This document defines how Invest-GT should eventually turn a small number of explicit human inputs into an executable life portfolio.
The idea is not to replace judgment. The idea is to make judgment more structured, more legible, and more practically usable.
A life-plan compiler should accept a limited set of declared goals, constraints, and conditions, and transform them into:
- a sequence of priorities,
- a manageable portfolio of actions,
- a timing structure,
- a reason record,
- explicit trade-offs for self and others.
With few but explicit inputs, a person should be able to generate a first practical life plan.
The output is not a final destiny. It is a structured starting portfolio that can be executed, reviewed, and revised.
The compiler should answer:
- what to do,
- when to do it,
- why it comes first,
- what it costs,
- what it enables later,
- what it risks for oneself,
- what it risks for others.
A first version of the compiler should work from a deliberately small input surface.
The system should support a bounded set of selectable goals such as:
- survival and safety
- health and vitality
- stability and order
- education and competence
- income and financial resilience
- family and relationship quality
- freedom and optionality
- contribution and service
- meaning and spiritual coherence
- institutional or community building
The user does not need to select all of them.
The compiler should record at least:
- health condition
- energy level
- cash buffer or financial stress
- schedule control
- dependents or care obligations
- social support quality
- current work condition
- current education or skill level
- major active headwinds
The compiler should record:
- money constraints
- time constraints
- physical constraints
- legal constraints
- moral constraints
- geographic constraints
- family constraints
- institutional constraints
The system should ask:
- how much downside can be tolerated,
- what losses would be catastrophic,
- which actions are reversible,
- which commitments should remain optional.
The compiler should ask who else is materially affected by the plan:
- spouse or partner
- children
- parents or dependents
- team or group members
- local community
- institution or organization
The compiler should proceed in layers rather than trying to optimize everything at once.
First address catastrophic downside and major headwinds.
Examples:
- untreated health breakdown
- severe sleep deprivation
- acute debt spiral
- unsafe housing
- addiction
- relationship chaos with strong downstream effects
- legal exposure
Second secure conditions without which higher goals cannot be executed well.
Examples:
- sleep and baseline health
- emergency savings buffer
- schedule control
- basic literacy or skill repair
- minimum social support
- baseline order and routine
Only then should the portfolio heavily emphasize high-upside compounding domains.
Examples:
- education
- skill accumulation
- financial accumulation
- habit systems
- relationship strengthening
- trust and reputation
- spiritual discipline where relevant
After prerequisites are reasonably stable, the system should prefer investments that broaden future choice.
Examples:
- language learning
- portable skills
- geographic flexibility
- savings and liquidity
- durable networks
- institutional credibility
Finally, the plan may allocate serious effort toward long-range projects such as:
- family formation
- institution building
- public contribution
- major creative work
- political or civic engagement
- mission-driven or religious commitments
Each compiled plan should produce at least the following sections.
A ranked list of what comes first and why.
A set of concrete actions with:
- action name
- target domain
- effort class
- start timing
- frequency or cadence
- expected gain
- expected downside
- prerequisites
- review date
For each major action:
- benefits for self,
- costs for self,
- benefits for others,
- costs for others,
- whether the action is mostly positive-sum, redistributive, or destructive.
The plan should state which actions unlock others.
The plan should state when to stop, pause, or revise because reality changed.
A first practical compiler should follow rules like these:
- remove large avoidable headwinds before adding ambitious new projects,
- do not buy upside by destroying health,
- do not call a strategy a group success if it quietly sacrifices identifiable persons,
- preserve optionality under uncertainty,
- protect maintenance and preservation work from being invisibly crowded out,
- prefer positive-sum creation over zero-sum transfer when both are available,
- use lesser-evil logic only when cleaner options are truly unavailable.
The compiler must not evaluate a person only as an isolated unit.
A strong life plan should show both:
- what the plan does for the actor,
- what the plan does to surrounding persons and groups.
This matters because some plans improve one life by externalizing hidden damage onto others. The system should keep those costs explicit.
This document should connect to:
docs/life-portfolio-theory.mddocs/personal-and-collective-investment.mddocs/collateral-damage-and-externalities.mdpipeline/00_inputs/priorities/pipeline/03_models/investment-schema.mdpipeline/03_models/model-family-life-portfolio.mdpipeline/03_models/model-family-risk-and-reversibility.md
A mature Invest-GT implementation should eventually allow a person or group to declare a small set of goals and constraints and receive a draft portfolio that is:
- understandable,
- challengeable,
- revisable,
- ethically legible,
- practically executable.