"because I want it and can afford it"

[bluecollarmusician]

It's gone from cut your own hair, monitor your energy bills, don't use a dryer, bike everywhere and face punches to which new Tesla should I buy?

I don't think that these things are mutually exclusive- partly because: I (still) cut my own hair, I (still) monitor my energy usage, I (still) don't use a dryer (except a bit in the winter), I (still) bike everywhere I can; I (still) routinely keep a friendly facepunch ready for myself;  and I also have been thinking of purchasing a Tesla.

The new MMM brand of frugal seems to be geared more towards very wealthy folks.

I think the message was always geared towards very wealthy people; even though the strategies will work for anyone.  It's just it initially attracted people who were already very in line with the philosophy- by softening the tone, it has reached the target audience; basically the very rich are the ones who are doing the most to destroy our planet. 

[EscapeVelocity2020]

...

He's still living an extremely Mustachian lifestyle, with spending far below that of all but the most extremely frugal of people.

This seems to be a point of contention on the forum these days. Understandably so. It's gone from cut your own hair, monitor your energy bills, don't use a dryer, bike everywhere and face punches to which new Tesla should I buy? And somehow it's still being considered "mustachian" and "spending well below frugal people." It makes sense that some folks are seeking a bit more of the original MMM brand. The new MMM brand of frugal seems to be geared more towards very wealthy folks. Admittedly I'm sure many folks who implemented many of the strategies early on probably are very wealthy. So perhaps this is just the natural progression taking shape?

I'm not even sure what the 'new' MMM brand is geared toward -

We both realized that we were being too cheap with ourselves, and we needed to work on it. And we came up with a set of three ideas that should hopefully work together to help us have more fun with our life savings, while we are still alive:

the Minimum Spending Budget
the Dedicated Money Wasting Account
and the Splurge Accountability Buddy

There's a 'race from 2 to 4 million and beyond' thread that gets a lot of posts along the lines of - I'm well beyond FI, but I'm still spending ridiculously low amounts.  I guess I should spend more, but life is pretty great.

When the guy at the top has been posting this same message then suddenly posts about how to force himself to spend more, you've got a reason to be confused.  I'm still holding out hope his next posts are more in line with the original brand that I relate to (i.e. who cares how far beyond FI I am, I still have a responsibility to leave this planet in respectable shape, and I certainly don't need to consume for a squirt of dopamine just because I can afford it)...

[GuitarStv]

You were.  MMM-classic was a different blogger than MMM-yolo.

He is.  There aren't many benefits of getting older, but realizing the world isn't as black and white as you thought it was when you are younger is one of them.

I'd like to think that Pete having spent a number of years, without a 9-5 to job, having accumulated enough wealth that money is significantly less important than it was a dozen years ago, and having been through a divorce, that was partly due to conflicts about lifestyle, he has developed a more nuanced view about spending and the limits of frugality.

When the facts change, I change my mind, what do you do sir?

Woah.  Hold on.  MMM has been pretty darned rich for a pretty long time now.  Certianly rich enough to buy a Tesla with zero impact to his finances.  What 'facts' exactly have changed?

We're not talking about a dozen years ago.  He was writing about how he had a personal justification machine that kept telling him to buy stuff that wasn't necessary and that there was no need to buy a new Tesla in 2019!  And this was after his divorce was completely finalized.

[bluecollarmusician]

@GuitarStv I think the change in material facts is that his van died.

[clifp]

@GuitarStv I think the change in material facts is that his van died.

Exactly. 

Also the Model Y wasn't released until 2021 and the Model 3 was hard to get until 2019. 
The Model S and X are huge cars, and the sheer size and weight, and luxurious options, really undercut the save the planet message.  I'm much happier with my Model 3 than the Model S, for many reasons.  Primarily, because it was overkill for my needs.  Sure there was one time I hauled 3,500 pounds of tile flooring up 1,100 feet on the 10% grade road. But most of the time I haul an extra ton of unneeded mass up my hill. (Regenerative braking only recovered about 1/2 the energy)

Model 3 and Y are the size of most other compact cars or small SUVs, the Y is about 600 lbs heavier than a Leaf and has a virtually identical MPGe rating. 
I bet if bought a Leaf instead of Tesla, the face punches would be far less.

But then Elon Telsa hatred is pretty irrational.

[RWD]

But then Elon hatred is pretty irrational.

No no, there are plenty of rational reasons to hate Elon.

[clifp]

But then Elon hatred is pretty irrational.

No no, there are plenty of rational reasons to hate Elon.

You are right, I should have said Tesla. I'm sure at least 90% of Tesla's hate is actually Elon hate and why I'm far more of an admirer than a hater of the man. He sure says and does dumb things at times.

[Villanelle]

Maybe when DH and I retire, we'll buy weekly lottery tickets.  Or tickets any time the jackpot is over $100m (so an estimated take home of about $35m after lump sum and taxes).  Afterall, we'll be able to afford it.  If we win, we can do a metric ton of good with that money.  (We would not be buying a Tesla, even then, I suspect!) If When we don't win, the $500 ($10 a week) certainly won't make a meaningful difference in our existence. 

Based on the new definitions, this seems like a pretty Mustachian (or is it Pete-iful?  Maybe we need a new adjective!) and frugal purchase. 

