What does your optional spending look like?

[Retired To Win]

I would be perfectly happy with the baseline lifestyle I describe in my blog post about my $15,000 annual baseline living expenses.  But, since I have considerable surplus passive income over and above that $15,000, I do spend additional money on optional things.  And here's a summary of that optional spending for the last 6 months.

[  ] restaurants & concerts $593
[  ] liquor $241
[  ] at-home entertainment $1000*
[  ] donations $1100
[  ] travel $664
[  ] gifts & miscellaneous $270
[  ] haircuts $36
[  ] books & bookcases $456**
[  ] blog expenses $495***

... for a spendy total of $4855, or about $800 a month.  (Which, however, still left me with a net net 44% passive income surplus of $9930 for the 6 months.)

What about you?  What does your optional spending look like?


* If I were a business, I would capitalize/amortize this at-home entertainment expense line because I'll watch/listen those DVDs and CDs over and over for years.

** My books are my "secret" unfrugal passion.

*** These blog expenses consist of some $300 of one-time design fees and the annual domain & hosting payments.

[forummm]

Almost everything is optional. We could just eat rice and beans only. But we eat a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc. We could live in a tent. But we have a nice house. It's impossible for me to calculate all those items.

[Janie]

I agree with Forummm. I wouldn't break out break out my spending to baseline and optional and don't see any reason to categorize haircuts, etc separately. "Food treats" lol.

[bobechs]

Eggzackly.  Spending is spending.  Dividing it out so is just a personal finance parlor trick, not that different from categorizing housing expenses all-in as "investments" or for that matter perversely calling lottery tickets investments.  The degree of harm done by such self-deceptions; when income -calling it passive or not doesn't matter much either- comfortably exceeds spending, the harm is slight indeed.

But it's really not honest accounting.

[Retired To Win]

Almost everything is optional. We could just eat rice and beans only. But we eat a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc. We could live in a tent. But we have a nice house. It's impossible for me to calculate all those items.

No, no, that's not the way I'm presenting the question.  Groceries are not optional.  Having a place to live in is not optional. And for the purposes of this thread, how much you spend on them is not at issue.  I wanted to keep the conversation non-judgmental.  Whatever you are spending on your groceries, that's what you're spending as a baseline groceries expense at the moment.  Now talk to me about how much you spend, for example, on totally optional "restaurants".

That's how I am defining "optional spending" for the purpose of this conversation.

Thanks...

[GuitarStv]

Groceries aren't optional .  .  . but buying much more than rice and beans at the store is.  Having a place to live is not optional, but a tent in the woods qualifies.

Pretty much everything spent is some degree of optional.

[Janie]

You may have a difficult time finding someone to respond to your question given your rigid parameters and odd definitions.

[forummm]

We spent around $3700 on "travel" last year. Some of it was not very optional. Relatives got married. Visiting family. We would bear substantial relationship expense if we do not visit our families on occasion. And some of the visits were to take care of/be there for ailing family members. Not the most enjoyable. We went on another trip for a friend's birthday that we regretted doing, but it was important to her. We did one trip for us that was cheap (of course).

[Zikoris]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call haircuts "optional spending" so I'm not going to. Otherwise, for the last 6 months, 2 people:

Snacks: 181
Restaurants: 118
Fancy chocolate: 47
Electronics (video games + ebooks + a tablet): 222
Masquerade ball masks: 13
Entertainment (mostly movies, also a couple symphonies and tickets to a masquerade ball): 164
Gifts: 22
A set of resistance bands for exercise: 10

So we're at a lucky $777 I guess.

Oh, and $4373 of travel for trips to Hong Kong, Iceland, and two weekend getaways :)

[GuitarStv]

I've spent 0$ on haircuts in the last three years, so they seem pretty optional to me.

[Retired To Win]

Almost everything is optional. We could just eat rice and beans only. But we eat a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc. We could live in a tent. But we have a nice house. It's impossible for me to calculate all those items.

I too could live on rice and beans only.  And, at least theoretically, I suppose I could live in a tent.  But I have specifically rejected making either of those part of my baseline lifestyle.  So my baseline requires the "wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc" that you mentioned, as well as a house to live in. (All of which I was very careful to specify in the intro to my $15K living expenses blog post.)  And which, therefore, do not fall under "optional spending" to me.

