The Money Mustache Community
Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Ask a Mustachian => Topic started by: Mesmoiselle on November 26, 2014, 02:45:35 PM
-
From Nannies vs Daycare, to third cars, to boats, to a high entertainment budget...
All of them get a pass so long as their savings rate is high and/or they already have hefty 40-whatsis, Roths, etc. High and hefty are ambiguous, yes. But am I the only one that notices this?
"I'm not going to give myself a face punch for the $1000/month waste because my savings rate is 72%."
"I just wasted my money on [this]. Do I deserve a face punch for wasting that money? - "Well, it depends on your savings rate."
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
And these comments are not applied to those who can't meet that magic number. In fact, the opposite comments are applied. If you don't have a high enough income, while maintaining a high savings rate, to support your bad habits, you're a wasteful, lazy, "complaineypants." I feel like the philosophy of MMM is that all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal. People who spend $200 on restaurants with a 20% savings rate are failures, but spending $1000+ on restaurants with a 60% savings rate is A-ok when both should probably receive an equal face punch.
So who is actually doing this the MMM way?
Because you are who I want to learn from.
I and my husband make 70k gross, and the top of our earning careers 6+ years from now will finally get us into 150k+. But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
-
People who spend $200 on restaurants with a 20% savings rate are failures, but spending $1000+ on restaurants with a 60% savings rate is A-ok when both should probably receive an equal face punch.
I agree with your interpretation of MMM and have often been surprised at many people on the forum who approve an expenditure "if you can afford it and still ER."
On the other hand,
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I feel like I live like I'm rich because my needs are completely satisfied.
-
I think much of the answer may lie in the Shockingly Simple Math (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/). For someone who is already saving 75% of their income, cutting an additional 5% shaves about 18 months off of their working career. Someone who is only saving 10% can retire eight years earlier if they bring that savings rate up to 15%.
So while saving money is helpful for everyone, someone who is already saving a lot will see comparatively less benefit from further spending reductions. And as we heard from MMM this week, it's not really about the money anyway (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/). It's about getting your life to a place where you can maximize your happiness. So if you're considering cutting spending on an activity that does legitimately make you happier in the here and now, it's worth considering what you're getting in return. If you can accelerate your FI date by eight years, many of us may find that a worthwhile trade. For 18 months? Maybe not. It's important to enjoy the journey even as you're traveling toward your destination.
-
MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs).
He actually spent $25k in 2013, without a mortgage. Some $2k of that was for travel and $630 was for Crossfit.
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/01/12/exposed-the-mmm-familys-2013-spending/
MMM is about making conscious choices about expenses. Your "bad habits" are someone else's decisions made with the full knowledge of the work-FI trade-off.
-
I wish I could remember the threads, so hopefully others will chime in, but there's been discussion of this exact issue before.
-
I think much of the answer may lie in the Shockingly Simple Math (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-simple-math-behind-early-retirement/). For someone who is already saving 75% of their income, cutting an additional 5% shaves about 18 months off of their working career. Someone who is only saving 10% can retire eight years earlier if they bring that savings rate up to 15%.
So while saving money is helpful for everyone, someone who is already saving a lot will see comparatively less benefit from further spending reductions. And as we heard from MMM this week, it's not really about the money anyway (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/).
I put a lot of stock in his post about muscle over motor. It's not all about money, true, but also about self-sufficiency and living a life that's engaging rather than passive. There's value in not simply buying your way out of problems. Mowing your own lawn, fixing your own sink, these types of things are good, regardless of higher or lower opportunity cost (I say types, because of course individual tastes and abilities vary). That's where I have a problem with the "you can afford it" mentality.
I agree that if it's about something that "legitimately makes you happier" then that becomes a factor, though efficient use of resources is also a factor still. Can you get it more cheaply used? Or through bartering? You shouldn't be happier with getting less value for your dollar just because you have more of them.
-
MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs).
He actually spent $25k in 2013, without a mortgage. Some $2k of that was for travel and $630 was for Crossfit.
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/01/12/exposed-the-mmm-familys-2013-spending/
MMM is about making conscious choices about expenses. Your "bad habits" are someone else's decisions made with the full knowledge of the work-FI trade-off.
but once he minuses all the "waste" that number is 19k and 15k in 2012. Implying that this is the sort of numbers he was spending + mortgage BEFORE he was FI.
-
I 100% agree with the OP. Frivolous and wasteful spending is exactly that, whether your income is $10K or $1,000K. If the MMM family can live in $35K/year (when including housing), you can too. I live off $20K/year in San Jose (single), and am working on getting that down to $15K.
Mustachianism is very simple: beyond your basic needs, spending more just doesn't increase your happiness level. The best entertainment is extremely low-cost or free! Telling someone they can "afford" to spend more just because of their income is most definitely not Mustachian.
-
OP - I have to admit that I am often shocked by the high incomes and high discretionary spending of some people here. But I just figure that people who want to use their high income in that way aren't as interested in FIRE as MMM or some others are and their expenditures are worth it for them to put that off. As long as they don't complain about being unable to save enough for FI or RE (or whatever they want to achieve financially) then I'm OK with it and won't throw any face punches. If they come on here and bitch and moan while earning a high income, and nothing that prevents them from saving it, then I'll be the first one swinging. Otherwise I figure what they use their money for is their business. Lots of lower income FIRE'd people on this site to learn from if that's your interest.
Very well said - I agree.
One of the things I think is that most people with very high incomes aren't giving up their relationships with their similar-income friends. As such, they feel the pressure to spend more, and can thus only go Mustachian to a certain degree without being deemed "cheap". It's as Jacob at ERE said brilliantly (http://earlyretirementextreme.com/how-i-live-on-7000-per-year.html):
Consider people living at different budgets, e.g. $100k, $80k, $60k, $50k, $40k, $30k $20k, $15k, $10k, $7.5k, $5k, $2.5, $1k, and $0k. Now, what Wheaton observes is that people who spend one or two levels below you are inspiring to you in terms of budget reductions. People who spend three levels below you are slightly nutty and people who spend four or more levels below your level are crazy or downright extreme. This holds no matter where you are. If you spend 60k, then 50k and 40k is inspiring, 30k is nutty and 20k is crazy. If you spend 30k, then 20k and 15k is inspiring, 10k is nutty, and 7.5k is crazy. Conversely, people who spend a couple of levels above you are considered prodigal and wasteful.
I find this is very true for me as well. Of course you can extrapolate the scale into the hundreds of thousands of income.
-
Hi Mesmoiselle,
You're welcome to throw some face punches out for any or all of the situations described. A lot of us do as well and we'd be happy to back you up. However, there comes a point where it's just not conducive to furthering the conversation and/or learning. If Mr & Mrs Big Income want to spend $1000/mo eating out, you can call them out all you'd like, but unless they're willing to change, it won't do any good. No matter how many face punches you throw, it'll be hard to convince someone to change their ways if they're happy with the speed at which they're headed towards FI.
I've found it's usually best to save the face punches for those situations where they'll do some good, to actually wake someone up and bring them out of their comfort zone. While continually throwing face punches sounds like something that should be done, usually all you'll end up with is sore knuckles.
-
" all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal"
No way! I drive 100 miles a day for work. Why? Because I like to surf before I spend my day.
If something brings joy to your life while it puts off FIRE for several years, than I dont call that Un-Muchastian a bit
-
I'm confused on the nanny vs daycare, what is the problem there? If both parents want to work, and daycare costs less than working, why is that a bad thing?
-
I like and appreciate this thread. I am sometimes guilty of this sort of thing,, and I cannot even decide whether to face punch myself!
On one hand, my husband and I still have "hair on fire" high interest student loan debt. On the other, our savings rate/ debt reduction rate is good by this forum's standards (not yet great.). We have lots of luxuries that we haven't given up yet, and some I know we will never give up.
How are we doing? No clue.
-
Huh....thought it was okay to say things that line up with my opinion (I just gave someone a pass on a semi-spendy phone plan dependent on what their savings rate looked like), not just parrot what MMM says or believes. Oh wait...is it really a cult? 'Cause I thought "join the cult" was meant to be humorous! LOL.
-
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I don't think Musachianism is about living like you are poor. For me it means:
- Being able to look objectively at a situation and deciding when something (relationship, thing, whatever) is offering a diminishing or negative return and having the courage to let it go - despite you mental associations and attachments.
- Maximizing happiness and personal fulfillment - Being able to identify what is important to us and maximizing the people/experiences and things in our life that feed us, while minimizing or removing the people/things that don't.
- Constantly improving your skills and resiliency and and surrounding yourself with the people/experiences/community/things that serve your highest self.
- Freedom to live a great life - While yes, most of the focus is on achieving FI sometimes we forget the reason BEHIND doing what we do and it essentially comes down to freedom. To have the flexibility, financial cushion and insight available to make the most out of life - to seize opportunities as they come - to embrace an alternative to operating and living from a place of scarcity and fear.
-
From Nannies vs Daycare, to third cars, to boats, to a high entertainment budget...
Whew! This post is a breath of fresh air. I dared suggest another option on that thread and got my head handed to me. What the whaa? Isn't that like choosing between a Bentley and a Maserati?
Back on topic: I lived very frugally when I was amassing my stash. Now that I'm FIRE, I'm finding it difficult to let it out a little without feeling guilty. I think what others have said is true. If you're FIRE or still working but saving a shitload of money, you do get more privileges than those still clawing their way out of consumer and student debt.
So this will make me a target, no doubt, but here goes: We own three cars, an RV and two jet skis. Our clown house is paid for. We have well over seven figures in investments, plus rental property. Wait for it - I have cleaners come in twice a month and I get a pedicure once a month! I buy whatever I want for groceries. Aren't I ridiculous? Nah. MIL has Alzheimer's and lives with us. She won't let me clean her room, but she'll let the cleaners do it. (The dogs sleep with her, it gets stinky in there.) She isn't capable of taking care of her feet and won't let me do it, so we get a pedicure together once a month. DH walks to a job he loves. I fix three meals a day for our family of four adults. I shop at 99 Only, Grocery Outlet and Costco, so I'm sure that's better than eating out.
All cars were purchased new or used. They are 7-10 years old, paid for, look good, run well and are maintained by DH. He bought the RV and jet skis used and fixed them up. Got rid of his boat, but likes to fish, so he uses the jet skis for fishing now. All are worth at least what he paid for them.
My point is that if you drive past our house, you'd think we were as extravagant as hell. You simply can't tell what a Mustachian person looks like if they're doing it right. And you can't judge their balance sheet from the outside either.
So yeah, sometimes things get weird on the forum, but the bottom line is that your choices are yours to make. You get to do what works for you. But don't come complaining around here if you don't have an army of green soldiers to back you up.
-
Have we all read the most recent MMM blog post? It seems to me that he addresses just this issue in his amusing but get to the point style. Try giving it a read....MMM lifestyle is NOT about spending the least amount of money possible regardless of your income, its about being mindful and deliberate on those things you spend money on so that you get maximum benefit/enjoyment out of that money.
-
Great example, Diane!
-
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I don't think Musachianism is about living like you are poor. For me it means:
- Being able to look objectively at a situation and deciding when something (relationship, thing, whatever) is offering a diminishing or negative return and having the courage to let it go - despite you mental associations and attachments.
- Maximizing happiness and personal fulfillment - Being able to identify what is important to us and maximizing the people/experiences and things in our life that feed us, while minimizing or removing the people/things that don't.
- Constantly improving your skills and resiliency and and surrounding yourself with the people/experiences/community/things that serve your highest self.
- Freedom to live a great life - While yes, most of the focus is on achieving FI sometimes we forget the reason BEHIND doing what we do and it essentially comes down to freedom. To have the flexibility, financial cushion and insight available to make the most out of life - to seize opportunities as they come - to embrace an alternative to operating and living from a place of scarcity and fear.
Giant +1 to all of this.
Heck, even MMM spends "wastefully" in some ways according to the blog posts. I think that if he cut out all unneccessary spending, his annual spending would be even lower than it currently is.
I'm not suggesting we all give up on frugality and go buy mcmansions and drive our kids to fancy pre-schools in our SUVs - just that there's enough room on the forum for those of us who still go out to dinner once a month, as well as those who spend $6k a year (Herbert Derp!).
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
-
Hi Mesmoiselle,
You're welcome to throw some face punches out for any or all of the situations described. A lot of us do as well and we'd be happy to back you up. However, there comes a point where it's just not conducive to furthering the conversation and/or learning. If Mr & Mrs Big Income want to spend $1000/mo eating out, you can call them out all you'd like, but unless they're willing to change, it won't do any good. No matter how many face punches you throw, it'll be hard to convince someone to change their ways if they're happy with the speed at which they're headed towards FI.
Wait, you mean someone who's happy with his or her own life won't change it just to better match the priorities of a random person on the internet?
-
There's an awful lot of "complain-bragging" on this forum from people with $200k+ incomes. I hope we will hear more from people with more average incomes who are using the Mustachian way of life to live like someone with a much higher income. That impresses me a lot more than someone who saves 70% of their income and can still easily afford a live-in nanny.
-
Huh....thought it was okay to say things that line up with my opinion (I just gave someone a pass on a semi-spendy phone plan dependent on what their savings rate looked like), not just parrot what MMM says or believes. Oh wait...is it really a cult? 'Cause I thought "join the cult" was meant to be humorous! LOL.
I think this brings up an important point. There is two sorts of answers on the forum here. One is our representation, to the person asking the question, of the "mustachian" answer. That should be an answer we believe is consistent with how MMM would answer the question. The second sort is the sort you are talking about, simply our opinion. Hopefully guided by MMM, since that is why were are all on the forum, but maybe not fully consistent with or identical to the answer MMM would give.
I don't have a major point to make, other than simply suggest we recognize and keep it in mind. I do think it would be good when our advice strays from what we think MMM would say, that we point that out. For example, "MMM wouldn't give you a pass on that phone plan, but I would." I think it is important, being MMM forum, that any answer does have a response that indicates what MMM would say, not just our personal viewpoint. But it doesn't mean we all have to agree with MMM in our response.
-
Anyone ever find it odd that MMM doesn't post on these forums? I've often wondered if he comes on here with alternate identities to give us virtual facepunches when he sees his readers start getting flabby.
Well played MMM, well played. ;-)
Facepunch accepted...
-
I feel like the philosophy of MMM is that all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal.
I sincerely don't understand this part of your statement and I may have misunderstood your post. I have a large "education" budget. I take everything from cooking classes, to writing classes, to art classes, to programming classes, to proper lifting techniques, to outdoor survival, etc...Is it a bad habit? These classes aren't cheap and in the case of the arts/crafts, the materials can be expensive. I am OK with working a bit longer to pay for these classes and I intend to take even more classes when I retire. I don't travel and I don't have a lot of "things". On the other hand, if I just stuck to the public library (I love to read) and didn't do any classes I would save a ton of money. The classes I take don't add to landfills (my art is beautiful and should be in gallery's LOL) and I employ a "teacher" plus I get to meet interesting people. All of the classes, even the cooking class, could be categorized under wasteful spending. But I like it and I'm ok with the work/FIRE exchange.
Not pertaining to your post but relating to what I have seen in life and in this forum there are "stuff" people (3 boats, 2nd home) and there are "experiences" people (travel, classes) and some people are bot. I'm not motivated by "stuff" but it doesn't impact me what other people decide to do with their money so if they want to buy a boat or go to a restaurant that's their deal.
As far as "facepunches" are concerned, they are most useful for people who really need to understand "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". If you want drastic changes in your life, you need to take drastic action and for most people that is a combo of increasing income + decreasing expenses. After finding this forum, I sold my wonderful SUV and downgraded to a used sedan. It's definitely not as fun as my previous car but I'm saving a fortune on gas and maintenance. Plus I can always rent an SUV when I want to go camping and off-roading (which I did 3 times in the 8 years I had my AWD SUV, not a good ROI). I would not have thought of that without coming here and reading articles and posts. I also bought YNAB last black Friday thanks to this forum. Thank you Forum! So I wouldn't say that people aren't modifying their behaviors and in my opinion there is nothing wrong with healthy debate.
Some days I wish I were a stuff person. At least you can sell stuff! But a class on foraging...and tracking...so much fun and good prep for the inevitable zombie apocalypse!
+1 to Diane C's post
-
"Low wages" are all relative. Taken against cost of living they might not seem as low as you think. I make 60k a year, I could buy a modest home needing no work with one year's pay. How many people living in San Fransisco can do that even on a 150k a year paycheck?
-
One person's waste is another's wise spending. Didn't you spend 10K on medical care for dogs, yet decide not to get health insurance for yourself? One was a necessity to you, the other was not. Not everyone would make the same decisions. Who decides what's wasteful?
Personally, I don't want to be in a contest to see who can live on less. I'll lose, and that's fine.
-
I have stopped commenting on most Case Studies because when people can't seem to find a place to save or make excuses for what I consider to be ridiculous spending, I can get bitchy.
On a couple of occasions I've typed out, "Have you even read the blog?"
I do recognize that people are free to live their own lives and I am free to roll my eyes and move on.
-
I think all of us wrestle with this balance to some degree. MMM shows us that FI is possible if we're willing to be ruthless with our expenses. In this way, he's in line with ERE. And that's the math--if I can live on $10K/year, I can retire REALLY early.
MMM tells us that we don't have to be quite THAT extreme, as he exemplifies a life in a house, with travel, cars, a child, etc. But I'm not so sure that this then equates to "figure out what makes you happy and then aim for that, be it $30K or $80K". I mean, yes, he does talk a lot about happiness and figuring out what makes a meaningful life for you--conscious spending instead of unconscious clown-following.
But I can't help but notice that MMM has also been clear that he's doing this with a not-so-secret environmental agenda. His goal isn't really to convince us that it's ok to be happy on $80K/year. IMO, it's to convince us to get down to a very non-materialistic $30K family TO DISCOVER THAT ITS POSSIBLE TO BE HAPPY LIVING THAT LIFE. In other words, I think he's trying to convince us that a small life is a good life, AND that its the life more of us need to live if we're going to live sustainably on this planet.
Now, I believe that message. I really do. And to some degree, DH and I live that life. We live a simple, homestead-y, close to home life, and it makes us very happy. However, to support our simple life, we work jobs with clown commutes and own a totally non-mustachian sailboat (well, it would be mustachian if we were already FI, cause it's old and small and cheap). Our savings rate is like 30%, and we're not young. Sigh.
I know what MMM (and this forum! :) ) wouild tell us to do: move into our closest town where we could buy a small house for $250K (that's dirt cheap around these parts) (or rent!), find new jobs in the same town, even if they pay a little less, walk to work and sell the boat. And it's true, if we did all of that, we could be FI faster. And that would be awesome. But once we were FI, we would want our boat back, and our lovely house and garden back, etc...I don't know. It just seems circular to us. But I'm probabaly wrong. And rambling! Hah.
So this is all to say, I think it's easy to see the mathmatical clarity when we look at case studies and just the facts. I think it's a journey to figure out who we are and what we want out of life and what kind of priority ER is and what kind of life we want as we work to get there...at least that's been the case for me.
-
...So this is all to say, I think it's easy to see the mathmatical clarity when we look at case studies and just the facts. I think it's a journey to figure out who we are and what we want out of life and what kind of priority ER is and what kind of life we want as we work to get there...at least that's been the case for me.
Ditto.
I look at everything in life as a page on a Chinese menu: I'll have something from column A, maybe an appetizer, you and I can split something from column B...
Life is short and while everyone and their dog has an idea of EXACTLY what I'm supposed to be doing, and how, and with how much money...there are times that my mileage varies.
