> "b-but go see a IFA"
> I don't want to nor care for their overpriced advice.
Hardly anyone here says that.
Here you're more likely to read that, for sums of less than £5m, "the only thing you would get from an IFA is expensive hand-holding".
As per the other comments, you appear to misunderstand the Lifestrategy series, though - if you'll excuse me saying you appear to be missing the point or misunderstand what's in them.
The Lifestrategy 60 and 80 contain both stocks and bonds - I think it's important to understand why. This is covered in Tim Hale's Smarter Investing and, I'm sure, the Boglehead books.
If you're not resident in the UK then you can't use an ISA, although you can only sock away £20,000 a year in one of those, anyway. More importantly, if you're not resident in the UK you don't have to pay income or capital gains tax on your investment earnings.
EDIT: This was wrong. ~~However, being non-resident in the UK also means that you can't declare you are on a W8-BEN form, hence are unable to reclaim tax on your US equity holdings (which constitute about 40% or 45% of a Lifestrategy 100). Hence you might consider instead getting your equity allocation through non-US funds - e.g. developed world ex-US + emerging markets, or FTSE 350 + STOXX + developed Asia + emerging markets.~~
Most of what I know I learned from this sub (and perhaps some others on Reddit) and Tim Hale's Smarter Investing .
These sources emphasise that most people can't beat the market - most professional fund managers don't 1, 2, 3.
However, I have subsequently been influenced by Benjamin Graham's The Intelligent Investor, which really speaks to me and makes sense.
I am concerned that equities are currently overvalued, particularly in the US, for example. This resonates with Graham's narrative, that over the long term the markets boom and bust cyclicly cyclical, that one must simply buy assets that are fairly priced.
I don't think I'm qualified to pick individual stocks (and also you need at least 20 - 40 individual stocks in order to reduce risk down to systemic levels - i.e. properly average out disasters like bankruptcies amongst your holdings), but I've been considering how to apply Graham's "margin of safety" to the 21st century, and was very impressed by Norbert Keimling's Predicting Stock Market Returns Using Shiller-CAPE And PB (he updates this map quarterly) and so I am now buying index funds on a value basis.
Heed Lars Kroijer .
Read Tim Hale's Smarter Investing .
> I've been told it's not that hard and fairly risk free to get 4% + Inflation on an investment,
This number is often cited, as it's the number that was originally arrived at by Bergen and confirmed by the Trinity Study.
More recent studies suggest the safe withdrawal rate is probably a bit lower, around 3.2%.
The safe withdrawal rate depends on your definition of "safe" - what percentage probability of failure do you accept? - and your asset allocation. But if you have a 90% chance of success that also means that, 9 times out of 10, your investment portfolio will grow.
This is indeed, as per other comments, based on investing the money in index funds of stocks and bonds. Heed Lars Kroijer .
I think to many people in your position, having made a fortune on a single investment, a crash is inconceivable. Especially in the case of Bitcoin - for years you must've been hearing that it's a scam and a bubble, so the boy's cried wolf a few too many times now for you to pay attention. But we can learn from history, and I should point out that Cisco's share price still hasn't recovered from the dot-com crash, even nearly 20 years later. If your holdings half in price overnight, you might well be stuck with that.
What's O'Leary's track record?
The majority of funds don't beat the market average (1, 2, 3) and you can't know that their track record will be maintained. There have been some quite famous fund managers who achieved 2 decades of spectacular results, and then another decade of failure.
Here you'll find most people advocate index funds, which do not suffer quite the same degree of uncertainty - they're guaranteed to achieve the market average, near as damnit.
I believe that an index tracker is the appropriate vehicle for a JSA.
You can't use one JSA for two kids, because the investments in the JSA belong to the child - they get handed over at age 18, and you can't withdraw them in the meantime. If they had some dreadful row, for example if one stole the other's boyfriend, then you couldn't make the one, in whose name the JSA is held, share it with the other.
Try Lars Kroijer's explanation?
I highly recommend the book that I already mentioned yesterday, Tim Hale's Smarter Investing - its clear and structured explanation is what made everything fall into place for me.
Read Tim Hale's Smarter Investing to clear up the gaps in your understanding raised by the other replies.