The Money Mustache Community
Other => Off Topic => Topic started by: dycker1978 on August 17, 2017, 04:49:09 PM
-
I have noticed so many odd topics. From the three times daily "the top is in, red dow" to should I buy a new car, to I think I got out too soon.
All of these topics then have many people here saying that the face punch worthy decision is OK.
Has the MMM community gone soft?
-
I think most of those topics are started by newbies who haven't necessarily read much of the blog. (I am also a newbie, but I only ended up here after I finished reading the whole backlog and started itching for more.) I've only seen responses discouraging the anti-mustachian choices, though.
-
You're complaining about people asking questions who could count their total forum history on their fingers. It might get tiring, but you're going to see the same rookie questions asked over and over. Some people enjoy throwing mustachian haymakers, and others prefer delivering fatherly advice. The "getting out" person made a rookie mistake and in my opinion was firmly scolded and educated. There's only so much we can do if they're determined to not take our advice.
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
Gets softer every year. As more and more people join, the forum advice drifts further and further mainstream.
-
I've been lurking around here for a few years now and do find the general tenor of advice to much more "buy the thing; you deserve small luxuries" than it used to be. There don't seem to be many ERE types left (or maybe they're too busy eating lentils in a van by the river to post? ;)). In all seriousness, I do miss the motivation I got from the more extremely frugal types.
-
I am guilty of not being hardcore mustache. I have come a long way, I'm now saving 45% of my income and not buying stupid shit. I am detecting some snowflake actions. I take my face punches with pride. I've earned each and every one of them!
-
A 1 or 2 year old used toyota rav4 is going to be pretty similar in price to a brand new. These cars don't depreciate much, therefore a new car of this model type would be perfectly fine.
It seems the consensus is that it is newbie posting these comments. This was posted in the new car forum. The poster has over 1000 posts. They are not new.
-
I feel that over the years the forum has become more distanced from true Mustachianism.
-
I think its changed a lot in the last couple of years. What used to only be in the Mustachian Hall of Shame, can now be a many page thread in ask a Mustachian, with a ton of people YOLOing along with some expensive consumeristic choice.
The thing is, I think people always made choices to spend on silly things, they just didn't come to the forum to get advice/support for it, because they new they wouldn't get it, now they get extremely defensive with anyone who hands out an old fashioned facepunch.
But there are sill some great posters fighting the good fight. It's just a lot more diluted now.
-
Although I don't post much, I've been lurking around since 2012, and yes I also have the impression that there are less face punches and more back patting than before. For some reason, that seems to happen more often with car related posts. My observations are all anecdotal, of course.
-
I lurked for a few years and started posting more a couple of years ago.
I agree that the forum seems "softer" now and I would say that is one of the reasons I started posting more (that and the Ramsey forums closing up shop).
I love the whole FIRE concept but don't really love the face punches. I'm a "catch more flies with honey" type of girl.
Additionally, I think another issue is that there are many of us who save in the 30-50% range and there isn't really a great place for us. We aren't necessarily interested in saving 70% like MMM but this forum is a better fit than almost anywhere else on the webz.
If someone knows of a different forum I'd be very interested in knowing about it.
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
Gets softer every year. As more and more people join, the forum advice drifts further and further mainstream.
I feel that over the years the forum has become more distanced from true Mustachianism.
And this poll confirms it.....
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-type-of-re-person-are-you/ (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-type-of-re-person-are-you/)
-
So, does this thread serve as permission to release my inner grumpy old man, ERE, mustachian kracken on the masses?
-
There are definitely more "filthy casuals" now than before. I considered myself maybe 40th percentile frugal relative to the whole of the forum when I first joined (2012) but now I feel like I'm more like 80th percentile, and my spending has gone up somewhat in that time (granted, my income has gone up substantially more).
-
Some of us have definitely gotten softer as a result of moving up the food chain in terms of wealth/income.
I just spent $100 on cheese and I'm not even sorry.
-
So, does this thread serve as permission to release my inner grumpy old man, ERE, mustachian kracken on the masses?
Considering that you ended debt slavery, I'm not so sure you're such a good messenger for hardcore mustachianism ;)
-
So, does this thread serve as permission to release my inner grumpy old man, ERE, mustachian kracken on the masses?
Considering that you ended debt slavery, I'm not so sure you're such a good messenger for hardcore mustachianism ;)
I fight debt wherever, whenever, and in whatever forms it appears. Truth... justice... and the Athenian way! I think MMM would approve.
-
I just spent $100 on cheese and I'm not even sorry.
This somehow reads like a motivational quote to me. I don't know why. :)
-
I'm a new member, so I can't say anything about drift....but the forum is definitely more spendy-pants than the actual blog.
-
We're commonly having conversations about the need to own an 800$ blender, the terror and dangers associated with cycling, and the benefits of market timing/speculation. MMM Forums, I hardly know you any more.
-
Meh. Places and things shift.
Nonplussed is now defined as being surprised and confused so much that they are unsure how to react AND being not disconcerted; unperturbed.
The guru himself just started a Pay to Play clubhouse for the cool kids.
Soon the universe itself will become unmoored, the kingdom of Thut will slide into the sea, and entropy itself will die. So it goes.
-
We're commonly having conversations about the need to own an 800$ blender, the terror and dangers associated with cycling, and the benefits of market timing/speculation. MMM Forums, I hardly know you any more.
There's a thread about an $800 blender? Must've missed that one. O_O
I think most people came down against market timing, though. At least it's in the water supply that market timing is a bad idea.
-
We're commonly having conversations about the need to own an 800$ blender, the terror and dangers associated with cycling, and the benefits of market timing/speculation. MMM Forums, I hardly know you any more.
There's a thread about an $800 blender? Must've missed that one. O_O
I think most people came down against market timing, though. At least it's in the water supply that market timing is a bad idea.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/reader-recommendations/vitamix-blender/ (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/reader-recommendations/vitamix-blender/)
-
I'm a new member, so I can't say anything about drift....but the forum is definitely more spendy-pants than the actual blog.
The funny thing is I would say it used to be the other way around.
-
Oh its definitely gone soft. Wider audiences tend to have more mainstream views. I used to be the one to keep my mouth shut because while I save 50%+, I definitely spend on things the old forum wouldn't appreciate. Now I spend time explaining how I dare to retire early. Ummm aren't we on a retire early forum? Did I miss the change over?
I think you also have the added a effect of dilution. People who can retire on very little don't take long to retire so they quickly shuffle off the board into retirement (a few post after FIRE but usually this is more for before than after). People who are saving only a little will be here longer. Since that takes longer you will get more and more of those types.
-
Somebody should create a new forum where mustachians can hang out.
-
We're commonly having conversations about the need to own an 800$ blender, the terror and dangers associated with cycling, and the benefits of market timing/speculation. MMM Forums, I hardly know you any more.
I think we've had these types of threads as long as I've been around... There are just more of them.
-
Maybe that's a natural evolution of forums?
I was on a very birthy forum prior to the birth of my second and the organization and forum was pretty hardcore about the mission (decreasing c-sections) and supporting moms. There were lots of really smart ladies on there and lots of new moms coming for support. There was much to discuss and learn. Really cool and amazing things happened. We compiled data and proved that the community had achieved an admirable c-section rate in spite of having a group comprised of some of the least favorable candidates. Our group, with hundreds of births, was larger than most of those we found in published scientific studies and contained some really rare categories (two VBAC triplet births, for instance).
Over time, though, it became more of a social network for local moms rather than a support network for expectant moms. The off topic stuff mushroomed and on topic stuff seemed played out. Fewer moms posted for advice. Perhaps the birth community in the area had improved to the point it wasn't as necessary. Perhaps new visitors felt they weren't part of the "friends group" and didn't stick around. From the peak of hundreds of active posters (remember, this was a group for a specific metro area), they're down to a couple of dozen at best.
I will say that as a fairly new member of this forum, the sheer volume posts can be intimidating. It's hard to keep up with or contribute to a post that quickly gets dozens of responses. Though I'm not the type to spend $800 on a blender, I do think there's room for flexibility and less face punching if one is on track with their goals (one of my fav financial podcasts is "Afford Anything"). I mean, I asked for and received a 4' tall metal rooster for my birthday and it's probably the best gift I've ever gotten. But again, I'm not crying about a crushing debt load either, so there's that.
So now I've managed to refer to both vaginas and cocks in one post. You're welcome.
-
The forums are more spendypants than MMM. Pretty common to see people asking "Should I buy/keep expensive item X" where the person asking the question has not reached FIRE, has debt, hair on fire situation. And X is clearly isn't a necessity. I'm shocked it how often the responses are "if it makes you happy you should have it" or other such tripe.
Hedonism is prevailing over stoicism.
-
My theory is that some of this is due to the inability to search easily. People, particularly newbs, ask questions that have been thoroughly and even recently discussed. Costco membership, anyone?
I know ARS has posted a helpful tutorial, but the search function needs a working "Search" box, not a tutorial. OTOH, I am enormously grateful that this is a free, and moderated, site.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
Spending is just the most common visible symptom. There are other examples, such as people saying it's fine to move far into the country which greatly extends the commute, because the OP really wants to and they believe it will make them happy. Spending way more on fuel and maintenance? Killing your body sitting in a long commute? Environmental damage of all additional emissions? It all takes a back seat to personal happiness. The heart wants what it wants.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
+1. There's a common - and in my mind misplaced - assumption that this blog is about extreme frugality and money. Perhaps read over this classic post: If you think this is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point. (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/)
At the same time there does seem to be loads more posts justifying spendypants purchases and too many free passes given to wasteful spending under the cloak of "it's not really that much more each month".
I tend to view MMM much more about aligning your spending with your values. If something doesn't measurably improve your life, cut it out. That seems to be 60-80% of most people's budget. There's also of course the 'secret (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2016/03/15/mother-earth/)' mission of this blog, which a lot of newer members seem completely unaware of. Lately, as more members filter here from mass-media articles and google searches the questions often seem at odds with the secret purpose of this entire blog.
-
I tend to view MMM much more about aligning your spending with your values.
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
The MMM site has values. This community used to have those same values. If your values don't align with the site's values, maybe this isn't the community for you? What's the point in maintaining an active online community of people who are so openly at odds with the mission and purpose of the site that created the community?
Oh, right. Blog income.
-
To me, it seems like it's turned into a millennial self-help / lifestyle forum with financial undertones.
-
Is there anything that those damned millenials won't ruin? :P
-
I tend to view MMM much more about aligning your spending with your values.
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
Common man, at least include my next sentence: "If something doesn't measurably improve your life, cut it out."
eg: I desire an $800 blender I saw in a magazine; i want something to make smoothies at home; i realize a used, mid-tier blender bought on craigslist for $20 will bring me as much happiness as that $800 marketing monstrosity plus now I get to max out both my IRA and HSA for the month instead, paying future me dividends.
like i siad, it's not about buying crap, or about NOT buying anything (e.g. 'extreme frugality') - it's figuring out what makes you happy, buying only what fits that and not pissing all over mother earth.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
+1. There's a common - and in my mind misplaced - assumption that this blog is about extreme frugality and money. Perhaps read over this classic post: If you think this is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point. (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/)
At the same time there does seem to be loads more posts justifying spendypants purchases and too many free passes given to wasteful spending under the cloak of "it's not really that much more each month".
I tend to view MMM much more about aligning your spending with your values. If something doesn't measurably improve your life, cut it out. That seems to be 60-80% of most people's budget. There's also of course the 'secret (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2016/03/15/mother-earth/)' mission of this blog, which a lot of newer members seem completely unaware of. Lately, as more members filter here from mass-media articles and google searches the questions often seem at odds with the secret purpose of this entire blog.
I miss the posts of I.P. Daley. He doesn't post around so much. Man, that guy GETS it.
Common man, at least include my next sentence: "If something doesn't measurably improve your life, cut it out."
eg: I desire an $800 blender I saw in a magazine; i want something to make smoothies at home; i realize a used, mid-tier blender bought on craigslist for $20 will bring me as much happiness as that $800 marketing monstrosity plus now I get to max out both my IRA and HSA for the month instead, paying future me dividends.
like i siad, it's not about buying crap, or about NOT buying anything (e.g. 'extreme frugality') - it's figuring out what makes you happy, buying only what fits that and not pissing all over mother earth.
Well said.
-
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
If your values really and truly tell you to buy it then yes, it is mustachian.
However, chances are the blender is worth something to you, just not $800. Maybe the true value of the blender to you is $200 and you rationalized the other $600 with concepts that are difficult to put a value on like "It'll improve my health!"
No matter the positive effect a purchase may have on your life, you always need to weigh it against the cost. (And I don't just mean the monetary cost)
Edit:
i realize a used, mid-tier blender bought on craigslist for $20 will bring me as much happiness as that $800 marketing monstrosity
And yes, always look for alternatives that fill the same 'need'
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
+1 to this. I've seen so many times lately that if you can afford it and it makes you happy then it is okay. Minimalism, stoicism, environmental and social responsibility, frugality, badassity, etc. don't seem to matter. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed the trend.