And I'm ok with it. ;-D
-
I know what MMM (and this forum! :) ) wouild tell us to do: move into our closest town where we could buy a small house for $250K (that's dirt cheap around these parts) (or rent!), find new jobs in the same town, even if they pay a little less, walk to work and sell the boat. And it's true, if we did all of that, we could be FI faster. And that would be awesome. But once we were FI, we would want our boat back, and our lovely house and garden back, etc...I don't know. It just seems circular to us. But I'm probabaly wrong. And rambling! Hah.
So this is all to say, I think it's easy to see the mathmatical clarity when we look at case studies and just the facts. I think it's a journey to figure out who we are and what we want out of life and what kind of priority ER is and what kind of life we want as we work to get there...at least that's been the case for me.
I think you're missing the point that living your lifestyle now versus later is an opportunity cost. You're giving up the snowball effect of all of that freed up money going towards investments earning increasingly more interest over time.
It's all about the power of compounding interest. It would ultimately pay for your lifestyle while providing FI faster than for you to live your current lifestyle and become FI.
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k). Sure, you can reach financial independence no matter what your pay is, but it's a lot easier and faster if you are being paid more -- so why settle for such low wages?
Sure, any decently smart person can pretty much learn to get paid whatever they want, but it's more complicated than that. There are zip code, racial, and gender differences. There'a also laziness and not being motivated. There are plenty of reasons why people "settle", or otherwise don't find the courage to move and take chances.
-
I don't understand why we would need to figure out what is true Mustachian, as if it is some sort of religion with an associated dogma. MMM shows how you can lead an on the surface fairly typical middle class lifestyle on a limited budget. If you are looking for a more extreme example, you can go and check out Jacob at Early Retirement Extreme. He lives on $7,000/year vs $24,000 for MMM's family of 3. If you divide MMM's budget by 3, he is only spending $1,000 per year and per person more than Jacob. So maybe Jacob is not that much more extreme than MMM.
MMM shows the concept of early retirement, with all the components involved in that. You should figure out what fits for you and your family, without worrying how Mustachian your lifestyle really is. It is a way that can be modified according to your individual situation. Just take what feels right to you. MMM gives you the math tools to see if the financial part of your lifestyle works for you. The blog demonstrates that you can achieve ERE at just about any income level. Income matters very little. Many higher income people seem to have a harder time achieving ERE, partially due to student loans and lifestyle inflation.
A high income family obviously can achieve ERE easier mathematically since they could save an extremely high percentage of their income. Higher income people are often more specialised, so they tend to call for professional help when something needs to be repaired or built. A renaissance man is able to save lots of money by fixing things. Your absolute spending level simply makes you more robust. So you have the tools to figure it out and you have some examples to show you what is possible, not what is required. That is what I appreciate from this site. The rest is simply an informed free choice.
-
Obviously, like anything, you can go to extremes on either end of the spectrum. Living like you are dirt poor is ok if thats what you get enjoyment out of. Living like you are dirt poor because you are saving for FIRE that might be 10 or 15 years down the road, that is just as unhealthy as throwing money away and never being able to retire. Tomorrow is not guaranteed and like the one guy said, if something gives me enjoyment, provides a hobby for me to spend my time while I work towards my goal and it puts FIRE off by year or two, its worth it to me. On the other hand, you have to be realistic about it and realize your spendy hobby is going to put off FIRE for a bit.
-
I think you should read MMM's latest entry.
Its not just about living like your poor. Spending should be aligned with your values. I think its more about understanding the math behind how much you save vs how much longer you have to slave away at a job you are dissatisfied. If you love your job, have a large nest egg, and enjoy spending money on certain things.....why the hell not. It is your life to live.
I have been busting my ass at a job that I liked less and less every day over the past few years. I am in the process of switching careers and the new employer seems to treat people extremely well. If I enjoy what I do, accrue good vacation/personal time off. I don't think I will live like I'm below the poverty line to exit the proverbial rat race.
-
OP - I have to admit that I am often shocked by the high incomes and high discretionary spending of some people here. But I just figure that people who want to use their high income in that way aren't as interested in FIRE as MMM or some others are and their expenditures are worth it for them to put that off to a later time. They are willing to make the trade offs to have some things they must feel are important to their overall well being. I personally don't think money can buy happiness and wouldn't ever put off FIRE for something l can do without, but to each his own. As long as they don't complain about being unable to save enough for FI or RE (or whatever they want to achieve financially) then I'm OK with it and won't throw any face punches. If they come on here and bitch and moan while earning a high income, and have nothing that prevents them from saving it aside from their own spending habits, then I'll be the first one swinging. Otherwise I figure what they use their money for is their business. Lots of lower income FIRE'd people on this site to learn from if that's your interest.
I'm pretty shocked sometimes as well. And I agree, as long as they are not complaining about how "tough" things are and understand the trade off regarding ER/FI, then yeah, not much to say about what they are doing. They don't always start off their threads stating that, however, so I do end up wondering if they are understanding that trade off or completely unaware of it.
As to the various replies about parroting the religious/cult message of MMM as one of two (or more) methods of responding to those that post here, I'm mildly disappointed but don't expect that you should at the same time. MMM stopped responding to direct messaging for the most part a while back. We can't get advice from MMM (outside of his blog) and he redirected us here to this forum he created. I am also on YNAB and the message there is hyper conscious awareness while making constant tradeoffs.Make enough of them, and the big picture gets lost, but I think for most of them the goal is simply "not to struggle paycheck to paycheck". I came here for something more hard core. If I want the soft message of "do your best" then I'll talk about my wussyness there and everyone will give me a pat on the back as they console me about how "life comes up." I came here for face punches, tips with face punches, or just tips sans pats on the back.
Instead, (random percentage not backed by anything) 75% of first couple of pages of "Ask a Mustachian" are semi FI high income earners patting other less semi FI high income earners on the back.
I feel like the philosophy of MMM is that all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal.
I sincerely don't understand this part of your statement and I may have misunderstood your post.
At least from my reading of his blog, classes teaching useful life skills aren't bad habits. Would imply you and others to consider ROI but sometimes that can only be measured in happiness about self sufficiency rather than actual dollars.
Bad habits are relying entirely on expensive things to entertain you or using money so you can avoid independence (such as house keepers, chefs and to a lesser extent, mechanics, carpenters, plumbers, electricians.) So the "can't seem to get it down, but my groceries are $1200 a month and we spent $800 on restaurants and then there is our personal spending/entertainment budget of $1000. And don't forget our live in nanny/housekeeper whom I just adore receives $2600/month" crowd need and deserve a face punch.
I disagree with the premise of the question. Mustachianism is not about facepunching people and badgering them into spending less or becoming financially independent. It's about empowering people to realize that there is a different way than what is considered "normal" by society.
.....
Mustachianism gives you the tools, ideas and philosophy to take control of your finances and your life. It doesn't tell you whether or not you should bike to work, eat at restaurants or own a sailboat. It does give you the ability to figure out the costs/benefits of each option, how they may affect your financial future and how you can design a different lifestyle if you are not satisfied with your current trajectory.
I find this interesting. Like his post about optimization; perhaps you will come to the same conclusion, but at at least you question your choice on a regular basis.
I think all of us wrestle with this balance to some degree. MMM shows us that FI is possible if we're willing to be ruthless with our expenses. In this way, he's in line with ERE. And that's the math--if I can live on $10K/year, I can retire REALLY early.
.... he does talk a lot about happiness and figuring out what makes a meaningful life for you--conscious spending instead of unconscious clown-following.
.... I think he's trying to convince us that a small life is a good life, AND that its the life more of us need to live if we're going to live sustainably on this planet.
I know what MMM (and this forum! :) ) wouild tell us to do: move into our closest town where we could buy a small house for $250K (that's dirt cheap around these parts) (or rent!), find new jobs in the same town, even if they pay a little less, walk to work and sell the boat. And it's true, if we did all of that, we could be FI faster. And that would be awesome. But once we were FI, we would want our boat back, and our lovely house and garden back, etc...I don't know. It just seems circular to us. But I'm probabaly wrong. And rambling! Hah.
So this is all to say, I think it's easy to see the mathmatical clarity when we look at case studies and just the facts. I think it's a journey to figure out who we are and what we want out of life and what kind of priority ER is and what kind of life we want as we work to get there...at least that's been the case for me.
That would be pretty circular! I agree, with your values about boat/garden/house, I would do the same (although MMM would argue you get to do considerably less of the things you like due to loss of income and commute time spent bored in a car. ;) )
-
seattlecyclone said I think much of the answer may lie in the Shockingly Simple Math. For someone who is already saving 75% of their income, cutting an additional 5% shaves about 18 months off of their working career. Someone who is only saving 10% can retire eight years earlier if they bring that savings rate up to 15%.
So while saving money is helpful for everyone, someone who is already saving a lot will see comparatively less benefit from further spending reductions. And as we heard from MMM this week, it's not really about the money anyway. It's about getting your life to a place where you can maximize your happiness. So if you're considering cutting spending on an activity that does legitimately make you happier in the here and now, it's worth considering what you're getting in return. If you can accelerate your FI date by eight years, many of us may find that a worthwhile trade. For 18 months? Maybe not. It's important to enjoy the journey even as you're traveling toward your destination.
I really abhor a current coworker and experienced euphoria at the prospect of only working with her another 18 months vs the 4 years I initially thoughy. Some people love their work environment way more than I do to be making that trade off. And even when I do go work somewhere and like my coworkers/environment, I keep recalling a comment someone made on an MMM blog post. The environment changes as other people enter it. Your beloved job of 10 years can become miserable in a short time span when the "most annoying judge mental stupid person" starts working with you. And your past self made the decision to be leisurely about FI and you can't get that time back. Other things out of your control; illness of yourself, a spouse, or close family member. A surprise pregnancy (BC isn't perfect). Time is finite even if your income isn't.
I think you should read MMM's latest entry.
Its not just about living like your poor. Spending should be aligned with your values. I think its more about understanding the math behind how much you save vs how much longer you have to slave away at a job you are dissatisfied. If you love your job, have a large nest egg, and enjoy spending money on certain things.....why the hell not. It is your life to live.
I have been busting my ass at a job that I liked less and less every day over the past few years. I am in the process of switching careers and the new employer seems to treat people extremely well. If I enjoy what I do, accrue good vacation/personal time off. I don't think I will live like I'm below the poverty line to exit the proverbial rat race.
There is a reason I put that wording in quotations; I am not the most eloquent at representing my thoughts so I sometimes accept poorer word choices with the sarcasm implication. If person A spends 3 steps under Person B, Person B thinks A is crazy and living poor. The reality is they are very comfortable and don't feel poor at all.
is the MMM forum not to try to apply most or all of the tenets of the man himself to your life with the supportive advice of others? So it confuses me to see that the supportive advice is not even remotely like something MMM would say.
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k). Sure, you can reach financial independence no matter what your pay is, but it's a lot easier and faster if you are being paid more -- so why settle for such low wages?
Sure, any decently smart person can pretty much learn to get paid whatever they want, but it's more complicated than that. There are zip code, racial, and gender differences. There'a also laziness and not being motivated. There are plenty of reasons why people "settle", or otherwise don't find the courage to move and take chances.
And some times it take courage, determination, motivation and dedication to stay at a lower earning job because you are doing something that you feel makes a difference in the world (or at least to someone besides yourself) rather than just padding your bank account. It's not all about the money for many people.
In my case, the acceptance of a part time 48k/year job was because I am making more money than everyone in my entire family. I think my mother works for 35k or less, my sister works for 20k or less, and my younger brother/sisters are students earning 10k or less. I also got to this income with relatively little effort, as a 2 year trade school and on the job training gave me all this. With the addition of my husbands income, 20k until recently and 40k-80k in the near future, my vantage point is that we're earning the sort of money that all of my family would consider "easy street" as compared to their constant struggling; and I agree! I'm really mad I was wasting all the surplus of a 70k gross income until 6 months ago. Additionally, I really like my job even if I dislike my coworkers. And until I started getting RSI in my entire right shoulder, I was satisfied with my situation.
I actually find it very odd that MMM suggests everyone should either be making 100k each or accepting that they are working for pleasure/greater good and not to become FI. At the time time, he then posted 50 jobs at 50k so he obviously doesn't look down his nose too much at the middle-of-the-road-but-not-bad earner.
-
MMM has had so much mainstream coverage over the last couple of years, that the current community is different than the original one. That's neither good nor bad, but I do find the change frustrating at times.
ERE is definitely more extreme and frugal than MMM, but you'll probably find the posters there uber rational and more in tune with the frugality aspect than some forum members here. You may want to check out that community too.
Here is an interesting blog entry that makes reference to the Wheaton scale: http://earlyretirementextreme.com/how-i-live-on-7000-per-year.html
-
I would reference, yet again, muscle over motor (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/12/05/muscle-over-motor/). MMM finds a snowblower, for the needs of his area, facepunch-worthy regardless of how much money the buyer has.
It’s more than just an article. It’s a Founding Principle of Mustachianism, because when you embrace it, it adds great fun to your life even while it simultaneously strips away the fat from your physique and your budget.
Leafblowers vs. rakes, motorcycles vs. bikes, manual lawnmowers vs. the other kind, motorboats vs. kayaks. There are obviously times when the more technologically-assisted choice is the right one and some of that can have to do with individual choices, but he espouses the more challenging, less wasteful life, including tying it in with insourcing, without a lot of emphasis on money.
But also, the biggest refutation of "well, I can enjoy it and I can afford it" philosophy is, Is it convenient? Would I enjoy it? Wrong question (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/09/18/is-it-convenient-would-i-enjoy-it-wrong-question/)
Let’s suppose you want the latest iPad. You want it because it is convenient to be able to look at pictures and websites and books and play music around the house. Sure, you already have other computers that do those things, but the iPad is special because it lets you do them while holding it in one hand, sitting on the couch.
Wow, that couch is pretty convenient too, isn’t it? It is comfortable, enjoyable, convenient, and joyful to sit and lie on your couch. In fact, wouldn’t it be best to just lie on that couch all day? Forever? Yeah! Maybe you could even hook it up with a catheter and a bedpan, and a friend or robot could bring you all your food on the couch too. With each release, the latest iPad could be delivered to you, and you’d have the most convenient and comfortable and effort-free life ever.
Maybe you were with me for the first bit of that paragraph, but it probably lost its appeal by the time we reached the end, right? And indeed, with proper understanding, almost any consumer purchase (and almost any bad habit) these days, beyond the necessities, should start to sound like a catheter and a bedpan to you.
So, yes, you can absolutely address a purchase as being wasteful regardless of affordability.
People can say, well, it's worth it to me. But you are allowed to facepunch if you think their thinking is misguided. That may not get you very far on a case study thread because we can't really get inside another person's head. But I get tired of hearing the excuse that mustachianism is first and foremost about mindful spending or whatever or that you get carte blanche to do whatever if you're FI or your savings rate is over 50%. These are sound ideas that I agree with, I just think they contradict the text. And yes, I've read the latest blog post.
" all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal"
No way! I drive 100 miles a day for work. Why? Because I like to surf before I spend my day.
If something brings joy to your life while it puts off FIRE for several years, than I dont call that Un-Muchastian a bit
But this is interesting because I definitely see people on the forum who deeply believe mustachianism has to do with limiting our damage to the environment, so they would find this facepunch-worthy. Personally, I get where they see environmentalism in MMM's posts, but it's not something I've incorporated into my understanding of the philosophy. So you definitely can have multiple people who are "mustachian" but with different beliefs. Like any good religion :)
-
I disagree with the premise of the question. Mustachianism is not about facepunching people and badgering them into spending less or becoming financially independent. It's about empowering people to realize that there is a different way than what is considered "normal" by society.
You don't HAVE to buy a brand new car every 3 years to prove that you're successful.
You don't HAVE to buy a McMansion in the suburbs to prove that you're a grown up.
You don't HAVE to go on an expensive vacation paid for by credit cards to prove that you're enjoying life.
In general, you don't HAVE to spend proportional to your income and embrace every consumer convenience thrown at you.
For most Americans this is already a revolutionary message.
Mustachianism is not prescriptive or doctrinaire, it's a "choose your own adventure" philosophy, where you
(1) Decide what you really want in life, whether it's to be able to stay home with your kids or to travel the world without working or to simply retire in 10 years.
(2) Figure out what percentage of your current income you have to save.
(3) Figure out what changes to your spending, earning, lifestyle you need to do in order to achieve your goals.
Some people require drastic changes, particularly if they are drowning in debt and are saving virtually nothing. THIS is where "facepunching" comes in handy.
But other people can accomplish their goals even with relatively large spending because their income is high enough to allow them some "wasteful" spending even while they save 70%-80%.
Mustachianism gives you the tools, ideas and philosophy to take control of your finances and your life. It doesn't tell you whether or not you should bike to work, eat at restaurants or own a sailboat. It does give you the ability to figure out the costs/benefits of each option, how they may affect your financial future and how you can design a different lifestyle if you are not satisfied with your current trajectory.
I think you summed it up really well here.
-
I have felt the same way as the OP. I by no means live the MMM lifestyle. We spend more for a family of 2 than he does for four, and yes we have a payed for house too. I think the point like others have said is conscious spending. The posts that annoy me are the ones asking "is this ok" as it relates to fairly obvious extravagances. To me, this is not the blog to come to for justification of extravagant purchases. I don't necessarily care how people spend their money, but this does not seem the place to try and rationalize.
For me, trying to completely live the MMM lifestyle was/is a great exercise. I dove in head first, biking everywhere, downsized car, etc. etc. This allowed me to reach my FI number in my mid 30's and leave my FT job. Having only been out a month, I'm interviewing for a PT teaching position and my hobbies are already producing income. I say that bc I plan to buy a newer, somewhat frivolous car. Cars bring me a lot of happiness and entertainment and I can afford it. Should I get a face punch if I ask on the MMM forum if it's ok, YES.
-
" all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal"
No way! I drive 100 miles a day for work. Why? Because I like to surf before I spend my day.
If something brings joy to your life while it puts off FIRE for several years, than I dont call that Un-Muchastian a bit
Well stated! I think this thread and the undertone border on "judgey" The MMM lifestyle is good for MMM and others. However, what you find joy in is not to be judged. Some people love to travel, so be it. I love everything about cars. Some people love golf. You don't have to agree with someone else's choice, you just have to respect their right to pursue their happiness. The key is that you are frugal and smart with money, not wasting it on meaningless stuff that burns resources quickly and gives no lasting return TO YOU(for me that would be $20 "craft cocktails" or other such nonsense. If you choose XXXX saving rate that gets you to your chosen exit on the time frame you are happy with, then you win the game! If you can get there faster by BIKING and you want to Bike, great! If you don't want to, no one should be looking down their nose at your choices. This should be an inclusive community.
I try to choose used cars that are at the slowest rate of depreciation and/or could appreciate, but not all are. I bought one car 2 years old at a very good price, kept it for 2 years and sold it for $2400 less. So for $100/month I had a toy/mode of transport that made me happy. Better than $100 cable bill, to me anyway.
Lastly and a bit off-topic is income. If you are in acquisition and growth of wealth mode, as equally important as saving is growing your income. If you can change jobs, push for a promotion, and earn more, you push further along also. A penny made, is penny saved, is a penny earned.
-
is the MMM forum not to try to apply most or all of the tenets of the man himself to your life with the supportive advice of others? So it confuses me to see that the supportive advice is not even remotely like something MMM would say.