[bluecollarmusician]

Maybe when DH and I retire, we'll buy weekly lottery tickets.  Or tickets any time the jackpot is over $100m (so an estimated take home of about $35m after lump sum and taxes).  Afterall, we'll be able to afford it.  If we win, we can do a metric ton of good with that money.  (We would not be buying a Tesla, even then, I suspect!) If When we don't win, the $500 ($10 a week) certainly won't make a meaningful difference in our existence. 

Based on the new definitions, this seems like a pretty Mustachian (or is it Pete-iful?  Maybe we need a new adjective!) and frugal purchase. 

@Villanelle , while I did chuckle at this (thanks for the smile), I don't think buying lottery tix is analogous to buying bread or replacing a car.  Maybe you all are car-free (and if you are, kudos to you!!) but if you aren't what do you plan to do when your vehicle is too unreliable/expensive to justify keeping? 


*Edited* Just wanted to add, I think my question really revolves around "what was he supposed to do?"  Is the burn more from the Tesla/Musk hate?  Or is it the sense of him saying "it's ok to have a few nice things..." ? 

[Villanelle]

Maybe when DH and I retire, we'll buy weekly lottery tickets.  Or tickets any time the jackpot is over $100m (so an estimated take home of about $35m after lump sum and taxes).  Afterall, we'll be able to afford it.  If we win, we can do a metric ton of good with that money.  (We would not be buying a Tesla, even then, I suspect!) If When we don't win, the $500 ($10 a week) certainly won't make a meaningful difference in our existence. 

Based on the new definitions, this seems like a pretty Mustachian (or is it Pete-iful?  Maybe we need a new adjective!) and frugal purchase. 

@Villanelle , while I did chuckle at this (thanks for the smile), I don't think buying lottery tix is analogous to buying bread or replacing a car.  Maybe you all are car-free (and if you are, kudos to you!!) but if you aren't what do you plan to do when your vehicle is too unreliable/expensive to justify keeping? 


*Edited* Just wanted to add, I think my question really revolves around "what was he supposed to do?"  Is the burn more from the Tesla/Musk hate?  Or is it the sense of him saying "it's ok to have a few nice things..." ?

For direction on "what he was supposed to do", you could go to older posts where he talks about buying modest (used, though I know at the moment that might not be as frugal) used vehicles.  Maybe I'm imagining it, but I'm pretty sure he addressed that specifically and repeatedly. 

When my car needs to be replaced, I'll do what I did last time I needed a new car.  Last time, I bought a used, no-frills Corolla. 

But really, it's not so much about just the car.  It's about the fact that I believe, without a shadow of a doubt, that old-MM would mock and shame new-Pete.  He was kinda a judgmental prick about his delivery in many things, even if I agreed with the message. Yet now suddenly he gives (and maybe expects) grace he never gave anyone else. When others wanted fancy things, they were wasteful spendypants who needed face punches.  But when he wants them, it's different.

  I agree there's room for change, and that changing your mind doesn't make you a hypocrite. But when your brand was "face punching" people who did pretty much the same thing (IMO, I guess) what you are now doing, it seems like maybe having enough humility to at least address it head on would be nice.  Pete/MMM doesn't owe anyone anything, of course, but I think it's natural that people will notice and call it out.  His brand was no-holds barred criticism of spending decisions; should he be exempt from that? 

[VanillaGorilla]

To be fair, back in 2016 MMM himself suggested a Tesla as being a totally reasonable vehicle for high net worth individuals.

Of course by that standard I should go buy a Model S, the mere thought of which is horrifying. So maybe we should increase that number a bit for inflation? So 2.5M?

Then in 2019 MMM posted about how he really really really wants a Tesla but he's trying to put it off as long as possible. Which, four years later, he seems to have accomplished well.

So I'm not entirely sure it's fair to say that the newest article is tremendously at odds with his historical perspective.

Honestly, I find it a lot more jarring when forum members talk about freely spending a third of their total net worth on vehicles and generally don't receive much (or any) criticism.

[Valley of Plenty]

This is probably the first time in the dude's life that he has spent upwards of $20k on anything other than a house

Not really the first time. There was the Nissan Leaf, the Detatched Studio and of course the MMM Headquarters building. I have no idea about his divorce agreements/settlements but he did buy a 2nd house after getting divorced. And of course pre-MMM days he tried his hand at running a small home building company that he did a blog post about. That certainly required greater than $20K in spending. He of course has done well despite the ups and downs of all this and can certainly buy anything he feels like buying. But he certainly has spent well north of $20K multiple times.

He's still living an extremely Mustachian lifestyle, with spending far below that of all but the most extremely frugal of people.

This seems to be a point of contention on the forum these days. Understandably so. It's gone from cut your own hair, monitor your energy bills, don't use a dryer, bike everywhere and face punches to which new Tesla should I buy? And somehow it's still being considered "mustachian" and "spending well below frugal people." It makes sense that some folks are seeking a bit more of the original MMM brand. The new MMM brand of frugal seems to be geared more towards very wealthy folks. Admittedly I'm sure many folks who implemented many of the strategies early on probably are very wealthy. So perhaps this is just the natural progression taking shape?

The Nissan Leaf was purchased for under $14k, as per the article that you linked.

The Detached Studio was a $30k add on to his existing house, which all but certainly increased the property's value by more than what it cost to build. I would consider this to fall under "spending money on a house". Even if you do want to consider it a personal expense, it still almost certainly ended up increasing his net worth.

Same goes with the MMM HQ, which was more of a community donation than a personal expense, and still both created a source of income and increased his net worth.