-
To me, it seems like it's turned into a millennial self-help / lifestyle forum with financial undertones.
Ha, I was literally counting the posts until someone blamed the millennials.
I've only been here two and a half years but the trend is towards "spend your values" softness. I do think the number of true mustachians has grown, just not as fast as the wishy washy crowd who saves only 20% of income due to their boat payment and claim to be taking the "slow route to FI".
I'm REALLY curious how it would look if someone like Winchesterfrugal came back. Originally, she was panned by 90% of posters. Now I bet a third of respondents would be telling her it's ok to spend it all "since you can afford it".
-
Is there anything that those damned millenials won't ruin? :P
Put it on the Board!
(https://www.civilized.life/assets/Uploads/millennials-killing-things-collage.jpg)
-
^ That is great!
-
Bear in mind that since the forums started, the stock market has gone up and unemployment has gone down. I'm guessing that people in general may be feeling more wealthy and relaxed about their spending as a result. When the next recession rolls around, I suspect the tone will change and posters will be more motivated to cut spending.
I do think also there's a lot of merit to the comments about the forum simply becoming more mainstream as it gets larger. That's inevitable. I see a lot of posters who make it clear they don't aspire to ER at all, just want to be a bit more frugal/financially secure than average.
What annoys me most is the posters who mock or deride people who are living more frugally than they are as "not enjoying life" or similar. Like, have you not read the MMM blog, early posts especially?
-
Death to Marmalade!
Actually I kind of like it but I make my own. And I looked that one up, the title was being sarcastic.
-
Yeah, the forums have gone wussypants. I definitely find myself posting a lot less than I used to, because I have nothing to contribute to discussions about new cars and luxury goods, or the same beginner questions that have been done to death.
Maybe sticky posts would help, for things like:
- How to spend less on food
- How to access retirement accounts early
- Spending level ≠ Quality of life or happiness
- Renting vs buying
But then again, people might just ignore them and post dumb shit anyways.
-
Bear in mind that since the forums started, the stock market has gone up and unemployment has gone down. I'm guessing that people in general may be feeling more wealthy and relaxed about their spending as a result. When the next recession rolls around, I suspect the tone will change and posters will be more motivated to cut spending.
Interesting hypothesis. It shuld be noted that this entire forum has existed only during a bull market. I, too, wonder what will happen when the SHTF.
But then again, people might just ignore them and post dumb shit anyways.
Yes, many people will ignore both the search feature and stickies to ask the same damn question for the 100th time.
Hey, should I pay down my mortgage faster or contribute more to my investments? Anyone??
-
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
If your values really and truly tell you to buy it then yes, it is mustachian.
People believe unverifiable crap all the time. In the most extreme example, believing is such a strong force that it leads people to take their own lives.
How strongly one believes something is not relevant when examining its validity.
-
Maybe sticky posts would help, for things like:
- How to spend less on food
- How to access retirement accounts early
- Spending level ≠ Quality of life or happiness
- Renting vs buying
But then again, people might just ignore them and post dumb shit anyways.
It's not like these topics haven't been covered in the blog. I've started posting quotes from the Pete along with a link to the blog article when people start saying things like "I'm sure MMM would be fine with me spending $$$$$ on a full size truck because it aligns with my values."
-
Bear in mind that since the forums started, the stock market has gone up and unemployment has gone down. I'm guessing that people in general may be feeling more wealthy and relaxed about their spending as a result. When the next recession rolls around, I suspect the tone will change and posters will be more motivated to cut spending.
Good point. I wonder if there will be a huge surge of traffic after the next recession since people will be searching for terms that the forums must be littered with by now.
What annoys me most is the posters who mock or deride people who are living more frugally than they are as "not enjoying life" or similar. Like, have you not read the MMM blog, early posts especially?
Drives me nuts. But I guess the Wheaton scale applies even to those who aspire to FIRE.
-
Remember all of those threads on "what if everyone becomes frugal/mustachian?" and how the economy and world would implode?
I guess we don't have to worry since we can't even keep our own community frugal/mustachian.
-
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
If your values really and truly tell you to buy it then yes, it is mustachian.
People believe unverifiable crap all the time. In the most extreme example, believing is such a strong force that it leads people to take their own lives.
How strongly one believes something is not relevant when examining its validity.
I'm pretty sure Sol was being sarcastic and my comment is out of context as quoted.
When I say values I don't mean someone believes it is worth the costs, but rather that it truly is worth the cost based on a cost benefit analyses. The benefit side of the analyses can include that person's happiness, trouble is we typically judge that purchases will bring us more happiness than they really do.
-
Drives me nuts. But I guess the Wheaton scale applies even to those who aspire to FIRE.
I had to look that up, but it seems Very applicable.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
There was a thread where someone posted that their neighbor drove their kid to school something like 4 blocks. Instead of everyone saying ya that's crazy, get your badass self powered motor running and walk the 4 blocks. It was all about how hard it is to walk your kids to school. I'm not talking blizzards and 40below temps, just to hard to walk your kids to school, so it's okay to drive 4 blocks.
I knew then things were changing around here. haha!!
-
Millennials might be the only group to complain more than the GenXers.
Or maybe every generation gets to be the scapegoat, in their turn.
-
Or maybe every generation gets to be the scapegoat, in their turn.
This!!
-
Or maybe every generation gets to be the scapegoat, in their turn.
Nope! It's either the baby boomers or the millennials, sometimes GenY. Us GenX'ers got it right.
Maybe the forum is getting softer because no one wants to know about the $1000 worth of upgrade parts that I had in my checkout cart waiting for me to hit submit, and instead I put $2500 into Vanguard.
-
Most of my work problems came from Late Gen Xers.
Just FYI, Millennials=Gen Y. We got our own cool name after a while :)
-
Remember all of those threads on "what if everyone becomes frugal/mustachian?" and how the economy and world would implode?
I guess we don't have to worry since we can't even keep our own community frugal/mustachian.
Being frugal =/= being Mustachian.
-
Also, the changing meaning of "badassery" around these forums. The number of posts about getting a promotion, cutting your grocery bill, losing weight, leaving your job etc....these are normal things - aren't badass! Stop skewing the meaning!
Badass is biking to work during the winter, going through a dumpster to get your groceries, and manually taking a wasp nest out of your yard with your bare hands.
Get with the program, people!
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII and, thanks to their parents, reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. What did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
-
Also, the changing meaning of "badassery" around these forums. The number of posts about getting a promotion, cutting your grocery bill, losing weight, leaving your job etc....these are normal things - aren't badass! Stop skewing the meaning!
Badass is biking to work during the winter, going through a dumpster to get your groceries, and manually taking a wasp nest out of your yard with your bare hands.
Get with the program, people!
Maybe you can start a sticky with "the original meaning of mustachianism" or something. Or an "I will tell you if you are a bad*ss" thread. I'm not being facetious and actually think something like that would be sort of fun.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into the arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII thanks to their parents, and reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. what did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Can't argue . . . that's a pretty legit complaint.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into the arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII thanks to their parents, and reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. what did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Can't argue . . . that's a pretty legit complaint.
Pretty much no contest that the greatest generation (WWII) gave birth to the worst one.
-
Is there anything that those damned millenials won't ruin? :P
Have you seen what they're doing to the Confederate statue industry?
-
What if "my values" tell me to buy an $800 blender?
If your values really and truly tell you to buy it then yes, it is mustachian.
(https://i0.wp.com/blog.givelify.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Princess_Bride_That_Word.jpg?fit=506%2C284&ssl=1)
-
Is there anything that those damned millenials won't ruin? :P
Have you seen what they're doing to the Confederate statue industry?
LOL. Wait...I mean...not in an actual LOL kind of way, but...
You know what, never mind. I'm just going to shut up.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into the arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII thanks to their parents, and reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. what did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Can't argue . . . that's a pretty legit complaint.
Pretty much no contest that the greatest generation (WWII) gave birth to the worst one.
You mean the Silent Generation? They are the parents of the Boomers.
-
Bear in mind that since the forums started, the stock market has gone up and unemployment has gone down. I'm guessing that people in general may be feeling more wealthy and relaxed about their spending as a result. When the next recession rolls around, I suspect the tone will change and posters will be more motivated to cut spending.
I personally caved and bought myself a birthday present I'd been wanting for year as both our jobs looked solid, economy seems to be doing well, etc. Barely 2 weeks later and my wife is out of work again... The tide can change right quick. While a lot of people are working, it's a different world. My wife hasn't been able to find a "real" full-time benefits type job at any point in the last 6 years. Those just don't exist anymore. If you've got one, cling to it. What's out there that's making the unemployment numbers look good are just minimum wage part-time positions. Keep facepunching away, we all need it!
-
The guys who tried to killed government weren't the Boomers, it was the GI generation.
Here's the guys who were running the show in the 1980s:
Reagan: 1911
HW Bush: 1924
Tip ONeill: 1912
Milton Young: 1897 (!!!!)
Mondale: 1928
Strom Thurmond: 1902
Roger Smith of Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" fame was born in 1924. Jack Welch was born 1935 (silent, not a Boomer).
Baby Boomers only really start running the show in the 90s, and even then, only a small part. I'd say even today you're still looking at the full influence of the Baby Boomers in their 50s and 60s...and even that might be questionable. For instance, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are both Baby Boomers, just recently appointed. Roberts and Alito are both Baby Boomers. Thomas is an early boomer, so I don't think that Baby Boomers were a majority until Kagan was appointed.
Takes a long time to take over power.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into the arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII thanks to their parents, and reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. what did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Can't argue . . . that's a pretty legit complaint.
Pretty much no contest that the greatest generation (WWII) gave birth to the worst one.
You mean the Silent Generation? They are the parents of the Boomers.
Yeah... the "Greatest generation" (also called the GI Generation) were born between 1910-1924 and were the ones fighting WWII. But they were the ones that gave birth to the first wave of the Baby Boomers. They also lived through the great depression.
The "Silent Generation" were those that were born around the 1930s and early 40s. The Silent Generation were alive during WWII but largely missed fighting in it because they were too young. They also missed or were too young to really remember the depression.
Boomers were those that were born immediately after WWII through the 1950s. Older boomers had parents that were part of the Greatest Generation. Younger boomers have parents that are from the Silent Generation.
...at least that's what Mr Google tells me.
-
Or maybe every generation gets to be the scapegoat, in their turn.
Nope! It's either the baby boomers or the millennials, sometimes GenY. Us GenX'ers got it right.
Agreed. The millennials are much worse than the boomers I know.
-
Or maybe every generation gets to be the scapegoat, in their turn.
Nope! It's either the baby boomers or the millennials, sometimes GenY. Us GenX'ers got it right.
Agreed. The millennials are much worse than the boomers I know.
My friends are cooler than your friends, star belly sneetches are the best sneetches, my kid is well behaved, quiet, polite, all others are brats and....and........I'm sorry...what were we talking about?
-
star belly sneetches are the best sneetches
Preach!
-
The car ones seem to touch a nerve. Earlier in the year a poster was complaining about there being no parking within a block of the school, or there being a car pick up line half a mile long.
After suggesting she park a block away and walk, I recall copping an earful in response :(
I am happy to keep calling out inappropriate behaviour such as ridiculous blenders when I see it (I missed that thread too!). Also happy that we have people like Laura S and Frankies Girl who tear case studies to shreds every now and again.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
+1 to this. I've seen so many times lately that if you can afford it and it makes you happy then it is okay. Minimalism, stoicism, environmental and social responsibility, frugality, badassity, etc. don't seem to matter. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed the trend.
I'm raising my guilty little hand here, but for a completely different reason. I got to FIRE! I made it! Now that I've hit the target (and then some) I'm having a blast knowing I've saved enough and I don't have to save any more and I'll be fine forever. Holy Mother of God, how did that happen? As long as I don't overspend to ridiculous extremes, I'll be fine. I have no desire for an $800 blender, but if I did, I could buy it with nary a ripple in my finances. (Whoa, even typing that is hard. True, but hard.) If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
Maybe instead of accusing people of being soft, you might consider that what they have actually been is successful. This shit works, man.
Speaking of social responsibility, FIRE has allowed me even more time to volunteer, and more money to share with the causes I care about. DH and I joke that we tithe to our community, and then some. Yeah, that alone was worth all the years of sacrifice.