If you, on the other hand, are saying that a rice and beans diet and living in a tent are your baseline lifestyle, then of course just about anything is going to be optional to you.  Still, I would imagine that your wife and kids (if you have either) would want to have a serious talk with you about that.  ;D

[forummm]

I've spent 0$ on haircuts in the last three years, so they seem pretty optional to me.

Unfortunately, my workplace has a strict "No alien mohawk" policy.

[Retired To Win]

I agree with Forummm. I wouldn't break out my spending to baseline and optional and don't see any reason to categorize haircuts, etc separately. "Food treats" lol.

Yea, that "food treats" item WAS silly.  Don't know why I did that.  (And I've changed it.)

Now, you may not see any reason to separate baseline from optional spending.  But doing so really works for me.  And one big reason is that the separation allows me NOT to hardwire any discretionary spending into my budget. No installment payments, no contracts, no embedded budget cost assumptions, maximum flexibility.  In contrast, my baseline expenses are hardwired in the sense that they are necessary to maintain the minimum baseline lifestyle I have defined for myself.

If push came to shove, I could and would rein in my optional spending in order to keep my baseline lifestyle financially covered.  I wouldn't do it the other way around.  So, at least to me, there is a difference in principle between baseline expenses and optional ones.  And because they are that different, they don't belong all lumped in (as equals?) in one budget pot.

[forummm]

I think you can hardwire in plenty of discretionary spending at the grocery store or through housing. I think most people's largest discretionary item is housing. One decision there can lock away thousands of dollars per month.

[Retired To Win]

... Spending is spending.  Dividing it out so is just a personal finance parlor trick...

I can't agree that all spending is equal, which is what I get from the statement "spending is spending."  Sure, it may all just be the same dollars to you.  But $10 spent at a garage sale for 10 music CDs that can be enjoyed over and over again for years to come is not the same (to me, anyway) as $10 spent on 2 lottery tickets.  And that's just one example.

However, to me the more crucial difference is between obligatory and discretionary spending.  That's where "parlor tricks" go out the door and serious financial prioritizing comes in.

[Retired To Win]

We spent around $3700 on "travel" last year. Some of it was not very optional. Relatives got married. Visiting family. We would bear substantial relationship expense if we do not visit our families on occasion. And some of the visits were to take care of/be there for ailing family members. Not the most enjoyable. We went on another trip for a friend's birthday that we regretted doing, but it was important to her. We did one trip for us that was cheap (of course).

I agree that just about all of the travel you described was "not very optional."  Sometimes family and social obligations leave us no choice except to buck up and spend what has to be spent to maintain the relationships.  But I don't imagine that you would consider that $3700 you spent on travel to be a component of your baseline living expenses.  Or that you would have incorporated it into your following year's budget.  In any case, I could not have.  So the money to pay for it would have come from my Discretionary Fund -- and I would not have planned to  spend it again the following year.

[Retired To Win]

You may have a difficult time finding someone to respond to your question given your rigid parameters and odd definitions.

We've got both forummm and GuitarStv presenting rice and beans as their food baseline and a tent in the woods as their housing baseline... and you think I am the one presenting odd definitions and rigid parameters?

I'll tell you one thing I've learned from this thread, though.  You can't really have a discussion like this until the people in the discussion have agreed generally on the lifestyle baseline that the discussion should be based on.  And you can't have the discussion at all if the baseline is set so low that housing is defined as a tent in the woods.

So...

[Ricky]

Beyond adequate shelter, food, and water that will allow you to survive, everything is optional. We just don't realize it sinice we haven't lived that simply in thousands of years. Doesn't make anything beyond that any less optional.

So, you're right...one person's option is another person's requirement.

[Insanity]

Discussions like this are why contracts are a pain in the ass.  Some would call it you need to know details.  Others would say reasonable intent to which the ones arguing details would respond with:  what is reasonable.   

It is evident that the "optional" is a personal definition and anyone trying to challenge otherwise is just being argumentative at best.

[Caella]

"Optional" is tricky to define.

What I think you mean is something on the lines of "what would you first cut if you need to cut spending".
Yeah, i think it's pretty much consensus that you should cut 'restaurants' before 'various fruits and veggies', or cut 'DVDs or books' before downsizing your house to a tent in the woods.

