Plan/education for someone desiring to achieve financial independence primarily through investing?
Stay in school, learn everything you can, and spend as little money as possible.  And realize that the chances of you dropping out and becoming a millionaire are much lower than the chances of you staying in school and becoming a millionaire.  You're unlikely to be a good investor if you make bets with negative expected payoffs. The basic problem here is that you need to have money to invest before you can make a profit from it.  Now if you have say $500K or more, you can put that in mutual funds and live modestly off the profits.  If you don't have that $500K to start out with, you're either looking at a long time frame to accumulate it - say by working a job for 30+ years, and contributing the max to your 401k - or are playing the market trying to get it.  The last is essentially gambling (though with somewhat better odds than casinos or horse racing), and puts you up against the Gambler's Ruin problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_ruin You also, I think, have a very mistaken idea about the a typical investor's lifestyle.  Take for instance the best known one, Warren Buffet.  No offence to him, but from everything I've read he lives a pretty boring life.  Spends all day reading financial reports, and what sort of life is that? As for flying places being exciting, ever tried it?  I have (with scientific conferences, but I expect boardrooms are much the same), and it is boring.  Flying at 30,000 ft is boring, and if it's a commercial flight, unpleasant as well.  A conference room in London, Paris, or Milan is EXACTLY the same as a conference room in Podunk, Iowa.  Even the cities outside the conference rooms are much of a muchness these days: you can eat at McDonalds in Paris or Shanghai.  Only way to find interest is to take time from your work to get outside the conference rooms & commercial districts, and then you're losing money.
Here would be the general steps to my mind for creating such a plan: Write out the final desired outcome. Is it $x in y years to fund your retirement? Is it $a in b years to put as a house down payment? This is the first step in defining how much money you want at what point in time. Consider what is your risk tolerance and how much time do you plan on spending in this plan. Is it rebalancing once a quarter and that's it or do you plan on doing monthly research and making tweaks all the time? This is slightly different from the first where one has to be mindful of how much volatility would one handle and what time commitment does one have for an investing strategy. Also, how much money would you be adding to the investments on what kind of time table would also be worth noting here. Construct the asset allocation based on the previous two steps along with historical returns averaged out to be a first draft of what you are buying in general. Is it US stocks? Is it a short-term bond fund? There are more than a few choices here that may make sense and it is worth considering based on the first couple of responses that determine what this will look like. Retirement in 40 years may be quite different than a house down payment in 2 years for example. Determine what brokerages or fund companies would offer such funds along with what types of accounts you'd want to have as in some countries there may be tax-advantaged accounts that may be useful to use here. This is where you're almost ready to start by doing the homework of figuring out how will things work. This may vary depending on one's jurisdiction. Get the applications from whatever institutions you'll be using and run with the desired asset allocation across various funds and accounts. Note that in the first few steps there were points of being aware of how much would you have, how aggressive are you investing and so forth. This is where you actually send in the money and get things rolling. Run with the plan and make tweaks as needed to achieve result, hopefully desired or better. "&gt; There may not be anything shameful about doing that, but that scenario is, indeed, a business **failure**. People do not shutter a profitable (successful) business and then go to work for someone else.  Not necessarily.  It may very well be a ""planned exit"" -- not all businesses will (nor should they be expected to or *planned* to) endure into perpetuity... just because the corporate charter sets no specific limit to the duration of the corporate entity does not mean that it is (and certainly not that it needs to be) ""immortal"".  And a business that may be quite profitable to run, even if it's final pre-closing year is less so... is not necessarily a ""failure"": in fact closing an operation down *while it is (still) slightly profitable*, and BEFORE it begins losing money (and/or selling it's assets off while they still have substantial investment value), may in fact be the **wisest** move (especially financially speaking); which counts as anything BUT a ""failure"".  Plus there are several industries where a ""temporary"" existence of a firm is heartily recognized as a positive thing: take films as an example, a new ""company"" (with a pre-planned, limited lifespan) will often be formed to craft and produce the film, and cease to exist once that task has been completed.  And I think the hand-wringing about ""restaurants"" is especially gratuitous... if ever there was/is a business niche that was subject to fad &amp; fashion, and the ephemeral even transitory nature of people's ""tastes"", it would be the ""boutique"" segment of the restaurant industry; even the ones (or chains) that do manage to survive, often do so by dramatically changing their menus, brand &amp; character... so that a decade later they barely resemble their former selves.  