into

just uh you know kind of fluffy little

tidbits versus long. But I think in

general it was a good thing. I think I

think one of the terrible ways that

we've taught writing is telling PE is is

is is the page minimum. It's done with

good intentions to keep kids from being

lazy. Uh but it taught them to just

expand expand expand expand.

>> Yeah. Really what we should do is it's

fine to get them to expand because

really what you're pro you're protecting

against is the lazy people who are just

like you know four words and whatnot but

really

what we're writing education becomes to

life is compression. Like if you could,

we used to do a exercise when I was

teaching writing was we would give

people this long page horribly written

about the Concord and we would basically

say this is a poorly written paragraph

about the history of the Concord and

here's a bunch of data points and now

what you need to do is you need to make

the same point first of all figure out

what is the point that's trying to be

made and then you have 200 words and

then you can pull from these data points

and what you're teaching is just

compression compression compression

compression.

>> And what's true too is that it's true

that social media has taught people how

to be short. And a lot of times when

it's short, they there's no insight.

Like they've stripped away the meat like

more than the fluff. They took away the

meat. So concise doesn't necessarily

mean short. The best example of this I

come across is Doris Kern Goodwin's

book, No Ordinary Time. It's a biography

of FDR during World War II. And the book

is like 800 pages. Maybe it's 750. It's

it's a gigantic brick of a book. Uh, and

not a single word can be stripped from

that book.

>> Wow.

>> To me, like every word needs to be

there. There's not a single wasted

sentence anywhere. There's not a single

paragraph of fluff anywhere. And so

concise doesn't mean short. You can be a

great length. You can write an 800page

book, but it's just lack of fluff. And

the opposite of that is there's plenty

of 500word essays or 450 of the words.

495 of the words didn't need to be

there. You could have summed it up with

a little a little blurb, a little quote.

>> Yeah. Cuz even when you think of short,

you know, you might think, oh, short is

like 60 seconds, 2 minutes. Seinfeld has

a great bit where he says you can go to

a comedy

stand up and someone can go for an hour

and an hour you're just nodding your

head, you're looking at your partner,

you're like, man, this is so good. This

is so good. But then if you go to 90

minutes and they're a little bit bored

by the end, they'll walk out. They'll

say, eh, it was all right.

>> Right? And I think that as a what this

is really about is that as a creator,

it's less about trying to make it as

short as possible, but much more about

having a deep intuitive sense of

awareness for when you've lost the

audience, both in the micro of whatever

story that you're telling, but also in

the macro in terms of when have I lost

their attention.

>> Yeah, I do a lot of speaking at

conferences and historically most event

planners will say, "Can you do a

60-minute keynote?" That's always been

the standard is the 60-minute keynote.

Wow. And it took me a while to realize

and to start pushing back on event

planners and be like, "It's too long.

It's too long. People will like this

much more if it's 30 minutes." And I'm

not doing that to be lazy or get out of

work. It's just better if it's 30

minutes. And uh sometimes a conversation

like this can be long because we're

going back and forth. But to listen to

one person talk for 60 minutes, even if

it's good, can be exhausting. And so

sometimes to your point, you just have

to know where the exhaustion point is

with your own material and for the

audience and cut it cut it off right

there.

>> When I think of your writing, I almost

think of what you're doing is you're

making a collage. The way that you write

is you're sort of collecting stories and

quotes and ideas and you sort of start

off making collage and you have all

these things, but then what you're so

good at is the removal process.

Especially with the distillation, we

were like, "This story I read in this

book, but the writer took like 23 pages

to do it."

>> Summarize it for you.

>> And like, "Oh my goodness, guys. I could

have done this in two and a half pages,

and it would be freaking awesome." And

you do that, and then you're really good

at having these maxims to basically

describe things. That's how I think

about your writing process. And you're

kind of doing that over and over and

over.

>> I have a hu Thank you. I have a huge

character flaw as a husband where it it

it bothers me when people are telling

stories and not getting to the point and

my wife, love her to death, best friend

forever. She tells long stories and

sometimes this is the huge character

flaw that you should never do as a

husband. We'll be at like a dinner party

with friends and she'll be telling a

story and I'll interrupt her and I'll be

like, "Can I can I speed this up for you

cuz you're just going down some rabbit

holes here?" Not not not a good thing to

do. But I I I I get I get aggravated at

stories that are longer than they need

to be.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> Not a good thing.