And yet, a lot of lifestyle choices (if not all of them) includes a chunk of optional spending that can or can not be downsized easily. My 861 sq ft apartment sure is "optional", I could live comfortably on half of that. And my choice of buying steak on my groceries, or fresh instead of frozen things. I think that's what most people are complaining. It's hard to discriminate the various 'discretionary' spending built in on your budget.

[OldPro]

It's amusing to see how your simple question has generated so many ridiculous responses RTW. 

I get what you mean by baseline expenses vs. discretionary.  I'm trying to figure out if the average of $10k or so per year that we spend on travel is something you would put in my baseline expenses column or in the discretionary column.

Bearing in mind that the objective is to enjoy life, I find it hilarious that anyone would suggest that anything above rice and beans and living in a tent is discretionary.  Unless of course they are actually happy living on rice and beans and living in a tent.  Is anyone actually doing that?

For my wife and I, travel is a necessity for our enjoyment of life.  That's why I don't know whether you would include it in baseline expenses or under discretionary.  Life without travel really would not be something either of us would be happy doing.  So which column would you say we should put it under RTW? 

I'm thinking that really, nothing is optional spending.  The only things that would be are things that we don't need or that do not add to our enjoyment of life.  Now that's not to say that people don't spend money on things that don't add to their enjoyment of life.  But that discussion has been well covered in various studies of how money doesn't buy happiness.

But if buying books for example, adds to your happiness RTW, then I would say it isn't 'optional spending', it belongs in the baseline column.

[GuitarStv]

If buying things adds to your happiness, you might have a problem.  Using things can add to happiness, but buying them?

[forummm]

It's amusing to see how your simple question has generated so many ridiculous responses RTW. 

I get what you mean by baseline expenses vs. discretionary.  I'm trying to figure out if the average of $10k or so per year that we spend on travel is something you would put in my baseline expenses column or in the discretionary column.

Bearing in mind that the objective is to enjoy life, I find it hilarious that anyone would suggest that anything above rice and beans and living in a tent is discretionary.  Unless of course they are actually happy living on rice and beans and living in a tent.  Is anyone actually doing that?

For my wife and I, travel is a necessity for our enjoyment of life.  That's why I don't know whether you would include it in baseline expenses or under discretionary.  Life without travel really would not be something either of us would be happy doing.  So which column would you say we should put it under RTW? 

I'm thinking that really, nothing is optional spending.  The only things that would be are things that we don't need or that do not add to our enjoyment of life.  Now that's not to say that people don't spend money on things that don't add to their enjoyment of life.  But that discussion has been well covered in various studies of how money doesn't buy happiness.

But if buying books for example, adds to your happiness RTW, then I would say it isn't 'optional spending', it belongs in the baseline column.

Travel is a necessity? Nothing is optional spending? Your enjoyment level determines what is essential? These are some different perspectives than what I usually hear.

[Aussiegirl]

Now, you may not see any reason to separate baseline from optional spending.  But doing so really works for me.  And one big reason is that the separation allows me NOT to hardwire any discretionary spending into my budget. No installment payments, no contracts, no embedded budget cost assumptions, maximum flexibility.  In contrast, my baseline expenses are hardwired in the sense that they are necessary to maintain the minimum baseline lifestyle I have defined for myself.

If push came to shove, I could and would rein in my optional spending in order to keep my baseline lifestyle financially covered.  I wouldn't do it the other way around.  So, at least to me, there is a difference in principle between baseline expenses and optional ones.  And because they are that different, they don't belong all lumped in (as equals?) in one budget pot.

I use a similar system - baseline living expenses (which doesn't inc travel, restaurants and has a lower amount for some living expense categories) plus discretionary expenses.  The rationale for this is 2 fold:
1.  It gives me a cash amount that I need to hold so that I avoid having to draw from investments in down years (one of the biggest risks for outliving your money is having bad investment return years after you first retire and having to draw down on investments to fund lifestyle).  During those down investment years I know how much I can spend to maintain a comfortable life without endangering the longer term game.  Similar to taking a variable amount out of the stash rather than sticking with the SWR of 4% plus inflation.
2.  It gives me the absolute minimum that I need to save to become FI, which is enormously empowering when you pass it!  I think some one described it in a previous post as having FU money!!  The rest is all cream ....... 