-
I think a very long bull run has made a lot of people more rich then they thought, so more soft. If we see a bear market for a year or two, or god forbid a crash. I think you'll see this community quicker get more stoic
-
I think a very long bull run has made a lot of people more rich then they thought, so more soft. If we see a bear market for a year or two, or god forbid a crash. I think you'll see this community quicker get more stoic
Was going to post this very thing. We've had 8 years of very easy money making with only a few slight pauses. I've started seeing/hearing lots of positive thoughts on the economy from regular people, which likely means we're already past the peak for this cycle***
***not market timing advice, which I don't do, just anecdotal observation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
I think that for most of the "original" mustachians the goal was never to accumulate money and FIRE so that you can then acquire items that you have been pining for and can now buy since you have great wealth. I think the goal was to acquire time that you may spend as you please on experiences that will enrich your life.
-
This has been fun to read. Boomer here, so was already close to retirement when I found the blog.
Boomers are as variable as any other age group, for money, social attitudes, etc. And for you young'uns, we also lived through times of high unemployment (why do you think so many of us went to grad school?), massive high interest rates (19% mortgages) when personal finance books had mortgage tables that started at 7% - and they needed mortgage tables because there were no personal computers to do the math for you. The internet has made a huge difference, there was no easy access to the stock market (financial advisors and your bank were the gatekeepers), mutual funds were rare.
BTW, people were complaining at least 3 years ago that the forums were getting soft.
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
-
I was in a combative mood yesterday, partly for reasons I reference in my journal.
Of course there are some great Boomers, and my comments referenced more those from the US. That block has been the most vocal for slashing their taxes that it just makes me sick sometime. I do find the attitudes towards taxation more sane here in Canada. The other day I heard one politician here mention tacitly mention the need for balancing new taxes with smarter use of public funds... an he was a conservative. Such a statement would get you tarred and feathered int he GOP. And of course there are lots of Boomer heros, my parents among them (immigrants who built very good lives for themselves and their children while becoming bedrocks of their community).
And yes, having lived outside the US it still shocks me how low prices are in the US on everything from food to electronics.
Mostly I get tired of the reflexive blaming and hating on Millennials and Xers (full disclosure - I straddle that line). Its hard for me to stomach the rhetoric around the tea party and neo-cons and not think this benefits the most affluent generation in history potentially at the expense of everyone after them.
-
Mostly I get tired of the reflexive blaming and hating on Millennials and Xers (full disclosure - I straddle that line).
I have trouble keeping the labels straight. I have had wonderful students my whole time in teaching, and I have had entitled slackers over the same time span. Of course people are affected by the times in which they live. If there is a weakness in the younger generations (simply because they haven't lived that long) it is that they have no gut feel for recent history. They can't conceive of mortgage rates at 19%, for example, or really understand that there was life before computers.
I am reminded of a story in Heinlein's biography - for one of his earlier juvenile books he and his wife got sheets of brown paper and got down on the floor and plotted trajectories. When he told this to a young fan, the young fan (Ph. D. but a lot younger than Heinlein) asked why he didn't just plot it on his PC. Heinlein had to reply that there were no PCs when he was writing that book (at that point I think they were at Eniac) and the fan was just totally floored - no PCs in existence was just not part of his world concept.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
-
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
I think that for most of the "original" mustachians the goal was never to accumulate money and FIRE so that you can then acquire items that you have been pining for and can now buy since you have great wealth. I think the goal was to acquire time that you may spend as you please on experiences that will enrich your life.
Not to mention, the goal is to correct your thinking to the point that you don't WANT excessive consumption, and are happy with what you have. If getting to FIRE was an arduous, deprivation-filled process, you basically missed the entire point of the thing, which is to live your ideal lifestyle both before and after.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Total taxes while I was in Germany were about the same as in California (state + fed).*
Didn't mind paying DE taxes because: clean parks, functioning transit, well maintained roads, low crime, great schools, strong social safety net. A paragon of good governance.
I despise paying US/California taxes. Not because I want to "starve the beast," but because it's so damn wasteful and we get so little value. Roads (and other infrastructure) go unmaintained such that they become much more expensive to repair. Our schools are terrible (we could have an entire discussion about bloated administration, unreasonably high costs to build, low funding, or other potential causes). Crime is high, becoming a problem to run errands by bike because thieves cut locks (and carry bolt cutters) in broad daylight. Now our small county wants to spend $200M+ to build a rail line that, by their own estimates, will only be used by about 2000 people/day (less than 1% of the population) and run huge annual deficits (abysmally low farebox recovery rate of 9-22%) while our road network already has a backlog of over $150M in deferred maintenance and long stretches are almost unrideable by bike.
* Likely due to high income at the time. Now with lower income I probably pay less in California, which may partially explain the difference in services. DE has a broader tax base whereas California relies heavily on high earners because Californians love taxes...but only if the tax is on someone else.
-
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
I think that for most of the "original" mustachians the goal was never to accumulate money and FIRE so that you can then acquire items that you have been pining for and can now buy since you have great wealth. I think the goal was to acquire time that you may spend as you please on experiences that will enrich your life.
As one who learned of MMM pretty close to its debut, I'm going to include myself in that so-called "original" group. I was well on my way, long before personal finance blogs existed, let alone MMM.
The goal was always to acquire money, for this Mustachian anyway, because money = time = freedom. . There are plenty of people with money who don't have freedom, and plenty with time but no money. The goal is always about balance.
Now that I'm FIRE, it's surprisingly nice to be able to splash out a bit on occasion. It doesn't make me any less of a Mustachian.
And I never really pined for anything material. If I wanted something enough to deploy green soldiers, I figured out how to attain the goal by expending as few troops as possible. That's Badass and Mustachian.
-
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
I think that for most of the "original" mustachians the goal was never to accumulate money and FIRE so that you can then acquire items that you have been pining for and can now buy since you have great wealth. I think the goal was to acquire time that you may spend as you please on experiences that will enrich your life.
Not to mention, the goal is to correct your thinking to the point that you don't WANT excessive consumption, and are happy with what you have. If getting to FIRE was an arduous, deprivation-filled process, you basically missed the entire point of the thing, which is to live your ideal lifestyle both before and after.
Admittedly, I've always been "less badass" than most Mustacians. I retired "late" at 52 and with higher expenses than the badasses. I did this knowingly and I'm okay with it. That said, my "ideal lifestyle" was to have time to do hobbies like tinkering with old machines, wood working, learning to weld (or learning to weld well), etc. These are things that take money. Before I didn't have the time. Now I do. And it costs me a little more money. And I'm cool with that.
-
I don't really post much here anymore either.
Over the past years it has increasingly felt like an echo chamber where the goal is patting each other on the back for not being like "those people" yet being nearly just like those people.
-
Millennials are too soft and pampered to give up the Starbucks and avocado toast to become a legendary MMM/ERE rockstar.
-
What I've noticed on these forums is the formula, "Thing One is crazy. I would never do anything like that. Instead I do Thing Two, which is just half a notch down from that. Which is totally different and makes me a badass." I see this formula over and over and over. People can - and do - rationalize away anything.
-
It's worth pointing out that MMM himself, the original mustachian:
- Travels for fun: Look up how much fuel is consumed flying round trip to Hawaii, South America or cross country.
- Drinks beer: Energy and water intensive.
- Enjoys marijuana: Also energy and water intensive.
- Owns a smartphone
These are all luxuries and the environment would be better off without them. Just to be clear, I'm not ragging on MMM for these. He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most. And he's not a consumer sucka, does not mindlessly try to fill a void by buying shit he doesn't need. He does these in moderation, and he's not in debt and already FIRE. So the money aspect matters quite a bit.
Is a $800 blender worth it? If you're in debt and/or still working towards FIRE? No! After FIRE I think it depends. I have no idea what could make a blender cost $800 but if you'll use it a lot and it does something no other blender can and you can't find it used and you can easily afford it and you're not buying stuff just for the sake of buying stuff, then fine. How is that any different from enjoying some MJ or jetting off somewhere?
-
He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most.
International flights have a very significant carbon footprint.
Both jet fuel and car gas have similar carbon/gallon emissions (jet fuel is slightly higher). Airlines naturally do get better per/mile gas mileage, but an international flight (say Boulder CO to Rio) is about 12000 miles worth of miles round trip, give or take a few connections.
Airliners get ~80ish MPG per passenger, so that flight is the equivalent to driving nearly 5000 miles in a car getting mileage in the low 30s.
That means someone taking a couple international flights easily has a higher carbon impact from their traveling than someone driving a considerable length. This is particularly worse if you have multiple people fly, as the airline MPG is per passenger, so if you take 2 people on that international flight you've just racked up nearly 10k "road miles" worth of travel.
-
He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most.
International flights have a very significant carbon footprint.
Both jet fuel and car gas have similar carbon/gallon emissions (jet fuel is slightly higher). Airlines naturally do get better per/mile gas mileage, but an international flight (say Boulder CO to Rio) is about 12000 miles worth of miles round trip, give or take a few connections.
Airliners get ~80ish MPG per passenger, so that flight is the equivalent to driving nearly 5000 miles in a car getting mileage in the low 30s.
That means someone taking a couple international flights easily has a higher carbon impact from their traveling than someone driving a considerable length. This is particularly worse if you have multiple people fly, as the airline MPG is per passenger, so if you take 2 people on that international flight you've just racked up nearly 10k "road miles" worth of travel.
This. I've never understood the free pass for extensive international travel that people get on this forum when it should really receive a massive face-punch.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Federal tax is consistent, provincial taxes vary. Property tax is municipal, so tax rates can vary widely. There is also school board tax to consider, varies by province.
-
He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most.
International flights have a very significant carbon footprint.
Both jet fuel and car gas have similar carbon/gallon emissions (jet fuel is slightly higher). Airlines naturally do get better per/mile gas mileage, but an international flight (say Boulder CO to Rio) is about 12000 miles worth of miles round trip, give or take a few connections.
Airliners get ~80ish MPG per passenger, so that flight is the equivalent to driving nearly 5000 miles in a car getting mileage in the low 30s.
That means someone taking a couple international flights easily has a higher carbon impact from their traveling than someone driving a considerable length. This is particularly worse if you have multiple people fly, as the airline MPG is per passenger, so if you take 2 people on that international flight you've just racked up nearly 10k "road miles" worth of travel.
This. I've never understood the free pass for extensive international travel that people get on this forum when it should really receive a massive face-punch.
Fair enough. Perhaps "tiny" is too strong. Maybe "significantly less" is a more accurate term. Let's go with the 10k road miles estimate. A household with two commuters can easily rack up 30k to 40k miles commuting. Then, like MMM, they fly somewhere for vacation and/or to see family a couple times a year. Then they are buying copious amounts of stuff Made in China - not sure how to quantify the carbon footprint of plastic goods that get shipped halfway around the world, but it's significant. Guesstimating that a typical household "road miles" equivalent is 40k to 50k, or even higher. So MMM's footprint is maybe 1/4 or 1/5 the average person?
In any case, my point was really that I don't think MMM is first and foremost about environmentalism (AFAICT Pete's primary motivation was freedom/FI).
And yes, it's inconsistent to laud international travel as something virtuous while scolding people for lesser sins.
-
This forum has indeed gotten very strange. I just got yelled at for explaining to someone that there are free repair instructions online so they don't need to throw away their cell phone when the internal battery stops holding charge.
-
I've been hanging around maybe 4 or 5 years, and the main thing I am always surprised by is how many gearhead types there are on here. Lots and lots of talk about cars and how great they are, which confuses me a little. But I'm not sure that's changed in the time I've been here.
-
the post-FIRE board has always been pretty solid. There is still whining but it is the whining of people undergoing existential crisis because they have to redefine who they consider themselves to be.
-
the post-FIRE board has always been pretty solid. There is still whining but it is the whining of people undergoing existential crisis because they have to redefine who they consider themselves to be.
I don't go there much because I have imposter syndrome - not really an RE. Actually I liked my job enough that I stayed for 3 more years than I had to. Blasphemy on this forum. ;-) Or SWAMI.
-
This has been fun to read. Boomer here, so was already close to retirement when I found the blog.
Boomers are as variable as any other age group, for money, social attitudes, etc. And for you young'uns, we also lived through times of high unemployment (why do you think so many of us went to grad school?), massive high interest rates (19% mortgages) when personal finance books had mortgage tables that started at 7% - and they needed mortgage tables because there were no personal computers to do the math for you. The internet has made a huge difference, there was no easy access to the stock market (financial advisors and your bank were the gatekeepers), mutual funds were rare.
BTW, people were complaining at least 3 years ago that the forums were getting soft.
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
Until the ACA, there were people who could not get insurance for any sum of money, no matter how much they were willing to pay.
-
This has been fun to read. Boomer here, so was already close to retirement when I found the blog.
Boomers are as variable as any other age group, for money, social attitudes, etc. And for you young'uns, we also lived through times of high unemployment (why do you think so many of us went to grad school?), massive high interest rates (19% mortgages) when personal finance books had mortgage tables that started at 7% - and they needed mortgage tables because there were no personal computers to do the math for you. The internet has made a huge difference, there was no easy access to the stock market (financial advisors and your bank were the gatekeepers), mutual funds were rare.