>> Isn't it funny though how first of all

that's funny and a comedian once told me

that part of the key to good humor is

just extreme opinions. Like extreme

opinions are funny. Like the fact that

you feel that way like oh you know I

like that. Like it's just funny to hear.

But the other thing is how much of good

writing if you were to fundamentally get

to the core of what makes a writer great

would be something that really really

aggravates them because it'll either be

the content for whatever it is that you

share. Like there's this thing in the

world who was driving me nuts. But then

for you it's I just can't stand when

somebody takes way too long to tell a

story. Like that bothers me. It clearly

does not bother me like it bothers you.

But also, you read your writing, you're

like, "No wonder Morgan's writing is

like that."

>> I I think it's I think it's if you spend

20 years online, as a lot of people

have, you it just it just pushes you to

do that. My wife a huge character credit

of hers and what she's good, she spends

no time on social media. So, she has not

been honed by fire of trying to get to

the point as people online have. No.

>> Yeah. How has writing these books

changed how you read?

I have a I have a great sense of

appreciation for good writing. And there

are a number of books that I love. I'm

like, "Oh, that was a great book." And

I'll I'll tell a friend that and they're

like, "Really? That book sucked." Like

the author has no idea what he's talking

about. And and there's part of me that's

like, "Yeah, I know, but like it was

really good writing." And so I think I

think I I enjoy good writing so much

that I'm over I'm willing to look past

flawed arguments and bad thinking if I'm

like, "Yeah, but it was beautiful pros."

I haven't read it, but that's what a lot

of people have told me about Gibbons

decline in the fall of the Roman Empire.

>> Haven't read it.

>> Which I've heard it's like he got a lot

of things wrong. Like there's a lot of

things that we know about what happened

with ancient Rome, but also it's kind of

cool that maybe his writing was just so

good that people were like, "Ah, yeah,

it's fine." I mean, I I will uh there

was a book that I read many years ago,

and I'm I'm I'm I'm drawing a blank on

the title of the book, so I'm I'm I'm

giving the author a lot of discredit

here, but I uh I uh it was a book about

World War II, and it was a book about

D-Day.

>> And the sentence was they're talking

about a platoon of troops going in on on

one of the boats, and it said, "All of

the men were willing to give their life

that day." Period. Next sentence. All of

the men gave their life that day. Whoa.

>> And that's that's one of those things of

just like a sentence like that. I'm

like, I have It's so hard to do that.

It's so hard to write with that much

punchiness and to make a point so

profoundly in so few words that when I

see it, I'm like, "Oh, I I love And the

fact that I do it and I know how hard it

is makes it so when I see it, I I just

have a different level of respect for

it."

>> Yeah. I've started just memorizing

just stuff that I like. I mean, this is

so cliche, so forgive me, but uh I I was

at dinner and a friend quoted a line

from McBth and he quoted it and I was

like, "Dude, I need to remember that."

It goes like this. Tomorrow, tomorrow,

and tomorrow creeps in this petty pace

from day to day to the last syllable of

recorded time, and all these yesterdays

have blighted fools, the way to dusty

death. Out out brief candle. Life is but

a walking shadow.

A poor tale told by an idiot full of

sound and fury signifying nothing.

>> It's good.

>> And I heard that at the end like full of

sound and fury signifying nothing. And

you're just like, "Oh my goodness, what

is going on with the rhythm?" And

sometimes it's like the rhythm of the

way that it's written or whatnot. And

then sometimes it's just that

simplicity. But I think that as you

write, as you think about the craft, you

just develop this extreme

awe for elegance that's not fancy, but

elegance that's just has what it needs

and no more.

>> Yeah. And I think I think when you ask

what I what I do as a reader, there are

even there are bloggers whose substance

I disagree with. Maybe their politics I

disagree with or they're writing about

things that I don't actually I disagree

with them on, but I know they are such

good writers and I'm like, "Oh, I'm I'm

reading them." And so I think I think

you only get to that point when you're

an author. I I definitely was not that

before I was an author. If if I

disagreed with someone, it'd be like,

well, that's the point of writing is to

is for me to learn and whatnot. Whereas

I I think I have I have a lot more

tolerance for flawed thinking if it's if

it's wrapped in good pros.