[arebelspy]

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

If it was, I wouldn't spend it.

All of my spending is targeted towards being optimized and giving me maximum enjoyment.  Reducing my expenses would be deprivation, which I'd rather not do, and couldn't be able to break out which things I'd deprive myself of first.

Electricity?  Food?  Hell if I know.  :)

It all fits in my values.

[HipGnosis]

my baseline requires the "wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc" that you mentioned, as well as a house to live in. (All of which I was very careful to specify in the intro to my $15K living expenses blog post.) 

So you admit this thread is just a ruse to taunt people into clicking on your blog...
I'm not falling for it.
But I will say; if your blog is anyway connected to your income, your expenses for it aren't optional.

[NoraLenderbee]

Now, you may not see any reason to separate baseline from optional spending.  But doing so really works for me.  And one big reason is that the separation allows me NOT to hardwire any discretionary spending into my budget. No installment payments, no contracts, no embedded budget cost assumptions, maximum flexibility.  In contrast, my baseline expenses are hardwired in the sense that they are necessary to maintain the minimum baseline lifestyle I have defined for myself.

If push came to shove, I could and would rein in my optional spending in order to keep my baseline lifestyle financially covered.  I wouldn't do it the other way around.  So, at least to me, there is a difference in principle between baseline expenses and optional ones.  And because they are that different, they don't belong all lumped in (as equals?) in one budget pot.

I use a similar system - baseline living expenses (which doesn't inc travel, restaurants and has a lower amount for some living expense categories) plus discretionary expenses.  The rationale for this is 2 fold:
1.  It gives me a cash amount that I need to hold so that I avoid having to draw from investments in down years (one of the biggest risks for outliving your money is having bad investment return years after you first retire and having to draw down on investments to fund lifestyle).  During those down investment years I know how much I can spend to maintain a comfortable life without endangering the longer term game.  Similar to taking a variable amount out of the stash rather than sticking with the SWR of 4% plus inflation.
2.  It gives me the absolute minimum that I need to save to become FI, which is enormously empowering when you pass it!  I think some one described it in a previous post as having FU money!!  The rest is all cream .......

These posts make sense to me.

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

That's a false dichotomy. There are not just two categories, "essential" and "waste." There is a broad category in between of things that are not *essential* to one's happiness but that enhance one's happiness, add enjoyment, etc. As RTW and Aussiegirl say, they are things (experiences, pleasures, whatever) that they can cut out easily to safeguard their financial security, but that they prefer to have.

Like, I enjoy eating dessert. I really like it. If I found myself gaining too much weight, I could eat less dessert or even cut it out entirely. I wouldn't be miserable; life would still be good. But once I lost the weight (or made other lifestyle changes or whatever) and had room to include dessert again, I would like to do so, because it adds enjoyment to my life. For some people, beer is the same kind of thing.

I think the OP is asking what is other people's beer, or dessert, as opposed to their meat and potatoes (or tofu and rice).

The fact that one could meet all one's nutritional requirements with, say, homogenized soybean slurry is beside the point, unless one actually likes to live on soybean slurry.

[arebelspy]

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

That's a false dichotomy.

Yes, this whole thread premise is built on that false dichotomy, that there is "optional" or "mandatory" expenses.

All of my expenses are optional.  None is mandatory.  Thus all of it is exactly in line with my values, like I posted.  None of it is waste.

There are not just two categories, "essential" and "waste." There is a broad category in between of things that are not *essential* to one's happiness but that enhance one's happiness, add enjoyment, etc.

That's everything.

[ikonomore]

my baseline requires the "wide variety of fruits, vegetables, meats, etc" that you mentioned, as well as a house to live in. (All of which I was very careful to specify in the intro to my $15K living expenses blog post.) 

So you admit this thread is just a ruse to taunt people into clicking on your blog...
I'm not falling for it.
But I will say; if your blog is anyway connected to your income, your expenses for it aren't optional.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed this.

All of his "questions" are a ruse to get people to read his blog.

[NoraLenderbee]

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

That's a false dichotomy.

Yes, this whole thread premise is built on that false dichotomy, that there is "optional" or "mandatory" expenses.