This is really the key question and divide as I see it. Personally, I have gotten a great deal of value from the blog and forum, but I have no desire to live exactly like MMM. I'd say I'm probably 25% mustachian and quite happy at that level because I will still be able to retire very early thanks to a high salary. I'm not interested at all in voluntary discomfort but that doesn't mean I can't contribute and learn from the blog and forum. Not everyone is going to buy into the message to the same extent, but if you wanted a forum filled with only true believers it wouldn't be a very lively or interesting place for very long.
-
Not everyone is going to buy into the message to the same extent, but if you wanted a forum filled with only true believers it wouldn't be a very lively or interesting place for very long.
Not exactly sure about that. These forums have changed a lot as MMM has gotten more popular. I personally come here much less often because it doesn't seem to have the same vibe it once did. Part of that is I get the math and concerning the basics there's not a lot more to learn. However, the bigger thing for me is that these forums seem to have gotten soft, but all good things change. I just accept that and move on to other communities.
-
Not everyone is going to buy into the message to the same extent, but if you wanted a forum filled with only true believers it wouldn't be a very lively or interesting place for very long.
Not exactly sure about that. These forums have changed a lot as MMM has gotten more popular. I personally come here much less often because it doesn't seem to have the same vibe it once did. Part of that is I get the math and concerning the basics there's not a lot more to learn. However, the bigger thing for me is that these forums seem to have gotten soft, but all good things change. I just accept that and move on to other communities.
I agree. There are some ridiculous questions going on nowadays - as if they haven't even read the blog. I also feel that the site is slowly declining as there isn't much more he can really write about. The site has dropped in Alexa rankings because there isn't as much new content as before.
All of his ideas and lifestyle choices are based on one thing: efficiency. It's engrained in his mind. I think much of it comes from an engineering background and the general personality type that goes along with it. We live around people that spend excessive amount of money so that we can easily take advantage of all of the inefficiencies by being extremely efficient ourselves. The extent to which we are or are not efficient will define the length of our working years. Or rather, the length of our dependence for money. It's about recognizing that we live in an extremely rich country and we buy and do things that are extremely wasteful. It's about catching the "waste" and using it rather than paying an extreme amount up front.
I feel like the philosophy of MMM is that all bad habits are "wasteful" spending until you actually reach your FI goal.
Your entire post was spot on except for this. This implies deprivation. You're not saving for FI just so you can resume all of your excessive spending habits. The point is to keep the efficiencies up which leads to just as much happiness as splurging all the time. There will always be inefficiencies and splurges, but at least you won't be dependent on splurging.
-
I'm confused on the nanny vs daycare, what is the problem there? If both parents want to work, and daycare costs less than working, why is that a bad thing?
Exactly. I read that thread and it was a good one. The costs were not too far apart and it was a productive discussion about the trade-offs associated with either choice.
Childcare is not a frivolous expense.
-
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
-
I don't think Musachianism is about living like you are poor. For me it means:
- Being able to look objectively at a situation and deciding when something (relationship, thing, whatever) is offering a diminishing or negative return and having the courage to let it go - despite you mental associations and attachments.
- Maximizing happiness and personal fulfillment - Being able to identify what is important to us and maximizing the people/experiences and things in our life that feed us, while minimizing or removing the people/things that don't.
- Constantly improving your skills and resiliency and and surrounding yourself with the people/experiences/community/things that serve your highest self.
- Freedom to live a great life - While yes, most of the focus is on achieving FI sometimes we forget the reason BEHIND doing what we do and it essentially comes down to freedom. To have the flexibility, financial cushion and insight available to make the most out of life - to seize opportunities as they come - to embrace an alternative to operating and living from a place of scarcity and fear.
+1.
And +1 to the posts suggesting that it's not a cult, that we're not required to model our lives after MMM himself. We found each other through his lovely blog and forum, but that doesn't mean we all have to have the precise same ends and means to those ends. Freedom means different things to different people. It's subjective.
And, MMM is not about frugality at all costs. This is one method for potentially achieving our version of freedom (other options include working two jobs, or devoting 6 years to working in a high-pay field we dislike before opting out entirely, etc).
Also, I think some people are genuinely confusing MMMness ("facepunches", etc) with being rude. Share a third option, sure, but why not do so with openness, politeness, and respect? Some responses are so snarky, judgey, finger-wagging, etc. If we feel the strong need to use Mr MM as some sort of uber-example, I see him using silly and fun terms but not being rude and aggressive. There's a difference. I see a lot of people very open to hearing a "third option" or a differing perspective, but balking at outright rudeness and aggression. And I hate when we lose awesome forum members to the latter.
I'm additionally concerned when I hear people imposing their own beliefs and values on other members, as though they know what's "right" (and as though there is only one of those for all people). Makes me squirm. Happily, I don't see loads of that -most members and posts seem to remember, honour, and respect diversity.
So, why I don't throw punches, call people on specific spending, etc? Because I trust that most if not all members are smart, thoughtful, conscientious, aware people, and that we all grow best through respectful, open-minded dialogue. From that place, I happily post a third option where I believe it might not have been considered...but once I've gotten acquainted with a certain member, and know his or her general conscientiousness, etc, I'm confident in their path and choices and don't feel the need to yell at them, redirect them, ask them to take on my specific beliefs or path, etc. And if I don't know them enough to have seen those qualities yet, I spend more time listening before I get around to speaking up.
Lots of us are guiding each other over time, we just don't think our posts need to be written as though there's an actual life and death emergency, that the person will collapse if we don't internet-yell at them.
-
I agree 100% Errr.. Sort of. I do spend ridiculous money on travel while trying to keep costs down, but when somebody here starts going on about justifying a maid, gardener, or a giant Hummer for transportation, I definitely think, "Wow, what the fuck?"
-
is the MMM forum not to try to apply most or all of the tenets of the man himself to your life with the supportive advice of others? So it confuses me to see that the supportive advice is not even remotely like something MMM would say.
This is really the key question and divide as I see it. Personally, I have gotten a great deal of value from the blog and forum, but I have no desire to live exactly like MMM. I'd say I'm probably 25% mustachian and quite happy at that level because I will still be able to retire very early thanks to a high salary. I'm not interested at all in voluntary discomfort but that doesn't mean I can't contribute and learn from the blog and forum. Not everyone is going to buy into the message to the same extent, but if you wanted a forum filled with only true believers it wouldn't be a very lively or interesting place for very long.
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
Maybe this is a distinction that should have been made in the OP and was something James was referring to. To me, the issue is that people refer to things as being mustachian when there's no justification for it in anything MMM has written. That doesn't mean that the idea is bad or that they don't have a right to share it on the forum.
Indeed, if something is a good idea, it shouldn't need an attribution to MMM to prop up its value. The 'trade-offs are an individual choice / it all depends on savings rate, etc' trope is so closely related to mustachianism, is such a sound financial principle, and is so widespread on the forum that people rarely make the distinction that it's not from the blog and in fact often mis-attribute it, so I can see why that's frustrating, particularly to a new reader.
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k).
Ai Carumba! And here's me making $86K thinking I was doing fairly well. Damn, I'm "really low"? That means the average American is in the poorhouse.
-
I disagree with the premise of the question. Mustachianism is not about facepunching people and badgering them into spending less or becoming financially independent. It's about empowering people to realize that there is a different way than what is considered "normal" by society.
You don't HAVE to buy a brand new car every 3 years to prove that you're successful.
You don't HAVE to buy a McMansion in the suburbs to prove that you're a grown up.
You don't HAVE to go on an expensive vacation paid for by credit cards to prove that you're enjoying life.
In general, you don't HAVE to spend proportional to your income and embrace every consumer convenience thrown at you.
For most Americans this is already a revolutionary message.
Mustachianism is not prescriptive or doctrinaire, it's a "choose your own adventure" philosophy, where you
(1) Decide what you really want in life, whether it's to be able to stay home with your kids or to travel the world without working or to simply retire in 10 years.
(2) Figure out what percentage of your current income you have to save.
(3) Figure out what changes to your spending, earning, lifestyle you need to do in order to achieve your goals.
Some people require drastic changes, particularly if they are drowning in debt and are saving virtually nothing. THIS is where "facepunching" comes in handy.
But other people can accomplish their goals even with relatively large spending because their income is high enough to allow them some "wasteful" spending even while they save 70%-80%.
Mustachianism gives you the tools, ideas and philosophy to take control of your finances and your life. It doesn't tell you whether or not you should bike to work, eat at restaurants or own a sailboat. It does give you the ability to figure out the costs/benefits of each option, how they may affect your financial future and how you can design a different lifestyle if you are not satisfied with your current trajectory.
I think you summed it up really well here.
Is it? Because in the latest blog he specifically says that it wasn't a top down process where they decided they had to cut money out of their budget. And sure he says if he wanted to go to DisneyLand, he simply would. But then he goes on to say that he wouldn't want to because of the extent to which he's altered his thinking through philosophy.
Don't get me wrong. Rweba has made a good summation of a great financial approach that a lot of people would benefit from adopting.
-
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
+1 A couple of days ago I was contemplating posting about a pattern I saw in myself and to see if others had seen something similar. I started with copying MMM's ideas last year, and for most of 2014 I've been realizing how I can grow outside of the MMM model and do my own thing. Imitation until you completely understand a concept is common when learning something new, and once you understand the system, you can change it to suit your needs. I'd guess the OP is doing the same, but is currently at the idea-copying phase.
Anyway, the blog is written from the perspective of a guy who has already retired early. I've found some of the stuff he talks about in terms of efficiency is useful, but only if one actually has the ample free time of early retirement. For example, childcare was free for him for a reason.
-
Most people are here on the forums because they WANT to do better. Meaning that, right now, they are not in the category [FI] and have habits that reflect that. As the person above said, MMM is some dude who is retired. In other words, not some dude who wants to retire in spite of crippling debt. The forums are not going to be mostly retired dudes congratulating each other on their money and slacks. They are going to be questions asked by people who don't have the habits yet or who don't have the means yet or who don't have the opportunity yet and who are trying the only ways they can currently see to get there. And since they don't have the best solutions yet, this usually entails working through the bad ones.
-
Personally, my goal in life is to be able to afford the luxuries that I want.
I'm not willing to have boring 20s in exchange for maybe having better 50s.
I try to be conscious of my choices, but yeah, once in a while, I order sushi takeout and get a decent bottle of wine. As long as my net worth is over what my excel doc says I should be at, I'm fine.
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k).
Ai Carumba! And here's me making $86K thinking I was doing fairly well. Damn, I'm "really low"? That means the average American is in the poorhouse.
I'm with you on this. You know all those threads about "privilege"? Someone who believes that anything below $100k is "low income" needs to check their privilege. And maybe leave their gated community a little more often.
-
Some people are way to caught up in MMM and his system. This isn't a religion and you can do whatever the heck you want.
Its not like MMM is the first person to ever live below his means.
Its all when broken down about living below your means in extreme ways so that you can retire at a much earlier age than say
65 or older.
Some people don't want to live on 20k a year…. personally I don't want do to this and I don't hate my job that much that
I want to retire before I am 35.
and to the person that says making below 100k is a low income….gtfo the avg income in this nation is like 40k if that.
-
To me, the issue is that people refer to things as being mustachian when there's no justification for it in anything MMM has written.
Of course there is. In his 2013 spending, there's $1900 of travel spending and $650 for (gasp!) gym fees!!!!111 That's about as un-mustachian as one can get. Er, wait...*head explodes*
Which side is Big-endian and which is Little-endian? Who wants to be Mildendo?
-
What I also think what comes into play is that your universe of opportunities/options/choices changes dramatically as you move up the income ladder/net worth ladder. When I was just out of college, my net worth was zero. Life was pretty simple. Expensive dinners, vacations, holidays etc were just not even on my radar of possibilities. Fast forward to today (age 30) and here is a financial decision that I am making that I could not have contemplated 8 years ago in my wildest dreams. I have never had a car, never wanted one, never thought I would ever buy one....but now I need one AND - gasp - I might actually buy a BMW! I know, wtf, what's wrong with me. Well, my employer offers me a program whereby I can buy a brand new BMW at half of what the normal price is...I then own it for three years...then I sell it back to my employer for the price that I bought it at guaranteed (and can repeat this indefinitely). So essentially I would own a non-depreciating car (with the obvious tradeoffs of lost interest on investing the money instead and slightly higher gas and insurance costs, but the last two are negligible because both are very cheap where I live). Now, if you saw me list a BMW as an asset on a case study here, I am sure people would point out how dumb it is to own such a car....but if they knew the above background story, things might look different. So what I am trying to say, don't judge a book by its cover.
When I was younger I always looked at people who owned luxury cars as a bit stupid...it was totally unconceivable to me to ever own such a car. But a lot of things were unconceivable to me when I wasn't earning what I ended up earning after graduation....and enjoying the intangible opportunities that come from that. Life was really simple at first...show up to work...I saved 80% of my salary...not a care in the world. Until a year later when there were over 100k in my checking account and I was like, crap, I gotta figure something out about this, can't just sit there for God's sake. I grew up poor, so the idea of "managing my assets" etc was very new to me despite working in the financial industry. Suddenly I had the options of investing in stocks or buy real estate or buy lots of crap or another 10,000 other options! Life did get more complicated...more options that I never thought of openend up for me. Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, I don't want to trade with someone who is just making ends meet or paying off debt. But my universe of options and my universe of "problems" is just fundamentally different from that person, at least for the time being.
If you get to a certain wealth level then you may make choices that were just unimaginable before. That doesn't mean that they are stupid. Everyone has different priorities. Maybe you want to get to FI as fast as possible, and that's fine. Over the past 8 years I estimate (didn't actually record this) that I probably spent 60k on airfare to all kinds of cool places. That would have been inconceivable to me in college. A sum of 60k was inconceivable to me! That's more than 2X of my parents' yearly family income their whole life! I couldn't even phathom earning such an amount, let alone spending it! But do I regret that? No, absolutely not. I love traveling. And if I had saved those 60k instead of spending them, I would be 6 months closer to FI. Yes, 6 months, that's all given my income and savings rate. I love traveling more than those 6 months less of working could ever be worth to me.
-
What I also think what comes into play is that your universe of opportunities/options/choices changes dramatically as you move up the income ladder/net worth ladder. When I was just out of college, my net worth was zero. Life was pretty simple. Expensive dinners, vacations, holidays etc were just not even on my radar of possibilities. Fast forward to today (age 30) and here is a financial decision that I am making that I could not have contemplated 8 years ago in my wildest dreams. I have never had a car, never wanted one, never thought I would ever buy one....but now I need one AND - gasp - I might actually buy a BMW! I know, wtf, what's wrong with me. Well, my employer offers me a program whereby I can buy a brand new BMW at half of what the normal price is...I then own it for three years...then I sell it back to my employer for the price that I bought it at guaranteed (and can repeat this indefinitely). So essentially I would own a non-depreciating car (with the obvious tradeoffs of lost interest on investing the money instead and slightly higher gas and insurance costs, but the last two are negligible because both are very cheap where I live). Now, if you saw me list a BMW as an asset on a case study here, I am sure people would point out how dumb it is to own such a car....but if they knew the above background story, things might look different. So what I am trying to say, don't judge a book by its cover.
When I was younger I always looked at people who owned luxury cars as a bit stupid...it was totally unconceivable to me to ever own such a car. But a lot of things were unconceivable to me when I wasn't earning what I ended up earning after graduation....and enjoying the intangible opportunities that come from that. Life was really simple at first...show up to work...I saved 80% of my salary...not a care in the world. Until a year later when there were over 100k in my checking account and I was like, crap, I gotta figure something out about this, can't just sit there for God's sake. I grew up poor, so the idea of "managing my assets" etc was very new to me despite working in the financial industry. Suddenly I had the options of investing in stocks or buy real estate or buy lots of crap or another 10,000 other options! Life did get more complicated...more options that I never thought of openend up for me. Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, I don't want to trade with someone who is just making ends meet or paying off debt. But my universe of options and my universe of "problems" is just fundamentally different from that person, at least for the time being.
If you get to a certain wealth level then you may make choices that were just unimaginable before. That doesn't mean that they are stupid. Everyone has different priorities. Maybe you want to get to FI as fast as possible, and that's fine. Over the past 8 years I estimate (didn't actually record this) that I probably spent 60k on airfare to all kinds of cool places. That would have been inconceivable to me in college. A sum of 60k was inconceivable to me! That's more than 2X of my parents' yearly family income their whole life! I couldn't even phathom earning such an amount, let alone spending it! But do I regret that? No, absolutely not. I love traveling. And if I had saved those 60k instead of spending them, I would be 6 months closer to FI. Yes, 6 months, that's all given my income and savings rate. I love traveling more than those 6 months less of working could ever be worth to me.
$60k just on airfare? Wow. Not face-punching you, just saying wow that's amazing you were able to spend that. I think you made the right choice to enjoy your 20's while making good money though.. And I'm assuming you live in NY since the no car thing and working in finance? Why even consider a car if so?
I guess the real point is that $100k is either a lot of money or hardly anything depending on what you do with it. The fact is thst as eager and peppy as you are when you're 22-23, you're not going to be that way forever in a high income/high stress job. I don't guess it has to be stressful per se, but I always hear high paying finance jobs are among the most stressful. But if you're still at an 80% savings rate, I doubt you have anything to worry about.
-
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
+1.
Good thread, lots of great replies, but this one matches my thinking the most - Good post MrsPete. We are not disciples, we all choose our own path. And life is not a competition.
I'll just add, the marginal utility of money works both ways. When you make a lot of money and easily save 50%, convincing yourself to save $1 becomes harder. I still save that $1 most of the time, but I understand the spendypants mentality for a high earner.
Also, for me it's less about money and more about badassity, self-reliance, and muscle over motor.
-
Wow--I don't know. After reading several of these recent replies, I'm all confused now. I feel like I need to go back and read the WaPo article about MMM that got me here in the first place.
-
This is a really helpful discussion, y'all. I think we're circling around something important, but that there's no real way to resolve.
Thanks to those who commented on the position we've consciously chosen to be stuck in: we're living our happiest ideal life now (it's the simple homestead-y one), and the trade-off is that we'll work longer. If we gave it up temporarily and went bare bones, we could save more money faster, and then buy all this back. It's true! Sort of. Except that it's more complicated than that, because we're in a very high COL area, and we'd have to move far away to get out of it. I have a specialized job that's not easy to leave--there's nothing else I could be paid this well for and like as much...well actually anywhere in the country at the moment. We keep plugging away, and we do make changes where we can. MMM's approach is always at the back of my mind, and we'll just keep optimizing. The point is, we recognize the trade-offs and are making the choices that make us happy. And we're REALLy happy. So we're complacent. :)
And that's the paradox that I think this discussion is nailing. In theory, MMM is trying to convince us to live a small, humble life not just because it's the right thing for the world, but because it's AWESOME. Badass. Fun! But just how small and humble? Everyone draws the line in a slightly different way. If we're soft and supportive, that's cool, man. Cause, ya know, ya just got ta be conscious, right?
If we're face-punchy and extreme, then it's not ok unless you've given up the car, the travel, the accessories, and are left nothing but the hand tools to Do It Yourself. Otherwise we're consumer sukkas!
But what if the math doesn't work out? What if it DOES actually make sense to stay in the high COL area even if it has the commute? What if it does make sense to work the 12 hr days even if my child is young and I'm missing out? What if there are more important things in life besides FI?
Well, then we're back to the paradox of either--that's ok, mon, it's all about trade-offs and choices, or suck it up or you're a sukka.
I don't think there are any easy answers, because the truth is that if we're wealthy enough to live in places that GIVE us choices, then we're already the privileged few who just have to keep doing our best and plugging away and navigating the complexities of life in these crazy times we live in.