I'm also not sure what "second house" you're referring to? He has certainly bought many houses over the years, but to my knowledge he has never had more than one personal home at any given time. He has owned multiple houses for the purpose of renting some out, but those are passive investments, not spendypants purchases.

None of these examples are in any way anti-mustachian when you actually look at them beyond the surface level. They aren't spendypants behavior. This most recent purchase is the first time that I am aware of that MMM has spent a large sum on something for personal enjoyment. And even that is stretching it considering A) $20k is by no means a large sum comparative to his net worth, and B) he's not buying it simply for personal enjoyment - he actually needs a vehicle and this will be filling that need.

Saying that the blog has gone from "cut your own hair" to "which new Tesla should I buy" is simply a disingenuous strawman argument. He isn't saying that, and anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty knows that's not at all what he's advocating for. I'm still early in my pursuit of FIRE and by no means very wealthy, and I still feel able to relate and learn from the articles MMM is publishing. I feel like anyone who feels differently is probably just consciously or subconsciously looking for a reason to be critical of things.

[GuitarStv]

@GuitarStv I think the change in material facts is that his van died.

Exactly. 

Also the Model Y wasn't released until 2021 and the Model 3 was hard to get until 2019. 
The Model S and X are huge cars, and the sheer size and weight, and luxurious options, really undercut the save the planet message.  I'm much happier with my Model 3 than the Model S, for many reasons.  Primarily, because it was overkill for my needs.  Sure there was one time I hauled 3,500 pounds of tile flooring up 1,100 feet on the 10% grade road. But most of the time I haul an extra ton of unneeded mass up my hill. (Regenerative braking only recovered about 1/2 the energy)

Model 3 and Y are the size of most other compact cars or small SUVs, the Y is about 600 lbs heavier than a Leaf and has a virtually identical MPGe rating. 
I bet if bought a Leaf instead of Tesla, the face punches would be far less.

But then Elon Telsa hatred is pretty irrational.

Oh.  His van died.  Of course.  Lemme see if I can remember the purchase specs of the van . . .

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

[FireLane]

To be fair, back in 2016 MMM himself suggested a Tesla as being a totally reasonable vehicle for high net worth individuals.

Of course by that standard I should go buy a Model S, the mere thought of which is horrifying. So maybe we should increase that number a bit for inflation? So 2.5M?

Then in 2019 MMM posted about how he really really really wants a Tesla but he's trying to put it off as long as possible. Which, four years later, he seems to have accomplished well.

So I'm not entirely sure it's fair to say that the newest article is tremendously at odds with his historical perspective.

Heck, he's talked about wanting to buy a Tesla as far back as 2012:

I write about bikes pretty often, so I must be one of those wacky car-free people right? Wrong again! I actually love cars and am a closet gearhead. Throwing aside practicality, I would own an all-electric Tesla Model Y (a practical 7-passenger crossover which also just happens to be one of the fastest cars in the world)...

Even if a new $52,000 Tesla isn't a frugal purchase, it's something he's had his eye on for years. I'm more inclined to extend him grace on the grounds that this is the fulfillment of a long-held desire, rather than something he spontaneously decided to buy because he's rich and this is the kind of car rich people have.

[obstinate]

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

Yeah, I'd say it's pretty reasonable for a guy to spend <1% of his net worth on a car he's been dreaming of and denying himself for more than a decade. There are a few who self-deny harder than that, but not many.

[obstinate]

To be fair, back in 2016 MMM himself suggested a Tesla as being a totally reasonable vehicle for high net worth individuals.

Good citation. It even explicitly references the duality of his person and persona early in the post as well.

[Valley of Plenty]

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

Assuming MMM has about a $10m net worth (best guess), he spent about .5% of his net worth on this purchase. If I were to spend the same percentage of my ~$100k net worth on a car, it would be a $500 car.

If I could get a decent replacement vehicle for only $500, I would consider that pretty damn reasonable.

[GilesMM]

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

Assuming MMM has about a $10m net worth (best guess), he spent about .5% of his net worth on this purchase. If I were to spend the same percentage of my ~$100k net worth on a car, it would be a $500 car.

If I could get a decent replacement vehicle for only $500, I would consider that pretty damn reasonable.

At his age he should only be spending 3% of investments, so adding in another 1/2 percent is significant.

[obstinate]

At his age he should only be spending 3% of investments, so adding in another 1/2 percent is significant.

I don't think he's planning on buying a Tesla each year. Without amortization this conversation makes no sense.

[bluecollarmusician]

@Villanelle  thank you for your thoughtful reply; I agree with you that it seems to align with a consistent (positive) view he has had of electric cars as being a responsible step for those with the means. 

I also agree with you that it is tough to reconcile that with the previous attitude towards others on the things that they think are "worth it..." (whatever that means.) I think that much has been made of solving the "money" problem- and the joy of frugality; which makes any type of conspicuous consumption seem jarring and out of alignment with the philosophy. 

I also really agree with you regarding the idea of spending a large portion of net worth on a depreciating asset is deserving of pushback in these parts.

At his age he should only be spending 3% of investments, so adding in another 1/2 percent is significant.

His last van lasted 25 years, so I think you could probably depreciate it over that timeline making the cost insignificant.


Now this IS interesting:

Heck, he's talked about wanting to buy a Tesla as far back as 2012:

I write about bikes pretty often, so I must be one of those wacky car-free people right? Wrong again! I actually love cars and am a closet gearhead. Throwing aside practicality, I would own an all-electric Tesla Model Y (a practical 7-passenger crossover which also just happens to be one of the fastest cars in the world)...