All of my expenses are optional.  None is mandatory.  Thus all of it is exactly in line with my values, like I posted.  None of it is waste.

Food, shelter, clothing are optional expenses? I can see how any particular item in a category can be optional (you can find cheaper housing, you can substitute oatmeal for steak), but are you saying that all your food costs are optional, you could go naked, you could live somewhere for free and eat for free?

[arebelspy]

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

That's a false dichotomy.

Yes, this whole thread premise is built on that false dichotomy, that there is "optional" or "mandatory" expenses.

All of my expenses are optional.  None is mandatory.  Thus all of it is exactly in line with my values, like I posted.  None of it is waste.

Food, shelter, clothing are optional expenses? I can see how any particular item in a category can be optional (you can find cheaper housing, you can substitute oatmeal for steak), but are you saying that all your food costs are optional, you could go naked, you could live somewhere for free and eat for free?

Yes.  (Or free clothes, rather than naked.  But yes to the rest.)

[Retired To Win]

... For my wife and I,travel is a necessity for our enjoyment of life.  That's why I don't know whether you would include it in baseline expenses or under discretionary.  Life without travel really would not be something either of us would be happy doing.  So which column would you say we should put it under RTW?...

You answered your own question when you labeled your travel as a "necessity".

It's too bad that so many people replying to the original post haven't seen (yet) that "necessary" versus "optional" spending is in the eye of the beholder.  They could have answered the question based on their own priorities without getting all tangled in an argument about whether something is optional or not.  That depends on what you value and how you value it.

Except that I am still NOT buying the soybean-slurry, tent-in-the-woods, everything-else-is-optional argument.  Because it is NOT REAL.

[arebelspy]

It's too bad that so many people replying to the original post haven't seen (yet) that "necessary" versus "optional" spending is in the eye of the beholder.

Exactly. So how can we answer what is necessary versus optional to you, asking the question?  Because we don't know your criteria.

And if we're answering it for ourselves, it's odd that you don't accept our answer, vis-a-vis:

Except that I am still NOT buying the soybean-slurry, tent-in-the-woods, everything-else-is-optional argument.  Because it is NOT REAL.

It might be instructive for you to learn of Diogenes.  "Fool that I am, to have been carrying superfluous baggage all this time!" (aka "What do I need a bowl for?")

Regardless, either all of it's necessary, or none of it is.  Take your pick.

And if you have spending that's not necessary for happiness or living, cut that * out, and accept some free face punches, because you are wasting money.  One properly optimized doesn't have waste.

[sol]

I'm less down on RTW than most of you are.  I intend to have some "optional spending" in my retirement budget, and I personally define that as any spending on anything that I don't currently spend money on.   In my mind "optional spending" and "safety margin" are easily conflated, and I mean that in both the up and down directions. 

While haircuts and entertainment are definitely part of my current spending, I plan to have more money available for that kind of thing in retirement and it's the extra I'm calling optional.  If my investments do poorly, I can not spend that extra (hence "optional") or I can spend even less than I currently do on something else (like selling my house and moving to a cheaper one, which is definitely an option but not something I consider "optional").

[arebelspy]

If my investments do poorly, I can not spend that extra (hence "optional") or I can spend even less than I currently do on something else (like selling my house and moving to a cheaper one, which is definitely an option but not something I consider "optional").

Then how do we define what is optional?

So I see where you're going with this.  For us, one plan if investments do poorly, is to live more of the year in cheaper areas of the world (South America, Southeast Asia) and less in more expensive (US, Western Europe).

But we'd spend the exact same while in those areas as we would if investments were doing really well.

So none of that spending done there is "optional" in the sense that we'd cut any of it.  Or it's all "optional" in that we could live in a cheaper place.

So how do we define it?  Set a base level (say, poverty level) and call all spending above that optional?  Say we could live in Beijing for 20k USD/yr.  If we're spending 25k in Turkey, does that make 5k optional?  What if we could live in Thailand for 15k?  Does that make the 25k in Turkey now 10k optional?  And if we could live in the Phillipines on 7k?  Then our Beijing 20k has 13k optional in it?  Even if it's only food and shelter?

I go back to: every dollar we spend will be purposeful.  Under that, none seems optional.  If you used a definition of "could do without," all of it is optional.  I just literally cannot think of a definition whereby some spending is optional and some is not, without that optional spending being wasteful.

