Something really strange happened to me a few days ago.
I normally evangelize Mustachianism to people who are really open to it/way more Mustachian than me to begin with. There's my roommate GG who has made me be extremely environmentally conscious and pretty much does not spend money beyond essentials except for books - and that's with our heavy library habit. On my own, I checked out and read more than 70 books in June. There's a now-married pair who're already saving 50% and think that Mustachianism is kinda an interesting thought experiment. They're definitely down for increasing biking and healthy food plus lowering energy consumption and that jazz. They're also in Colorado, so they're part of that culture.
So I pitched Mustachianism to one of my buddies a few nights ago, after I read the Forbes interview. This is how the conversation went:
GL
Im on page 2 right now, but so far I hate this guy!
I totally disagree with almost everything he's said so far haha
Me
10/3, 8:04pm
are you being sarcastic?
GL
10/3, 8:07pm
no! i like, ALMOST agree with parts of it, but he's just such a prick!
and i just totally disagree with his basic assumptions
Me
10/3, 8:08pm
what basic assumptions?
GL
10/3, 8:08pm
He didn't think he could be a good parent with a full time job?
what a douche!
Me
10/3, 8:08pm
how many hours a day do you think a parent should spend with their kids?
and i thought you'd like bike commuting
NOTE: That is what GL wants his career to be. He wants to promote bike commuting, preferably internationally. His ideal day job is doing stuff with bike commuting, which is more or less what he's doing right now. He's really, really environmentally conscious.
GL
10/3, 8:08pm
some of his points are valid
I do like the biking part. and the spend less part. and the hobbies part.
Let me start off by saying that I'm not welcoming facepunches here. GL is a very dear friend of mine, but I was absolutely flabbergasted by the idea that he would hate MMM, who espouses the antimaterialism/anticonsumption and pro-freedom/pro-biking attitudes that GL is known for.
I'm not putting in the entire conversation, but GL goes on to say that he likes living in NYC and that he doesn't want to sit in a hacienda/farm for 40 years. These, to me, were valid points but he acted as if MMM was attacking GL's lifestyle...
of low consumption and lots of fun experiences! Since that's what Mustachianism
means to me, I was really confused.
He says that he likes the biking, low spending, and hobbies parts of the articles. Since those are central pillars of Mustachianism, I don't think that he's actually against MMM. I think that he might have gotten the wrong idea from the short Forbes article in that he thinks that MMM is anti-fun in some way.
I also think that GL does not understand what early retirement actually entails. It's not sitting far away from civilization with nothing to do. It's going and living the life that you'd live if money didn't matter (because it doesn't after you hit FI). To some extent, that's what GL is doing now because he seriously does not care about money (and has generous supporters). So, again, that's confusing.
I think that GL's kneejerk reaction was like this Washington Post question:
RURAL LIVING
Sounds like you live in a rural community. Was it important for you to move to a rural location in the US? Is this the only way to afford your home and live cheaply as you do? (I like the country, but wondered if others could do this in an urban area)
A.
MR. MONEY MUSTACHE :
No, we live at the center of a city of about 100,000 people, which itself is just 40 miles from downtown Denver, with a population of several million. We also have a relatively expensive house, at over $400k.
However, people pursuing a more extreme early retirement strategy could locate to cheaper areas, like suburbs of Phoenix, Reno, Las Vegas, Dallas, etc., where some houses are under $100k. Rural living could work too, as long as you can do it without a huge amount of car driving.
I think that the word "rural" means different things to different people. To someone in the Midwest like me, rural means a town that just got its first stoplight or maybe that has one gas station at best. That's a town that might have 4-digits worth of people. To someone from NYC or DC, I'm hearing [though maybe incorrectly] that any town that only has 6 digits of people (like Boulder) and not 7+ digits of people (like NYC, LA, DC, etc.) is rural and de facto everyone there lives on a farm. I lived for 1/3 of last year in DC and I did not get that impression directly from people, but I'm wondering if "rural" means non-coastal [is Las Vegas "rural"?].
Everyone should correct me here. :)I feel like I pitched Mustachianism wrong or that the media interviews that MMM is doing are portraying Mustachianism in a different light than I understand it as an avid blog reader who has read every article.
I kinda want to clear things up with GL, but I'm not exactly sure what to say to him to clear up the crazy misconception he has that Mustachianism = no fun. <--actual question of this whole thing