Sorry that was so long! Y'all are making me think!
-
Wow--I don't know. After reading several of these recent replies, I'm all confused now. I feel like I need to go back and read the WaPo article about MMM that got me here in the first place.
My post crossed in cyberspace with Cheddar's. I wasn't referring to Cheddar's. I liked his and Mrs. Pete's. But I'm still confused. And that's OK.
-
What I also think what comes into play is that your universe of opportunities/options/choices changes dramatically as you move up the income ladder/net worth ladder. When I was just out of college, my net worth was zero. Life was pretty simple. Expensive dinners, vacations, holidays etc were just not even on my radar of possibilities. Fast forward to today (age 30) and here is a financial decision that I am making that I could not have contemplated 8 years ago in my wildest dreams. I have never had a car, never wanted one, never thought I would ever buy one....but now I need one AND - gasp - I might actually buy a BMW! I know, wtf, what's wrong with me. Well, my employer offers me a program whereby I can buy a brand new BMW at half of what the normal price is...I then own it for three years...then I sell it back to my employer for the price that I bought it at guaranteed (and can repeat this indefinitely). So essentially I would own a non-depreciating car (with the obvious tradeoffs of lost interest on investing the money instead and slightly higher gas and insurance costs, but the last two are negligible because both are very cheap where I live). Now, if you saw me list a BMW as an asset on a case study here, I am sure people would point out how dumb it is to own such a car....but if they knew the above background story, things might look different. So what I am trying to say, don't judge a book by its cover.
When I was younger I always looked at people who owned luxury cars as a bit stupid...it was totally unconceivable to me to ever own such a car. But a lot of things were unconceivable to me when I wasn't earning what I ended up earning after graduation....and enjoying the intangible opportunities that come from that. Life was really simple at first...show up to work...I saved 80% of my salary...not a care in the world. Until a year later when there were over 100k in my checking account and I was like, crap, I gotta figure something out about this, can't just sit there for God's sake. I grew up poor, so the idea of "managing my assets" etc was very new to me despite working in the financial industry. Suddenly I had the options of investing in stocks or buy real estate or buy lots of crap or another 10,000 other options! Life did get more complicated...more options that I never thought of openend up for me. Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, I don't want to trade with someone who is just making ends meet or paying off debt. But my universe of options and my universe of "problems" is just fundamentally different from that person, at least for the time being.
If you get to a certain wealth level then you may make choices that were just unimaginable before. That doesn't mean that they are stupid. Everyone has different priorities. Maybe you want to get to FI as fast as possible, and that's fine. Over the past 8 years I estimate (didn't actually record this) that I probably spent 60k on airfare to all kinds of cool places. That would have been inconceivable to me in college. A sum of 60k was inconceivable to me! That's more than 2X of my parents' yearly family income their whole life! I couldn't even phathom earning such an amount, let alone spending it! But do I regret that? No, absolutely not. I love traveling. And if I had saved those 60k instead of spending them, I would be 6 months closer to FI. Yes, 6 months, that's all given my income and savings rate. I love traveling more than those 6 months less of working could ever be worth to me.
$60k just on airfare? Wow. Not face-punching you, just saying wow that's amazing you were able to spend that. I think you made the right choice to enjoy your 20's while making good money though.. And I'm assuming you live in NY since the no car thing and working in finance? Why even consider a car if so?
I guess the real point is that $100k is either a lot of money or hardly anything depending on what you do with it. The fact is thst as eager and peppy as you are when you're 22-23, you're not going to be that way forever in a high income/high stress job. I don't guess it has to be stressful per se, but I always hear high paying finance jobs are among the most stressful. But if you're still at an 80% savings rate, I doubt you have anything to worry about.
Well, thinking about it, 60k is probably exaggerated, but I haven't been documenting it, so just threw out the number to make a point. Probably 40k is closer to the truth. But anyhow, it's A LOT either way, I agree...but I didn't spend it in some kind of zombie mode, it was a conscious decision, I really enjoy to travel...I live on another contintent than where I am from and spending that amount didn't make much of a dent into my FI plans. I started working at 25 and will be FI in 3 years...at 33. Of course THAT was also inconveivable to me. Of course having so much optionality is not always a blessing as I have pointed out on other threads. The key to spending though is that you don't lose sight of it...I know the value of a dollar...I know I have spent a lot on traveling...and I also know if I can't afford it anymore then I won't. (And traveling is really the only thing I spend money on, I am a very frugal person...wouldn't be FI in 3 years time if I wasn't). The good thing about having grown up relatively poor is that I still have that perspective. I am surrounded by a lot of people at work (and this might deserve another thread) whose spending you you can't belive. I once had dinner with a colleage, she told me her rent is 30k. I just nodded....not spectatcular or antyhing...until I realized she didn't mean 30k a year...she meant 30k per month. Nowadays such statements don't shock me anymore, I secretely think these people are nuts, but there is no point in arguing this because they don't realize how crazy it really is, they just don't have any perspective anymore when it comes to money! (I have so many stories on outrageous spending, I could really start another thread, lol). For me, I am very aware of what I am spending on traveling and that it's a real luxury but I can also just as easily not spend that if it's required.
Oh, and no, I don't work in NYC. Spent most of my career in Asia and have now moved to a new position and new city which unfortunately requires a car due to pretty much non-existent public transport. Actually, I would be fine without a car still, but for what my husband does professionally, it's impossible for him here without a car. Anyhow, it's been a good run, 30 years without a car...I think I will be here until FI...so 3 years...then I intend to return to my car-free life again (I really don't like driving) and move somewhere where I can bike a lot and rely on public transport:)))
And on a related note, I also know people my age who have died of cancer or had other terrible things happen to them (which were not preventable). I want to get to FI, but I am already someone who is always focused on the future. But the future may never come. I still save a lot on FI...but spending 3% of my yearly take-home pay on travel is very acceptable to me. So yes, I partly do agree that spending is always relative.
-
Wow--I don't know. After reading several of these recent replies, I'm all confused now. I feel like I need to go back and read the WaPo article about MMM that got me here in the first place.
My post crossed in cyberspace with Cheddar's. I wasn't referring to Cheddar's. I liked his and Mrs. Pete's. But I'm still confused. And that's OK.
Thanks for clarifying, I wasn't sure.
I just think: find a way to live a happy life, now and in the future, and try not to fuck up the planet. And spending money does not equal happiness. The rest is up to the individual.
-
There's an awful lot of "complain-bragging" on this forum from people with $200k+ incomes. I hope we will hear more from people with more average incomes who are using the Mustachian way of life to live like someone with a much higher income. That impresses me a lot more than someone who saves 70% of their income and can still easily afford a live-in nanny.
Just in case this is in reference to my suggestion on another post, a live in nanny was the same price as daycare for two kids... $1250 per month.. With a lot more value! Anyone looking for outside help to go back to work should know about all options, including diane c's suggestion about SAH as viable...The OP was looking at live out nanny which costs far more as you can not deduct standard room and board.
I certainly do not consider ourselves rich, although money has been much much more the past year or so- mainly due to peak earning years and my insane travel schedule.
The OP is right on that waste is waste. Even if you have a high savings goal. But it is not a waste of money, per se, that is important, but wasted satisfaction with what you have and can do yourself. Wasted time not spent with people you love and enjoying just 'being'.
MMM is about taking enjoyment in a can do attitude- to figure out new skills as you explore life and living. To stop equating things, money and spending with your purpose in life.
-
To me, the issue is that people refer to things as being mustachian when there's no justification for it in anything MMM has written.
Of course there is. In his 2013 spending, there's $1900 of travel spending and $650 for (gasp!) gym fees!!!!111 That's about as un-mustachian as one can get. Er, wait...*head explodes*
Thank you! I have been making a stronger and stronger form of the point hoping to prod someone into coming up with some actual evidence. Because god knows I don't have the blog memorized and may be as guilty as anyone else of picking and choosing what I want to remember from it.
That example doesn't totally satisfy me because
1. I don't necessarily see an action as compelling as an explanation. His budget might contain things he doesn't necessarily see as totally compatible with his philosophy. (For example, his enjoyable experiment (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/03/04/an-enjoyable-experiment-wasting-1000/) about wasting $1000 is one of those exception-that-proves-the-rule type things.)
2. I'm not the OP trying to prove that any expense beyond necessities is wasteful and not allowed. I'm trying to point out the lack of justification for the soft-focus philosophy others are touting as mustachian of "whatever you want to do is fine so long as it matters to you and you can afford it."
3. Again, that's why an opinion of his in writing would be better than an action, because we'd want to compare his justification of the action.
--For starters, I believe the gym membership is totally a Mrs. MM thing. And it's justified by the fact that a. healthiness is good and b. she hasn't found a free alternative for crossfit. He of course does free weight training, but she feels crossfit is special. That's where I understand that individual tastes come into it. However, they were working on building some equipment and getting friends to come over so they could have free classes that way. So it is something they're challenging themselves to pare down.
--For travel, he's freaking bare bones about travel. Didn't he trade construction work on a reader's house for free housing in Hawaii? Didn't he go into detail about how they visit relatives for like a month so they can drive their van (couch surfing if they have to stop overnight along the way) and it's cheaper than flying.
--So, the level of life-hacking that goes into this is what I come away with as the point, not 'oh, it's okay to spend whatever you want on ocean cruises if that's your priority.'
I submit as further evidence Why Should I Be Frugal When I'm So Rich? (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/04/25/why-should-i-be-frugal-when-im-so-rich/)
we are now at a point where we could probably triple our annual spending forever, without running out of money. And yet, I continue to ride my 2008 commuter bike everywhere, get filthy doing local construction projects, and buy everything used from Craigslist. [ . . .]We’re even shopping around for a smaller house in the neighborhood, to downsize our space a bit. How could this possibly be? It’s because our current life is already more than enough. We don’t want to lose the challenge and the spice that is part of life right now.
[. . .]
[On his boiling rage for inefficiency:] Buying treats for yourself that aren’t truly necessary is inefficient. It’s unsatisfying.
Paul Allen’s 414-foot Octopus yacht has engines totaling 19,000 horsepower, which burn about 622 gallons of diesel fuel per hour at cruising speed. It’s currently off the coast of Australia, a journey which took about $780,000 of fuel to make. This is an inefficient way to have fun. A man skilled at having fun should be able to achieve equal bliss within walking distance of his own house. He could then invest the surplus funds to save a few lives, which are surprisingly affordable these days at only about $200 per human according to Peter Singer. Or you could start companies, fix cities, or even change countries. All challenging and effort-filled endeavors[ . . .]
And so I’d like to issue a challenge that you consider deflating, rather than inflating your own lifestyle as you get richer. The desire for luxury, while very real and occasionally pleasant to satisfy, is actually a weakness that stands in the way of a happier life. Getting off of the path that society has beaten for you will lead to much better adventures. So I’d rather work towards strength as I get older, rather than striving for weakness.
After all, which would you rather be, the man who requires 622 gallons per hour of diesel and a crew of 60 to have fun, or the one who can do it just by stepping out his front door?
I totally agree we shouldn't go around rejecting people for taking what they want out of MMM or because they don't ride a bike or whatever. It just feels sometimes like people don't even realize they haven't even grasped the hard-core version of the message.
It reminds me of a bit from the movie Shine about genius pianist David Helfgott. He has taken off his glasses while still rehearsing.
Teacher: The page, for God’s sake! The notes!
David: Sorry, sir. Forgetting the notes.
Teacher: Would it be asking too much to learn them first?
David: And then forget them?
Teacher: Precisely.
And as for relative spending, personally, even though I'm one of the low earners on here, I don't mind if a person who earns even less than I do wants to facepunch me. I'm surrounded by people who earn what I do or more, so I'm happy to have my complacency about anything and everything questioned.
-
I personally do not give a shit about "mustachianism". I enjoy saving money and would like to retire early. I've found great advice on this forum regarding real estate investments (and references to bigger pockets), asset allocations (and references to bogleheads), and various other techniques and ideas to save money. I max my 401k and my IRA, I'm only 25, and I save 50%+. Without this forum I probably would not have maxed my 401k this year, but instead would have put that money in my taxable account. I'm also spending 30k on a wedding coming up, I will never drop cable because I like watching the niners and giants play, and I'll always own a car (technically two since I have a hot did that just sits and collects dust).
There's lots of great advice to be found on this forum. Personally I am not a fan of the face punches, or people trying to measure who can spend the absolute least. That's not what this is about. It's about conscious spending on what's important to you. It's all about making your best effort to be more efficient with the resources you have and we all have. That's it.
I don't even care about savings rates. It's all about doing the best you can with what you have. I've checked mine once just to get a ballpark of it, but in the end it's not a competition, and it's not a race. If I can help teach a coworker about increasing their 401k, or compound interest, or marginal tax rates. I'm happy.
Anyways, I'm probably talking in circles now. I initially did not like this forum because of all the face punches, and attacking personalities when people weren't perfect. I try to stay out of those type of threads. There is valuable information that I would have missed out on if I did not get past that.
-
I personally do not give a shit about "mustachianism". I enjoy saving money and would like to retire early. I've found great advice on this forum regarding real estate investments (and references to bigger pockets), asset allocations (and references to bogleheads), and various other techniques and ideas to save money. I max my 401k and my IRA, I'm only 25, and I save 50%+. Without this forum I probably would not have maxed my 401k this year, but instead would have put that money in my taxable account. I'm also spending 30k on a wedding coming up, I will never drop cable because I like watching the niners and giants play, and I'll always own a car (technically two since I have a hot did that just sits and collects dust).
There's lots of great advice to be found on this forum. Personally I am not a fan of the face punches, or people trying to measure who can spend the absolute least. That's not what this is about. It's about conscious spending on what's important to you. It's all about making your best effort to be more efficient with the resources you have and we all have. That's it.
I don't even care about savings rates. It's all about doing the best you can with what you have. I've checked mine once just to get a ballpark of it, but in the end it's not a competition, and it's not a race. If I can help teach a coworker about increasing their 401k, or compound interest, or marginal tax rates. I'm happy.
Anyways, I'm probably talking in circles now. I initially did not like this forum because of all the face punches, and attacking personalities when people weren't perfect. I try to stay out of those type of threads. There is valuable information that I would have missed out on if I did not get past that.
I'm kind of with you (even if I did refer to savings rate in one thread). I'm not in it like's it a religion to follow with a bunch of rules or whatnot. I won't be purchasing any WWMMMD bracelets. There's guiding principles for me, and that's it, and I like it that way. I always thought "Mustachianism" was meant tongue in cheek. I'm not certain everyone here feels that way. LOL.
-
I'm looking for inspiration. You can punch me in the face if you want, but I've got a tough jaw. I'll probably become defiant and stubbornly continue doing whatever awful, wasteful, flippant, spendthrift thing I was doing before. But every once in a while, I'm inspired. I'm reminded of the joys of being around when your kid wants to go play by the stream or the pain of looking at a beautiful day through tinted windows (if you're so lucky).
I don't want my life to pass me by while I'm in a cubicle, and I often need a reminder of that when I'm about to buy a shinier widget or convenient kitchen gadget. But that reminder is probably going to be someone talking about their experiences, rather than just telling me that they're judging me. I already just myself. I don't like the mistakes I make. Pointing them out to me probably doesn't help me. But if I can find some inspiration bubbling up inside me, I just might change myself.
-
I think the problem with trying to apply blanket lifestyle and spending rules to everybody and saying that if something is different than what MMM would do it's 'wrong/uneccessary' is that...everybody values things differently. Perhaps I think someone's 2k of travel per year is ridiculous and wasteful, while they think me spending $500 on restaurants because I enjoy good meals is just completely outrageous.
To me 'mustacianism' has never been about not spending money on things I don't purely 'need'. I don't 'need' more than one bike but I have several...i don't 'need' to have football season tickets but it's my favorite thing to do with my family in the fall, and we didn't 'need' to book tickets to see our east coast family for xmas this year...but they are all things that makes my family happy. Mustacianism to me is about being self aware with enough willpower to cut out crap you don't value in order to both be able to fund the hobbies/experiences that do truly make you happy, while saving enough to reach whatever financial goals one sets for themselves, whether that's FI, RE, or what not.
To the people who have boats and such...do I personally think they are a waste of money, in general yes, would I buy one, probably not, but for some people that's what they value the most and that's fine, to each their own. Perhaps these people don't give a crap about football or traveling for xmas and would never spend what I do for football and plane tickets every year because they don't value that.
-
Regarding all the complaints about an "MMM religion" that seems to exist here on the forums, I can say it's really no surprise. I came over from LessWrong, and, while smart, many of them would follow Eliezer Yudkowsky and a few others right into a volcano if push came to shove. Not all of them, but many of them.
It's the guru thing. People tend to become over-awed by individuals who reveal to them a way of thinking they either a.) had not considered before but find extremely sufficient and desirable or b.) have considered before but never had the will to pursue until they discovered this person.
MMM's main strength as a blogger is that he writes aggressively. Everything else he does (the math, the money saving ideas, the financial advice) has all been done by others. He's making it digestible for a new readership. What gets him "followers" is that he's charismatic. That's a good thing because we want writers like MMM out there telling Average Joe "wake up man!" But a lot of those Average Joes who listen aren't going to go, "This chap's right!" and then start doing all the work on his own. They'll think "Listening to this man saved me money. I should listen to him more and more!"
People falls for gurus, it happens. Sadly, it can happen whether the guru is good or not.
-
I'm one of the high spenders we plan to retire on 48k/yr. I found this site due to the shockingly simple post. It woke me up to math I was over looking as well as motivated me to increase my savings. You don't have to be 100% mustachian to benefit from what he says. Could I cut my boat and retire 2 years earlier. Probably. Could I cut out the vacations we take and cut another year. Probably. But I enjoy these things. I'll work 3 extra years to continue enjoying these things until I die. There is a mix. You don't have to be 100% Pete to gain an earlier retirement and consume less.
-
I personally do not give a shit about "mustachianism". I enjoy saving money and would like to retire early. I've found great advice on this forum regarding real estate investments (and references to bigger pockets), asset allocations (and references to bogleheads), and various other techniques and ideas to save money. I max my 401k and my IRA, I'm only 25, and I save 50%+. Without this forum I probably would not have maxed my 401k this year, but instead would have put that money in my taxable account. I'm also spending 30k on a wedding coming up, I will never drop cable because I like watching the niners and giants play, and I'll always own a car (technically two since I have a hot did that just sits and collects dust).
There's lots of great advice to be found on this forum. Personally I am not a fan of the face punches, or people trying to measure who can spend the absolute least. That's not what this is about. It's about conscious spending on what's important to you. It's all about making your best effort to be more efficient with the resources you have and we all have. That's it.
I don't even care about savings rates. It's all about doing the best you can with what you have. I've checked mine once just to get a ballpark of it, but in the end it's not a competition, and it's not a race. If I can help teach a coworker about increasing their 401k, or compound interest, or marginal tax rates. I'm happy.
Anyways, I'm probably talking in circles now. I initially did not like this forum because of all the face punches, and attacking personalities when people weren't perfect. I try to stay out of those type of threads. There is valuable information that I would have missed out on if I did not get past that.
+1
I have a hard time using the trademarked phrases like facepunch, complainy pants, mustachian etc. Let's call it what it is: frugality with an environmental emphasis and acknowledge that MMM does not have a patent on this philosophy. I read the blog because it he does write about it in a way that is entertaining and engaging and because his point of view really resonates. I read the forums to learn new tips and tricks. Like Joel, I started maxing out my 401k instead of taxable thanks to you all. I think its a red flag when people are afraid to think for themselves and conversely when they are too close-minded to see that a different approach may work better. As others have pointed out, this is not a religion or a cult but I've been characteristics of both of those at times. I think we just need to keep the dogma in check and we'll be good.