[NoraLenderbee]

There is no line in my spending whereby everything past that is waste.

That's a false dichotomy.

Yes, this whole thread premise is built on that false dichotomy, that there is "optional" or "mandatory" expenses.

All of my expenses are optional.  None is mandatory.  Thus all of it is exactly in line with my values, like I posted.  None of it is waste.

Food, shelter, clothing are optional expenses? I can see how any particular item in a category can be optional (you can find cheaper housing, you can substitute oatmeal for steak), but are you saying that all your food costs are optional, you could go naked, you could live somewhere for free and eat for free?

Yes.  (Or free clothes, rather than naked.  But yes to the rest.)

How do you (or could you) get food, clothes, and shelter for free? I don't mean just one or two meals, or one or two nights--I mean, how could you get all those things at no cost, consistently, over the long term?

[arebelspy]

Look up the stories of Mark Boyle and Daniel Suelo for real life examples.

[GuitarStv]

That Suelo guy is really a cool person.  Thanks for the name to google ARS!

[captainawesome]

When I read the title at first glace, the items that came to mind are things like upgrading to Hydro Flask water bottles instead of using the same nalgene bottle I have had for years. Or buying a piece of workout gear here and there.  Or Netflix. Things that increase my version of happiness, but aren't necessary to achieve my goals/future lifestyle. I budget $300 for myself per month.  Some months I spend it, others I don't.  My "need" for stuff is mostly driven by if I wear through something (like a pair of Kuhl shorts) and would like another pair because I want one.  I will still get the occasional "ooo I want that right now" but that tends to be very far and few between. 

I did just buy some Caveman Coffee Co nitro brew cans just to see what nitrogen poured coffee would taste like. Did I need it? absolutely not. Is it something that will increase my happiness? I have no idea until I try it. But after I have some I will be able to say "well you did what you wanted and now you know." And if it isn't something that will make me happier in the long run, I'll probably forgo it.

[NoraLenderbee]

Look up the stories of Mark Boyle and Daniel Suelo for real life examples.

I see. If one is willing to live as they do, then all spending is optional. I'm not willing to live like them, so for me, some level of spending is not optional. The beans-in-a-tent soy slurry life is an example where one has everything necessary to sustain life. If I were willing to live like that, I'd be doing it. But I'm not, so I need enough money to live somewhere with a roof and a door that can be locked. That's my mandatory spending.

Maybe that's the distinction? Non-optional spending is money you spend because you're not willing to do without whatever you're spending it on, even if you could survive physically without it. Optional spending is for things that you are willing to do without, but prefer to have if you can afford them. Both kinds of spending are purposeful, though; both go toward creating the life you want to live and enjoy.

I literally don't understand why optional = wasted.

[arebelspy]

Look up the stories of Mark Boyle and Daniel Suelo for real life examples.

I see. If one is willing to live as they do, then all spending is optional. I'm not willing to live like them, so for me, some level of spending is not optional.

Absolutely.  Since my expenses are optimized to match my values, any reduction would be a deprivation, therefore I wouldn't want to live like that, therefore all of my spending is non-optional.

If I was wanting to live like that, all of it would be optional.  It either all is, or none is.  (Or some is, which is non-optimized waste by definition.)

Exactly as I've been saying all along.  We just needed the extreme example for it to make sense.  :)

[Aussiegirl]

Theres clearly 2 camps here, the "my spending currently includes everything I need and want, I have nothing else that i would spend on which would increase my happiness", and the  "my spending includes everything that I need, but a few extras that I want would add to my happiness (not that I'm not happy without them) if the money is available".  Neither wrong, just different.

[arebelspy]

Theres clearly 2 camps here, the "my spending currently includes everything I need and want, I have nothing else that i would spend on which would increase my happiness", and the  "my spending includes everything that I need, but a few extras that I want would add to my happiness (not that I'm not happy without them) if the money is available".  Neither wrong, just different.

Good way to sum it up, Aussiegirl.  :)

[NoraLenderbee]

Look up the stories of Mark Boyle and Daniel Suelo for real life examples.

I see. If one is willing to live as they do, then all spending is optional. I'm not willing to live like them, so for me, some level of spending is not optional.