BTW, people were complaining at least 3 years ago that the forums were getting soft.
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
Until the ACA, there were people who could not get insurance for any sum of money, no matter how much they were willing to pay.
Yeah, a lot of people were offered the "Fuck Off and Die" plan from all the insurers.
-
This thread has been a fun read!
Several points
Firstly, MMM DOES NOT travel much by plane - he last went to Hawaii more than TEN years ago. I understand that he travels to his family by land rather than air. He really does try to live the life he preaches. As I understand it, he got involved in the Ecuador camps, so he does fly there, but would prefer to stay at home. My reading of his latest MMM HQ post is that he is trying to bring the world to him, and never leave Longmont again. I could easily be wrong.
Secondly, I have a poll - https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-type-of-re-person-are-you/?viewresults - which has had some interesting results. There are NOW an enormous number of people on the forum who are FI - at least 22% of the poll. They HAVE the stash, so they might be getting a bit looser in their spending habits. I traveled overseas three times before retirement (and I retired in my early fifties because I didn't realise I could until then), but I have now gone to the Ecuador camp and the Seattle Camp Mustache, and I am soon going to Canada. I am STILL accumulating money - and most of the people in the post-fire forum seem to be doing the same.
This is reasonable - the blog has been going for six years, and after about five years, the SERIOUS frugal people can possibly FIRE. And then they become looser in their habits. This means that the less frugal mustashians are more dominant - because the frugal ones are FIRE, and the others are still going. So the forum may naturally be getting looser.
However, the other thing is that you are just becoming a bunch of old fogies, and the forum content hasn't changed at all - you are just getting more frugal, and less benevolent toward the idiots (what I called the Spendthrift Splendours and Reluctant Reducers) in the poll.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
-- side thread to a post a few days ago ---
GACK. That link reference had someone in Canada maxing out RRSP's at $22k per year, so paying net tax on $78k, versus someone only contributing $6k to 401k on $110k. Of course someone with 78K per year pays a lot less tax in dollars than someone earning $104k per year!! grrr. One pays 21 % taxes, at a lower income, and the other pays 28% taxes for a higher income. There are many other factors that we can't see in this equation as well.
Property tax is a different situation, by city and state, (ex., NJ appears to be horrendous for taxes, overall, really) for both countries.
In addition, other huge differences -- 5% to 14% sales tax in Canada, (vs many higher sales tax states have low income tax)... no "married filing jointly" discount for single higher earner families in Canada, and those with large HCOL mortgages do get the income tax deduction on mortgages.
I went from the lowest tax province in Canada (Alberta) to a higher taxed state (CA), for nearly the same income, once company benefits were factored in. I paid the identical tax rate in the following year, after I included my familiy's gold plated employer subsidized health care... (nb, as a renter in California). So you just need to ask if your province is higher or lower than Alberta, and if your state has more or less taxes than California. (Family income / Salary range $100k to $150k with a young family)
-
It's worth pointing out that MMM himself, the original mustachian:
- Travels for fun: Look up how much fuel is consumed flying round trip to Hawaii, South America or cross country.
- Drinks beer: Energy and water intensive.
- Enjoys marijuana: Also energy and water intensive.
- Owns a smartphone
These are all luxuries and the environment would be better off without them. Just to be clear, I'm not ragging on MMM for these. He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most. And he's not a consumer sucka, does not mindlessly try to fill a void by buying shit he doesn't need. He does these in moderation, and he's not in debt and already FIRE. So the money aspect matters quite a bit.
Is a $800 blender worth it? If you're in debt and/or still working towards FIRE? No! After FIRE I think it depends. I have no idea what could make a blender cost $800 but if you'll use it a lot and it does something no other blender can and you can't find it used and you can easily afford it and you're not buying stuff just for the sake of buying stuff, then fine. How is that any different from enjoying some MJ or jetting off somewhere?
On the surface, this seems to be correct.... then I remember the year he spent only $150 or something on fuel . Not $1500, but $150 for the year.... That brings it to a whole other level. Make you realize that adding a few special, lower cost items into your life can make a big difference, but keep the edge tuned on the "everything else"...
------------
BTW $800 blender is ONLY worth it if you are selling blenders or selling shakes. (ie., using it to make money) I mean, really, it uses electricity and costs as much as a fridge or a stove... ?!? How many people are actually going to use it for 10,000 shakes or whatever? You don't need perfectly pulverized hemp seeds, or whatever magic it does that no other blender can do. Sure, it is better than the others, but you don't need better, and it won't make your life better. Even if you just paid $800 instead of $25... Trust me on that one.
-------------
Does anyone remember the guy a few months ago that wanted to buy a new used "nice" truck or car for driving to work, when he already owned a "used" truck to take his RV / ATV into the bush for camping fun with friends, a truck that he could be rougher with, plus had a nice truck that cost a lot to drive, that he wanted to keep nice and only drove once a week because "you need to live a little". So needed a different car or truck for work? He mentioned how all of his toys were not as nice as his friends' toys, too, as an example of his frugality. (hint comparing yourself to friends is a dead give away that you need a facepunch).
Turns out the "old used" truck for trailer hauling / camping was under 7 years old.. The used one he was looking to buy was about 3 years old, etc. Made me think that the "nice" truck was likely a $60k+ brand new vehicle. The only thing was that he wasn't financing them, but we have all purchased vehicles without financing, so that does not mean you are MMM.
Yep, the forum was soft on him that week.
-
GACK. That link reference had someone in Canada maxing out RRSP's at $22k per year, so paying net tax on $78k, versus someone only contributing $6k to 401k on $110k. Of course someone with 78K per year pays a lot less tax in dollars than someone earning $104k per year!! grrr. One pays 21 % taxes, at a lower income, and the other pays 28% taxes for a higher income. There are many other factors that we can't see in this equation as well.
Property tax is a different situation, by city and state, (ex., NJ appears to be horrendous for taxes, overall, really) for both countries.
The guy in the thread asked for the income taxes for someone in the U.S. with a $100K income, so I gave him the real results of someone with $110K with deductions making it about $103K of taxable income, so that was within 3% of what he was asking for.
We're second highest next to N.J.
-
GACK. That link reference had someone in Canada maxing out RRSP's at $22k per year, so paying net tax on $78k, versus someone only contributing $6k to 401k on $110k. Of course someone with 78K per year pays a lot less tax in dollars than someone earning $104k per year!! grrr. One pays 21 % taxes, at a lower income, and the other pays 28% taxes for a higher income. There are many other factors that we can't see in this equation as well.
Property tax is a different situation, by city and state, (ex., NJ appears to be horrendous for taxes, overall, really) for both countries.
The guy in the thread asked for the income taxes for someone in the U.S. with a $100K income, so I gave him the real results of someone with $110K with deductions making it about $103K of taxable income, so that was within 3% of what he was asking for.
We're second highest next to N.J.
I don't have a problem with your reply, it was actually quite generous to provide details as you did. Just with the original poster who did not state very clearly that maxing out retirements brought his income down to around $78k, and with the first $11k tax free, well, it was not really a full $100k taxable income..that op was asking a comparison for.
-
I think a very long bull run has made a lot of people more rich then they thought, so more soft. If we see a bear market for a year or two, or god forbid a crash. I think you'll see this community quicker get more stoic
Yeah, success tends to make you complacent. In a booming economy, it's easy to take things for granted. You get a higher salary, and you stop caring about the little extra expenses that make your life easier as long as they stay < 1% of your income. But doing that, you lose your frugality muscles and you fail to take the opportunity to save more money when it was there, and you might regret later.
-
Yes, the community and especially the lead Mustachian have gone 'soft'. Why not, when ER is a distant concern, FI was maybe a worry for a while, and now what to do with excess is what you think about. My goal, long ago, was 1 'meelion' dollars :) Sounded 'eempossible', but I got there in 2009 after a bumpy ride through the housing bubble. I thought it would be business as usual eventually, but the Fed has kept rates expansively low for years and just now contemplates reigning in the balance sheet. Of course there is a huge party in the markets! I couldn't engineer a more direct cause and effect to the rich becoming richer. But the bill / payment will come due sooner or later - we cannot borrow from the future forever, the future ultimately demands a little something more favorable.
We are in a unique time to solve our problems. The eye of the storm. If we wanted to, we could put solar panels on roofs and windmills in the sea. Humankind could make this planet sustain our way of life for at least the foreseeable generations. But I guess we're not willing to go there yet. None of our collective dreams are coming true, so I have to wonder what humanity really wants.
-
EscapeVelocity -- nothing is stopping YOU from putting up solar panels, then starting a club to share with others / encourage them to do the same. DH and I are thinking about this right now and it is all based on our knowing / visiting someone 15 years ago, who built an ultimate sustainable home within city limits. If they can do it, and start a club for others about it, so can all of us.
-
I will admit to needing a swift mental kick in the ass occasionally (okay, perhaps more than occasionally) for my only-semi-mustachianism. I could benefit from seeing more face-punching and choice-questioning here, even if it's not directed at me.
-
I'm pretty new here, and new to "Mustacianism", but not new to the concept.
I'll freely admit to being a Boomer ... my parents were Depression babies, they learned thrift from their parents and passed it down. My kids are learning it from me. I started reading the blog, and came here, to find like-minded people.
And I find I'm already giving "shoulder taps" — not full-blown face punches, not yet.
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
-
Firstly, MMM DOES NOT travel much by plane - he last went to Hawaii more than TEN years ago. I understand that he travels to his family by land rather than air. He really does try to live the life he preaches. As I understand it, he got involved in the Ecuador camps, so he does fly there, but would prefer to stay at home. My reading of his latest MMM HQ post is that he is trying to bring the world to him, and never leave Longmont again. I could easily be wrong.
MMM flew to Hawaii in 2012 (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/10/the-hawaii-project-final-numbers-and-a-few-pictures/) so more like 5 years ago. Then in this interview (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-to-retire-early-35-years-early-2014-01-17) from late 2014 he mentions "other trips to quite a few other countries in recent years". And Costa Rica in 2013 (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/01/15/a-tale-of-two-vacations/).
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
-
There is an ancient proverb that goes something like this... "We didn't inherit our land from our forefathers, we borrow it from our children". These words have sunk in deeply since having kids. I fell upon MMM five years ago and laughed out loud. Then I realized that maybe he wasn't so crazy. Then I grew 1/2 a mustache and started to see immediate results. As time has gone by the stache gets a little bigger. I need a good face punch all too often, but all in all I am in a much better place now than before. Where I see the weakness is everyone wants everything right now. This lifestyle is not a scratch off lottery ticket, it is a slow grind. I love all the millennial and their YOLO (you only live once) If they really thought about this they might come to ask themselves why they are volunteering to live a life of debt and slavery in exchange for stupid material items... I too believe in the YOLO philosophy, but I choose to live my life financially independent. I hope to teach my kids the true value of money and the true cost of debt. If you never dig the hole then you don't have to fill it back in. I am by no means a hardcore mustache taking cold showers, but I also have cut my spending in half and simplified my life so that I am not working every week to pay bills. You can call it soft, but it has more than worked for me and I thank this community for helping me achieve what I have done.
-
It's worth pointing out that MMM himself, the original mustachian:
- Travels for fun: Look up how much fuel is consumed flying round trip to Hawaii, South America or cross country.
- Drinks beer: Energy and water intensive.
- Enjoys marijuana: Also energy and water intensive.
- Owns a smartphone
These are all luxuries and the environment would be better off without them. Just to be clear, I'm not ragging on MMM for these. He doesn't commute and gets around mostly by bike so his carbon footprint is tiny compared to most. And he's not a consumer sucka, does not mindlessly try to fill a void by buying shit he doesn't need. He does these in moderation, and he's not in debt and already FIRE. So the money aspect matters quite a bit.
Is a $800 blender worth it? If you're in debt and/or still working towards FIRE? No! After FIRE I think it depends. I have no idea what could make a blender cost $800 but if you'll use it a lot and it does something no other blender can and you can't find it used and you can easily afford it and you're not buying stuff just for the sake of buying stuff, then fine. How is that any different from enjoying some MJ or jetting off somewhere?
On the surface, this seems to be correct.... then I remember the year he spent only $150 or something on fuel . Not $1500, but $150 for the year.... That brings it to a whole other level. Make you realize that adding a few special, lower cost items into your life can make a big difference, but keep the edge tuned on the "everything else"...
------------
BTW $800 blender is ONLY worth it if you are selling blenders or selling shakes. (ie., using it to make money) I mean, really, it uses electricity and costs as much as a fridge or a stove... ?!? How many people are actually going to use it for 10,000 shakes or whatever? You don't need perfectly pulverized hemp seeds, or whatever magic it does that no other blender can do. Sure, it is better than the others, but you don't need better, and it won't make your life better. Even if you just paid $800 instead of $25... Trust me on that one.