>> It's interesting because I feel like

your respect for the craft of writing

relative to good ideas has gone up. Like

I still think that obviously you really

appreciate good ideas, but I think if we

were having this conversation five years

ago,

it's the ideas that you would have been

focused on a little bit more

>> and now I'm just really feeling this

like deep admiration for beautiful

language. One of the things that I

didn't really understand at the time

when I wrote Psychology of Money,

>> I I I think I probably could have

expressed this when I wrote it, but I

didn't believe it as much as I do now,

>> is when I turned in the manuscript for

Psychology of Money, I had a deep sense

of of of shame when I turned it in.

>> Because I knew the truth, which is the

truth, which is that there's nothing

original in there. There's there's no

there's no new ideas. there's nothing in

there that a million people before me

haven't said and that a million people

already know. And and so I I kind of

felt bad like I I didn't I didn't break

any new ground with this book. There's

really no original concepts in here.

It's just I I did my best. But I think

why it it worked is because I think I

said it in a different way.

>> Yeah.

>> And hopefully and and hopefully I I said

it in a in a good way that people

enjoyed. And so that that just instilled

in me of just like you don't need to say

something new. You just need to say it

well. you need to do a good job telling

a good story about it in with good

words. That's been true for a lot of

non-fiction writers and it can drive

people nuts. Uh you all know Harrari

Nasin Talib, a lot of these people have

been accused of not breaking new ground

and sometimes it's true, sometimes it's

not. But to the extent it's true, it's

like it doesn't matter. They said it

really well. They said it really well

and even if what they said was was

flawed, whatever be you're like, "Yeah,

but it's but it's beautiful, isn't it?"

And so I think so much of that is is a

subjective thing and it's just like if

you if someone listened to the Beatles

and said like, "Oh, it's technically not

good music." Like what what the hell

does that mean? It's good. Like they

liked it. They enjoyed it. So I think it

won. And um and so I think I have a

newfound appreciation for stories over

substance. Even if that sounds kind of

real, like of course I want the

substance to be good. Of course I want

it to do. But all the but what matters

more than anything else is how you say

it.

>> Yeah. The word that I would add to that

is just fun. Like I read your writing.

It's just fun to read. Like I got to

devote a few hours today to just like

reading your writing. And it's just your

writing's easy to read. It's it's it's

like drinking a really delicious

smoothie, you know? Like I like it's

definitely not like cut up my

broccololis, you know, really got to

chew the steak kind of writing. It's

like really fun to read and there's a

nice cadence and and all that. And it's

the same thing with Nim TB. Like all

those scenes where he has fat Tony. Like

I just started laughing and I'm like I

get to go read about fat Tony and every

book is going to have some new, you

know, update to the fat Tony character

and I'm like boom, I'm here for it.

>> And one of the things is interesting

about writing too is that you never know

which whole chapter just flowed out of

the author's brain and which sentence

took a month of agony to get right. you,

but as a reader, you usually have no

idea which one is which. And so there's

a lot of times if you're reading an

author, whoever it might be, and you're

like, "Oh, it just flows. It just

flows." There's part of me that's like,

"Yeah, you didn't see the behind the

scenes. This is there was there were a

lot of dams here. This was not flowing.

There were a lot of there were a lot of

forks in the forks in the road here."

>> So once again, reconcile that with that

good ideas tend to be easier to write.

>> I don't know how to reconcile it because

I I I believe that as well. I believe

that profoundly that every time that I

felt like I had a good idea, it was easy

to write. And every time I got writer's

block, what actually happened was the

idea sucked. The idea was wrong. And the

reason I couldn't get the words on paper

is because I in I because I I knew it

was a dumb idea. I knew it was bad. And

>> so I I don't know how to reconcile that

other than maybe like macro micro where

if your idea is is good, you can you can

get the point on the page, but you still

are going to grapple with a couple

sentences here and there, a couple

transitions here and there. Whereas if

the idea is bad, it's the the whole

thing's going to be be aggravating for

you.

>> Yeah.

