What gives on this forum?

[NumberJohnny5]

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."

[Goldielocks]

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?

[MDM]

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....

[thepokercab]

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.   

[JustTrying]

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!

[milesdividendmd]

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.)

[Dicey]

...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!

[ioseftavi]

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?

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[Gin1984]

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.

[rubybeth]

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.

[Bob W]

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. 

 

[NinetyFour]

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.

[neo von retorch]

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.

[NinetyFour]

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.  :(

[Threshkin]

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.

[sheepstache]

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?!'

[SisterX]

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.

[NinetyFour]

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%.)

[mak1277]

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.

[scrubbyfish]

...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?

[milesdividendmd]

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.

[scrubbyfish]

...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!

[mom2_3Hs]

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...

[Gray Matter]

...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.

[davisgang90]

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. 

[milesdividendmd]

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.

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[mak1277]

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?

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[SisterX]

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?

[NinetyFour]

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?

[Villanelle]

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. 

[milesdividendmd]

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.

[mak1277]

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". 

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[mak1277]

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.

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[mak1277]

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?

[Mesmoiselle]

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.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

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?

[mm1970]

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.

[Goldielocks]

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?   .

[SisterX]

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.

[milesdividendmd]

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.

[milesdividendmd]

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.

[SisterX]

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.

[sheepstache]

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.

[milesdividendmd]

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.)

[milesdividendmd]

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.)