If you've ever taken a train journey in the United Kingdom, you're probably familiar with Richard Templar's ever-expanding "Rules" series. There's always at least one of these cheesy tomes somewhere within the "bestsellers" section in WHSmith, promising easy answers and quick fixes to this morning's caffeine-addled commuters.
I vaguely remember reading The Rules of Life as a teenager and being unimpressed by it, but when I spotted The Rules of Wealth in my local library the other day, I thought it might be at least worth a skim; I wasn't expecting much, but maybe I'd learn a thing or two that I could apply to my personal finances.
As it turns out, the only smart financial decision I've made in relation to this book was to borrow it from the library, because thank God I didn't pay £10.99 for this garbage.
The Rules of ... books are bestsellers, which makes me wonder who's buying them? Judging by Templar's simplistic writing style (two pages per "rule" i.e. chapter), I can only assume he's targeting an audience who don't generally read books. No wonder that so many of his Rules are so staggeringly obvious - e.g. Rule 61: "Think Long Term" - that if you need to be told them, you're probably illiterate. Rule 40 reminds me to "Spend Less Than You Earn" - yes, it really does take him until the 40th rule to make this point!
Or what about "Rule 57: Use your head"? Gee, Richard, what a profound insight - until now I'd been making financial decisions by getting chimpanzees to pick random stock tips out of a goldfish bowl, so thanks for the reminder that financial intelligence requires me to think. And by the way, doesn't this contradict "Rule 72: Play your hunches"? Not to mention "Rule 103: Know how to choose charities", in which you advise among other things to "trust your gut feelings"? (By the way, that's just about the worst way you could possibly determine which charities to donate to, but unpacking that point would take a book in itself.)
That's hardly the only time Templar contradicts himself. In Rule 41 he says "Don't borrow money - unless you really, really have to", which is actually semi-decent advice. But then just six rules later he tells us: "don't rent, buy", repeating the familiar mantra that it's better to own your home than to rent it. Great, so how am I supposed to buy a house when you just told me that I shouldn't borrow money?
Templar assures us that "a mortgage can actually be viewed as an investment rather than borrowing", a dubious claim to say the least. Multiple studies have shown that house prices generally rise in line with inflation and no more, and that's without considering all the extra money you have to spend on property maintenance, taxes etc.. Even Templar can tell you in Rule 50 that "property, in the long run, will not outpace shares"; yet another self-contradiction.
As for the idea that buying always trumps renting: I'll freely admit, as a renter, that renting poses certain disadvantages compared to buying - but, as anyone who isn't completely brainwashed can tell you, it also comes with a whole host of advantages. It's a matter of trade-offs, and the one-size-fits-all refrain that "renting is for suckers!" is nothing short of toxic. (By the way, The Rules of Wealth was published in 2007, right before the bottom fell out of the global housing market. Meaning anyone who took Templar's advice back then and bought their first home probably regretted the decision not long after. But anyone who takes a book like this seriously deserves what they get.)
A few more rules that deserve honourable mentions:
"Rule 67: Don't answer ads that promise get-rich-quick schemes - it won't be you who gets rich quick" - You mean I shouldn't have transferred my life savings to that Nigerian prince?
"Rule 94: Don't surrender equity" - Oh, so is that why every single famous Silicon Valley success story you can name took some kind of funding deal in which the founders surrendered part of their equity?
"Rule 59: If you are going to get financial advice, pay for it." - No, no, no, no, just no.
All in all, this could be the worst book I've ever read. On the plus side, it had entertainment value; I read it while sitting next to my wife, and we had a few laughs together as I read her some of the most egregious examples of Templar's terrible punditry.
I'll leave things with my own rule of wealth, which I adapted from the aforementioned rule 59: if you're going to get advice on money, wealth, life, or in fact anything whatsoever, don't get it from Richard Templar.