That's super weird- Mention of a Tesla Y in an article written back in 2012??! Something funny going on there....

[Valley of Plenty]

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

Assuming MMM has about a $10m net worth (best guess), he spent about .5% of his net worth on this purchase. If I were to spend the same percentage of my ~$100k net worth on a car, it would be a $500 car.

If I could get a decent replacement vehicle for only $500, I would consider that pretty damn reasonable.

At his age he should only be spending 3% of investments, so adding in another 1/2 percent is significant.

So only $300,000 a year? I guess he'd better buy a few more Teslas then, or he's going to come in way underbudget!

[MasterStache]

The Nissan Leaf was purchased for under $14k, as per the article that you linked.

The Detached Studio was a $30k add on to his existing house, which all but certainly increased the property's value by more than what it cost to build. I would consider this to fall under "spending money on a house". Even if you do want to consider it a personal expense, it still almost certainly ended up increasing his net worth.

Same goes with the MMM HQ, which was more of a community donation than a personal expense, and still both created a source of income and increased his net worth.

I'm also not sure what "second house" you're referring to? He has certainly bought many houses over the years, but to my knowledge he has never had more than one personal home at any given time. He has owned multiple houses for the purpose of renting some out, but those are passive investments, not spendypants purchases.

This is probably the first time in the dude's life that he has spent upwards of $20k on anything other than a house

Whether these purchases may or may not return a value at some point in the future does not negate upfront cost of over $20K.

Saying that the blog has gone from "cut your own hair" to "which new Tesla should I buy" is simply a disingenuous strawman argument.

It's actually a straw-man to misquote me and then claim it's a straw-man. I was referring to the forum, not the blog.

This seems to be a point of contention on the forum these days. Understandably so. It's gone from cut your own hair, monitor your energy bills, don't use a dryer, bike everywhere and face punches to which new Tesla should I buy?

None of these examples are in any way anti-mustachian when you actually look at them beyond the surface level. They aren't spendypants behavior.

Depends really. For someone with Pete's wealth you have a valid point. For the average Joe Shmo starting out on their FIRE journey or still in accumulation phase, a $52K luxury car would absolutely be considered spendypants behavior and anti-mustachian. 

[GuitarStv]

At this stage with plenty in the bank, I have grown soft and have a bit more truck than I need. It’s a 1999 Honda van with 140,000 miles on it. I bought it for $4,800 four years ago, and current market value is maybe 3 grand.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2015/04/28/what-does-your-work-truck-say-about-you/

Is this really a reasonable reasonable replacement?

Assuming MMM has about a $10m net worth (best guess), he spent about .5% of his net worth on this purchase. If I were to spend the same percentage of my ~$100k net worth on a car, it would be a $500 car.

If I could get a decent replacement vehicle for only $500, I would consider that pretty damn reasonable.

What you can comfortably afford is completely beside the point.  MMM has never advocated buying shit just because you can afford it.  That's like the most simplistic and basic intro level of mustachianism - make a budget and keep to it.  He has always advocated for a more advanced approach from the realization that spending typically doesn't equate to happiness.

Last in my own miniature summary of Stoicism, I’d like to point out the difference between Pleasure and Happiness. An alternative philosophy called Hedonism suggests that to have the best life, you simply maximize pleasure. But Stoics reject that, since pleasure is just one dimension of true happiness. Eating cupcakes is pleasurable, as is sex, sleeping in, drinking wine, and watching TV. Higher level pleasures might be had by driving a fancy car for the first few times, receiving compliments from important people or having millions of people ask for your autograph. But each pleasure very rapidly wears out if overused, and the Hedonist is left scrambling desperately higher up the pyramid of earthly pleasures until he runs out of money or health. Meanwhile, by focusing on Happiness – the underlying signal delivered by Pleasure, the Stoic can make it a much more consistent and tranquil companion in his life.

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/02/what-is-stoicism-and-how-can-it-turn-your-life-to-solid-gold/

Well, it turns out that when a person jumps to a new level of material convenience, he loses the ability to enjoy the things he previously thought were pretty neat. A cold Bud Light was once a true delight after a work day for the lottery winner, but after the win he quits the job and takes up high-end scotch, poured by a personal butler. Both serve the same purpose, and the pleasure is about the same. Similarly, when moving down the hedonic scale, either voluntarily or involuntarily, we can learn to appreciate simpler things with just as much gusto as we would have appreciated more expensive things. I truly love the sound of the wheels of my bike slicing through the quiet wind on an open road, just as much as I enjoyed the whirring sound of the gear-driven camshafts and the rich tuned exhaust note of my old VFR800 motorcycle.

This happiness averaging also explains why we the people of the most materially abundant country in the world, the United States, where the gas is the cheapest and the cars are the fanciest and the houses are the biggest, are actually quite far below other less wealthy countries in the world when we evaluate our own happiness. Depending on the survey, you’ll see countries like Denmark, Switzerland, Austria, Canada, Bhutan, Mexico, Cuba, and others kicking our ass, and the US rarely ranks above #17 on the list.

It is intuitively hard to believe these things at first, when you have been raised as a consumer. My cravings for the crisply carved seats and slickety smooth gearshift of a Mini Cooper S felt very real. Just as Mrs. Money Mustache’s cravings for the artistic perfection and self confidence boost offered by the latest names in athletic fashion felt real. In fact, the cravings ARE real, and the adrenaline rush of buying these new things is real as well. They really do make you feel happy – for a very short time.