Sure there are also other segments of the industry that are generally ""stable"" -- but many of them tend to be slow-or-no growth as well.  &gt;I believe a key contributor to the confusion is talking about the self-employed and business owners in the same breath. Someone who's self-employed basically owns a job. His income will always be directly proportional to the amount of time spent working and the company does not exist apart from himself.   It covers an entire spectrum... and the lines are rather fuzzy.  Yes, a lot of self-employed people (whether configured as sole proprietorships, partnerships, LLC's or full ""corporations"") are by INTENT -- and probably always will be -- simply ""job replacement"" businesses. (And again, there is NOTHING wrong with that -- whether they endure for a year, 5 years, 10 years or an entire lifetime). How or why people have come to view this as somehow of less ""merit"" than someone being gainfully employed *for someone else* -- has always puzzled me.  But some of those -- just as some of the ""part time"" or ""on the side"" businesses -- can take on an (unexpected, unplanned) ""life of their own"" and grow into substantial enterprises that employ hundreds and even thousands of people over multiple decades. AFTER THE FACT, the owners will often (at least publicly) claim that it was ""all part of the plan"", but in several cases where I know the founder/owner personally... I know from private conversation that THAT simply wasn't the case.  &gt;A business owner, on the other hand, has processes/equipment/staff/IP in place that generates income whether or not she gets out of bed in the morning.  You are speaking of someone who has achieved a CERTAIN level of success, and a certain SIZE of operations.  &gt;These are different people with different goals and cannot be lumped into the same demographic block.  Any and all ""blocks"" are going to be subjective (and in a very real sense the dividing lines placed at rather arbitrary segments) -- a particular named ""block"" will be very true from ONE point of view (with lots of things that correlate and appear to be uniformly applicable)... and yet fallacious from another (where there is again a whole spectrum of distinctions)." "A financial planner can help with investments, insurance, estate planning, budgeting, retirement planning, saving for college, tax planning/prep, and other money topics. One way to get a sense is to look at this Certified Financial Planner topic list. Another idea is to look at this book (my favorite I've read) which covers roughly a similar topic list in a concise form: http://www.amazon.com/Smart-Simple-Financial-Strategies-People/dp/0743269942 It could not hurt at all to read that before deciding to visit a planner, so you have baseline knowledge. By the way, look for the CFP certification which is a generalist certification. A CFP might also have a deeper cert in certain topics or connect you with someone who does. For example: You really want a generalist (CFP) who may have an additional credential as well. The idea is to holistically look at what you're trying to accomplish and all finance-related areas. Especially because there may be tradeoffs. The CFP would then refer you to or work with lawyers, accountants, etc. Importantly, some advisors are fiduciaries (must act in your interests) and some are not. In particular many stockbrokers are neither qualified planners (no CFP or equivalent) nor are they fiduciaries. Stay away. There are several models for paying a financial planner, including: There's an organization called NAPFA (napfa.org) for fiduciary non-commission-based planners. Membership there is a good thing to look for since it's a third party that defines what fee-only means and requires the no-commissions/fiduciary standard. Finally, the alternative I ended up choosing was to just take the CFP course myself. You can do it online via correspondence course, it costs about the same as 1 year of professional advice. I also took the exam, just to be sure I learned the stuff. This is the ""extreme DIY"" approach but it is cheaper over time and you know you are not going to defraud yourself. You still might do things that are counterproductive and not in your interests, but you know that already probably ;-) Anyway I think it's equivalent to about a quarter's worth of work at a decent college, or so. There are about 6 textbooks to dig through. You won't be an experienced expert at the end, but you'll know a lot. To get an actual CFP cert, you need 3 years experience on top of the courses and the exam - I haven't done that, just the book learning. Someone who puts ""CFP"" after their name will have the 3 years on top of the training. Some editorial: many planners emphasize investing, and many people looking for planners (or books on finance) emphasize investing. This is a big mistake, in my view. Investing is more or less a commodity and you just need someone who won't screw it up, overcharge, and/or lose your money on something idiotic or inappropriate. Some people are in plain-bad and inappropriate investments, don't get me wrong. But once you fix that and just get into anything decent, your biggest planning concerns are probably elsewhere. On investments, I'd look for a planner to just get you out of overpriced annuities and expensive mutual funds you may have been sold (anything you were sold by a salesperson is probably crap). And look for them to help you decide how much to invest, and how much in stocks vs. bonds. Those are the most important investment decisions." Since your child is 2, he has a long time horizon for investment.  Assuming the savings will be used at age 19, that's 17 years.  So, I think your best bet is to invest primarily in equities (i.e. stock-based funds) and inside an RESP. Why equities?  