>> Then that's what it tends to be. But so

if you ask me which blog posts I'm

proudest of, it's by and large the ones

that took me a couple hours.

not not that long a time to write that

just kind of sat down and just kind of

got it out there and hit publish and

hope for the best that I think uh that

that I'm proudest of. And if you ask me

which ones I was like the most

disappointed in, it was the ones that I

labored over relentlessly for a week.

And the reason that it didn't do well is

cuz the idea sucked. The idea was

clearly wrong.

>> Yeah. Uh so when I was in high school, I

played pretty competitive golf and every

Saturday, every Sunday, I just watch

golf all day, usually in the morning.

And what I'd do is I'd go out and play

golf in the afternoon. And there were so

many times, man, where I'd be watching,

you know, Tiger Woods and its heyday,

whatever. I'd be like, "Oh, I'm going to

go out there and shoot three under par.

I'm not going to miss a shot." And you

develop this like false sense of

confidence that's basically borrowed

confidence from the tour guys that

you're watching. You go out there and

you're just start hacking the ball

around. You remember, "Oh my goodness,

this is so hard." That's how I feel when

I read your writing. It's like watching

the freaking PJ tour golfers. Like right

now, you know, I haven't written since I

read you write it. I'm like, dude, it's

going to be so easy, but there's just

that flow that somehow you that I think

is one of your core skills. It's that

and the storytelling. Another thing that

comes to mind here though is when I

write, I write truly one sentence at a

time in terms of I will write a sentence

and then get up and do the dishes and

come back and write another sentence and

then go talk to my wife for a couple and

like I I I really can't I have a hard

time uh writing at length. I really

can't do it. I think I feel like it's

just one sentence at a time. And I think

part of why that is is I think like when

I get up to go do the dishes, like I'm

thinking about the next sentence, but I

have a hard time connecting them in real

time. And so that's I I bring that up

because you say like it flows, which is

great to hear. Like thank you. But when

I'm writing it, there's there's no flow.

It tends to be when I'm writing it is

very

uh just truly line by line. Every every

line is a little bit of a battle.

>> Wow. What do you feel like is going

through your head as you're in the early

stages of a chapter? Like at what level

do you feel like you have fidelity? And

at what level do you feel like ah, you

know, I'm a little more clueless?

>> I think one thing that I and a lot of

writers will get better at over time is

um uh I I I I have I think I'm much

better at not starting a blog or a

chapter if it if it's not going to work.

just being able to very quickly before

I've typed a single letter being like

that's there's no way that's ever going

to work or being or the opposite of

before I've typed a single letter being

like the psychology of money I don't

even know what's going to be in it and I

I don't even know what I'm going to say

the psychology of money that that that's

going to work let's go let's go with

this I would say that almost without

exception

>> when a non-writer comes to me and says

you should write about x y and z it's

always a bad idea I mean like maybe a

couple exceptions but that

>> what do you that they miss.

>> Um I I think you have to have done it a

billion times to hone the sense of like,

oh that's not going to well that's not

going to work for me. Maybe that maybe

that topic would have worked for you or

somebody else, but how I write and how I

write stories, never in a million years

would that work. And that's why working

with I've worked with so few editors

over time

>> is because they will in a very

well-meaning uh professional sense do

that. You should write about this. I'm

like, what? No, that would sounds

terrible. I'd never do that.

>> And so I I think you just have to figure

that out for yourself. But you get

better at it over time. And so in a in a

much higher degree today than it was 15

or 20 years ago, if I start writing

something, it's probably going to work

out to the end. But that's not because

I'm better at just at figuring it out.

It's because I'm better at not writing

the thing that's not going to work.

The other thing that you've been so

deliberate about is I love how as you've

gotten more successful, you've gotten

more free um in the sense of you just

feel less busy now than you used to be.

you know, like you haven't let

your schedule pile up. And obviously

that's been a super deliberate choice,

but it's pretty obvious that you talk

about the book, like from a lifestyle

perspective, but also from the

perspective as a of a writer, like part

of the reason that you become successful

can be so that you can just have more

time to just putts around and think of

ideas. I remember reading this thing

that um at least part of the reason that

Jerry Seinfeld stopped his show in 1998

was that he realized that what made the

show great is that he and Larry David uh

could go observe society,

>> right,

>> and come up with funny observations. So

they would like go to a deli and watch

how people ordered and make jokes out of

that. But then they became so famous and

recognizable that they couldn't do that

anymore.