-------------
Does anyone remember the guy a few months ago that wanted to buy a new used "nice" truck or car for driving to work, when he already owned a "used" truck to take his RV / ATV into the bush for camping fun with friends, a truck that he could be rougher with, plus had a nice truck that cost a lot to drive, that he wanted to keep nice and only drove once a week because "you need to live a little". So needed a different car or truck for work? He mentioned how all of his toys were not as nice as his friends' toys, too, as an example of his frugality. (hint comparing yourself to friends is a dead give away that you need a facepunch).
Turns out the "old used" truck for trailer hauling / camping was under 7 years old.. The used one he was looking to buy was about 3 years old, etc. Made me think that the "nice" truck was likely a $60k+ brand new vehicle. The only thing was that he wasn't financing them, but we have all purchased vehicles without financing, so that does not mean you are MMM.
Yep, the forum was soft on him that week.
No doubt about it, MMM's footprint is less than most...thought that was clear from my post but will state it again. Yet it's also clear that it's higher than necessary because of travel, booze, etc. I don't blame the guy for enjoying life in moderation, and the planet would much better off if more people followed his example. As the saying goes, don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.
My impression from MMM interviews and almost all the blog posts is that this cult is first and foremost about achieving FI by rejecting consumerism and embracing stoicism and other counter cultural philosophies. The environmental benefits, however desirable, are a nice side effect. If environmentalism is the main thing then I'm afraid MMM needs to revisit some of his priorities.
RE expensive blenders: There are other reasons for these. If you care for someone who cannot chew food then an industrial strength blender is probably a good choice. Or if you're making lots of smoothies every day, or blending lots of difficult stuff (some of the fancy new blenders can take the place of a food processor). I'm sure there are other perfectly good reasons I haven't thought of. That's why I generally don't like absolute value statements, especially when there are those here spending $160/oz for pot (going rate in CO) that literally goes up in smoke and that's perfectly ok.
-
Blenders, Gah... No one that posted about a vitamix was doing so because they were caring for a person that could not chew... AND my free magic bullet does wonders in smashing up baby food, so I imagine it would be fine for that purpose.
No one needs a blender than can pulverize things that other blenders can't do. Want? yes. Need? No. The vast majority of people buying these will not keep making several smoothies a day x 20 years to recoup the cost of a blender that is approx 15X the price of others.. I have had 3 blenders in my life, and went through 5 years of 7-20 smoothies a week (family), one cheap one, was disposed due to a broken glass that I could have replaced, one was a free magic bullet that I use a lot, and the other was a gift to replace the broken one... and I am coming up to 28 years since I bought the first one, so one blender every 10 years...?
Yes, there have been times when I wanted to make more than a small batch of nut butter, or grind oatmeal for flour, or flax seed, or whatever, but I got over that fast. Food processors are much less money than a vitamix, BTW...
As to the question of should people smoke <anything>, well, it needs to be part of an overall budget? But if someone asked if they should buy $800 of pot, fancy coffee beans, or what have you, I would definitely be showing the math on how much that means to the retirement fund... The kind of person that will blow off $800 on one item is often a person that has a lot of other expenses.
-
Again, I don't know all the reasons for having a particular item. It's quite possible that everyone on that thread was just being a spendypants (didn't read the thread) so facepunch away. My point is that it depends on each person's situation. If a person is already FI and can easily afford a $800 blender they really enjoy, meh, I don't see the problem. They'll have that blender for the rest of their life, so amortized over say 40 years that's $20/yr. It's far less than what people spend on beer or pot every year, which again is fine if they really enjoy these luxuries and can truly afford them (not just I have cash available, but it's not a problem for my stash) .
Approximately every 10 years I buy a new mountain bike. Not cheap, last one was about $5000, and by no stretch is it a necessity. I live in an area with fantastic trails that wind through redwood/fern forests, oak and scrublands, and coastal bluffs, all right outside my door. And I love to ride, typically getting in 3-4 rides per week which means I'm getting exercise while also having a great time outside in a climate that's ideal for riding 9 months of the year. I'm FIRE and the cost of buying a new bike every 10 years isn't an issue for the budget. Would I recommend this for someone in debt, working toward FI? Hell no. But at the same time, I don't want make a blanket statement that someone who's already FI(RE), a pretty good indicator that they're good at making good saving and spending decisions, can't buy a blender.
-
But the forums haven't just drifted from the money aspect. I feel like a great deal of people don't fully understand Mustachianism at this point. It's not just about MONEY.
It's also about minimalism, stoicism, being environmentally and socially responsible. I feel a lot of these tenets have lost their fervor on the forums, especially in the past year.
+1 to this. I've seen so many times lately that if you can afford it and it makes you happy then it is okay. Minimalism, stoicism, environmental and social responsibility, frugality, badassity, etc. don't seem to matter. I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed the trend.
It's not exactly, though.
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/
This is not about being cheap, minimalist, or extreme.
It’s about using logic and science to design a Slightly Less Ridiculous Than Average Lifestyle in order to live more happily.
-
FINate (great name, btw),
The people posting about $800 blenders aren't typically the FIRE ones. They know what they can and can't afford and usually spend away as they like, but most are naturally frugal so would not choose this...
The underlying question is : Should I delay FIRE (or another money goal) so that I can buy X.?
The only answer to this question should always be "NO", unless not doing so will create a larger loss later on (e.g., no insurance for those that need it, or not fixing a leaking roof, etc.). On this forum lately, we get a lot of "if you can afford it, then blah , blah, blah".
I personally think everyone should have free spending money in their monthly budget. You pre-calculate your buget based on your debt and money goals, then you live within it. People that are asking about these purchases may not have pre-saved up their $40 per month x 2 years to buy a blender, but are typically diverting it from savings or have not created a budget yet.
-
FINate (great name, btw),
The people posting about $800 blenders aren't typically the FIRE ones. They know what they can and can't afford and usually spend away as they like, but most are naturally frugal so would not choose this...
The underlying question is : Should I delay FIRE (or another money goal) so that I can buy X.?
The only answer to this question should always be "NO", unless not doing so will create a larger loss later on (e.g., no insurance for those that need it, or not fixing a leaking roof, etc.). On this forum lately, we get a lot of "if you can afford it, then blah , blah, blah".
I personally think everyone should have free spending money in their monthly budget. You pre-calculate your buget based on your debt and money goals, then you live within it. People that are asking about these purchases may not have pre-saved up their $40 per month x 2 years to buy a blender, but are typically diverting it from savings or have not created a budget yet.
Totally agree this forum getting soft, with things like "if you can afford it, then ..." And I get it that the $800 blender thread is not the FIRE crowd (you've piqued my interest, going to find the thread now). See my earlier comment on this thread about hedonism taking over.
On the other hand, there's a danger that $800 blenders become symbolic, a distraction from the underlying problem. The real issue is that people don't have a healthy concept of money and what it's for. A focus on "don't buy a $800 blender" becomes one of many sins to avoid. "I'm up to my eyeballs in debt and just spend $40 on pot, but at least I didn't buy a $800 blender!" I just think it misses the bigger picture.
-
Why the hate for the boomers? Being such a large generation presented many problems such as too many people competing for the same jobs, many never moving up the career ladder because not enough chief positions, many went to grad school because they could not find jobs, interest rates on mortgages sky high ( our first home was at 12%). It climbed way above that and then people could not afford to buy homes. Each generation has their own challenges and I find it weird that you can hate a group as a whole. Each group is made up of individual people both good and bad. Also what I have found as I have aged (63) is that I am more willing to pay for comfort then I did when I was young. Part of that is physical ability, aches and pains and part of that is how much time do I want to waste doing things. So for instance tent camping is over for me and we have a old RV. We also like to stay in motels vs sleep in the car. My balance is no longer good enough to ride a bike. I used to do that. Now I do a ton of walking because it is safer for me. Life changes as you age.
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
Congratulations on having the intuition and self-discipline to not need a budget. People come here because they don't have those skills and want to learn. For those who say "I have a ton of debt and don't know where my money is going, please help!" teaching them how to budget is a great start.
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
Congratulations on having the intuition and self-discipline to not need a budget. People come here because they don't have those skills and want to learn. For those who say "I have a ton of debt and don't know where my money is going, please help!" teaching them how to budget is a great start.
Budgeting is also for people with great frugal instincts but low income. I'm a single mom and part-time librarian. I don't have an 82% savings rate because I make less than $40K per year (counting support). We live pretty well on that, all things consider, but I can't just autopilot. Budgeting tells me whether I can afford a little luxury (something nice at the grocery store, for instance) that month or whether I'd better stick to making something from my giant bag o' pinto beans.
-
Why the hate for the boomers? Being such a large generation presented many problems such as too many people competing for the same jobs, many never moving up the career ladder because not enough chief positions, many went to grad school because they could not find jobs, interest rates on mortgages sky high ( our first home was at 12%). It climbed way above that and then people could not afford to buy homes. Each generation has their own challenges and I find it weird that you can hate a group as a whole. Each group is made up of individual people both good and bad. Also what I have found as I have aged (63) is that I am more willing to pay for comfort then I did when I was young. Part of that is physical ability, aches and pains and part of that is how much time do I want to waste doing things. So for instance tent camping is over for me and we have a old RV. We also like to stay in motels vs sleep in the car. My balance is no longer good enough to ride a bike. I used to do that. Now I do a ton of walking because it is safer for me. Life changes as you age.
Yes - I posted something similar up-thread. I'm not a fan of Dave Ramsey, but his "live like no-one else today so you can live like no-one else tomorrow" has a point, just not the one he is making. Part of being thoughtful about money when you are younger is that your choices will be different when you are older, and your age is going to be playing a big part of that. I used to do all my own house painting (inside) for example, now my knees just won't co-operate. Plus we become more aware that time is fleeting and the choice between spending money and spending time shifts.
I don't really worry about it much, except when the boomer bashing starts, because the younger ones on here are still at the point where they need to use time to save money, not spend money to maximize time. And of course we (at least here) have learned that time is worth more than stuff, so spending money is still not spending ridiculous amounts of money.
-
Budgeting is different from tracking.
Tracking: paying attention to how you are spending your money, so that you can understand your spending habits and patterns.
Budgeting: determining how you will spend your future money.
You can track money with no thoughts of budgeting, and that's what I recommend to those who say "I want to retire in 5 years, tell me how; I have no idea what my expenses are."
One can also budget without tracking, but that's a fool's errand.
gerardc, I don't know who you are (I'm new here), but I'm happy that you have such a good understanding of your finances that you need to neither budget nor track. For those "novices and weaklings" among us, I suggest you guide rather than criticize.
-
So, does this thread serve as permission to release my inner grumpy old man, ERE, mustachian kracken on the masses?
Please do! As a year-long lurker and newbie commenter, I'm personally here looking for some hard core mustachian whupass. Self-justifying, consumeristic, complainypants discussions already consume 99% of the other forums out there. I want to be challenged and inspired here.
-
So, does this thread serve as permission to release my inner grumpy old man, ERE, mustachian kracken on the masses?
Please do! As a year-long lurker and newbie commenter, I'm personally here looking for some hard core mustachian whupass. Self-justifying, consumeristic, complainypants discussions already consume 99% of the other forums out there. I want to be challenged and inspired here.
+1
-
So I just read the Vitamix thread (this one: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/reader-recommendations/vitamix-blender/100/)
Just FYI - one of the Vitamix folks is taking care of someone who can't chew their food. Someone else made a snide remark about simply chewing food and they reluctantly brought up that wife has cancer. No apology, just dropped like a hot potato.
The thread started out ok. Several posters mentioned other brands that are much cheaper with similar performance. Several others brought up saving a lot buying refurbished. A lot of people mentioned getting them as gifts, and others having issues with burning out many cheaper blenders.
But the thread was derailed by a hard-line position implying that those who buy a Vitamix don't really belong on MMM (the vitamix litmus test). For good measure Audiophiles as a group are summarily thrown under the bus. No discussion of FIRE goals or anything like that, all nuance is lacking and people are accused of using the forum to "brag about your luxury purchases."
This is exactly my worry about discussions becoming symbolic rather than substantive. Someone asked an honest and sincere question. Some folks apparently have a legitimate need for a more powerful blender. People responded with good options to do this for less money (other brands and/or refurbished) but this was eclipsed by a heated debate about the MMMness of $800 blenders (which, after searching the interwebs looks to be a gross exaggeration - more like $300-$500 depending on the model/options). I wonder if the OP, or people lurking on the thread, are going to risk asking these types of questions in the future?
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
Congratulations on having the intuition and self-discipline to not need a budget. People come here because they don't have those skills and want to learn. For those who say "I have a ton of debt and don't know where my money is going, please help!" teaching them how to budget is a great start.