The key for me is not denying the existence of the craving or the short term rush. It’s zooming out and reminding myself, “Dude, the scientists have already figured this out for you. You can buy the Cooper, and get a short term rush, or you can put that same energy and money into doing something that creates far more lasting happiness.”

- https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/

I just don't see a case that the new Tesla creates any more true happiness than an old beater van . . . like he has always driven.  MMM has instead chosen a very much a Hedonistic rather than Stoic pursuit.  And that's a very different path than the one he has been advocating for so long.  Going by his own articles, the purchase is certainly a misstep.

[RWD]

Now this IS interesting:

Heck, he's talked about wanting to buy a Tesla as far back as 2012:

I write about bikes pretty often, so I must be one of those wacky car-free people right? Wrong again! I actually love cars and am a closet gearhead. Throwing aside practicality, I would own an all-electric Tesla Model Y (a practical 7-passenger crossover which also just happens to be one of the fastest cars in the world)...

That's super weird- Mention of a Tesla Y in an article written back in 2012??! Something funny going on there....

Definitely a stealth edit or two there. Looking at archive.org he originally mentioned the Tesla Roadster (MSRP $125k in 2012) in that spot. So actually a Model Y is much cheaper than he was dreaming of a decade ago. Still seems in bad faith to retroactively change what he said in 2012 to align with what he did in 2023 without an obvious edit indication.

Edit: as an aside, he left in the wording "one of the fastest cars in the world" which is definitely not true about the Model Y like it was (at least somewhat) about the Roadster.

[RWD]

Still seems in bad faith to retroactively change what he said in 2012 to align with what he did in 2023 without an obvious edit indication.

I went through archive.org and found the exact date of the edit, which was January 22, 2022. So at least the edit does slightly predate the actual purchase of the Model Y.

[ender]

Wow, so even MMM himself realizes the problematic brand him buying a brand new Y has! lol

[Psychstache]

I just don't see a case that the new Tesla creates any more true happiness than an old beater van . . . like he has always driven.  MMM has instead chosen a very much a Hedonistic rather than Stoic pursuit.  And that's a very different path than the one he has been advocating for so long.  Going by his own articles, the purchase is certainly a misstep.

And I think this gets back to the crux of the issue. MMM did not choose this, Pete did. We are back to the problem of the dual identity issue that content creators have. In a way, Pete is a like a Luchador who can't take off the costume because the MMM costume looks just like him. Modern internet content creators can't split out the two very easily, so the personal and professional identities blend and conflict. This is the risk in taking a WWE approach to developing your online brand.

[GuitarStv]

I just don't see a case that the new Tesla creates any more true happiness than an old beater van . . . like he has always driven.  MMM has instead chosen a very much a Hedonistic rather than Stoic pursuit.  And that's a very different path than the one he has been advocating for so long.  Going by his own articles, the purchase is certainly a misstep.

And I think this gets back to the crux of the issue. MMM did not choose this, Pete did. We are back to the problem of the dual identity issue that content creators have. In a way, Pete is a like a Luchador who can't take off the costume because the MMM costume looks just like him. Modern internet content creators can't split out the two very easily, so the personal and professional identities blend and conflict. This is the risk in taking a WWE approach to developing your online brand.

I had always thought there wasn't a huge difference between the online persona and the actual person.

So, MMM was an inauthentic persona then, and his message of environmentalism, frugality, and happiness with less was just a myth?  In many ways, that seems even worse.

[obstinate]

So, MMM was an inauthentic persona then, and his message of environmentalism, frugality, and happiness with less was just a myth?  In many ways, that seems even worse.

If your definition of "authentic" means, "perfect adherence," yes, that's correct. But also nobody else is authentic either, so it's a kind of pointless word.

[Psychstache]

I just don't see a case that the new Tesla creates any more true happiness than an old beater van . . . like he has always driven.  MMM has instead chosen a very much a Hedonistic rather than Stoic pursuit.  And that's a very different path than the one he has been advocating for so long.  Going by his own articles, the purchase is certainly a misstep.

And I think this gets back to the crux of the issue. MMM did not choose this, Pete did. We are back to the problem of the dual identity issue that content creators have. In a way, Pete is a like a Luchador who can't take off the costume because the MMM costume looks just like him. Modern internet content creators can't split out the two very easily, so the personal and professional identities blend and conflict. This is the risk in taking a WWE approach to developing your online brand.

I had always thought there wasn't a huge difference between the online persona and the actual person.

So, MMM was an inauthentic persona then, and his message of environmentalism, frugality, and happiness with less was just a myth?  In many ways, that seems even worse.

Maybe not quite myth, more idealized paragon version of his general beliefs on those topics. But like all real humans, beliefs we espouse as important (helping the environment, not wasting money) can be rationalized to fall below other beliefs (fast techy car is fast and techy and looks fun).

[Telecaster]

To be fair, back in 2016 MMM himself suggested a Tesla as being a totally reasonable vehicle for high net worth individuals.

Of course by that standard I should go buy a Model S, the mere thought of which is horrifying. So maybe we should increase that number a bit for inflation? So 2.5M?

Then in 2019 MMM posted about how he really really really wants a Tesla but he's trying to put it off as long as possible. Which, four years later, he seems to have accomplished well.

So I'm not entirely sure it's fair to say that the newest article is tremendously at odds with his historical perspective.