>> They couldn't go sit in Central Park and

watch they'd be mobbed. They can't do

it. And so at least part of the reason

that he quit was he was like the thing

that made the show so great we can't do

anymore.

>> It's it's been it's been cut out. And I

think I think so that I I really admire

people who come to that realization. It

also happens to a lot of CEOs who are

like you are really good at starting

companies and but but now it's a big

company and and the thing that made you

great it doesn't exist anymore. Like the

crazy risk that you used to take you

can't do that anymore. So like you have

to recognize that and move on. And so to

me it was just a recognition of like

what makes good writing I think for

everybody for every non for for for

every author is just like tons and tons

of observation and thinking I think

every great writer spends 1% of their

time writing

>> and the rest just reading and thinking

and so if it was like oh as I got a

little bit more successful as a writer

if I was going to fill my schedule with

tasks and not then then I'm not I'm not

I'm not reading I'm not thinking I'm not

doing that anymore

>> and it takes away from the thing that

actually made it good to begin You know,

it's been really good for me. A friend

told me to do this. She was like, "If

you want to be better at observing the

world, here's what you do. Just go

somewhere and just play I Spy." Yeah.

I'm like, "What are you talking about?"

And so you'll just be an Italian

sandwich shop. I Spy the waitress behind

the counter with a big thick accent. I

spy the cheap looking photos of Italy on

the walls. And you just I'm making this

up now. Go to 20 just I spy 20 things.

And if you do that, all of a sudden

you're like,

>> "Wait, okay, now I'm seeing things." And

then if you try to communicate that to

somebody else, they're like, "You are so

observant. You are so, no, I'm not. I

just stand there and I just look and I

just look at 20 things." And if you do

that a few times a day, you all of a

sudden things just pop into mind. And

it's it's like so simple a

three-year-old can do it.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Just being a little bit more

observant with it. And so I've gotten

I've gotten uh in the habit of just

constantly taking notes

>> of things people said and constantly

interrupting conversations. I'm sorry. I

I have to write that down. Really?

>> More more recently.

>> Uh yeah, in the last five or 10 years, I

feel like whenever I have a conversation

or a dinner with a friend, I I interrupt

it every 5 minutes to take a note of

something that they that you just said.

But because a I I would I would

instantly forget it if I didn't. and and

B if if you do that enough over time you

come up with a ton of different insights

and different anecdotes that you can use

as a writer. So a lot of people are not

writers and they but I think it's still

a worthwhile endeavor of just being more

observant and taking notes of what you

do over time that adds up to something

fantastic.

>> How do you feel like all the time that

you spent learning from Ken Burns is

like washed over your creative process?

>> I have I have I have more respect for

him as a content creator and just as a

thinker than than almost anybody. I

think he's just done I mean an un done

an unbelievable job at what he's

produced. The humility at which he's

done it with the business model that he

did it through. The storytelling ability

is is unparalleled. It's it's one of

those there'll never be another Warren

Buffett. There'll never be there'll

never be another Ken Burns. He's just

that is a once in a generation talent,

one once in a multigeneration talent.

>> And so I I just think he's done a better

job at taking things that by and large

people already know.

>> People know how the Civil War ended.

people know how World War II ended. Uh

so much ink has been spilled on every

topic that he's covered. And he and he

added he said it in a way that no one

else has ever said before. And doing so

added more value than than anybody else

has has done. And I've watched I think

all of his documentaries uh at least the

vast majority of them multiple times.

And like you learn something different

every time because they're they're

story. It's not just statistics. you can

remember memorize statistics, but

stories like hit you in a different way

at different times. So, he's I I think

he's the absolute greatest at what he

does.

>> What do you think you've pulled from

him?

>> Uh stories. The the idea I think he was

one of the first where I recognize like

the Civil War documentary, there's not a

lot of new information in there. You

know, people know how the battles played

out and whatnot. If you're talking about

statistics and information, there's

virtually nothing new in there. But the

stories are are just absolutely

sensational. the they're the best

stories that hadn't been told before.

