3 ms·

I work in the financial advice industry, and I honestly personally believe current legislation in most countries have truly failed to protect normal people from

I work in the financial advice industry, and I honestly personally believe current legislation in most countries have truly failed to protect normal people from bad financial advice, despite that being their entire point. The problem is, giving financial advice en-masse is very expensive and risky for a company. You need to ask a lot of questions about the users situation (assets, debt, income, dependants, etc) to make an informed decision. If you give bad financial advice, your putting yourself at big legal risk. The language has to be very specific (aka hard to understand for normal humans). And often the advice comes out as rather un-opinionated and general, which for most people means it's hard to actually action and put in place. All in all, it's a big investment, big cost, stresses out your legal team - which means less companies choose to do it, which in turn make it less accessible. The alternative camp is very clearly just choosing to give 0 advice. Just giving access to investment products, with a full hands off 'make your own choices man' approach. Think robinhood. This is where people make mistakes. The weird thing is while legitimate companies are afraid of giving advice, anyone with a social media presence can get online and talk whatever smack they want, with very little worry of blowback. One of the biggest mistakes I see is somebody from one country (say AU) watching a youtuber talking about another country (say US) like it's a universal truth. Different financial systems have their own metas depending on government retirement schemes, importance of credit scores, mortgage systems etc. Most useful and practical advice is country specific. Legislation has just fully failed to protect consumers from bad advice, by making the barrier to entry so high for legitimate companies looking to inform at scale that it's not financially viable - compared to just doing the hands off 'not our problem man' approach. They've also done nothing to stop people taking advice from randoms online (not that they really could). Unfortunately visiting a personalised financial advisor in the same way you'd visit a doctor, is just expensive and not an option for most.

pmontra 4y ago
> And often the advice comes out as rather un-opinionated and general, which for most people means it's hard to actually action and put in place I agree with this. It seems that I have to make all the choices myself to shield the company from any responsibility so why should I pay some fee for the advice? No wonders that people get advice from random videos on YouTube or any equivalent source.
- JusticeJuice 4y ago
  I have found there is really good advice out there, it's just in places most people won't look. The first one is books. Go to a book shop, and find a book on personal finances, written by a registered financial advisor in your country, for your country. It'll be long, stuffy, boring as fuck, but you'll likely come away well informed. I think if you're reading HN this would suit. Second one is personal financial advisers. You want to talk to an independant one, who's not tied to a company that's actually selling financial products. They shouldn't be paid a percentage commision (also called trailhead) on your money - I never understood how somebody can be 'acting in your best interests' if they're paid by how you invest. You should pay them by their time, like you would a doctor. Except it'll cost like $200 You also want a personalised financial adviser. Some advisors say like the one you'd find it you went to a bank, or a mortgage shop have a limited scope - they're only allowed to give advice about the bank's products, or mortgages specifically. You want full picture. Sometimes employee assistance programmes if you have that will actually get you a few free sessions with an adviser, use them.
  - daurnimator 4y ago
    > You should pay them by their time, like you would a doctor. Except it'll cost like $200 I looked into this a couple of months ago. It turns out it costs minimum ~$2,000 here in Australia to get anything that's not "General Advice only".
    - JusticeJuice 4y ago
      Ah dang. I was a bit worried I low-balled that number. You might've already seen this, but you tried this guide for finding one? There's a register of advisers in aus, could shop around a bit? https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5eb4889e5e47b4255c41009e/t/5edf5a6f3704b46a54706dc5/1591696002687/Who-Can-I-Trust-2020.pdf https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5eb4889e5e47b4255c410...
  - Ozzie_osman 4y ago
    > Except it'll cost like $200 I don't know where you could possibly get high-quality, personalized financial advice (with fiduciary standard) for 200. From my experience it's more likely it's on the order of thousands of dollars.
usrn 4y ago
I'm not sure it's possible to protect people from bad financial advice without creating class stratification between those who can actually invest in useful things and those that can't.

pmontra 4y ago

> And often the advice comes out as rather un-opinionated and general, which for most people means it's hard to actually action and put in place I agree with this. It seems that I have to make all the choices myself to shield the company from any responsibility so why should I pay some fee for the advice? No wonders that people get advice from random videos on YouTube or any equivalent source.

JusticeJuice 4y ago
I have found there is really good advice out there, it's just in places most people won't look. The first one is books. Go to a book shop, and find a book on personal finances, written by a registered financial advisor in your country, for your country. It'll be long, stuffy, boring as fuck, but you'll likely come away well informed. I think if you're reading HN this would suit. Second one is personal financial advisers. You want to talk to an independant one, who's not tied to a company that's actually selling financial products. They shouldn't be paid a percentage commision (also called trailhead) on your money - I never understood how somebody can be 'acting in your best interests' if they're paid by how you invest. You should pay them by their time, like you would a doctor. Except it'll cost like $200 You also want a personalised financial adviser. Some advisors say like the one you'd find it you went to a bank, or a mortgage shop have a limited scope - they're only allowed to give advice about the bank's products, or mortgages specifically. You want full picture. Sometimes employee assistance programmes if you have that will actually get you a few free sessions with an adviser, use them.
- daurnimator 4y ago
  > You should pay them by their time, like you would a doctor. Except it'll cost like $200 I looked into this a couple of months ago. It turns out it costs minimum ~$2,000 here in Australia to get anything that's not "General Advice only".
  - JusticeJuice 4y ago
    Ah dang. I was a bit worried I low-balled that number. You might've already seen this, but you tried this guide for finding one? There's a register of advisers in aus, could shop around a bit? https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5eb4889e5e47b4255c41009e/t/5edf5a6f3704b46a54706dc5/1591696002687/Who-Can-I-Trust-2020.pdf https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5eb4889e5e47b4255c410...
- Ozzie_osman 4y ago
  > Except it'll cost like $200 I don't know where you could possibly get high-quality, personalized financial advice (with fiduciary standard) for 200. From my experience it's more likely it's on the order of thousands of dollars.

usrn 4y ago

I'm not sure it's possible to protect people from bad financial advice without creating class stratification between those who can actually invest in useful things and those that can't.