Meh, not really. I think if you don't have it in you to be frugal, you should just give up this lifestyle. Ever notice how all diets fail in the long term, and people gain back all their lost weight and then some? There's usually something else going on that prevents weight loss, and obsessing over calories isn't the answer. Otherwise they finish the diet and the only thing they can think of is rewarding themselves with a cake. Similarly, with a tight self-imposed budget, the non-frugal end up saying things like Dicey above:
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
or from that thread:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/i-want-my-lifestyle-inflation/
They're basically self-imposing a tight budget in the hopes of spending more in the future. So, they don't really get it, and should accept they'll be working for a long time. We all have vices though, if it's not spending, it'll be something else.
-
Dicey gets it! She saved $ to ensure that when older she would have a decent, comfortable life and nothing is wrong with that. If you are lucky enough you will get old. Do you want to be scrimping and scraping by and do you want to have enough $ to buy what you need and some of what you want?
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
Congratulations on having the intuition and self-discipline to not need a budget. People come here because they don't have those skills and want to learn. For those who say "I have a ton of debt and don't know where my money is going, please help!" teaching them how to budget is a great start.
Meh, not really. I think if you don't have it in you to be frugal, you should just give up this lifestyle. Ever notice how all diets fail in the long term, and people gain back all their lost weight and then some? There's usually something else going on that prevents weight loss, and obsessing over calories isn't the answer. Otherwise they finish the diet and the only thing they can think of is rewarding themselves with a cake. Similarly, with a tight self-imposed budget, the non-frugal end up saying things like Dicey above:
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
or from that thread:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/i-want-my-lifestyle-inflation/
They're basically self-imposing a tight budget in the hopes of spending more in the future. So, they don't really get it, and should accept they'll be working for a long time. We all have vices though, if it's not spending, it'll be something else.
So everybody who is having problems with their finances either already gets it or they just suck forever? Why do you think we even talk about this and have a Case Study and Ask a Mustachian forum? You're really saying nobody who has ever come for advice in this community has ever learned from it and turned their life around? Why are you even here, except to gloat that you think you're superior to others?
-
Budgeting is different from tracking.
Tracking: paying attention to how you are spending your money, so that you can understand your spending habits and patterns.
Budgeting: determining how you will spend your future money.
Oh right, I didn't know there was a difference. I guess I do track, in the sense that I have a rough idea where my spending goes in the big buckets, housing, transportation, food, etc., and where my amortized earnings come from, and how much I save per year, month and week as a result. My point is that I keep those in pretty coarse categories, e.g. 50% housing, 30% transportation, 20% everything else, and when the "everything else" category is negligibly small, I stop sub-dividing them, for simplicity.
To go back to the dieting analogy, it's good to have a rough sense of how much you're eating per day, how much is enough and how much is too much, but it's not useful to keep a spreadsheet and be anal about the small numbers. This way, tracking becomes more intuitive and less a mental burden.
-
I don't track spending that closely and don't make any significant effort in following the budget, it just comes naturally. I always review my bills, and I'll update the budget if needs to be (e.g. an increase in a utility rate.)
It seems to be working for me. My savings rate was 83% last year.
The underlying question is : Should I delay FIRE (or another money goal) so that I can buy X.?
Delaying FIRE to buy stuff reminds me of a discussion I had with a friend when I said I hope to retire in a couple years and was talking about reaching my target stash and wouldn't need any more to live comfortably in retirement, which is how I set my FIRE target date.
He asked, "If you worked one extra year after reaching your goal and didn't save anything, how much could you just 'blow' if you 'let loose for one year' and went on a 'one year spending spree' and waited until the follow year to retire?" I did some calculations and figured I could spend $110,000 OVER my bare bones budget by working one additional year with no effect on FIRE the following year. Of course, that also means I would lose one precious year of FIRE. He immediately said that after living frugally for so many years, I deserve to have one last year of work where I can just have "fun" without "worrying" about saving for retirement. He said that with $110,000, I could buy a new car, a new bike, do home improvements, go out to eat at nice restaurants frequently, etc. that additional year before I retire and just "live it up" for a change. Of course, I mentioned that the trade-off vs. FIREing on my target date wasn't worth it because I didn't need any of those things and wouldn't even feel happy about spending all that instead of saving. I'm just not wired that way - I'm a natural saver. I'm not "worried" about saving. My two year plan already gives me a cushion to have fun... WHILE FIREd instead of working an extra year.
-
So I just read the Vitamix thread (this one: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/reader-recommendations/vitamix-blender/100/)
Just FYI - one of the Vitamix folks is taking care of someone who can't chew their food. Someone else made a snide remark about simply chewing food and they reluctantly brought up that wife has cancer. No apology, just dropped like a hot potato.
The thread started out ok. Several posters mentioned other brands that are much cheaper with similar performance. Several others brought up saving a lot buying refurbished. A lot of people mentioned getting them as gifts, and others having issues with burning out many cheaper blenders.
But the thread was derailed by a hard-line position implying that those who buy a Vitamix don't really belong on MMM (the vitamix litmus test). For good measure Audiophiles as a group are summarily thrown under the bus. No discussion of FIRE goals or anything like that, all nuance is lacking and people are accused of using the forum to "brag about your luxury purchases."
This is exactly my worry about discussions becoming symbolic rather than substantive. Someone asked an honest and sincere question. Some folks apparently have a legitimate need for a more powerful blender. People responded with good options to do this for less money (other brands and/or refurbished) but this was eclipsed by a heated debate about the MMMness of $800 blenders (which, after searching the interwebs looks to be a gross exaggeration - more like $300-$500 depending on the model/options). I wonder if the OP, or people lurking on the thread, are going to risk asking these types of questions in the future?
Thanks for doing the research, FINate. This whole thread, I've been wondering which blender actually costs $800. Answer: In a mustachian world, exactly none.
-
Similarly, with a tight self-imposed budget, the non-frugal end up saying things like Dicey above:
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
Excuse me, did you just call me non-frugal? WTF? Did you not read the part about FIRE?
-
Dicey gets it! She saved $ to ensure that when older she would have a decent, comfortable life and nothing is wrong with that. If you are lucky enough you will get old. Do you want to be scrimping and scraping by and do you want to have enough $ to buy what you need and some of what you want?
Thanks, Cassie. I do get it. I had cancer when I was 21, so I was always mindful of saving for the hoped-for future while living fully in the present.
-
Similarly, with a tight self-imposed budget, the non-frugal end up saying things like Dicey above:
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
Excuse me, did you just call me non-frugal? WTF? Did you not read the part about FIRE?
Does (A says X, B says X) => A=B ?
-
Um, we are not hard-core frugal here, wasn't that ERE (Jacob?)? We are examining our spending and wants to make sure that we are not just wasting money because our consumer society tells us what to buy. People say they have no idea where their money went, that is the point of tracking. And when you track you see that money went on things you don't care about, and you stop that spending. And you look again at where your money went and you cut something else out. And then you realise that your life is just as good as it was (often it is better) and you start examining all your spending to see if it gives value to your life. And you continue to spend less on "stuff". The next thing you know you have an amazing savings rate. And you do spend some money, but on things you value that will not mess up your life. And when you retire and have more free time, you may end up spending more on the things that bring you joy in retirement.
It is a lot easier to do this when you are young and energetic, than when you reach 65 or 70 or 75 and realize you are broke and can't retire. I talk myself into doing things (or not doing things) by telling myself how much future me will appreciate it - whether future me is the next morning, the next year, or 10 years down the road. And for the next morning things, I then thank past me for doing it - it sounds silly, but it is a good mindset to develop. Little things like cleaning up the kitchen when I am tired, so the next morning I walk into a sparkling kitchen with no dirty dishes. Once you start doing this it is easier to do for bigger things. It is also easier to make saving and not spending automatic - get the automatic transfers into savings, so money come in and goes out and you don't see it as available to spend. Cut the recurring bills for things that don't matter - lots of talk on the forums about cutting cable, etc. Substitute fun inexpensive activities for fun expensive activities. You all know the drill.
-
Um, we are not hard-core frugal here, wasn't that ERE (Jacob?)? We are examining our spending and wants to make sure that we are not just wasting money because our consumer society tells us what to buy. People say they have no idea where their money went, that is the point of tracking. And when you track you see that money went on things you don't care about, and you stop that spending. And you look again at where your money went and you cut something else out. And then you realise that your life is just as good as it was (often it is better) and you start examining all your spending to see if it gives value to your life. And you continue to spend less on "stuff". The next thing you know you have an amazing savings rate. And you do spend some money, but on things you value that will not mess up your life. And when you retire and have more free time, you may end up spending more on the things that bring you joy in retirement.
It is a lot easier to do this when you are young and energetic, than when you reach 65 or 70 or 75 and realize you are broke and can't retire. I talk myself into doing things (or not doing things) by telling myself how much future me will appreciate it - whether future me is the next morning, the next year, or 10 years down the road. And for the next morning things, I then thank past me for doing it - it sounds silly, but it is a good mindset to develop. Little things like cleaning up the kitchen when I am tired, so the next morning I walk into a sparkling kitchen with no dirty dishes. Once you start doing this it is easier to do for bigger things. It is also easier to make saving and not spending automatic - get the automatic transfers into savings, so money come in and goes out and you don't see it as available to spend. Cut the recurring bills for things that don't matter - lots of talk on the forums about cutting cable, etc. Substitute fun inexpensive activities for fun expensive activities. You all know the drill.
Wow, Ra63, this post is golden! Brilliant two paragraph summary of Mustachianism!
I use future me in the distant future (macro me?) all the time. I do not use future me in the tomorrow sense (micro me?) at all. I just make myself do [whatever]. I'm going to adopt this way of thinking immediately. I'll differentiate the degrees of forward thinking by dubbing the new person "tomorrow me". When I use the term to battle my natural sloth and procrastination, I'll think of you. Thanks!
-
Um, we are not hard-core frugal here, wasn't that ERE (Jacob?)? We are examining our spending and wants to make sure that we are not just wasting money because our consumer society tells us what to buy. People say they have no idea where their money went, that is the point of tracking. And when you track you see that money went on things you don't care about, and you stop that spending. And you look again at where your money went and you cut something else out. And then you realise that your life is just as good as it was (often it is better) and you start examining all your spending to see if it gives value to your life. And you continue to spend less on "stuff". The next thing you know you have an amazing savings rate. And you do spend some money, but on things you value that will not mess up your life. And when you retire and have more free time, you may end up spending more on the things that bring you joy in retirement.
It is a lot easier to do this when you are young and energetic, than when you reach 65 or 70 or 75 and realize you are broke and can't retire. I talk myself into doing things (or not doing things) by telling myself how much future me will appreciate it - whether future me is the next morning, the next year, or 10 years down the road. And for the next morning things, I then thank past me for doing it - it sounds silly, but it is a good mindset to develop. Little things like cleaning up the kitchen when I am tired, so the next morning I walk into a sparkling kitchen with no dirty dishes. Once you start doing this it is easier to do for bigger things. It is also easier to make saving and not spending automatic - get the automatic transfers into savings, so money come in and goes out and you don't see it as available to spend. Cut the recurring bills for things that don't matter - lots of talk on the forums about cutting cable, etc. Substitute fun inexpensive activities for fun expensive activities. You all know the drill.
I just read through this thread and wanted to echo Dicey's shout-out. What you outline is exactly why I'm here! I'm never going to be a hardcore mustachian saving 80% of my income (since that would currently mean living on $9,000...) but I want to do the best I can with what I have, and make sure that I'm spending money on things that align with my values and bring joy to my life. I don't think of budgeting in terms of a diet--I think of my budget as a visual tool to make sure that my money is going to work for my values. I've always been a saver, but YNAB has been incredibly helpful in illuminating my financial blind spots, and throwing up a sign to pump my brakes if my farmers market habit is getting out of hand again (ahem).
I also think there's a lot of room in the movement for filthy moderates, more than people like gerardc would see. But then I also think that early retirement is only one piece of the whole package, and that it's no more or less laudable than working towards financial stability, a healthier lifestyle, and more sustainable, earth-friendly consumer choices. I think that you're going to get a lot more impact on the last two systemic issues if 20 people are supported to make some changes stick, rather than 2 people hewing to the 100% standard of ideological purity...which doesn't even exist in the first place. As many have noted, MMM himself makes plenty of choices that are out of line with his own stated ideals. I will admit to an audible WTF when I read the blog post about the social club.
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
Congratulations on having the intuition and self-discipline to not need a budget. People come here because they don't have those skills and want to learn. For those who say "I have a ton of debt and don't know where my money is going, please help!" teaching them how to budget is a great start.
