Financial planners cater to younger, less rich -- Is that good?

An article in today's Wall Street Journal discussed the emerging trend of financial planners catering to younger, less affluent folks. People need help navigating a much more complex financial world than their parents faced: 401(k)s, student loan debt, benefits, insurance, etc. I think it's great that there is help available for people, but I wonder how helpful it really is.

The problem is the costs: Most fee-only financial planners charge $100-$250 per hour, which is a huge amount when you're talking about someone making around the median income with little in the way of assets. And that's just for the financial advice. If you turn over your portfolio for them to manage, you'll hand over another 1-1.5% of that money each year, in addition to the expense ratios on the mutual funds they choose.

The problem is that financial planner services scale well: Someone with a net worth of $1,000,000 might not need that much more in the way of help than someone with $10,000, depending on the individual circumstances. So a financial planner might make sense for a high net worth person, but is probably just not a good investment for someone with less money.

I also think that most people could manage their own finances very competently with some basic research. Here are a few books that I think younger, less affluent people should read before they consider hiring a professional. If after reading these, you still think you need help, go for it:

To learn about budgeting: America's Cheapest Family Gets You Right on the Money: Your Guide to Living Better, Spending Less, and Cashing in on Your Dreams.

To learn about investing/financial planning: The Wall Street Journal Guide to Planning Your Financial Future.

In most cases, I think you'll be able to get a lot of the benefit of hiring a financial planner from those books for a whole lot less money.