Historically, equities have outperformed debt and cash over longer time periods.  But, equities can be volatile in the short term. So, do purchase some fixed-income investments (e.g. 30% government bonds and money market funds), and do also spread your equity money around as well -- e.g. buy some international funds in addition to Canadian funds.  Rebalance every year, and as your child gets closer to university age, start shifting some assets out of equities and into fixed-income, to reduce risk.  You don't want the portfolio torpedoed by an economic crisis the year before the money is required! Next, why inside an RESP? Finally... what if your kid doesn't attend post-secondary education?  First, you should probably get a Family RESP, not a Group RESP.  Group RESPs have strict rules and may forfeit contributions if your kid doesn't attend.  Have a look at Choosing the Right RESP and Canadian Capitalist's post The Pros and Cons of Group RESP Plans. In a Family plan, if none of your kids end up attending post-secondary education, then you forfeit the government match money -- the feds get it back through a 20% surtax on withdrawals.  But,  you'll have the option of rolling over remaining funds into your RRSP, if you have room. So you're 23 with no higher graduation, certificates etc which would allow you to study / training but with a high passion for logical thinking and math? Im 31 now, i was in a similar position back then when i was 23. The very best thoughts i want to throw you over: FORGET IT (AT LEAS THIS WAY) - You need cash equity (not borrowed) to even get a foot in the door (read on why) . The fact that you even consider to trade with a few hundred dollar shows how desperate you're, it would very likely result in loss, resignation and mental pain.  Let me get you a reality check: If you think you can quadruple your money within months with ease and no risk your wrong - this mindset is gambling - don't end up as gambler. To make 24K a year or 2K a month (taxes are not included) would mean 10% a month on a 20K account which would be almost impossible on a long run (show me a hedge-fund with that performance) - What do you do on draw down months - 3 months no profit would mean you're 8K behind - you wont make a living wit ha 20K account in a western civilization and normal lifestyle. Big question, how do you want to trade? Everything newsfeed / latency based is very hard to compete in. So called technical systems drawing lines, fancy indicators etc are bogus in my opinion (read taleb black swan). Trading/speculation based on fundamentals is a different animal - It to be able to do that you would need to understand the market you trade and what influences it, takes lot time, brainpower , tools ready (ugh, hard to write the picture on my mind). Im 31 years into trading now, seen so many faces come and most of them go in that time , to me it sounds like you quietly hope for a lotto ticket. To speak about hardware, ie the tools you need depends on your trading style (again a hint that a lot more study is needed. If you're really hooked, readreadread and get in touch with people - always question yourself. "A good place to start is to read, such as :  Robert T. Kiyosaki : poor dad rich dad. It is quite simple but it gives the good mindset to start. But moreover it is stated in the book : ""the best investement you can make is educate yourself"". You current situation is quite difficcult, but don't give up on your study. From your post i didn't understand : do you have a master degree?  If you love math, learn coding and find a job in banking or else. People that know how to code AND have a good level in math worth a lot." "I tell you how I started as an investor: read the writings of probably the best investor of the history and become familiarized with it: Warren Buffett. I highly recommend ""The Essays of Warren Buffett"", where he provides a wise insight on how a company generates value, and his investment philosophy. You won't regret it! And also, specially in finance, don't follow the advice from people that you don't know, like me." "I would like to add my accolades in saving $3000, it is an accomplishment that the majority of US households are unable to achieve. source While it is something, in some ways it is hardly anything.  Working part time at a entry level job will earn you almost three times this amount per year, and with the same job you can earn about as much in two weeks as this investment is likely to earn, in the market in one year.   All this leads to one thing:  At your age you should be looking to increase your income.  No matter if it is college or a high paying trade, whatever you can do to increase your life time earning potential would be the best investment for this money.   I would advocate a more patient approach.  Stick the money in the bank until you complete your education enough for an ""adult job"".  Use it, if needed, for training to get that adult job.  Get a car, a place of your own, and a sufficient enough wardrobe.  Save an emergency fund.  Then invest with impunity. Imagine two versions of yourself.  One with basic education, a average to below average salary, that uses this money to invest in the stock market.  Eventually that money will be needed and it will probably be pulled out of the market at an in opportune time.  It might worth less than the original 3K! Now imagine a second version of yourself that has an above average salary due to some good education or training.  Perhaps that 3K was used to help provide that education.  However, this second version will probably earn 25,000 to 75,000 per year then the first version.  Which one do you want to be?  Which one do you think will be wealthier?   Better educated people not only earn more, they are out of work less.  You may want to look at this chart."