Honestly, I find it a lot more jarring when forum members talk about freely spending a third of their total net worth on vehicles and generally don't receive much (or any) criticism.

It is tremendously at odds with his historical perspective--but not because he bought a Tesla!  He needed a vehicle so he bought a vehicle. 

It was suggestions like having a "free fun money account," a minimum spend, and a splurge buddy, to help you, well, splurge.  He even says some frivolous spending is okay.   There is a whole mountain of MMM blog posts contradicting those ideas.   The old MMM would mock the idea of spending a few hundred bucks extra just to sit at the front of the plane.   The old stoic MMM would argue that doing so would only bring pleasure for a short period of time and lead to hedonic adaptation.   This blog post is a good summary of what I'm talking about:

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/09/20/wealth-advice-that-should-be-obvious/

Don't buy that cool $10 flask.  Restaurants are only for carefully planned occasions, etc.  Tons more where that came for.   The two authors do not have the same message. 

Now, to be clear I agree with the current version of MMM.   I never wanted to live on $40,000/year or forgo a cappuccino if I want one because it will make me weak.

But the message has surely changed.  No question there.     

[TreeLeaf]

Still seems in bad faith to retroactively change what he said in 2012 to align with what he did in 2023 without an obvious edit indication.

I went through archive.org and found the exact date of the edit, which was January 22, 2022. So at least the edit does slightly predate the actual purchase of the Model Y.

This makes me wonder if he will wind up with a roadster someday when the new one comes out, and then go back in time and edit the article back to the original version.

[VanillaGorilla]

It is tremendously at odds with his historical perspective--but not because he bought a Tesla!  He needed a vehicle so he bought a vehicle. 

It was suggestions like having a "free fun money account," a minimum spend, and a splurge buddy, to help you, well, splurge.  He even says some frivolous spending is okay.   There is a whole mountain of MMM blog posts contradicting those ideas.   The old MMM would mock the idea of spending a few hundred bucks extra just to sit at the front of the plane.   The old stoic MMM would argue that doing so would only bring pleasure for a short period of time and lead to hedonic adaptation.   This blog post is a good summary of what I'm talking about:

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/09/20/wealth-advice-that-should-be-obvious/

Don't buy that cool $10 flask.  Restaurants are only for carefully planned occasions, etc.  Tons more where that came for.   The two authors do not have the same message. 

Now, to be clear I agree with the current version of MMM.   I never wanted to live on $40,000/year or forgo a cappuccino if I want one because it will make me weak.

But the message has surely changed.  No question there.   

Oh man I love that old post. Pure, unadulterated MMM goodness. I still go back and read the old posts regularly, to remind myself that I'm soft and weak and spoiled.

You're definitely right about the huge change in tone. I do miss the original MMM message. Oh well, time has a way of working on us all.

Honestly, these days I get a lot more annoyed with bloggers with ultrahigh net worths who are extremely stingy. You're worth $5M and you refuse to have any hobbies because they would cost money? Your kids are going to community college because Dad wants to hoard his wealth?

Then there's the dubious spending reports. After fifteen years of living in a starter house you've never had a $10k repair or upgrade? You've never had a $5k dental bill that insurance wouldn't cover? Maybe they're really really good at getting familial expertise in construction and their brother is a dentist. Or maybe their frugality is leading to poor long term decisions, or perhaps their spending reports aren't quite accurate?

Others insist that living out of a suitcase in other peoples' houses is The Correct Lifestyle and anybody who wants to indulge the luxury of home ownership is an idiot. Whatever floats your boat, but there's zero chance of me ever hating work so much that I'd rather be homeless.

With thoughts like these, I appreciate knowing that even MMM grew up and realized that paying adult bills on occasion is worthwhile, whether it's for the good of one's children or beneficial to your romantic relationship. Same goes for Go Curry Cracker - he scrimped and pinched to buy the life he wanted, then realized that he could afford way more, and acted accordingly. Good for him. I appreciate the honesty, even though the change in tone is obviously less motivational for those on their way to FI.

[GuitarStv]

With thoughts like these, I appreciate knowing that even MMM grew up and realized that paying adult bills on occasion is worthwhile, whether it's for the good of one's children or beneficial to your romantic relationship.

Buying a Tesla is an 'adult bill' necessary for the good of one's children and beneficial to your romantic relationship?  We must live in very different worlds.  :P

[Metalcat]

With thoughts like these, I appreciate knowing that even MMM grew up and realized that paying adult bills on occasion is worthwhile, whether it's for the good of one's children or beneficial to your romantic relationship.

Buying a Tesla is an 'adult bill' necessary for the good of one's children and beneficial to your romantic relationship?  We must live in very different worlds.  :P

Lol, total aside, but I sold my e-bike- yesterday to a dude for his sister. Dude's wife came to pick it up with a friend who has a pickup truck.

She was a miserable, rude cow of a human. Her husband had been quite delightful to deal with, but her hatred of her sister-in-law for whom the bike had been purchased was palpable.

Maybe there's a reason, I don't care, not my circus, not my monkeys.

Anyhoo, she brought the friend with the pickup truck because she didn't think the bike would fit in her Tesla.

Guess how many times she mentioned she had a Tesla in a 10 minute exchange?

"Can I park my Tesla here?"

"Where should I park my Tesla?"

"So I can leave my Tesla here? It's just a few minutes, right?"

"Can I bring my Tesla into the parking garage where the bike is?"

"Oh. Okay, I'll just leave the Tesla here."