-
Regarding all the complaints about an "MMM religion" that seems to exist here on the forums, I can say it's really no surprise. I came over from LessWrong, and, while smart, many of them would follow Eliezer Yudkowsky and a few others right into a volcano if push came to shove. Not all of them, but many of them.
It's the guru thing. People tend to become over-awed by individuals who reveal to them a way of thinking they either a.) had not considered before but find extremely sufficient and desirable or b.) have considered before but never had the will to pursue until they discovered this person.
MMM's main strength as a blogger is that he writes aggressively. Everything else he does (the math, the money saving ideas, the financial advice) has all been done by others. He's making it digestible for a new readership. What gets him "followers" is that he's charismatic. That's a good thing because we want writers like MMM out there telling Average Joe "wake up man!" But a lot of those Average Joes who listen aren't going to go, "This chap's right!" and then start doing all the work on his own. They'll think "Listening to this man saved me money. I should listen to him more and more!"
People falls for gurus, it happens. Sadly, it can happen whether the guru is good or not.
Interesting perspective.
That might be the case for some people, but I don't think all.
Those of us who lived a spending conscious existence before there was an MMM aren't won over by a guru. I appreciate Jacob's viewpoints, but he's not exactly charismatic. Since MMM has gone more mainstream, I actually find Jacob's forum more in line with the way I think, but overall, I'd say that I fall somewhere between ERE and MMM. I found the early days of this forum more in line with the way I think.
Now I'm curious to check out LessWrong. :)
-
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
What I was thinking. Just skip over what doesn't apply. Not sure why that's such a difficult concept.
-
No! Unless I missed it, I don't think MMM has ever said it depended on your savings rate. MMM implies that he lived on 10-15k plus his mortgage payments (at least this is what I've understood from his yearly expenses graphs). He didn't save #% , call it good, and then give himself a free pass to frivolity. Everything was a waste until his goal was met. He learned not to want those things until they were hardly or not at all on his radar and even now being a millionaire, he still doesn't have a high cell phone plan or a $1000/month entertainment budget.
Two thoughts:
- You find your comfort level, you make your plan, and I'll do the same. If yours doesn't match mine, that doesn't mean one of us is making a mistake.
- Something I don't quite grasp is seeing MMM almost as if he's Jesus. He has good ideas. Some of them will work for me, while others won't. I can pick and choose what works for my life; I don't have to adopt all his philosophies.
What I was thinking. Just skip over what doesn't apply. Not sure why that's such a difficult concept.
Because it doesn't work that way to be a member here you MUST abide by ALL mustacian concepts. This isn't like being a cafeteria Catholic. You either follow everything or you're doomed to retire at 65 with absolutely nothing like all others.
-
There are an awful lot of people on this forum who are paying zero attention to what MMM has to say. Mustachianism is all about personal fulfillment and a large part of that comes from self-sufficiency through the acquisition of skills. I read tons of posts on this forum every day from people who are outsourcing stuff that they could easily do themselves. That's one step removed from using an app to find someone to do your laundry or paying someone to ship frozen gourmet meals to your house so you don't have to cook. Just because you have a ton of money, that doesn't mean that you should spend it to make life "easier" for yourself. Ask yourself if you would have any value in the face of an EMP burst. In they were honest, most people would answer "no". Because of Mustachianism, I know I would be A-OK.
-
Regarding all the complaints about an "MMM religion" that seems to exist here on the forums, I can say it's really no surprise. I came over from LessWrong, and, while smart, many of them would follow Eliezer Yudkowsky and a few others right into a volcano if push came to shove. Not all of them, but many of them.
It's the guru thing. People tend to become over-awed by individuals who reveal to them a way of thinking they either a.) had not considered before but find extremely sufficient and desirable or b.) have considered before but never had the will to pursue until they discovered this person.
MMM's main strength as a blogger is that he writes aggressively. Everything else he does (the math, the money saving ideas, the financial advice) has all been done by others. He's making it digestible for a new readership. What gets him "followers" is that he's charismatic. That's a good thing because we want writers like MMM out there telling Average Joe "wake up man!" But a lot of those Average Joes who listen aren't going to go, "This chap's right!" and then start doing all the work on his own. They'll think "Listening to this man saved me money. I should listen to him more and more!"
People falls for gurus, it happens. Sadly, it can happen whether the guru is good or not.
Interesting perspective.
That might be the case for some people, but I don't think all.
Those of us who lived a spending conscious existence before there was an MMM aren't won over by a guru. I appreciate Jacob's viewpoints, but he's not exactly charismatic. Since MMM has gone more mainstream, I actually find Jacob's forum more in line with the way I think, but overall, I'd say that I fall somewhere between ERE and MMM. I found the early days of this forum more in line with the way I think.
Now I'm curious to check out LessWrong. :)
What this thread is helping me understand is that people who use the site for money-saving ideas are intelligently picking and choosing the parts that work for them, while people interested in the philosophy or environmentalism or lifestyle ideas are cult followers.
-
There's an awful lot of "complain-bragging" on this forum....
For the record, "complain-bragging" is one of the most genius terms I've ever heard!
"Everything was going so well with the savings, but then the transmission on my Lamborghini Reventon gave out and had to be replaced. FML."
"I can't believe the price of private schools has gone up so much! The cost to send our 8-year old Billy is now close to $56,000 a year. I don't know how we'll ever make ends meet."
Hahaha... Oh, you're such a douche.
-
I'm pretty new to this forum, so maybe it's not my place to complain. But yeah, I've noticed that this forum isn't what I expected of Mustachians.
I've got an honest question brewing in the back of my mind. Per MMM, I should try asking the Mustachians on the forum, but I feel like I shouldn't even bother. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider myself a full-fledged Mustachian. I was pretty much born frugal, but I would say I'm only semi-Mustachian. I'm surrounded by Consuma-suckers everywhere, so to get more of that kind of advice here is useless to me, KWIM? Maybe it's asking too much, IDK. I'm not about to start making my own reusable TP, but I really don't want a catheter and bed-pan handed to me here either. I guess I would rather that I would get advice here that errs on the side of more Mustachian rather than less so. I can figure out where I will draw my own line, but it's nice to get a nudge to improve. (I'm trying to ease the thermostat down!) Everywhere else, I get pushed to the other side. (such-and-such is sooo much more convenient!)
-
I have stopped commenting on most Case Studies because when people can't seem to find a place to save or make excuses for what I consider to be ridiculous spending, I can get bitchy.
On a couple of occasions I've typed out, "Have you even read the blog?"
I do recognize that people are free to live their own lives and I am free to roll my eyes and move on.
Hi BPA (and anyone else)--
I'd love it if you would take a look at my recent Case Study. I just added details about my spending so far in 2014 (at the end of the thread).
http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/case-study-need-advice-as-i-approach-the-finish-line-thanks!/
Feel free to administer face punches!
Sorry for this thread hijack.
-
I've got an honest question brewing in the back of my mind. Per MMM, I should try asking the Mustachians on the forum, but I feel like I shouldn't even bother.
I think you could get the tougher responses here. I would suggest including in your subject line something like: extreme options wanted... or facepunches wanted..., and then specifying in your post that you want the most extreme views possible.
Some will facepunch for people hiring a nanny, yet most won't facepunch for going ahead with having a kid* (the most unfrugal, unenvironmental thing we can do) in the first place. Some will facepunch for saving 43% when 45% is possible, yet entirely ignore a member choosing to hoard wealth vs donating the excess to alleviate others' suffering. You'll never get a consensus on what is "facepunch worthy", but if you straight out ask for punches and extremes, I think you might well find people here willing to offer those.
* Disclaimer: I am one that took this unfrugal, unenvironmental route myself :)
-
Y'all have given me the urge to start reading forum posts from the first few months, now!
-
I'm pretty new to this forum, so maybe it's not my place to complain. But yeah, I've noticed that this forum isn't what I expected of Mustachians.
I've got an honest question brewing in the back of my mind. Per MMM, I should try asking the Mustachians on the forum, but I feel like I shouldn't even bother. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider myself a full-fledged Mustachian. I was pretty much born frugal, but I would say I'm only semi-Mustachian. I'm surrounded by Consuma-suckers everywhere, so to get more of that kind of advice here is useless to me, KWIM? Maybe it's asking too much, IDK. I'm not about to start making my own reusable TP, but I really don't want a catheter and bed-pan handed to me here either. I guess I would rather that I would get advice here that errs on the side of more Mustachian rather than less so. I can figure out where I will draw my own line, but it's nice to get a nudge to improve. (I'm trying to ease the thermostat down!) Everywhere else, I get pushed to the other side. (such-and-such is sooo much more convenient!)
I posted my own case study, then got heat for:
an ethical choice
Not profiting "well" off family
my lack of health insurance (very informed short term gamble.)
I got little else from my case study other than a strong urge to get a bike. And yet my bills were still in ridiculous ville. I heard of ERE off this thread, started reading there, and can now see where I could shave off $650. Maybe give that a quick read?
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/frequently-asked-questions
-
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/frequently-asked-questions
I just clicked that link (thanks!) -I'm very excited to see that I'm spending about the same as his upper limit! Woo hoo! (And, not having looked at that before, I credit me, this forum, and YNAB for that.)
-
Daycare vs. Nannies is not a luxury. I am paying 12% of my take home pay for my kid's daycare it makes perfect financial sense. Now, if someone is thinking about nanny vs. daycare so they have time to go have their nails done and have a martini brunch on their boat while driving to the pier in their third car - that would be a different story.
@Diane C to be fair, people got defensive (myself included) in a thread about Daycare vs. Nannies, not because you offered a third opinion, but because you were passing a judgement.
-
The fact that people keep referencing 1 of the initial handful of examples just points out the over all trend of the discussion in this thread that one person's needed expense is another person's luxury.
I was silly and made my decision for a dog at 14, not considering any of the long term financial responsibility it would entail. I didn't ditch the responsibility, no matter how much it hurt financially. It seems natural to me, and I wouldn't expect people to get rid of their dogs or children if there was financial hardship. I would just expect them not to complain about it. (And I never did on my case study,complain that is. It was just a factor among many regarding my FI goal.)
MMM labels all dogs as "optional luxury companions" and children are just as optional a luxury decision. I even get the implication that he thinks of his own son that way (one of many things he thinks of him. Obviously adores him.) Accidents happen, but for the most part, Birth control is pretty effective. She intentionally got pregnant, and had a child, and now there are expenses that go along with that choice.
That person probably makes a crazy amount of money that I can't fathom and wants to pay my entire month's income to someone to take care of her kid and do light housekeeping. I'm guessing that due to this high income she still manages to come out ahead of this severe expense and so it's worth it in a purely numbers sense. But it ignores the consideration of taking time off and raising the child herself until the child reaches school age simply because of the earning potential being lost. If you're truly wealthy, then why is how much money you would lose a prime consideration?
Therefore, on a forum that is strongly MMM philosophy, I don't understand how they can discuss option A, option B, and never consider any other alternative, of which there could be many. TBH, I only read the NvsD OP and none of the replies. But the OP didn't really sound like they were considering all options, just two very expensive ones.
-
Therefore, on a forum that is strongly MMM philosophy, I don't understand how they can discuss option A, option B, and never consider any other alternative, of which there could be many. [...] the OP didn't really sound like they were considering all options, just two very expensive ones.
Something to be mindful of, though:
To keep a topic focused on the matter at hand, many of us will post a very specific question per thread.
This practice is usually intentional, toward the ends of:
- clearly presenting one issue, and
- eliminating red herrings that divert a discussion from the intended topic.
So, when you look at the one thread, you may be seeing only the most recent layer of an issue being explored. For example, that family may have previously explored in their own forum Journal, or in previous threads, or privately at home while watching other people's threads on parenting paths:
- the ramifications of having a kid at all,
- the ramifications of staying at home vs working outside the home,
- etc
...not to mention all sorts of other parenting/care decisions such as opening an education savings plan, cloth vs disposable diapers, private vs public school, best neighbourhoods for kids, and so on.
A well focused thread is usually a very tiny snapshot into one very specific aspect of a poster's larger exploration. To assume that a focused-question post reflects the entirety of a person's explorations would be erroneous in many, many cases.
-
I agree with the poster who said it appeared these forums are becoming high-income FI'ers patting other high income FI'er on the back. They are losing sight of what the Money Mustache philosophy is all about.
It is about living mindfully, and frugally, to get maximum enjoyment from life while also protecting this planet and its resources for future generations.
To say "I drive 100 miles a day so I can surf," is so contradictory to MMM's philosophy, I don't know where to start. Or to say "I own three jet skis but I bought them used," well, then good for you, but you are NOT embracing the MMM philosophy. As MMM's post said, "It's not just about frugality."
When you can bike to work AND then bike to the beach to surf, then you are living the MMM philosophy. When you SELL your jet ski's and pick up a used kayak that you can use your muscles to explore nearby shorelines, then you are living the MMM philosophy.
And even if you are making $200K, and saving $150K, and then you buy a new Mercedes with cash, then NO you are not living the MMM philosophy. You are a great saver and a successful person, but you are not practicing the MMM philosophy. Nothing wrong with that -- 95% of the people on the planet aren't either. But don't try to bend the MMM philosophy to suit your consumerist tastes.
Sorry to vent...but
-
I've got an honest question brewing in the back of my mind. Per MMM, I should try asking the Mustachians on the forum, but I feel like I shouldn't even bother.
I think you could get the tougher responses here. I would suggest including in your subject line something like: extreme options wanted... or facepunches wanted..., and then specifying in your post that you want the most extreme views possible.
Some will facepunch for people hiring a nanny, yet most won't facepunch for going ahead with having a kid* (the most unfrugal, unenvironmental thing we can do) in the first place. Some will facepunch for saving 43% when 45% is possible, yet entirely ignore a member choosing to hoard wealth vs donating the excess to alleviate others' suffering. You'll never get a consensus on what is "facepunch worthy", but if you straight out ask for punches and extremes, I think you might well find people here willing to offer those.
* Disclaimer: I am one that took this unfrugal, unenvironmental route myself :)
I've got a a couple too. (Don't even get me started on that topic. I already contributed by 2 cents on that article.) ;-)
Maybe I'll try that later. I don't need extreme advice--my imagination will suffice there. (Basically, suck it up and DIY, I'm sure.) What I'm interested in is help with reasoning in figuring out at what point it's okay to throw in the towel and pay for outside help.
-
I agree with the poster who said it appeared these forums are becoming high-income FI'ers patting other high income FI'er on the back. They are losing sight of what the Money Mustache philosophy is all about.
It is about living mindfully, and frugally, to get maximum enjoyment from life while also protecting this planet and its resources for future generations.
...
And even if you are making $200K, and saving $150K, and then you buy a new Mercedes with cash, then NO you are not living the MMM philosophy. You are a great saver and a successful person, but you are not practicing the MMM philosophy. Nothing wrong with that -- 95% of the people on the planet aren't either. But don't try to bend the MMM philosophy to suit your consumerist tastes.
This is an interesting discussion, and I will admit that while I believe whole-heartedly in the part I bolded above, I have a much harder time living it. I like my conveniences, I like international travel, I love my drafty old house that leaks heat like a sieve, I get a sense of pride from DIY something once, just to prove I can do it, and then I would be perfectly happy never to do it again. So, I probably don't belong here, though I can learn a lot from others here. It is unlikely that I will ever live frugally, but I have moved towards it on the continuum.
As MMM reaches more people, the general tone here will move towards the mean--I think that's inevitable. And, while it's good that more people are challenging their assumptions, it is also bit of a shame. I have, at times, felt guilty for watering down MMM, which is why I mostly stick to my journal and don't comment a lot on the other threads. In benefitting from the MMM philosophy, the last thing I want to do is water it down to the point where it loses what makes it powerful.
-
I agree with the poster who said it appeared these forums are becoming high-income FI'ers patting other high income FI'er on the back. They are losing sight of what the Money Mustache philosophy is all about.
It is about living mindfully, and frugally, to get maximum enjoyment from life while also protecting this planet and its resources for future generations.
To say "I drive 100 miles a day so I can surf," is so contradictory to MMM's philosophy, I don't know where to start. Or to say "I own three jet skis but I bought them used," well, then good for you, but you are NOT embracing the MMM philosophy. As MMM's post said, "It's not just about frugality."
When you can bike to work AND then bike to the beach to surf, then you are living the MMM philosophy. When you SELL your jet ski's and pick up a used kayak that you can use your muscles to explore nearby shorelines, then you are living the MMM philosophy.
And even if you are making $200K, and saving $150K, and then you buy a new Mercedes with cash, then NO you are not living the MMM philosophy. You are a great saver and a successful person, but you are not practicing the MMM philosophy. Nothing wrong with that -- 95% of the people on the planet aren't either. But don't try to bend the MMM philosophy to suit your consumerist tastes.
Sorry to vent...but
I disagree b/c I think MMM'ing is about changes in a lifestyle rather than a hard line between what's MMM and what isn't. If someone goes from buying a Mercedes SUV on credit to buying a diesel sedan with cash, then I think that's a Mustachian move.
Is it optimally Mustachian? No, but few things are. It's about improving yourself and your environment, not calling other people out b/c they aren't MMM enough.
-
I lived in the bay area without a car and did fine. Now I live in buffalo and the public transportation system is awful and the area is not safe. It would be like going through Oakland. Often times that is not the safest idea. I still did it some, once but with a kid, no way. And that is nice thing about personal finance, we share ideas and then do what works for us. Why do we have to pull others down?
-
I'm pretty new to this forum, so maybe it's not my place to complain. But yeah, I've noticed that this forum isn't what I expected of Mustachians.
I've got an honest question brewing in the back of my mind. Per MMM, I should try asking the Mustachians on the forum, but I feel like I shouldn't even bother. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider myself a full-fledged Mustachian. I was pretty much born frugal, but I would say I'm only semi-Mustachian. I'm surrounded by Consuma-suckers everywhere, so to get more of that kind of advice here is useless to me, KWIM? Maybe it's asking too much, IDK. I'm not about to start making my own reusable TP, but I really don't want a catheter and bed-pan handed to me here either. I guess I would rather that I would get advice here that errs on the side of more Mustachian rather than less so. I can figure out where I will draw my own line, but it's nice to get a nudge to improve. (I'm trying to ease the thermostat down!) Everywhere else, I get pushed to the other side. (such-and-such is sooo much more convenient!)
I posted my own case study, then got heat for:
an ethical choice
Not profiting "well" off family
my lack of health insurance (very informed short term gamble.)
I got little else from my case study other than a strong urge to get a bike. And yet my bills were still in ridiculous ville. I heard of ERE off this thread, started reading there, and can now see where I could shave off $650. Maybe give that a quick read?
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/frequently-asked-questions
In all fairness, you asked if people thought you could reach FI in less than 11 years while you were spending much of your income on pets, providing $1k a month in retirement funds for siblings who should be able to do it for themselves, as well as the health insurance thing.
Make whatever decisions you like, but if you make decisions like the ones you posted above and then ask the forum for what you could do to reach FI faster, you are going to get answers like the ones you got.
I like your mostly forthright manner, but you are not telling even close to the full story when you post threads like this one. You seem to cherry pick what you will mention in a given thread so that you get the answer you want. And then you get defensive about the responses you receive.
If you are asking What Would MMM Do? Well, he wouldn't be providing future income for siblings who should be able to do that for themselves. He isn't even doing that for his son. He wouldn't spend $10k on an ill pet. He doesn't even have pets. He has health insurance.
