That's not antifragile nor even particularly robust. 20% efficiency waste in salary is existential risk if it happens that: - you get ill - you get wiped bec

That's not antifragile nor even particularly robust. 20% efficiency waste in salary is existential risk if it happens that: - you get ill - you get wiped because you have not diversified these extra 20% - you get wiped because your 80% is wiped In short, the strategy only works if there is no downside. As there is always a potential for a big enough catastrophe, correct antifragile approach is to never gamble (with your own funds) until you have existential risks covered. If you have to ask "what will I do if bad outcome x happens" then you have not covered done existential risk. I recommend putting in typical natural and manmade disasters. This banker job? Worth about $0 in wartime. You better have some useful skills. Gambling on being rich enough for an escape or on people willing to work for you does not always pay either. Most people do not have even basic existential risks covered. Such as having a place to live. Preferably more than one. Water to survive a few weeks. Or good enough friends as well as enough portable capital for a clean break. (Such capital is knowledge or easily portable equipment. Not currency, as WW2 teaches.) Even to some surprise some really rich.