"Do you think it will fit in my Tesla?" (Dude with pickup is literally already there to take the bike)

"I wasn't sure it would fit in my Tesla"

"I brought a friend because it's probably too big to fit in my Tesla"

"Oh yeah, that's too big to fit in my Tesla"

"This is so heavy, I don't think I could even get it into my Tesla"

"[Husband] thought it might fit in the Tesla, but I don't think it would fit"

"I definitely don't want bike grease in my Tesla"

"See [Friend], there's no way this would fit in my Tesla, what the hell was [husband] thinking?"

"Yeah, that would not have fit in my Tesla"

"Okay, [friend] you turn around first and then I'll follow in the Tesla"

I'm pretty sure that woman loves her Tesla more than her husband.

[Sanitary Stache]

It was suggestions like having a "free fun money account," a minimum spend, and a splurge buddy, to help you, well, splurge.  He even says some frivolous spending is okay.   There is a whole mountain of MMM blog posts contradicting those ideas.   The old MMM would mock the idea of spending a few hundred bucks extra just to sit at the front of the plane.   The old stoic MMM would argue that doing so would only bring pleasure for a short period of time and lead to hedonic adaptation.   This blog post is a good summary of what I'm talking about:

https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/09/20/wealth-advice-that-should-be-obvious/
 

I agree with this sentiment.  But I don't think it is too much at odds with my understanding of MMM. When I read that linked blog post it is pretty clear the not spending on it advice is two parted. One don't spend one credit.  Two don't spend on something you wont use.  Also, I don't read into the purchase justification that Pete bought himself a car because he was looking for happiness, at least no more pleasure than those first few rides.  I hope he drives so little that those first few rides of pleasure last several years without the inevitable increase in hedonistic adaptation that a "fun money" account to spend his excess signals is coming.  It seems more like he is trying to replace a car and choosing what he thinks causes the least amount of harm.  Of course, no car is that option, and it is disappointing that he doesn't acknowledge this.

I also don't appreciate the blog persona gymnastics. But I never have. I always felt the yearly budget reporting was skewed by not including the lifestyle benefits inherent in Pete's "work" side of things - buying things for builds, flying on planes for MMM events, all the status and social access granted by hosting the co-working location, etc.

I think MMM has said what he had to say.  I'm still interested in what Pete is doing, but I think this persona maintenance should be over.  In the response to comments Pete acknowledges the MMM blog is to encourage people to a certain lifestyle. Just let MMM stand on its own. The lessons don't need updating to be relevant (highlighted by the silly "Model Y" change to an 11 year old post).  Perhaps Pete is looking for something greater to say about spending choices.  And I think he might find it, but I would rather wait to read it until he has found it (or found the person saying it better).  His early posts were presented as curated and editing thoughts that Pete had been collecting for many years.
From the blog post comments:

Except remember that these articles aren’t really about ME. I’m not just writing a diary here, that would be a huge waste of my time as a retired guy. Instead, the MMM blog is meant to be an advocacy platform that just happens to use personal stories as a framework.

The blog post misses the mark, especially coming on the heels of the "Car-free future" post.  What kind of future is Pete building if he needs a car to do it?  I'm not opposed to buying nice things for oneself, especially if you think it is the least harm option, without concern about the costs.  I support that for food and clothing and also for transportation, education, design choices, etc. And there is certainly a 'what you can afford' element to the decision making. 

Rich people should voluntarily limit "what they can afford".

There is a conflict that I think we have all been discussing here somewhat, between accumulation phase and drawdown phase.  A concept, I think called lifestyle smoothing, was promoted by a book i read early in my discovery of FIRE.  The book wasn't great, it was called "Spend Till the End" and it promoted inflating your lifestyle to match your income to the point where you spend all of your money.  It missed the point about "Enough'.  Pete didn't address how his decision making fits into the need to restrain lifestyle inflation and it didn't discuss the harm lifestyle inflation causes.

I sit on this hill now, overlooking my Town.  What a fucking paradise. not a road in sight.  Just bright green budding leaves, the pale brown of branches and lush green fields of new grown grass, the occasional white dot of a building with its idyllic red barn visible only in my minds eye.  White and grey clouds imperceptibly moving across the light blue sky.  A whisper of wind in the budding birches.

And that fucking hum of the highway.  I just want to go Monkey Wrench gang on that thing.
 

[GilesMM]

Still seems in bad faith to retroactively change what he said in 2012 to align with what he did in 2023 without an obvious edit indication.

I went through archive.org and found the exact date of the edit, which was January 22, 2022. So at least the edit does slightly predate the actual purchase of the Model Y.

Wow, revising a decade old blog make it appear one is following through as planned.  This guy might have ended up in jail if he worked at a financial institution...

[achvfi]

I recall seeing a few bets on here about how long it would be until MMM bought a Tesla.

Saving the world by buying a luxury car from a despicable billionaire… Mr. Money Mustache has officially jumped the shark :(

Even worse, he's paying for Twitter Blue like a loser.

That is so disappointing.

[joe189man]

I just don't understand all the anger over this blog post. The comments on the actual blog post were bonkers and in this thread are similarly weird to me.

Pete's a retired person spending his money, not some deity changing his religion.

Be happy for the guy and and move on.

[achvfi]

I just don't understand all the anger over this blog post. The comments on the actual blog post were bonkers and in this thread are similarly weird to me.

Pete's a retired person spending his money, not some deity changing his religion.

Be happy for the guy and and move on.