Make your own decisions, but don't get pissed off when you post here and don't like the responses you get.
Edit: changed "himself" to "his son."
-
Everyone takes and gives from/to the forum based on their own circumstances and point of view. People come here for support and to give advice and to get a different point of view when trying to figure out for themselves a path toward freedom. Some people here could never be happy living as MMM does. Some of us have family and friends all over the planet we enjoy seeing. It makes our life happy and worth living. MMM doesn't seem to value that unless he can sponge a freebie couch surfing in return for some carpentry work. Other people could face punch him silly. Some might say that kid of his is a waste of money and resources. There are enough people on the planet already. He built a house on raw land (the one he rented and then I think sold). What a waste! There are so many housing units available in this country, people just want their own special, just for me spot. Building a house from scratch is the opposite of environmentally friendly. And living in Longmont? Really? Living in a place that's cold and a waste of fossil fuels just because you are a hipster who wants to travel by bike? We used to go to Austin to hang with people like him. Now it's too crowded to ride your bike.
So, really, people should come here for what helps and if it doesn't suit you, find another forum...or two.
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k).
Ai Carumba! And here's me making $86K thinking I was doing fairly well. Damn, I'm "really low"? That means the average American is in the poorhouse.
I'm with you on this. You know all those threads about "privilege"? Someone who believes that anything below $100k is "low income" needs to check their privilege. And maybe leave their gated community a little more often.
Some people are way to caught up in MMM and his system. This isn't a religion and you can do whatever the heck you want.
Its not like MMM is the first person to ever live below his means.
Its all when broken down about living below your means in extreme ways so that you can retire at a much earlier age than say
65 or older.
Some people don't want to live on 20k a year…. personally I don't want do to this and I don't hate my job that much that
I want to retire before I am 35.
and to the person that says making below 100k is a low income….gtfo the avg income in this nation is like 40k if that.
The average American spends tons of money on vehicles, drives to work, eats out multiple times per week, is afraid of the stock market, and has some negligible amount of savings, probably less than $1,000, and will never be financially independent, or at least not until old age.
If you're planning to become financially independent at a young age, you need to be a lot better than average.
The MMM philosophy is not about being average.
It's a privilege to have a high income just like it's a privilege to have hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings, or millions of dollars in savings, or whatever your goal is.
If somebody said they just can't get ahead and save money because they have to buy cars, have to eat out, have to have $100 phone bills, have to buy coffee every day when free coffee is available at work, it would be fair to call them a complainypants, even though the average American is similar.
If you are happy earning a lot less money than you could, that's fine, but you could be earning a lot more than the average American if you wanted. The average American is very bad at finances.
I also find that most people with much lower income than me spend a lot more money than me, despite all the complaints about allegedly non-frugal high income people in this thread. For instance, I've never owned a vehicle, but the vast majority of low income people in the USA and on this forum own a vehicle.
Well, it's clear from what you say that you are a pretty special person. Congratulations on your success! Now, let's discuss what you said.
Yes, people spend too much money, especially on worthless stupid crap. This is a problem with almost everyone in the USA or MMM wouldn't have a blog like this. However, to say that the reason everyone isn't earning six figures is because of their spending makes absolutely no sense. There are tens of millions of jobs in the USA that need to be done but will never earn a six figure income. Take a look at census figures and you'll realize how special you are (and how special my family is) to earn six figures. It is rare. The average family works full-time and makes around $40,000 a year. People with lower incomes can still FIRE, because people can live on very little money if they learn more skills. Not everyone can be an engineer or doctor and not everyone should have those jobs. Not everyone has the aptitude to work a high-paying job. That's life. There are some people in this country who live extremely easy lives and because their lives are so easy they don't understand how anyone could ever have any kind of trouble. That's why I say those people should get out a little more, so they can learn about these things.
-
It should also be noted that the six-figure income comment came from someone living in the SF peninsula, literally one of if not the highest wage location in the country, and certainly one of the most expensive.
I'm not trying to be flippant when I say...100k is a pretty average/plebeian salary in the peninsula....not bad, not great. Everybody I know except for a couple of teachers that live there make around that much or more (some MUCH more), and they cover a pretty broad spectrum of professions in their 30's-40's. The teachers aren't even that far off...60-80k. Yes the people I know are all 'educated' type professions (not working at McDonalds)...but for most people that salary level is not 'special' in that area of the country. My company hires professionals in the peninsula that only have a few years experience for darn near 100k and we're not even the tech industry.
Context matters....alot. 100k where I live will let you live like the top 10-20% of people in the city and is a legitimately 'good' salary. 100k in the peninsula isn't enough income to buy a decent condo in large swaths of it and you can probably throw a rock at a rando on the street and hit someone that makes that much.
-
However, to say that the reason everyone isn't earning six figures is because of their spending makes absolutely no sense.
That clearly isn't what I said or meant.
What I said is that average people are bad at finances. Being bad at finances includes both spending too much and not earning enough. They are two sides of the same coin of "financial skill", unless done voluntarily (i.e. somebody who voluntarily chooses not to earn much).
The fact that there are many low paying jobs out there that "have to be filled" doesn't really matter, because average people can take those jobs. You don't need to be average if you don't want to be.
I would also say that, yes, everybody can be an engineer -- or at least, everybody above average. The nature of engineering is that it creates value where there was none before, especially software engineering. That creation of value can then be re-invested into more jobs. In other words, the more people who work as engineers, the more engineering jobs there will be. In the limit, all "low-skill" jobs will eventually be eliminated, but there will be an ever-increasing number of engineering jobs. So it's not unreasonable to say that everybody could be an engineer.
I don't want to be an engineer, I want to be a research scientist. Yes, I get paid pennies but I'm happy. I don't have to wait till I am FIREd to be happy. That does not mean I don't want financial independence, I do. But I am going to be happy getting there, not just once I am there. And yes, that means spending money in ways other don't like/needed.
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k).
Ai Carumba! And here's me making $86K thinking I was doing fairly well. Damn, I'm "really low"? That means the average American is in the poorhouse.
I'm with you on this. You know all those threads about "privilege"? Someone who believes that anything below $100k is "low income" needs to check their privilege. And maybe leave their gated community a little more often.
This needs a million likes.
-
It's about improving yourself and your environment, not calling other people out b/c they aren't MMM enough.
I see this happen lot in the "Antimustachian Wall of Shame and Comedy" section of the forum. Sometimes, there's real gems there, along the lines of:
"Someone I know just bought a brand new SUV and took a trip to Disney World, and now they're posting on facebook begging for grocery money."
Ok, I get it, let's make fun of them. I'd rather feel sorry for them, and vow to not be like them. But then, we also get a lot of:
"Some guy on a completely different forum, who has absolutely no debt and is saving quite a bit, wants to buy something fancy (boat, watch, SUV...basically anything that's not travel-related, because of COURSE travel is worth the cost). My god, he's such an idiot!"
Yeah, maybe, MAYBE if he (or she) was posting here on the MMM forums, I can get the whole "it's stupid to buy X, you could be buying your freedom instead!" or some such (even then I think it's a bit silly). But if they're not, why make fun of them at all? Would we like it if someone from a Black Friday forum (they exist) ridiculed us because we're not spending our Thanksgiving camped out in front of Best Buy? Or someone on a Tesla forum mocked us because we're all driving cars that run on gas or riding puny bikes?
It's one thing to say "hey, this forum is about optimizing the shit out of your finances, you WILL be made fun of if you take your kids to Disneyland," it's another to say "hey, let's mock the shit out of everyone who doesn't live their lives exactly the way we do."
-
It's about improving yourself and your environment, not calling other people out b/c they aren't MMM enough.
"Some guy on a completely different forum, who has absolutely no debt and is saving quite a bit, wants to buy something fancy (boat, watch, SUV...basically anything that's not travel-related, because of COURSE travel is worth the cost). My god, he's such an idiot!"
."
Yay!
This was not the central point of DarinC, so forgive the hijack..
Someone else has noticed that travel is expensive in absolute terms, and it's a fairly unenvironmental choice as well.
After all, what is the key difference between a $200 black Friday 60 inch TV, and a $500 net week cost of a vacation ( using cc churning to "save" $3000)?
Well, about $300...
So why all the posts about cc travel churning getting a good opinion? There are only limited situations, that apply to limited groups of people, where it truly makes sense. Else, these are all luxury choices... No?
-
Slightly off topic, but one of the things that throws me off on this forum is how many people are diligently toiling away with really low incomes (like say, anything less than $100k).
Ai Carumba! And here's me making $86K thinking I was doing fairly well. Damn, I'm "really low"? That means the average American is in the poorhouse.
I'm with you on this. You know all those threads about "privilege"? Someone who believes that anything below $100k is "low income" needs to check their privilege. And maybe leave their gated community a little more often.
This needs a million likes.
If one looks at many of Cathy's posts, one could reasonably conclude that Cathy enjoys saying outlandish things just to provoke reactions.
Of course, it's possible that she really believes....
-
I agree with the poster who said it appeared these forums are becoming high-income FI'ers patting other high income FI'er on the back. They are losing sight of what the Money Mustache philosophy is all about.
It is about living mindfully, and frugally, to get maximum enjoyment from life while also protecting this planet and its resources for future generations.
...
And even if you are making $200K, and saving $150K, and then you buy a new Mercedes with cash, then NO you are not living the MMM philosophy. You are a great saver and a successful person, but you are not practicing the MMM philosophy. Nothing wrong with that -- 95% of the people on the planet aren't either. But don't try to bend the MMM philosophy to suit your consumerist tastes.
This is an interesting discussion, and I will admit that while I believe whole-heartedly in the part I bolded above, I have a much harder time living it. I like my conveniences, I like international travel, I love my drafty old house that leaks heat like a sieve, I get a sense of pride from DIY something once, just to prove I can do it, and then I would be perfectly happy never to do it again. So, I probably don't belong here, though I can learn a lot from others here. It is unlikely that I will ever live frugally, but I have moved towards it on the continuum.
As MMM reaches more people, the general tone here will move towards the mean--I think that's inevitable. And, while it's good that more people are challenging their assumptions, it is also bit of a shame. I have, at times, felt guilty for watering down MMM, which is why I mostly stick to my journal and don't comment a lot on the other threads. In benefitting from the MMM philosophy, the last thing I want to do is water it down to the point where it loses what makes it powerful.
Gray, this post pretty much sums me up as well. I've gotten tons of inspiration from MMM and the forums and have made some changes over the past couple of years; but its to a point. It was easy for me to downgrade my cell phone; and I basically watch no TV so i had no cable to cut. I mostly work from home, so I conveniently don't have to commute. I practice convenience Mustachianism.
I've also learned how to optimize in certain areas, and I basically knew squat about investing before finding the FIRE community. Now, 1.5 years in, i've built up a nice little stash and slowly, but surely, it continues to grow. Before MMM, i was like your typical American, 1-2 lost paychecks away from a crisis. Now, I've got a stash that would last at least a year if I lost my job tomorrow. Honestly, this is what really resonated with me when i first came across this community; the idea that, as long as your making a decent income, there is absolutely no reason to be living paycheck to paycheck; and that your world just completely opens up once you start to become financially independent.
I'm 30 now, and I think i'll be able to FIRE by the time i'm 45 or so. I could probably do it in half the time if I really focused. I used to be one of those folks who thought that making 80K a year was just getting by and that I would never be able to retire. I'd say I've come a long way.
But, I'm simply not 'frugal' by pretty much any definition of the word. I buy too many things, drive too much, spend too much money and eat out too much. I don't want to DIY. I don't get any satisfaction out of building something or fixing a car, or any of that shit. I don't like riding my bike. I'm a lousy mustachian.
So why am I here? Well, i guess i'm always just sort of on the hunt for inspiration. I think i want to be that person who rides their bike everywhere or never eats anything that isn't from their kitchen. But I'm just not there yet. So i keep coming back here, and reading other people's stories and experiences. So i agree; the last thing I want to do is water down the MMM philosophy and do that whole "make it into something that works for you!" thing. No, mustachian = awesome, and I am far from it.
-
I like coming to the forums and reading and writing and thinking, as here I get a more diversified account of what to do with finances, with life, etc. In the "real world" I don't totally fit in because I'm so frugal that my friends and co-workers think I'm a bit over-the-top and crazy. If I just read the MMM blog, I'd think of myself as a huge loser who deserves a million face-punches. The forums give me a little bit of the in-between. I can read and reply and challenge myself in a friendly environment where the goal of most of us is NOT to be totally like MMM. So...I'm okay with the variety of questions and perspectives presented in the forum!
-
What I find much more tiresome than the variabilities in people's spending preferences, is the constant push to make mustachianism about judging others, as opposed to figuring out the right mix for each individual to maximize happiness.
Furthermore, Most of the happiness literature has found that increased wealth and spending continue to increase happiness almost regardless of the level. it's just that past a certain point (in America this is said to be $75,000 a year in income) there is decreased incremental benefit to more wealth (IE It takes more additional wealth to get the same benefit in terms of increased happiness.)
-
...this post pretty much sums me up as well. I've gotten tons of inspiration from MMM and the forums and have made some changes over the past couple of years; but its to a point. It was easy for me to downgrade my cell phone; and I basically watch no TV so i had no cable to cut. I mostly work from home, so I conveniently don't have to commute. I practice convenience Mustachianism.
I've also learned how to optimize in certain areas, and I basically knew squat about investing before finding the FIRE community. Now, 1.5 years in, i've built up a nice little stash and slowly, but surely, it continues to grow. Before MMM, i was like your typical American, 1-2 lost paychecks away from a crisis. Now, I've got a stash that would last at least a year if I lost my job tomorrow. Honestly, this is what really resonated with me when i first came across this community; the idea that, as long as your making a decent income, there is absolutely no reason to be living paycheck to paycheck; and that your world just completely opens up once you start to become financially independent.
I'm 30 now, and I think i'll be able to FIRE by the time i'm 45 or so. I could probably do it in half the time if I really focused. I used to be one of those folks who thought that making 80K a year was just getting by and that I would never be able to retire. I'd say I've come a long way.
But, I'm simply not 'frugal' by pretty much any definition of the word. I buy too many things, drive too much, spend too much money and eat out too much. I don't want to DIY. I don't get any satisfaction out of building something or fixing a car, or any of that shit. I don't like riding my bike. I'm a lousy mustachian.
So why am I here? Well, i guess i'm always just sort of on the hunt for inspiration. I think i want to be that person who rides their bike everywhere or never eats anything that isn't from their kitchen. But I'm just not there yet. So i keep coming back here, and reading other people's stories and experiences. So i agree; the last thing I want to do is water down the MMM philosophy and do that whole "make it into something that works for you!" thing. No, mustachian = awesome, and I am far from it.
Nice story and great line (my bold), thepokercab. I think you're closer to awesome than you realize. Keep up the good work!
-
What I find much more tiresome than the variabilities in people's spending preferences, is the constant push to make mustachianism about judging others, as opposed to figuring out the right mix for each individual to maximize happiness.
Agreed. Well said, Miles.
There is a spectrum of frugality on this forum. Some people save 10% of their income, some people save 80%. Some people start off saving 10% and slowly work their way up to 50%+. Some people start at 10% and get to 15% after a few years.
There are also a spectrum of incomes on the forum. Some people make $30k. Some people make $300k+.
Depending on your income and savings rate, you might be someone who indulges in zero consumer goods, never takes air travel, doesn't own a car, and yet you're "only" saving 30% of your $40k income.
On the flip side, let's imagine someone with multiple cars, a nice sized house, and you take air travel vacations a couple times of year. MAYBE THEY EVEN PAY FOR SOME KIND OF CHILDCARE. And perhaps this person might be saving 45% of their $300k income.
To me, both of these people are mustachians. Their base costs of living are very different, yes. I don't think that the person saving 30% is more 'mustachian' because their base income is lower and they give up more luxuries. I don't think the person making $300k is a worthless schlub because they take air travel vacations and opt for childcare.
Both of my hypothetical people are saving at rates that are literally multiples of what the average american does. By doing this, they are defying cultural norms. Unless either of them is a hermit or has dramatically pruned their social circle, the odds are good that they are surrounded by work colleagues, family, and friends who do NOT have a similar level of savings. They are, in both cases, discomforting themselves to a degree. They're doing this because they care more about being financially stable and independent than they do about fitting in.
Whether you make $30k or $300k, the normal expectation is that you will spend nearly all of it. To consciously spend less than 100% of your income - in some cases, a great deal less - and invest it prudently? That takes discipline, an independent streak, and a not-insignificant amount of knowledge.
Trying to judge "how mustachian" someone is strikes me as a pointless contest for bragging rights and validation. It also sounds like a recipe for an extremely alienating and cult-like community, where only people hitting certain metrics (savings rate, spending level, 'stash size) have anything valuable to contribute. Let's try to cool it with the judgmental stuff, eh?
-
If you're only saving 10% doesn't the math work out to retiring at the normal age of 62 to never before you die?
I'm also not sure you would become financially independent at any point.
Being "mustachian" has to at least be about retiring earlier than normal or attaining the financial ability to work only voluntarily. Remove both of these and you just have "frugal person" not mustachian.
-
What I find much more tiresome than the variabilities in people's spending preferences, is the constant push to make mustachianism about judging others, as opposed to figuring out the right mix for each individual to maximize happiness.
Agreed. Well said, Miles.
There is a spectrum of frugality on this forum. Some people save 10% of their income, some people save 80%. Some people start off saving 10% and slowly work their way up to 50%+. Some people start at 10% and get to 15% after a few years.
There are also a spectrum of incomes on the forum. Some people make $30k. Some people make $300k+.
Depending on your income and savings rate, you might be someone who indulges in zero consumer goods, never takes air travel, doesn't own a car, and yet you're "only" saving 30% of your $40k income.
On the flip side, let's imagine someone with multiple cars, a nice sized house, and you take air travel vacations a couple times of year. MAYBE THEY EVEN PAY FOR SOME KIND OF CHILDCARE. And perhaps this person might be saving 45% of their $300k income.
To me, both of these people are mustachians. Their base costs of living are very different, yes. I don't think that the person saving 30% is more 'mustachian' because their base income is lower and they give up more luxuries. I don't think the person making $300k is a worthless schlub because they take air travel vacations and opt for childcare.
Both of my hypothetical people are saving at rates that are literally multiples of what the average american does. By doing this, they are defying cultural norms. Unless either of them is a hermit or has dramatically pruned their social circle, the odds are good that they are surrounded by work colleagues, family, and friends who do NOT have a similar level of savings. They are, in both cases, discomforting themselves to a degree. They're doing this because they care more about being financially stable and independent than they do about fitting in.
Whether you make $30k or $300k, the normal expectation is that you will spend nearly all of it. To consciously spend less than 100% of your income - in some cases, a great deal less - and invest it prudently? That takes discipline, an independent streak, and a not-insignificant amount of knowledge.
Trying to judge "how mustachian" someone is strikes me as a pointless contest for bragging rights and validation. It also sounds like a recipe for an extremely alienating and cult-like community, where only people hitting certain metrics (savings rate, spending level, 'stash size) have anything valuable to contribute. Let's try to cool it with the judgmental stuff, eh?
I'm with Miles and ioseftavi. I am finding less and less to contribute because of the crap being done on here.
-
If you're only saving 10% doesn't the math work out to retiring at the normal age of 62 to never before you die?
I'm also not sure you would become financially independent at any point.
Being "mustachian" has to at least be about retiring earlier than normal or attaining the financial ability to work only voluntarily. Remove both of these and you just have "frugal person" not mustachian.