And and the music that's in it, the the

transitions that are in it, the things

that you might completely overlook, the

voice of the narrator is very well

thought out. I think I've talked about

this before that the background music,

he will literally edit the script so

that a a beat in the music will hit at a

powerful word. And like no other

historian's doing that. And that's why a

lot of history books are just dry and

tedious. But a Ken Burns documentary

like, "Hey, they can make you cry." You

know, they're so powerful.

>> Yeah.

Yeah. It really is such a lesson from

our conversation so far is you just

don't need

new ideas.

You just got to find what is the way to

tell this story?

>> Either more eloquently or in some sort

of way that hasn't been told. Sometimes

just finding the person out of the out

of the spotlight who'll give you a

different perspective

>> on whatever's going on.

>> Yeah. You don't you don't have to say

new things, you just have to say them

better.

>> Yeah.

Tell me about this John Gisham line of

the slow buildup followed by the sudden

shocks.

>> Oh yeah. I mean so many John Gisham

book. He's I love John Gisham. I know

some people kind of think it's kind of

this trash fiction but but I love it.

Can't get enough of it. And uh what's

interesting about John Gisham is that a

lot of his chapters are very slow and

grinding and you're like, "What? What?"

And all a sudden like boom, he just hits

you out of the middle of nowhere and

you're like, "Oh gosh, I didn't even see

that coming." And it's more powerful

when it happens because he pulled you in

with tedium and boredom and then he just

slaps you across the face with something

big. And so that that the buildup to it

is so incredibly powerful. Happens in a

lot of movies, too.

>> That doesn't seem like something that

you do as much of though. No, I think it

works in fiction

>> where you're just kind of being dragged

through what is truly just a storyline

probably less well in in non-fiction

where you you really got to keep the the

person engaged because you're trying to

teach them something. So, I think it it

works in that element. A lot of movies

are like that as well. And and John

Griman, too, like there are like huge

plot twists that he'll explain in one

sentence. He's not going to take 10

pages. He'll just be like, "And then Joe

was shot in the head." And it's just and

you're like, "Whoa, whoa, where did this

come from?" I mean, I remember when I

watched Parasite, people were like, "Oh,

this movie is so good. This movie is so

good." And I was watching the movie and

I was like raising an eyebrow like this

is what everyone said was so good. And

over time, you're like, "Okay, there's

this story that's unfolding. There's

this story that's unfolding. There's

this story that's unfolding."

And I'm like, "Come on, what's what's

going on here?" and then boom,

it's like plot twist and now it's just

one of my favorite movies. And it just

took that time and there's the cadence,

the tempo, the the tension, the suspense

that builds. And I agree with you, in a

movie and in a fiction book, that's kind

of what you're there for. But

non-fiction

stories are kind of in service of some

other things. They're less of the end in

themselves. I mean, it's very often in

fiction that you'll be reading and

you're like, why does he keep talking

about the cat on the couch?

>> You keep bringing this up and it just

seems like it's just fluff to and then

in chapter 18 like

>> I like that pun by the way. It's just

fluff. The cat is but then like in

chapter 18 like the cat on the couch is

like is like the game changer in the

story, whatever it might be. So there's

a lot of times where like they'll keep

talking about little things that you

you're like why do you keep saying this?

And you're like oh now I got why you did

that. Okay, totally. How do you think

about

one of the things that I've also noticed

you do more and more is

develop

a kind of frame for the book. So, this

is the art of spending money. And I

noticed a few things like this sentence.

In school, finance is taught as a

science with clean formulas and logical

conclusions. But in the real world,

money is an art. Oh,

>> and then you say, "This book is about

how spending money has little to do with

spreadsheets and numbers and a lot to do

with psychology, envy, social

aspirations identity insecurity and

other topics that are too often ignored

in finance." And it's interesting to

trace your work where psychology of

money was basically a collection of

something like 21 essays. And then this

is very much kind of I have almost like

an integrated way of thinking about the

book that I'm trying to write, the

problem that I'm trying to solve. And

for lack of a better word,

it feels like in that way you've matured

as a writer.