Meh, not really. I think if you don't have it in you to be frugal, you should just give up this lifestyle. Ever notice how all diets fail in the long term, and people gain back all their lost weight and then some? There's usually something else going on that prevents weight loss, and obsessing over calories isn't the answer. Otherwise they finish the diet and the only thing they can think of is rewarding themselves with a cake. Similarly, with a tight self-imposed budget, the non-frugal end up saying things like Dicey above:
If I can't buy what I want occasionally, what the fuck did I work so hard to get to FIRE for?
or from that thread:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/i-want-my-lifestyle-inflation/
They're basically self-imposing a tight budget in the hopes of spending more in the future. So, they don't really get it, and should accept they'll be working for a long time. We all have vices though, if it's not spending, it'll be something else.
This position makes no sense in a forum with a Case Study subforum (in which posters are chastised for not tracking their expenses). Examining the 'details that amount for <1% of results' is at the core of several of MMM's posts. Good for you that you don't need to track yourself, but it is not a 'waste of time' for most here.
Weird conversations indeed.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Total taxes while I was in Germany were about the same as in California (state + fed).*
Didn't mind paying DE taxes because: clean parks, functioning transit, well maintained roads, low crime, great schools, strong social safety net. A paragon of good governance.
I despise paying US/California taxes. Not because I want to "starve the beast," but because it's so damn wasteful and we get so little value. Roads (and other infrastructure) go unmaintained such that they become much more expensive to repair. Our schools are terrible (we could have an entire discussion about bloated administration, unreasonably high costs to build, low funding, or other potential causes). Crime is high, becoming a problem to run errands by bike because thieves cut locks (and carry bolt cutters) in broad daylight. Now our small county wants to spend $200M+ to build a rail line that, by their own estimates, will only be used by about 2000 people/day (less than 1% of the population) and run huge annual deficits (abysmally low farebox recovery rate of 9-22%) while our road network already has a backlog of over $150M in deferred maintenance and long stretches are almost unrideable by bike.
* Likely due to high income at the time. Now with lower income I probably pay less in California, which may partially explain the difference in services. DE has a broader tax base whereas California relies heavily on high earners because Californians love taxes...but only if the tax is on someone else.
For whatever curious reason I was looking this up last week and found something that compared the US to Germany as it relates to total tax revenue as a percent of GNP. I was surprised to see that income taxes (combined personal and corporate) weren't all that different in aggregate, property taxes were surprisingly low. The big difference was from things like sales taxes or VAT where in Germany it accounts for almost half of the total tax revenue. This is why things cost more in Germany and I suspect other countries as well.
So if the US were to implement a VAT (or national sales tax) similar to other countries the cost of goods would go way up ($800 blender may become a $1000 blender) but it could generate the revenue to pay for health care instead of just focusing on income. But this would never happen as it would be viewed as highly regressive...
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Total taxes while I was in Germany were about the same as in California (state + fed).*
Didn't mind paying DE taxes because: clean parks, functioning transit, well maintained roads, low crime, great schools, strong social safety net. A paragon of good governance.
I despise paying US/California taxes. Not because I want to "starve the beast," but because it's so damn wasteful and we get so little value. Roads (and other infrastructure) go unmaintained such that they become much more expensive to repair. Our schools are terrible (we could have an entire discussion about bloated administration, unreasonably high costs to build, low funding, or other potential causes). Crime is high, becoming a problem to run errands by bike because thieves cut locks (and carry bolt cutters) in broad daylight. Now our small county wants to spend $200M+ to build a rail line that, by their own estimates, will only be used by about 2000 people/day (less than 1% of the population) and run huge annual deficits (abysmally low farebox recovery rate of 9-22%) while our road network already has a backlog of over $150M in deferred maintenance and long stretches are almost unrideable by bike.
* Likely due to high income at the time. Now with lower income I probably pay less in California, which may partially explain the difference in services. DE has a broader tax base whereas California relies heavily on high earners because Californians love taxes...but only if the tax is on someone else.
For whatever curious reason I was looking this up last week and found something that compared the US to Germany as it relates to total tax revenue as a percent of GNP. I was surprised to see that income taxes (combined personal and corporate) weren't all that different in aggregate, property taxes were surprisingly low. The big difference was from things like sales taxes or VAT where in Germany it accounts for almost half of the total tax revenue. This is why things cost more in Germany and I suspect other countries as well.
So if the US were to implement a VAT (or national sales tax) similar to other countries the cost of goods would go way up ($800 blender may become a $1000 blender) but it could generate the revenue to pay for health care instead of just focusing on income. But this would never happen as it would be viewed as highly regressive...
This is a debate for another thread, but the US has/spends plenty of money for health care already (http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective). We don't need more...we need to be more efficient with how we currently spend.
-
I've been reading Case Studies ... several people posted saying variants of "I don't track expenses." I'm not the first responder on the thread ... why am I the first to tell them to get off their hineys and start figuring out what they spend? Instead, I see esoteric discussions on the merits of Trad vs Roth IRAs, 403bs vs Social Security ... when the #1 problem is:
The dud needs a face punch and a Mint account!
Grr... more punches to come.
Tracking expenses is a waste of time. I save 82% of my net and I just focus on the big expenses (housing, transportation) and monitor total credit card spending. I don't buy what I don't need. If I need something, I buy it, but I try to go for the cheapest version. I don't obsess over details that amount for <1% of results.
I feel only novices or weak people need to track, because subconsciously they're still trying to maximize their spending-related pleasure within budget boundaries. Those who are truly frugal don't need a budget. It's like fat people who are always on a diet and tracking what they eat, VS lean people who eat for function rather than for pleasure, and don't sweat the details.
agreed. if you're truly frugal a budget isnt necessary. optimization of tax advantaged accounts and how to access that money is much more valuable than how much you spent on potatoes in the last month.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation. They stumbled into arguably the most stable 50 year economic period in history, missed out on the horrors of WWII and, thanks to their parents, reaped all of the post-war rewards. To be fair they had Vietnam and the cold war but they were mostly kids during the civil rights movement. In the 1970s it was the boomers (in their late teens and 20s) who partook in the sexual and drug revolutions. By the 80s they were the dominant generation in business, politics and society. What did they do? Over the next few decades they drove the debt-to-GDP to their highest levels in a non-wartime environment and started the whole 'no-more-taxes' movement. More recently they've been the group most responsible for increasing the entitlement network for seniors (a demographic they are quickly moving into). Under this generation the opinion on the federal government has gone from something we are apart of and actively foster to some seperate, almost evil entity that stifles growth, steals our money, is inherently corrupt and must be reduced at all costs ("drown it in a bathtub!"). They deferred maintenance on the bridges and infrastructure systems their parents built while voting to cut their capitol gains taxes. They liked disco. All-in-all the boomers suffered less, demanded more, blamed the government, and kicked the can down the road. Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Wow that was rough, but probably true - except that last sentence (at least for me). Well, come to think of it, I did just miss all that sex and drugs too (my older siblings did partake though). Hmmmm..and I'm a few years from being a senior so no on that entitlement comment. I think public employees are treated very poorly and watched that public opinion transition to the negative occur during my 30+ years as one. I worked to try and build better cities, roads - and things equivalent to bridges (didn't actually do bridge work). Disco was always weird to me - I like rock n roll!
I get your point though and am not offended, just wanted to point out that your statement was a significant over-simplification and generalization. BTW - I know many more boomers who are like me, so its not just me speaking out. And that DJT moment was a low blow :).
-
just wanted to point out that your statement was a significant over-simplification and generalization
As is every sweeping statement about any generation. :P
-
Just stumbled onto this thread today.
As one who is coming upon two years in the MMM community, what I have noticed and I think was summed up well by RetiredAt63 is a shift as we get older. I'm one of the old people here (though not terrible at 47) sitting on the long tail. It seems to me that the vast, vast majority of regular contributors are in their 20s and 30s. But I am just entering the phase of life that I'd prefer not to, but that is giving me a hearty middle finger and telling me very clearly "too bad sucker, you're here" and that is what makes it hard to fit the MMM mold. I used to have no problem doing all my yard work, going to the home improvement store, buying 120 bags of mulch and doing it all in one day over my whole yard. Now I've spent the better part of two months getting 80 bags of top soil into my backyard because all I have energy for is 20 bags at a time and that takes me two hours and then my knees hurt and I have learned if I don't stop I'll be unable to do the next batch next weekend, but will instead need to wait a month before my back or knees, of muscles can deal with it. It sucks. I also have this new problem of getting effected or just having poison ivy new in my yard. So now I'm fighting with the prospect of can I even work in my yard at all without having a three week rash that is irritating as all get out. So now I contemplate is it worth the cost to pay someone to come trim my tree, because all I did for two hours last Sunday was trim a tree and then I break out in a freakin' rash even though I swear nothing was around. Tried to deal with it at home but after a week the rash looked so bad my wife said I looked like a leper and I finally gave in and went to urgent care to get the stupid steroids I had to do last time when it was terrible. I'd love tell my body to not do these things, but even with a strong MMM desire, there are just some things we cannot overcome. So I think this ends up being a bit of the softening that seems to be the point of this thread. I think as more people join the community that are older, more kids and those challenges we definitely bring the "we do the best we can to maximize but there are limits" that Ra63 pointed out.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Total taxes while I was in Germany were about the same as in California (state + fed).*
Didn't mind paying DE taxes because: clean parks, functioning transit, well maintained roads, low crime, great schools, strong social safety net. A paragon of good governance.
I despise paying US/California taxes. Not because I want to "starve the beast," but because it's so damn wasteful and we get so little value. Roads (and other infrastructure) go unmaintained such that they become much more expensive to repair. Our schools are terrible (we could have an entire discussion about bloated administration, unreasonably high costs to build, low funding, or other potential causes). Crime is high, becoming a problem to run errands by bike because thieves cut locks (and carry bolt cutters) in broad daylight. Now our small county wants to spend $200M+ to build a rail line that, by their own estimates, will only be used by about 2000 people/day (less than 1% of the population) and run huge annual deficits (abysmally low farebox recovery rate of 9-22%) while our road network already has a backlog of over $150M in deferred maintenance and long stretches are almost unrideable by bike.
* Likely due to high income at the time. Now with lower income I probably pay less in California, which may partially explain the difference in services. DE has a broader tax base whereas California relies heavily on high earners because Californians love taxes...but only if the tax is on someone else.
For whatever curious reason I was looking this up last week and found something that compared the US to Germany as it relates to total tax revenue as a percent of GNP. I was surprised to see that income taxes (combined personal and corporate) weren't all that different in aggregate, property taxes were surprisingly low. The big difference was from things like sales taxes or VAT where in Germany it accounts for almost half of the total tax revenue. This is why things cost more in Germany and I suspect other countries as well.
So if the US were to implement a VAT (or national sales tax) similar to other countries the cost of goods would go way up ($800 blender may become a $1000 blender) but it could generate the revenue to pay for health care instead of just focusing on income. But this would never happen as it would be viewed as highly regressive...
This is a debate for another thread, but the US has/spends plenty of money for health care already (http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective). We don't need more...we need to be more efficient with how we currently spend.
Your interpretation is that the US spends too much, another could be that the others don't spend enough. But I agree with you that efficiencies could reduce overall costs with impacting care. I think of things like MRI and CAT scans - so many facilities have these very very expensive machines that also require very very expense staffing and they most likely aren't being fully or optimally utilized. Would it be more efficient to have one MRI machine per x # of people or per x square miles at a single center - I don't know.
-
Just stumbled onto this thread today.
As one who is coming upon two years in the MMM community, what I have noticed and I think was summed up well by RetiredAt63 is a shift as we get older. I'm one of the old people here (though not terrible at 47) sitting on the long tail. It seems to me that the vast, vast majority of regular contributors are in their 20s and 30s. But I am just entering the phase of life that I'd prefer not to, but that is giving me a hearty middle finger and telling me very clearly "too bad sucker, you're here" and that is what makes it hard to fit the MMM mold. I used to have no problem doing all my yard work, going to the home improvement store, buying 120 bags of mulch and doing it all in one day over my whole yard. Now I've spent the better part of two months getting 80 bags of top soil into my backyard because all I have energy for is 20 bags at a time and that takes me two hours and then my knees hurt and I have learned if I don't stop I'll be unable to do the next batch next weekend, but will instead need to wait a month before my back or knees, of muscles can deal with it. It sucks. I also have this new problem of getting effected or just having poison ivy new in my yard. So now I'm fighting with the prospect of can I even work in my yard at all without having a three week rash that is irritating as all get out. So now I contemplate is it worth the cost to pay someone to come trim my tree, because all I did for two hours last Sunday was trim a tree and then I break out in a freakin' rash even though I swear nothing was around. Tried to deal with it at home but after a week the rash looked so bad my wife said I looked like a leper and I finally gave in and went to urgent care to get the stupid steroids I had to do last time when it was terrible. I'd love tell my body to not do these things, but even with a strong MMM desire, there are just some things we cannot overcome. So I think this ends up being a bit of the softening that seems to be the point of this thread. I think as more people join the community that are older, more kids and those challenges we definitely bring the "we do the best we can to maximize but there are limits" that Ra63 pointed out.