This part sounds a little Internet Retirement Police-y. Even MMM hasn't stopped working entirely, and has some income from the blog, and he basically says that financial independence is the key, not necessarily stopping work entirely. Being able to choose how and when you work, or not work at all, was his goal. It may not be *your* goal, but that's also okay.
Look, not everyone is going to do everything exactly the way MMM does it. We all come to MMM at different points in our lives, careers, some are parents, some grew up with money, some grew up poor, some start here with huge debt, some with none. And really, it's a journey, a path that MMM has set out as an example. You are free to do exactly what MMM does, move to Colorado, be a software engineer, have a spouse in real estate, save as much as possibly by making your wants few, and have one kid before getting the snip. But everyone gets to make their own choice for themselves. It might net you a facepunch, or not, depending on a variety of other factors.
As for me, I came to MMM in 2013 after paying off all of DH's and my nearly $54k in student loan debt in about 4 years. I was bored with Dave Ramsey, and MMM was a radical idea. Just keep putting that huge amount we were paying toward debt and invest it in the S&P 500 instead, allowing us to retire by age 50 if not earlier? DH and I were pretty much immediately on board. But we don't live like monks. We do, however, live near both of our jobs/school in an inexpensive one bedroom apartment with very little 'stuff' by most standards. No kids. We have two cars that we paid for in cash while paying off that $54k in debt, and we put less than 6,000 miles on them combined last year. DH earns less than $30k annually, and I earn between $50-60k depending on how you count benefits packages. Together, it's less than $100k annually, but our area is relatively low COL and while we do 'splurge' on a few things (concert tickets, travel, some eating out and other entertainment), we definitely aren't living paycheck to paycheck in search of happiness. Our net worth has gone from negative to over $100k in about two years. DH is only working part time and is in grad school, and we're able to pay that tuition bill each semester with no loans and no additional sweat. School (total ticket price around $22k) will bump up his income around $10k+ annually, if not more. Could I get a higher paying job? Yes, I likely could, but then instead of working exactly 40 hours per work, I'd likely be working 60+ hours per week, and the trade-off in my time for money isn't worth it to me. I'd be way more stressed and unhappy in my career, and the money wouldn't be a good enough compensation for my free time, which I like to spend reading, learning, exercising, and enjoying nature. Savings rate is around 40% and will be bumped up higher when we aren't paying tuition and DH's income goes up. We still aren't sure about buying a house, because of maintenance and utility costs (paying for heat in Minnesota from October through April doesn't sound fun, and neither is snow removal).
But there is always more than one way to see something, and I like that the helpful, friendly, kind people in this forum take their time to answer questions for newbies and others.
-
Dear OP,
Not everyone here is hell bent on FIRE by the way. (rant warning!)
I think there should be some guidelines like - own a boat? -- Never! Except for the 3 kayaks and canoe "I" own. So it is somewhat about priorities.
MMM dumped 400K into a house I could have bought in my area for 100K because he wants to be near friends and the park. Of course he could make new friends and live on acreage here but why go through the hassle? He could also move to Ecuador and live even cheaper.
How many restaurant meals, trips, fancy cars could one buy for the 300K extra he spent? He is choosing a mediocre house in at a high price rather than have an additional 30K in investment income per year. So be it! He is rich and only he and his SO gets to make those choices.
So you have my permission to face punch every single frivolous spender on here. Just remember that if I'm saving 7K on my annual grocery bill vs. the average Joe, IMHO I should get to do whatever I like with that 7K.
-
Being "mustachian" has to at least be about retiring earlier than normal or attaining the financial ability to work only voluntarily.
Even MMM hasn't stopped working entirely, and has some income from the blog, and he basically says that financial independence is the key, not necessarily stopping work entirely. Being able to choose how and when you work, or not work at all, was his goal. It may not be *your* goal, but that's also okay.
I think you both agree.
Financial independence is a key part of MMMism, it seems. How one reaches it and what one does afterwards are individual choices.
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Most (many?) jobs/careers are not particularly conducive to flow and lasting enjoyment (though there's evidence that you can learn to make them much more so), which means we return home unfulfilled and seeking something to make us "happy." The easy path to that is pleasure, spending, consumption, entertainment. The arguably better path is to use our body and mind to accomplish things, to find lasting enjoyment in self-sufficiency.
This is the underlying message we are all trying to teach each other. Many of the things we spend (money/time) on will not lend themselves to being productive, creative people. That may not be optimal but then in reality, we do not need to live truly optimal lives. The important thing is to change your attitude, your approach to fulfillment, entertainment and advancement such that you largely do things for yourself, have lasting enjoyment, and can sometimes do pleasurable things without dire, long-term consequences.
-
In general, the only constraint on my spending was the amount of money in my bank account.
Post-MMM: only spend what is truly necessary to make yourself happy and accomplish your objectives.
That sure sums it up well. Great descriptions of Pre-MMM and Post-MMM!
Of course, some people might have included credit limits in the description of their pre-MMM behavior. :(
-
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I wonder if you are completely missing the point of what this forum is all about.
Living like you are poor? Do you mean wracking up tons of CC debt, driving a huge gas guzzler everywhere, eating junk and restaurant food all the time. Then complaining that you have no money to pay your bills, much less save for retirement? To me, that is the definition of living like you are poor.
Money is a tool, nothing more. It should be used wisely like any other tool. If you abuse it, waste it, lose it, or let it decay you will not have it when you need it for the most important jobs.
This forum tends to have a heavy focus on FIRE but that is not the only valuable use for your tools (money). Not everyone wants to retire early, some put a high priority of investing in their children, some choose to pursue their hobbies or other interests. There is nothing wrong with this, provided you are using your money wisely.
What is "wisely"? Well that is in the eye of the beholder. Some of us want to eliminate all debt aggressively while others prefer to carry low interest debt and keep their capital free for other purposes. Some view FI as having enough passive income to never work again, others just want to have enough FU money to be able to walk away from a job they hate. Some of us are dealing with an overwhelming mountain of debt while others have more FI money than they will ever spend in their lifetimes.
The common factor here is that we are all interested in controlling our financial lives rather than letting our finances control us. This is the true meaning of MMM as i see it.
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Yes, I think this gets at it! So many people are convinced that they need things which are not actually necessary or that they are so exhausted from their workday that they "deserve" what they've been told to want to deserve. And convincing them otherwise is very difficult, hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
If there weren't this fundamental underpinning to it, it would just be a forum of easy discussions. 'Huh, I guess I don't really need cable!' as opposed to, 'What do you mean I don't need a car?!'
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Yes, I think this gets at it! So many people are convinced that they need things which are not actually necessary or that they are so exhausted from their workday that they "deserve" what they've been told to want to deserve. And convincing them otherwise is very difficult, hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
If there weren't this fundamental underpinning to it, it would just be a forum of easy discussions. 'Huh, I guess I don't really need cable!' as opposed to, 'What do you mean I don't need a car?!'
Yes. This isn't about religion, or forcing everyone to "live like they're poor". Sometimes, you need to call out someone's wasteful spending simply for the sake of pointing out that they're spending wastefully. Just because you can justify jetskis and a Hummer to yourself doesn't mean it's actually worthy of spending your money on, especially if you can get the same benefit (like still going fishing, just using a human-powered water craft rather than a gas guzzling one) without it. And people on this forum are free to call you out for being a ridiculous consumer. If you're just here for support and approval of your spendy ways, go somewhere else. Just because you see yourself as less ridiculous than other consumers doesn't mean you're not still in the absurd category. Don't get your panties in a bunch just because someone else has pointed out that you're spending in a silly way. You are.
No, you don't have to modify your spending just because someone on the internet told you to. But it's worth going over your spending again to ask, is this really making me happy? Or could I do it in a less wasteful way? I would even add, ask yourself if an activity/consumer good and the joy it brings you is worth the impact it has on the other 7 billion people on the planet. Even if you're not an environmentalist, there's still the problem of slave labor, the using of finite resources, etc. Is it worth it? Really? You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention.
-
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I'm not exactly sure what Mesmoiselle means by this, but I think it's the "millionaire next door" idea.
Many people might look at my lifestyle, for example, and assume that I am poor. I live in a 400 square foot outbuilding while I rent out my "main house". I drive a 10 year old vehicle. I have not purchased any clothing since June 2013. The clothes I wear have most likely come from a thrift store. My phone is pretty dumb and has no data plan. I usually walk or bicycle to work and shower there. I do not have a TV or cable. I do not belong to a gym. I can't remember the last time I went out to see a movie. I eat at a restaurant about once per month.
My spendy (and quite in debt) friend in a suburb of New York City says she just doesn't know how I live. Many people would assume that the reason I do not live in luxury (at least their idea of it) is that I can't afford to do so. I can afford it, but I choose not to spend money that way. So maybe I am one of those people who lives like I am poor and has a savings rate of over 70%. (My savings rate for Jan through Nov of this year is 83%.)
-
But it's hard to learn from folks who don't actually try to live "like they're poor" while still saving 70%+ of their income.
I'm not exactly sure what Mesmoiselle means by this, but I think it's the "millionaire next door" idea.
Many people might look at my lifestyle, for example, and assume that I am poor. I live in a 400 square foot outbuilding while I rent out my "main house". I drive a 10 year old vehicle. I have not purchased any clothing since June 2013. The clothes I wear have most likely come from a thrift store. My phone is pretty dumb and has no data plan. I usually walk or bicycle to work and shower there. I do not have a TV or cable. I do not belong to a gym. I can't remember the last time I went out to see a movie. I eat at a restaurant about once per month.
My spendy (and quite in debt) friend in a suburb of New York City says she just doesn't know how I live. Many people would assume that the reason I do not live in luxury (at least their idea of it) is that I can't afford to do so. I can afford it, but I choose not to spend money that way. So maybe I am one of those people who lives like I am poor and has a savings rate of over 70%. (My savings rate for Jan through Nov of this year is 83%.)
I think what she is saying is that there are some high earners here who have an excellent savings rate (70% plus), but who are still living fairly high on the hog, based on their high income. Mesmoiselle doesn't feel like she can learn all that much because these people are, in her mind, not living a mustachian life. Raw dollars spent, it seems, is more important to her and others than is savings rate.
-
...hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
Not necessarily. An idea can be presented in language and form that indicates a harsh, angry, dismissive, or righteous attitude, or it can be presented in language and form that indicates understanding, the benefit of the doubt, etc. The idea is still presented.
I'm curious about the idea that people might not be able to hear us unless we use a tough tone or wording. I know I sometimes feel frustrated enough in my personal life to use harsh tones or wording, but that's usually an indication that I need to reassess the relationship itself, or reassess my momentary concept of myself as all-knowing, rather than being an indication that the person actually needs to be yelled at.
But maybe it's only some of us that learn well when we're approached gently and kindly, and are actively prevented from grasping the underlying concept when it's presented harshly? Perhaps some people really do learn more when spoken to in a tough, harsh, angry, or dismissive tone? Is this so for some here?
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Yes, I think this gets at it! So many people are convinced that they need things which are not actually necessary or that they are so exhausted from their workday that they "deserve" what they've been told to want to deserve. And convincing them otherwise is very difficult, hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
If there weren't this fundamental underpinning to it, it would just be a forum of easy discussions. 'Huh, I guess I don't really need cable!' as opposed to, 'What do you mean I don't need a car?!'
Yes. This isn't about religion, or forcing everyone to "live like they're poor". Sometimes, you need to call out someone's wasteful spending simply for the sake of pointing out that they're spending wastefully. Just because you can justify jetskis and a Hummer to yourself doesn't mean it's actually worthy of spending your money on, especially if you can get the same benefit (like still going fishing, just using a human-powered water craft rather than a gas guzzling one) without it. And people on this forum are free to call you out for being a ridiculous consumer. If you're just here for support and approval of your spendy ways, go somewhere else. Just because you see yourself as less ridiculous than other consumers doesn't mean you're not still in the absurd category. Don't get your panties in a bunch just because someone else has pointed out that you're spending in a silly way. You are.
No, you don't have to modify your spending just because someone on the internet told you to. But it's worth going over your spending again to ask, is this really making me happy? Or could I do it in a less wasteful way? I would even add, ask yourself if an activity/consumer good and the joy it brings you is worth the impact it has on the other 7 billion people on the planet. Even if you're not an environmentalist, there's still the problem of slave labor, the using of finite resources, etc. Is it worth it? Really? You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention.
From this statement, it seems as if though you are more concerned with passing judgement on others, than persuading them.
Not my cup of tea, but then I am passing judgement on you, so there you go! No one learned a thing.
-
...it's worth going over your spending again to ask, is this really making me happy? Or could I do it in a less wasteful way? I would even add, ask yourself if an activity/consumer good and the joy it brings you is worth the impact it has on the other 7 billion people on the planet. Even if you're not an environmentalist, there's still the problem of slave labor, the using of finite resources, etc. Is it worth it?
(This isn't a comment to you specifically, SisterX, because off-hand I have no recall of how you generally post.)
I REALLY like these as guiding questions. If a response to a perceived spending error was presented this way, I could see that as being very helpful to the spender. I could see a response like this (a) effectively sharing the values of the responder, and (b) highly likely to result in the spender's rethinking. It's strong and clear, and expresses the responder's values, but isn't rude, harsh, dismissive, righteous, "disgusted", etc. I like!
-
My $0.02...it's about optimizing your spending and making money choices that reflect your values.
We did hire a nanny one year. It sounds "uppity", but we were moving to an area of NY state where licensed childcare for my two kids (one was 1, the other was 3) would have cost us $1800/mo. The nanny was $900/mo and some extra food costs. It was also a win for her, as her mom had just passed away (her dad died when she was 13), and because her mom didn't have a will and had recently (like 6 wks prior) remarried, the girl got nothing. (And step-dad ran off with her aunt shortly afterwards...) It gave her some stability and emotional space to reboot. The benefits to both her and us were immense, as it was the year that Hurricane Katrina happened, and my husband ended up in Louisiana for two months, and live in help made it somewhat sane. So just because it doesn't fit your value system, doesn't necessarily mean it deserves a facepunch...
-
...hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
Not necessarily. An idea can be presented in language and form that indicates a harsh, angry, dismissive, or righteous attitude, or it can be presented in language and form that indicates understanding, the benefit of the doubt, etc. The idea is still presented.
I'm curious about the idea that people might not be able to hear us unless we use a tough tone or wording. I know I sometimes feel frustrated enough in my personal life to use harsh tones or wording, but that's usually an indication that I need to reassess the relationship itself, or reassess my momentary concept of myself as all-knowing, rather than being an indication that the person actually needs to be yelled at.
But maybe it's only some of us that learn well when we're approached gently and kindly, and are actively prevented from grasping the underlying concept when it's presented harshly? Perhaps some people really do learn more when spoken to in a tough, harsh, angry, or dismissive tone? Is this so for some here?
I agree with you 100%, Scrubbyfish. If I'm escalating my tone or becoming more aggressive in trying to get a message across, it's about me and my frustration that they just can't accept that I know better and should just listen to me. In other words, it's about my own arrogance, and not about them and what's truly helpful.
I am relatively comfortable with conflict, but my reaction to harsh tones or words is to want to push back harder (and it makes others want to flee)--it does nothing to help me or them seek understanding. The problem I see with judging and harsh feedback is that it often activates people's threat response, which triggers all kinds of physiological changes in the body that make the brain less open to new ideas and less able to think rationally or logically or to consider different perspectives. So not helpful.
-
This has been an interesting discussion. If I shared my finances with the group, I would be black and blue from head to toe from the punches (face and otherwise).
I have learned a lot from MMM and you all, some I apply to my life, some I don't. I plan to FIRE in 3 years and I'm OK with that timeline.
I remember a thread on shaving where I posted about switching to a safety razor and how much I saved over buying the latest Gillette 8-bladed monster. Someone came along talking about using the same razor blade for years. I was waiting for someone else to come along and further one-up with a story about getting a rusty steak knife out of a Steak & Ale dumpster and sharpening it on the sidewalk each morning to shave.
Sometimes the desire to one-up each other gets old.
I'm reasonably happy with my savings and plan to retire. At the end of the day, that is what matters.
-
This has been an interesting discussion. If I shared my finances with the group, I would be black and blue from head to toe from the punches (face and otherwise).
I have learned a lot from MMM and you all, some I apply to my life, some I don't. I plan to FIRE in 3 years and I'm OK with that timeline.
I remember a thread on shaving where I posted about switching to a safety razor and how much I saved over buying the latest Gillette 8-bladed monster. Someone came along talking about using the same razor blade for years. I was waiting for someone else to come along and further one-up with a story about getting a rusty steak knife out of a Steak & Ale dumpster and sharpening it on the sidewalk each morning to shave.
Sometimes the desire to one-up each other gets old.
I'm reasonably happy with my savings and plan to retire. At the end of the day, that is what matters.
Exactly!
MMM inspires. Our job as individuals is to personalize the message to our own values, income and situations.
Turning the anti consumerist message in to a cultish, judgemental, screed does the message a disservice.
-
I remember a thread on shaving where I posted about switching to a safety razor and how much I saved over buying the latest Gillette 8-bladed monster. Someone came along talking about using the same razor blade for years. I was waiting for someone else to come along and further one-up with a story about getting a rusty steak knife out of a Steak & Ale dumpster and sharpening it on the sidewalk each morning to shave.
Oh, how I laughed. I change razors when the old one gives me razor burn. No idea how often. That is, but I kinda expect my most resent pack of Costco razors to last me at least 2 years. Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I prefer comfortable clothing. wear scrubs at work. And neither my husband or my boyfriend (poly) care if I shave. I shave pits for smell and legs for a quarterly party I attend. I don't think I'm being cheap, my razor use just reflects my lifestyle.
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Yes, I think this gets at it! So many people are convinced that they need things which are not actually necessary or that they are so exhausted from their workday that they "deserve" what they've been told to want to deserve. And convincing them otherwise is very difficult, hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
If there weren't this fundamental underpinning to it, it would just be a forum of easy discussions. 'Huh, I guess I don't really need cable!' as opposed to, 'What do you mean I don't need a car?!'
Yes. This isn't about religion, or forcing everyone to "live like they're poor". Sometimes, you need to call out someone's wasteful spending simply for the sake of pointing out that they're spending wastefully. Just because you can justify jetskis and a Hummer to yourself doesn't mean it's actually worthy of spending your money on, especially if you can get the same benefit (like still going fishing, just using a human-powered water craft rather than a gas guzzling one) without it. And people on this forum are free to call you out for being a ridiculous consumer. If you're just here for support and approval of your spendy ways, go somewhere else. Just because you see yourself as less ridiculous than other consumers doesn't mean you're not still in the absurd category. Don't get your panties in a bunch just because someone else has pointed out that you're spending in a silly way. You are.
No, you don't have to modify your spending just because someone on the internet told you to. But it's worth going over your spending again to ask, is this really making me happy? Or could I do it in a less wasteful way? I would even add, ask yourself if an activity/consumer good and the joy it brings you is worth the impact it has on the other 7 billion people on the planet. Even if you're not an environmentalist, there's still the problem of slave labor, the using of finite resources, etc. Is it worth it? Really? You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention.
From this statement, it seems as if though you are more concerned with passing judgement on others, than persuading them.
Not my cup of tea, but then I am passing judgement on you, so there you go! No one learned a thing.
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
-
If Christians can't agree on what the bible actually means, I don't expect we will do any better with coming up with a hard and fast definition os mustachianism, unless the MMM prophet himself wants to speak on the matter.
I'm sure I spend money on many things that many of you consider wasteful. And vice versa. *For me*, mustachianism is about mindful spending and not making excuses about what is possible.