Absolutely.  Since my expenses are optimized to match my values, any reduction would be a deprivation, therefore I wouldn't want to live like that, therefore all of my spending is non-optional.

If I was wanting to live like that, all of it would be optional.  It either all is, or none is.  (Or some is, which is non-optimized waste by definition.)

Exactly as I've been saying all along.  We just needed the extreme example for it to make sense.  :)

See, I was waiting for you to explain how with the right mindset, you could be happy living without food, clothing, shelter . . . ;)

[The Money Monk]

What about you?  What does your optional spending look like?

While a lot of people are being pedantic asbergers , I understand what you are asking, and I can answer it without being a twat.

My current 'optional" spending (per month):

- $33 on life insurance that I don't really need (no dependants) I just like to have in place for my family members and GF so they get a sweet death-bonus if I check out in some spectacular way

- $40 a month gym - I don't even need a gym membership with my home gym, but the university jiu jitsu club moved to the gym so now I have to pay for a membership to go.

- ~ $40 a month Alcohol

- ~$100 a month eating out, mostly social

- $10 a month for UFC fight pass (I am a huge MMA fan)

- ~$150 miscellaneous stuff that I could probably cut out if i eliminated every occasional expenditure that wasn't really necessary (occasional movie, book, replacing broken headphones, clothing, whatever)

- $100 travel expenses

[arebelspy]

Look up the stories of Mark Boyle and Daniel Suelo for real life examples.

I see. If one is willing to live as they do, then all spending is optional. I'm not willing to live like them, so for me, some level of spending is not optional.

Absolutely.  Since my expenses are optimized to match my values, any reduction would be a deprivation, therefore I wouldn't want to live like that, therefore all of my spending is non-optional.

If I was wanting to live like that, all of it would be optional.  It either all is, or none is.  (Or some is, which is non-optimized waste by definition.)

Exactly as I've been saying all along.  We just needed the extreme example for it to make sense.  :)

See, I was waiting for you to explain how with the right mindset, you could be happy living without food, clothing, shelter . . . ;)

Of course you can. I would be just as happy living in the woods as I would living in a giant castle.

Again, either all of it is optional or none of it.  Take your pick. ;)

For you, you say "I'm not willing to live like them" -- The level you choose to live at is what your level of spending should be. If you then go spend more for no reason, that's waste.

None of that spending is optional. Oh sure, you could cut back if you had to, but it'd be a depravation. You'd be living in a way you didn't want to.  Eventually you could cut back all the way to no money, like those fine fellows, and be living in a way you didn't want, but find it was all optional.

If there's some spending you could cut that you call optional that wouldn't make you less happy by cutting it, then it's waste, and you should cut it (optimize) now. And if you are less happy cutting it, it wasn't optional, or its all optional, cause you could cut to 0 (by living a way that wouldn't make you happy).

Does that make more sense as to why I say it's either all optional or none, or if there is optional it's waste?

[arebelspy]

What about you?  What does your optional spending look like?

While a lot of people are being pedantic asbergers , I understand what you are asking, and I can answer it without being a twat.

Maybe some day you'll decide to assume good intentions for other people, and perhaps even learn from their different points of view.  :)

[GuitarStv]

Sounds just like something a pedantic asbergers twat would say.  :P

[arebelspy]

Sounds just like something a pedantic asbergers twat would say.  :P

[Retired To Win]

What about you?  What does your optional spending look like?

While a lot of people are being pedantic asbergers , I understand what you are asking, and I can answer it without being a twat.

My current 'optional" spending (per month):

- $33 on life insurance that I don't really need (no dependants) I just like to have in place for my family members and GF so they get a sweet death-bonus if I check out in some spectacular way

- $40 a month gym - I don't even need a gym membership with my home gym, but the university jiu jitsu club moved to the gym so now I have to pay for a membership to go.

- ~ $40 a month Alcohol

- ~$100 a month eating out, mostly social

- $10 a month for UFC fight pass (I am a huge MMA fan)

- ~$150 miscellaneous stuff that I could probably cut out if i eliminated every occasional expenditure that wasn't really necessary (occasional movie, book, replacing broken headphones, clothing, whatever)

- $100 travel expenses

Thank you very, very much for that.