He is multimillionaire he can buy what he wants.  What is disappointing is buying a Tesla, from a company run by sociopath CEO. He could have bought any other electric car but I think he was cheap. On one had he acknowledges that issue and on the other he is rationalizing it. Worse part is he is a major influencer. I have seen on this forum, people who cant afford buy 50-60k tesla. He is setting a bad example.

[dividendman]

It turns out that living frugally isn't as easy as it seems.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

It turns out that living frugally isn't as easy as it seems.

Being hard wouldn't be all that big of an admission, I think we can all agree with and live with that, but the subtext that it actually isn't as sustainable or fun as he's made it out to be is damning.

[dividendman]

It turns out that living frugally isn't as easy as it seems.

Being hard wouldn't be all that big of an admission, I think we can all agree with and live with that, but the subtext that it actually isn't as sustainable or fun as he's made it out to be is damning.

Agreed. I wasn't nearly as hard-core as original MMM or many others, but I don't have a new tesla so maybe I'm better than MMM on the spending side now :D

[mspym]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

[dividendman]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

Of course people can grow and change. But it can be negative right? If he started spending all of his money on cigarettes and hookers would that be good too?

[mspym]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

Of course people can grow and change. But it can be negative right? If he started spending all of his money on cigarettes and hookers would that be good too?

I just wouldn't classify 'replacing a broken ICE van with an EV, as per his long-held publicly stated environmental concerns' in the same realm as 'cigarettes and hookerssex-workers'. If he'd replaced his van with a coal-rolling extended-cab pick-up truck? Sure. That seems like more of a betrayal of core values to me.

Is the problem people are having that he opted for something he would enjoy? Because if we're not hair-shirting it and loving it, 100% of the time then aren't we all hedonic-treadmill consumer sukkas? It just seems exhausting.

[Villanelle]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

I think multiple people in this thread have clearly acknowledged that yes, people can grow and change.  So maybe it's you who are high on your supply of self-righteousness?

If you scream from the rooftops that real estate investors (to use an example) are fools, and you regularly mock them, then you announce you've started a RE investing empire, it's going to raise eyebrows and make you seem like a hypocrite if you don't at least acknowledge that there's been a shift in your thinking and that maybe you were wrong before.  There's nothing wrong with having been wrong, or gaining new understanding that shifts your perspective.  But when you just pretend nothing has changed, well... can you really not see how that comes off? 

Also, sure, MMM/Pete or anyone else can grow and change.  I know someone who used to be pretty open and respectful of all people but has become quite a bigot.  Not all growth and change is good growth and change.  And when you are a public figure who has made your choices the cornerstone of your public profile, people are going to comment on your choices.

[GuitarStv]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

Of course people can grow and change. But it can be negative right? If he started spending all of his money on cigarettes and hookers would that be good too?

I just wouldn't classify 'replacing a broken ICE van with an EV, as per his long-held publicly stated environmental concerns' in the same realm as 'cigarettes and hookerssex-workers'. If he'd replaced his van with a coal-rolling extended-cab pick-up truck? Sure. That seems like more of a betrayal of core values to me.

Is the problem people are having that he opted for something he would enjoy? Because if we're not hair-shirting it and loving it, 100% of the time then aren't we all hedonic-treadmill consumer sukkas? It just seems exhausting.

I was under the impression that MMM didn't drive enough for the environmental savings of an EV to be worth it.  That's why he was always pushing the idea of using high mileage, cheaper used vehicles.  They're much more environmental than buying a brand new car unless you're putting great distances in.

It's not a matter of self-righteousness, so much as confusion.

[Villanelle]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

Of course people can grow and change. But it can be negative right? If he started spending all of his money on cigarettes and hookers would that be good too?

I just wouldn't classify 'replacing a broken ICE van with an EV, as per his long-held publicly stated environmental concerns' in the same realm as 'cigarettes and hookerssex-workers'. If he'd replaced his van with a coal-rolling extended-cab pick-up truck? Sure. That seems like more of a betrayal of core values to me.

Is the problem people are having that he opted for something he would enjoy? Because if we're not hair-shirting it and loving it, 100% of the time then aren't we all hedonic-treadmill consumer sukkas? It just seems exhausting.

A major component of what he espoused was that frugality isn't a hair shirt.  It was framed more as a blanket that kept one warm, safe, healthy and agile, without giving up any true comfort or happiness.  If it is in fact a hair-shirt, then everything he said about the relationship between money and happiness is called into question, no?  He never said, "frugality hurts, but is necessary for a better life, so you should suck it up and deal with the discomfort or pain of frugality." 

[MasterStache]

Y'all are high on your own supply of self-righteousness. People can never grow and change? We have to be bound by the opinions of our youth? I guess that’s a choice you make.

Of course people can grow and change. But it can be negative right? If he started spending all of his money on cigarettes and hookers would that be good too?

I just wouldn't classify 'replacing a broken ICE van with an EV, as per his long-held publicly stated environmental concerns' in the same realm as 'cigarettes and hookerssex-workers'. If he'd replaced his van with a coal-rolling extended-cab pick-up truck? Sure. That seems like more of a betrayal of core values to me.

Is the problem people are having that he opted for something he would enjoy? Because if we're not hair-shirting it and loving it, 100% of the time then aren't we all hedonic-treadmill consumer sukkas? It just seems exhausting.

Mehh, why go with a Tesla? An Aspark Owl would be way more fun to drive and it's an EV. YOLO!