>> I think Psychology of Money was a little

bit more desperate, but it was really

the psychology of building wealth is is

was the common denominator there. That

wasn't really int the intention, but

that's kind of how it it turned up.

There was a common denominator. There

was the psychology of building wealth.

And this is the psychology of of

spending wealth. And there's a lot in

here that's desperate. I go I go in all

sorts of different directions and

whatnot because everybody knows the

classic non-fiction book that could have

been an article

>> of just like you just made one point and

then you just repeated yourself for 300

pages. I want to avoid that as much as I

can. I mean like here's a broad theme,

but now I'm going to go in 47 different

directions to make sure I'm not

repeating myself in the same ideas over

and over again. So that's that's always

been the case, but I I always I think

there needs to be a common theme within

there. Otherwise, it's just a hodgepodge

of random ideas.

>> Mhm. Do you feel like we need more books

to be written or fewer?

>> Oh, I I think I think definitely there's

there's room for for as many ideas as

possible because there are countless

authors and books that were the author

was effectively a nobody when when they

wrote it. You have to have you have to

have the chance to do it. I'll tell you

one of my favorite stories. I use this

in the book. It's one of those stories I

heard in the last couple years. I was

like, "Oh, this is the one story." A

story told by Kevin Cosner.

>> Okay? Okay. And this is back in the

1980s when he was still kind of a

budding actor. He was a famous actor but

kind of let's say he was like a beeless

actor at the time. And he has a friend

who was homeless. And because he was

homeless, Kevin Cosner and his wife

invited them, "Hey, you can come stay in

our basement. Come live in our

basement." The homeless friend was a

writer. He wrote manuscripts uh for for

books. And as he's living with the

Cosners, this homeless guy in their

basement, he's constantly telling Kevin

and his wife, "I'm writing this thing.

It's the best thing I've ever written.

Please read it. Please read it." And no,

I'm not going to read. this my homeless

friend in the basement. I'm not going to

read your thing. U so he's living with

the Cers for several months and

eventually Kevin Cosner's wife says he

he's got to go. He's like he's he's been

here too long. He's got to go. So they

kick him out. And now he's back on the

streets. He's homeless. As he's

homeless, he's calling Kevin every day

being like, "Have you read the

manuscript yet? Have you read it yet?

Please read it." And Kevin's like,

"Stop. I don't care about I'm not going

to read it." Finally, after after a call

one day, Kevin says, "Fine. I'll read

your damn manuscript. Send it over. I'll

read it." And he reads it. And the

manuscript is titled Dances with Wolves.

Whoa.

>> Which became his biggest movie kind of

thing. And his point was like, you never

know where talent's going to come from.

You never know where it's going to come

from. You got to give everybody a

chance.

>> And um and so I I I think about that a

lot of like, you know, I I I mean there

I I think people are the system is

pretty meritocratic today of people like

Nick Mulli and whatnot who were talented

from day one and pretty much got credit

on day one. Not quite. Maybe he got

credit on day 60 or went up and pretty

much he started as a blogger and he was

really good and instantly people are

like that's a good blogger you should

pay attention to him over here. The

system is pretty meritocratic but you

got to give everyone a chance because

writing is an art. It's not a science

where the person who graduates from the

school with a a PhD in creative writing

is going to be the best creative. It's

not that at all. JK Rowling was like a a

broke single mother. I think that was

her backstory and became the greatest

fiction writer of all time. And so

there's I think that I think in anything

that is art driven not uh you know not

objectively driven like how f like how

fast you can run or how you know the

quality of your engineering this is

purely subjective and so everyone

deserves a chance. Wasn't Psychology of

Money kind of rejected

>> by every US publisher? Yes. All of them.

It's published by Haramman House, which

is a British publisher. Is the only

They're wonderful, wonderful people.

I've admired them for life. They're good

friends of mine now. But they're the

truth is they were the only publisher in

the world that even give it a chance.

But and I I don't look back at that

experience of every US publisher

rejecting it with any sense of like you

idiots. There's none of that because

it's all very subjective and you really

don't know what's going to hit. you

really have no idea what's going to work

and what's not going to work. And so I I

don't have any ill feelings to that.

It's a really hard thing to figure out

what makes a book tick.

>> Thanks, dude. Thanks, buddy. Always good

to see you.