I don't think calling it "rational financial planning" is a great idea. All I'm saying is that it's better than calling it "optimal financial planning". It's probably a good thing to replace "rational" with "optimal" if you have good reason to believe your approach is in fact optimal. But financial planning is a game of such complexity and with so many possible moves that it would be the height of hubris to regard your approach as an actual optimum.

ETA: Ah, I see this in one of your links:

Optimal on the other hand doesn't so much require specific contrast because pretty much everything is suboptimal by default to some degree or another -- optimizing is understood as an ongoing and very relativistic process.

Fair enough. Disregard my whining.