It's about different things for others. I don't understand the need for people to enforce their own interpretations on other posters. You want to have every meal you eat cooked by someone else? Okay. I don't. See how that works? For me, that would be wasteful (even though I utterly detest cooking) and outside my values and my plans for my money. So I don't do it.
If you are asking about your budget, complaining that you can't get ahead, or seeking places to cut, then I'm going to talk about your food situation. If not, I am going to assume you are doing what works best for your life, unless you give the impression it hasn't been a decision you truly explored and thought on before making it.
And we all live happily ever after.
-
We all want good lives. Culture (including and especially media/entertainment) trains us to crave consumption rather than respect production.
The reality is it is in our nature to find production/creation fulfilling. When we spend/consume, we get short-term (drug-like) positive feedback, which is rapidly followed by a pleasure hangover, which often triggers other bad behaviors. We we create/produce, we build up skills (pathways in our brain), get into a flow state, and find that the enjoyment that results has a lasting effect.
Yes, I think this gets at it! So many people are convinced that they need things which are not actually necessary or that they are so exhausted from their workday that they "deserve" what they've been told to want to deserve. And convincing them otherwise is very difficult, hence the tough tone. Someone only sounds judgemental until you realize they're right.
If there weren't this fundamental underpinning to it, it would just be a forum of easy discussions. 'Huh, I guess I don't really need cable!' as opposed to, 'What do you mean I don't need a car?!'
Yes. This isn't about religion, or forcing everyone to "live like they're poor". Sometimes, you need to call out someone's wasteful spending simply for the sake of pointing out that they're spending wastefully. Just because you can justify jetskis and a Hummer to yourself doesn't mean it's actually worthy of spending your money on, especially if you can get the same benefit (like still going fishing, just using a human-powered water craft rather than a gas guzzling one) without it. And people on this forum are free to call you out for being a ridiculous consumer. If you're just here for support and approval of your spendy ways, go somewhere else. Just because you see yourself as less ridiculous than other consumers doesn't mean you're not still in the absurd category. Don't get your panties in a bunch just because someone else has pointed out that you're spending in a silly way. You are.
No, you don't have to modify your spending just because someone on the internet told you to. But it's worth going over your spending again to ask, is this really making me happy? Or could I do it in a less wasteful way? I would even add, ask yourself if an activity/consumer good and the joy it brings you is worth the impact it has on the other 7 billion people on the planet. Even if you're not an environmentalist, there's still the problem of slave labor, the using of finite resources, etc. Is it worth it? Really? You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention.
From this statement, it seems as if though you are more concerned with passing judgement on others, than persuading them.
Not my cup of tea, but then I am passing judgement on you, so there you go! No one learned a thing.
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
You're right, and I wasn't implying any different. The only reason I could think of for Ninety Four to start shaving again is if she felt like her lack thereof was negatively impacting her social life. If not, no need.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
You're right, and I wasn't implying any different. The only reason I could think of for Ninety Four to start shaving again is if she felt like her lack thereof was negatively impacting her social life. If not, no need.
A lack of shaved legs can affect a woman's social life? Mind blown.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
You're right, and I wasn't implying any different. The only reason I could think of for Ninety Four to start shaving again is if she felt like her lack thereof was negatively impacting her social life. If not, no need.
A lack of shaved legs can affect a woman's social life? Mind blown.
You don't think there are men that aren't interested in dating a woman who doesn't shave?
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
You're right, and I wasn't implying any different. The only reason I could think of for Ninety Four to start shaving again is if she felt like her lack thereof was negatively impacting her social life. If not, no need.
A lack of shaved legs can affect a woman's social life? Mind blown.
You don't think there are men that aren't interested in dating a woman who doesn't shave?
Oooooooo. Not social life. Sex life. My experience is that all a woman have to be for over half the men in the world is "willing." The other half like intelligence, humor, kindness... and a small percentage of the latter half might judge a woman entirely on her body hair.
Any who. Sidelined and irrelevant to OP.
-
I agree with all of those that have said, the most important thing is to not be judgmental. I think that is what set this thread off, and could've easily been resolved by going back to MMM's post along similar lines:
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/05/03/reader-case-study-im-rich-and-life-is-perfect-now-what/
"I can’t really hound this guy for any sense of whining or entitlement, since he has acknowledged that he spends a lot and has a healthy attitude about it. But it’s still a shock to see a number like “Bonus: $300,000″ just slapped onto the end of an already gigantic income statement. So where could he improve?"...
That is how we should approach anyone who is here looking for help. And he went on to outline how to apply Mustachianism to someone who is doing fine financially -
1: Figure out if You’re Missing Anything
2: Break out of your Comfort Zone at least Once a Week
3: Are your Kids Learning about Scarcity, Hard Work, and Struggle?
4: How Long until you’re Covered for Retirement?
-
Hi Mesmoiselle,
You're welcome to throw some face punches out for any or all of the situations described. A lot of us do as well and we'd be happy to back you up. However, there comes a point where it's just not conducive to furthering the conversation and/or learning. If Mr & Mrs Big Income want to spend $1000/mo eating out, you can call them out all you'd like, but unless they're willing to change, it won't do any good. No matter how many face punches you throw, it'll be hard to convince someone to change their ways if they're happy with the speed at which they're headed towards FI.
Wait, you mean someone who's happy with his or her own life won't change it just to better match the priorities of a random person on the internet?
Mostly this. I've seen discussions/ arguments about lots of things like this:
1. Should you have two working parents, or is it more Mustachian to have one or both parents at home, regardless of the cost/ benefit analysis? (My take home pay is 4.5x my child care costs, for example).
2. Is it okay to drink coffee or tea, or to drink alcohol? These things are not necessary for living. You should not drink them.
3. If you are capable of making more money, and thus donating it to charity, you should. It is downright wrong for you to work less and make less - your OBLIGATION is to help society.
4. How much are you spending on food? Is it okay to buy organic if you can afford it? Or is it a waste of money. Should you be eating meat if beans and rice are cheaper?
5. Should you take a vacation? How much are you allowed to spend on it? Should you just never vacation because it's not necessary?
6. Should you live near work? Do you have an obligation to move within biking distance? Let's say that you lose your job and your new one is not biking distance, do you move?
Some of these are normal questions, and some border on the absurd (depending on who you are!)
You may think that some people have ridiculous expenses - but what if they don't agree, and they are saving? What if they already are ER, or could RE and just don't want to?
I could say that alcohol is completely unnecessary, so don't even bother making your own hard cider for pennies, save your pennies!
I read once that most people have the ability to focus on 3 big things at a time, and do them well. What are those 3 things? The fact of the matter is - mustachianism is often just getting better. Once you have one thing figured out, and it's second nature, move on to the next.
-
Longevity increased by shaving far less frequently then my fellow American women by a lot.
Would it be chauvinistic to point you to the "cheap vs. frugal" thread in light of this comment?
I am female. I had a knee surgery, after which I could not put weight on my leg for 6 weeks. I also had stitches which could not get wet. Everything was 8 times more difficult than usual. Shaving my legs was not happening. That was in 2000. I haven't shaved my legs since. Not being cheap, or even frugal really. Just can't think of a reason I should shave them anymore. Can you?
My answer to this belongs in the thread about what expectations of a partner are "reasonable".
Usually people's expectations match and they have a healthy relationship, or they don't match, and there is no relationship. Seems odd to imply someone's expectations outside of the relationship should matter.
You're right, and I wasn't implying any different. The only reason I could think of for Ninety Four to start shaving again is if she felt like her lack thereof was negatively impacting her social life. If not, no need.
LOL
I actually thought you were suggesting that she ask her partner shave her legs for her.. Is that reasonable to ask? .
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
"You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention."
To me statements such as this are preachy and judgemental, and this is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to your perspective.
More importantly If I were Jet skiing fisherman, the chance that such a statement would change my behavior is slim to none.
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
"You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention."
To me statements such as this are preachy and judgemental, and this is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to your perspective.
More importantly If I were a Jet skiing fisherman, the chance that such a statement would change my behavior is slim to none.
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
"You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention."
To me statements such as this are preachy and judgemental, and this is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to your perspective.
More importantly If I were Jet skiing fisherman, the chance that such a statement would change my behavior is slim to none.
Well, that spending does affect others. It affects the person's family, does it not? Maybe try being a little less defensive about your own wasteful spending rather than judging me for giving an honest opinion. I don't understand trying to post here if it's not to get a different perspective. If you're just going to say, "Nuh-uh!" all the time, it's rather pointless and talking about your spending is just bragging rather than an attempt to better your finances.
I've admitted that I too have blind spots and wasteful spending. But, I own it. I acknowledge it, so when someone else comes along saying, "Wow, that's luxury spending," I can say, "You bet!" and have no hard feelings. It does also prompt me to consider once again, "Is this worth it?" and I don't get all bent out of shape.
-
I've never thought the point of the forum was to convince other people.
If I had a relative or friend who was drowning in debt, sure, I'd take another approach. But people are talking about threads that are simply one-up-manship being "judgemental"? I read a thread on the ERE forum about 'do you really need a bed?' I thought that was really interesting hearing from people who had more and more minimal sleeping requirements.
There are so many things people can't imagine living without and what I see on the threads, especially case studies, is people starting out nicer and then getting more face punchy as the OP fails to "get it," just to be matter-of-fact about it. Sometimes when you're trapped in rationalization land, you need someone to be real with you. Of course, I also assume these OPs have read the blog and understand the point and, more importantly, the tone of the blog and understand it to be jocular good fun.
Also, I assume if you really don't want some aspect of your life judged, you wouldn't write about it.
The most negative comments I hear are the people who are like "FUCK this forum and y'all judgemental BITCHES ::overturns table, strides out::"
I'm not sure if I said this before, but I do notice the judgementalism more on the off-topic threads, but I figure it's because those are just bullshitting threads anyway. And I guess too if someone is making a moral judgement about some aspect of someone's life in a case study (e.g., whether to be a SAHP parent or not where it was originally asked as a purely financial question), that's problematic, but that's an intolerance towards a lifestyle thing. Intolerance toward financial wastefulness is, like, the whole fucking point of the place.
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
"You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention."
To me statements such as this are preachy and judgemental, and this is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to your perspective.
More importantly If I were Jet skiing fisherman, the chance that such a statement would change my behavior is slim to none.
Well, that spending does affect others. It affects the person's family, does it not? Maybe try being a little less defensive about your own wasteful spending rather than judging me for giving an honest opinion. I don't understand trying to post here if it's not to get a different perspective. If you're just going to say, "Nuh-uh!" all the time, it's rather pointless and talking about your spending is just bragging rather than an attempt to better your finances.
I've admitted that I too have blind spots and wasteful spending. But, I own it. I acknowledge it, so when someone else comes along saying, "Wow, that's luxury spending," I can say, "You bet!" and have no hard feelings. It does also prompt me to consider once again, "Is this worth it?" and I don't get all bent out of shape.
I don't really understand this response but it occurs to me that your difficulty in understanding my original point about the downside of being so judgmental, is probably a direct result of the fact that I voiced my initial objection in such a judgmental manner.
So.... Sorry!
(But I was not clever enough for that point to have been my initial intent.)
-
I didn't mean to come across as judgmental. These are the same criteria I use to evaluate my own spending decisions, big and small. I stopped using paper towels years ago because I realized that rags worked just as well (if not better) and are more in line with my values. So is it so much to ask that others think about their impact in the same way?
Put another way: even if my husband and I amass so much wealth that the next four generations of our family after us could be profligate spenders and never come close to spending it all, I still wouldn't change my way of life. Because it wouldn't make us any happier to spend the excess that way, nor would it be in line with my life goals and values.
I'm not against all large spending. Several people have made a great case for why they got a nanny, rather than doing daycare. When two parents work and they actually enjoy their jobs, it can make more sense than daycare. I worked as a nanny for a while--I'll never be against the profession because it is enormously rewarding for all parties, if it's a good situation. That is a gain for everyone, and worth every penny. You're not benefiting at the expense of someone else.
It's the blatant, "Oh, I can afford the mansion and the fuel for my hour commute and all the air conditioning I could ever want, so it doesn't matter if I spend that money." Yes, those things do matter because you are not living alone in the world and all of those things have an impact on people, a negative one. The land you take up with your mansion takes away from the ecosystem, and the fuel and energy you use for all of that creates pollution, which puts people more at risk for any number of diseases, including upping childhood asthma. (Think of the children! :P ) It doesn't even give the person a net gain, because all of that pollution affects them just as much as any other person. And do they really think that the money for all of that couldn't be spent in a better way? Really?
You don't think it's worth asking them to take a harder look at the true benefits and losses of such a situation?
I think you make an excellent case for your own values here.
I don't think asking "them" to take a harder look at their values is so useful however.
I think showing others that frugality can help them reach their own selfish goals is more likely to change behavior and persuade.
We all have ethical blind spots, and being shown them in a judgemental manner only closes us off to true change.
Yes, I made a case for my own values because that's what I could think of off the top of my head. If I was responding to a case study, I'd try to use that person's own language and concerns to turn the question around.
We all have blind spots, and we all have places where others are going to think our spending is frivolous or wasteful. I have a cat, a dog, and child. There have been plenty of people on these threads who've pretty much said that those are the most wasteful things I could have. But, I like them and I'm keeping them. I'm just trying to do it with as little spending and waste as possible. I don't buy new items for the kid because there's an amazing amount of used stuff. If someone else was talking about their budget for kid items and listed an absurd number, I'd suggest looking for used things, not going back in time and never having the kid.
It's the same idea with the person who said earlier that her husband has jet skis for fishing. Are they really necessary, or would a row boat perhaps be better? Don't the loud engines of the jet skis scare the fish away? I'm not saying the husband should stop fishing, but there's probably a more relaxing/rewarding way of accomplishing the same goal.
How, again, is that judgmental? I'm not asking others to change their values or to quit the activities they love, or give up the things which make life pleasant. Just to see about doing them in a way that's less "exploding volcano of wastefulness", to borrow an expression.
"You might think of your spending as only impacting yourself, but it clearly doesn't. I, for one, am going to keep pointing that out to people, whether they like it or not. Because it's a matter that deserves attention."
To me statements such as this are preachy and judgemental, and this is despite the fact that I am sympathetic to your perspective.
More importantly If I were Jet skiing fisherman, the chance that such a statement would change my behavior is slim to none.
Well, that spending does affect others. It affects the person's family, does it not? Maybe try being a little less defensive about your own wasteful spending rather than judging me for giving an honest opinion. I don't understand trying to post here if it's not to get a different perspective. If you're just going to say, "Nuh-uh!" all the time, it's rather pointless and talking about your spending is just bragging rather than an attempt to better your finances.
I've admitted that I too have blind spots and wasteful spending. But, I own it. I acknowledge it, so when someone else comes along saying, "Wow, that's luxury spending," I can say, "You bet!" and have no hard feelings. It does also prompt me to consider once again, "Is this worth it?" and I don't get all bent out of shape.
I don't really understand this response but it occurs to me that your resistance to understanding my original point about the downside of being so judgmental, is probably a direct result of the fact that I voiced my initial objection in such a judgmental manner.
So.... Sorry!
(But I am not clever enough for that point to have been my initial intent.)
-
If Christians can't agree on what the bible actually means, I don't expect we will do any better with coming up with a hard and fast definition os mustachianism, unless the MMM prophet himself wants to speak on the matter.
This is a truly baffling analogy. If the adherents to a 2 thousand year old religion based on a book - the New Testament - that is, in our language - a translation of a copy of a copy of a copy of.. we don't have the originals, and the oldest copies we have aren't identical and are nonetheless written in a different language altogether from that spoken where the events described occurred - if these followers cannot agree what it means, then how are we to know what Pete - a guy who lives about 2 miles from me - meant by all these blog posts?
-
If Christians can't agree on what the bible actually means, I don't expect we will do any better with coming up with a hard and fast definition os mustachianism, unless the MMM prophet himself wants to speak on the matter.
This is a truly baffling analogy. If the adherents to a 2 thousand year old religion based on a book - the New Testament - that is, in our language - a translation of a copy of a copy of a copy of.. we don't have the originals, and the oldest copies we have aren't identical and are nonetheless written in a different language altogether from that spoken where the events described occurred - if these followers cannot agree what it means, then how are we to know what Pete - a guy who lives about 2 miles from me - meant by all these blog posts?
I wish Christian disagreements were over different versions and translations. Most I know can come up with plenty of disagreements based on your basic King James version. It's a matter of which aspects they want to emphasize and which they want to ignore.
-
If Christians can't agree on what the bible actually means, I don't expect we will do any better with coming up with a hard and fast definition os mustachianism, unless the MMM prophet himself wants to speak on the matter.
This is a truly baffling analogy. If the adherents to a 2 thousand year old religion based on a book - the New Testament - that is, in our language - a translation of a copy of a copy of a copy of.. we don't have the originals, and the oldest copies we have aren't identical and are nonetheless written in a different language altogether from that spoken where the events described occurred - if these followers cannot agree what it means, then how are we to know what Pete - a guy who lives about 2 miles from me - meant by all these blog posts?
Even when using the same translation of the same book, they disagree. Many, if not most, of the disagreements are far more about interpretation than they are about which translation is being used. And unless the MMM prophet is going to come into the forums and settle these disputes, we, like the Christians, are going to have to look at personal interpretations of the same words and the varied results of that.
So yeah, I think it's a pretty apt comparison. People read the some words and come up with different interpretations, different views on what is most important, and different approaches to integrating the teachings into reality.
-
Even when using the same translation of the same book, they disagree. Many, if not most, of the disagreements are far more about interpretation than they are about which translation is being used. And unless the MMM prophet is going to come into the forums and settle these disputes, we, like the Christians, are going to have to look at personal interpretations of the same words and the varied results of that.
So yeah, I think it's a pretty apt comparison. People read the some words and come up with different interpretations, different views on what is most important, and different approaches to integrating the teachings into reality.
+1. I loved this analogy!
-
If Christians can't agree on what the bible actually means, I don't expect we will do any better with coming up with a hard and fast definition os mustachianism, unless the MMM prophet himself wants to speak on the matter.
This is a truly baffling analogy. If the adherents to a 2 thousand year old religion based on a book - the New Testament - that is, in our language - a translation of a copy of a copy of a copy of.. we don't have the originals, and the oldest copies we have aren't identical and are nonetheless written in a different language altogether from that spoken where the events described occurred - if these followers cannot agree what it means, then how are we to know what Pete - a guy who lives about 2 miles from me - meant by all these blog posts?
Even when using the same translation of the same book, they disagree. Many, if not most, of the disagreements are far more about interpretation than they are about which translation is being used. And unless the MMM prophet is going to come into the forums and settle these disputes, we, like the Christians, are going to have to look at personal interpretations of the same words and the varied results of that.
So yeah, I think it's a pretty apt comparison. People read the some words and come up with different interpretations, different views on what is most important, and different approaches to integrating the teachings into reality.
I think there is some value in the analogy overall, especially considering that most Christians seem to think that Jesus was just flapping his gums with respect to loving your enemies, giving all your money to the poor, non violence, humility, really anything that Jesus taught come to think of it, and wind up with a religion that bears no resemblance to its own core teachings. I see things around here that are analogous to that.
But I still don't agree that the source material is in any way confusing or needs explanation from the Prophet; we don't need to debate around here whether the "eye of a needle" is actually an esoteric reference to an ancient expression for the door to the area where the animals are kept, or if "spare the rod" meant the rod that a shepherd would use to guide sheep, rather than meaning that you need to beat the shit out of your children.