This is the reason to save like mad and get to FIRE when you're young. It's so much easier when your body will do whatever you wish. As we get older, it's damn nice to have enough money that to DIY or not to DIY isn't a budget-breaking dilemma.
Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Mine is not a hateful response, just a polite request for supporting data. Source, please?
-
Just stumbled onto this thread today.
As one who is coming upon two years in the MMM community, what I have noticed and I think was summed up well by RetiredAt63 is a shift as we get older. I'm one of the old people here (though not terrible at 47) sitting on the long tail. It seems to me that the vast, vast majority of regular contributors are in their 20s and 30s. But I am just entering the phase of life that I'd prefer not to, but that is giving me a hearty middle finger and telling me very clearly "too bad sucker, you're here" and that is what makes it hard to fit the MMM mold. I used to have no problem doing all my yard work, going to the home improvement store, buying 120 bags of mulch and doing it all in one day over my whole yard. Now I've spent the better part of two months getting 80 bags of top soil into my backyard because all I have energy for is 20 bags at a time and that takes me two hours and then my knees hurt and I have learned if I don't stop I'll be unable to do the next batch next weekend, but will instead need to wait a month before my back or knees, of muscles can deal with it. It sucks. I also have this new problem of getting effected or just having poison ivy new in my yard. So now I'm fighting with the prospect of can I even work in my yard at all without having a three week rash that is irritating as all get out. So now I contemplate is it worth the cost to pay someone to come trim my tree, because all I did for two hours last Sunday was trim a tree and then I break out in a freakin' rash even though I swear nothing was around. Tried to deal with it at home but after a week the rash looked so bad my wife said I looked like a leper and I finally gave in and went to urgent care to get the stupid steroids I had to do last time when it was terrible. I'd love tell my body to not do these things, but even with a strong MMM desire, there are just some things we cannot overcome. So I think this ends up being a bit of the softening that seems to be the point of this thread. I think as more people join the community that are older, more kids and those challenges we definitely bring the "we do the best we can to maximize but there are limits" that Ra63 pointed out.
This is the reason to save like mad and get to FIRE when you're young. It's so much easier when your body will do whatever you wish. As we get older, it's damn nice to have enough money that to DIY or not to DIY isn't a budget-breaking dilemma.
Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Mine is not a hateful response, just a polite request for supporting data. Source, please?
http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls
-
Virtually any poll of any country within the last 200 years?
Old people heavily skew to the right.
-
Typically people are more likely to vote republican as they get older anyway, not sure how much that played into it.
Another source:
http://college.usatoday.com/2016/11/09/how-we-voted-by-age-education-race-and-sexual-orientation/
I'm most disappointed by the skewedness of white voters towards Trump. Then again, I look at the numbers for other races and wonder, how did any non-whites vote for Trump. And then I think, how did anyone vote for Trump?
Pointless line of thought I guess. They did and I may never truly understand.
-
Virtually any poll of any country within the last 200 years?
Old people heavily skew to the right.
That's a recent change. Seniors used to lean (D).
http://www.gallup.com/poll/168083/seniors-realigned-republican-party.aspx
-
I'm most disappointed by the skewedness of white voters towards Trump. Then again, I look at the numbers for other races and wonder, how did any non-whites vote for Trump. And then I think, how did anyone vote for Trump?
Pointless line of thought I guess. They did and I may never truly understand.
Just think about who he was running against. It might have been a different story if it was that fool Biden.
-
Virtually any poll of any country within the last 200 years?
Old people heavily skew to the right.
That's a recent change. Seniors used to lean (D).
http://www.gallup.com/poll/168083/seniors-realigned-republican-party.aspx
I appreciate what you're trying to do but I would urge caution when trying to equate our two parties as definite right and left. They are really very narrow windows in a broad spectrum that moves quite a bit over time, especially in the last twenty-five years. Remember when George W. Bush went after an anti-terrorism bill that Clinton had signed because it discriminated against Muslims? Remember when Hillary Clinton said that marriage was between a man and a woman?
Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation.
<complaint>
<complaint>
<complaint>
Mm-hmmm.
-
Just stumbled onto this thread today.
As one who is coming upon two years in the MMM community, what I have noticed and I think was summed up well by RetiredAt63 is a shift as we get older. I'm one of the old people here (though not terrible at 47) sitting on the long tail. It seems to me that the vast, vast majority of regular contributors are in their 20s and 30s. But I am just entering the phase of life that I'd prefer not to, but that is giving me a hearty middle finger and telling me very clearly "too bad sucker, you're here" and that is what makes it hard to fit the MMM mold. I used to have no problem doing all my yard work, going to the home improvement store, buying 120 bags of mulch and doing it all in one day over my whole yard. Now I've spent the better part of two months getting 80 bags of top soil into my backyard because all I have energy for is 20 bags at a time and that takes me two hours and then my knees hurt and I have learned if I don't stop I'll be unable to do the next batch next weekend, but will instead need to wait a month before my back or knees, of muscles can deal with it. It sucks. I also have this new problem of getting effected or just having poison ivy new in my yard. So now I'm fighting with the prospect of can I even work in my yard at all without having a three week rash that is irritating as all get out. So now I contemplate is it worth the cost to pay someone to come trim my tree, because all I did for two hours last Sunday was trim a tree and then I break out in a freakin' rash even though I swear nothing was around. Tried to deal with it at home but after a week the rash looked so bad my wife said I looked like a leper and I finally gave in and went to urgent care to get the stupid steroids I had to do last time when it was terrible. I'd love tell my body to not do these things, but even with a strong MMM desire, there are just some things we cannot overcome. So I think this ends up being a bit of the softening that seems to be the point of this thread. I think as more people join the community that are older, more kids and those challenges we definitely bring the "we do the best we can to maximize but there are limits" that Ra63 pointed out.
This is the reason to save like mad and get to FIRE when you're young. It's so much easier when your body will do whatever you wish. As we get older, it's damn nice to have enough money that to DIY or not to DIY isn't a budget-breaking dilemma.
Oh, and who was the demographic who voted most heavily for DJT? not milllennials or GenXrs, but boomers.
ah, let the hateful responses come raining down!
Mine is not a hateful response, just a polite request for supporting data. Source, please?
http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls
HaHaHa...Perhaps I should have specified "hard data". Election polls are projections, not data.
Exit Polls
Exit polls are surveys of a small percentage of voters taken after they leave their voting place. Pollsters use this data to project how all voters or segments of voters side on a particular race or ballot measure.
Virtually any exit poll conducted in my home state would have given the election to Clinton easily.
HeeHeeHee, exit polls are not data.
-
Exit polls are as close to hard data as it gets. They're so good that elections are called using them well before ballots are counted.
Short of making everyone's vote public, there's no way to get more accurate results.
-
At the risk of pissing off ~1/3 of this forum, I'm going to say that the Baby Boomers are the biggest complainers of any generation.
<complaint>
<complaint>
<complaint>
Mm-hmmm.
What you're referring to as <complaint>s are the reasons behind the opinion and I think they're mostly solid. I don't read the comment as whining for not having those advantages.
Besides, any generalized difference between a generation is a product of the time, not the people. If the next generation is more unhappy and isolated due to smartphones and social media it's not because of anything they did wrong, they were just born into a different environment where smartphones existed. Our personalities as individuals may be a combination of genetics and environment but if you're comparing generations, the only difference is environment. Genetics should average out.
Don't take it personally, especially if it doesn't apply to you. And if you were making a joke sorry for over analyzing.
-
Exit polls are as close to hard data as it gets. They're so good that elections are called using them well before ballots are counted.
Short of making everyone's vote public, there's no way to get more accurate results.
So, Hillary Clinton won the election, then? She's the president of California? I'm so confused!!!
PdK, I love your contributions on this forum (especially on the funny stuff thread), but if your first sentence is true, we're all totally screwed. Oh, wait a minute, maybe that's already happened.
-
Exit polls are as close to hard data as it gets. They're so good that elections are called using them well before ballots are counted.
Short of making everyone's vote public, there's no way to get more accurate results.
So, Hillary Clinton won the election, then? She's the president of California? I'm so confused!!!
PdK, I love your contributions on this forum (especially on the funny stuff thread), but if your first sentence is true, we're all totally screwed. Oh, wait a minute, maybe that's already happened.
I don't follow. Exit polls indicated that Clinton would win California, and she did win California. Some states' exit polls incorrectly predicted their respective winners, mind you.
Exit polls are the closest thing to getting demographic data on voters, because unlike opinion polls who sample people who may or may not go vote, they sample actual voters who just cast their ballot. They're not official election results, but they're the closest thing to data that still allows you to collect demographic data.
-
Exit polls are as close to hard data as it gets. They're so good that elections are called using them well before ballots are counted.
Short of making everyone's vote public, there's no way to get more accurate results.
So, Hillary Clinton won the election, then?
Yes, she did win the most votes. No, she didn't win the election.
-
What's missing is context. Higher counts do not necessarily equal higher percentages.
When I was a sales rep, someone said to me, "We get more claims for your product than anything else we sell." Hmmm, "What do you sell the most?" I asked. "Oh, yours is the best selling line we carry, by far." "So, as a percentage of total sales, where would you say we rank?" says Dicey. "Oh" says complaining person. After which, I get no more complaints about the number of claims.
Asking for data is kind of a polite way of calling BS. If they can prove it, great, but otherwise, they're likely just spewing unproven nonsense, which seems to be on its way to becoming our new national pastime.
-
Also btw, while I am being a grouchy older lady, Americans (largest single group on this forum) complain like mad about health insurance costs, but the rest of their COL is so low compared to many other places (Canada, the UK and Australia come to mind) that if they are making a decent salary they should have the money for premiums. And of course we pay for our health care, the premiums are part of our taxes. We look at things like house prices, food costs, electricity, etc., convert it into our currency, and gasp at how low they are!
A while back, someone from Canada asked what taxes were for someone in U.S. making $100K/yr. to see how much more he was paying for taxes in Canada. As it turned out, he was paying much LESS in taxes.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what-i-learned-about-myself-politics-and-those-on-the-other-side/msg1630240/#msg1630240
It looks like the property tax rate is lower in Canada than here as well.
Total taxes while I was in Germany were about the same as in California (state + fed).*
Didn't mind paying DE taxes because: clean parks, functioning transit, well maintained roads, low crime, great schools, strong social safety net. A paragon of good governance.
I despise paying US/California taxes. Not because I want to "starve the beast," but because it's so damn wasteful and we get so little value. Roads (and other infrastructure) go unmaintained such that they become much more expensive to repair. Our schools are terrible (we could have an entire discussion about bloated administration, unreasonably high costs to build, low funding, or other potential causes). Crime is high, becoming a problem to run errands by bike because thieves cut locks (and carry bolt cutters) in broad daylight. Now our small county wants to spend $200M+ to build a rail line that, by their own estimates, will only be used by about 2000 people/day (less than 1% of the population) and run huge annual deficits (abysmally low farebox recovery rate of 9-22%) while our road network already has a backlog of over $150M in deferred maintenance and long stretches are almost unrideable by bike.
* Likely due to high income at the time. Now with lower income I probably pay less in California, which may partially explain the difference in services. DE has a broader tax base whereas California relies heavily on high earners because Californians love taxes...but only if the tax is on someone else.
For whatever curious reason I was looking this up last week and found something that compared the US to Germany as it relates to total tax revenue as a percent of GNP. I was surprised to see that income taxes (combined personal and corporate) weren't all that different in aggregate, property taxes were surprisingly low. The big difference was from things like sales taxes or VAT where in Germany it accounts for almost half of the total tax revenue. This is why things cost more in Germany and I suspect other countries as well.
So if the US were to implement a VAT (or national sales tax) similar to other countries the cost of goods would go way up ($800 blender may become a $1000 blender) but it could generate the revenue to pay for health care instead of just focusing on income. But this would never happen as it would be viewed as highly regressive...
This is a debate for another thread, but the US has/spends plenty of money for health care already (http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective). We don't need more...we need to be more efficient with how we currently spend.
Your interpretation is that the US spends too much, another could be that the others don't spend enough. But I agree with you that efficiencies could reduce overall costs with impacting care. I think of things like MRI and CAT scans - so many facilities have these very very expensive machines that also require very very expense staffing and they most likely aren't being fully or optimally utilized. Would it be more efficient to have one MRI machine per x # of people or per x square miles at a single center - I don't know.
It has nothing to do with "my" interpretation.
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/press-releases/2015/oct/us-spends-more-on-health-care-than-other-nations
The U.S. spent more per person on health care than 12 other high-income nations in 2013, while seeing the lowest life expectancy and some of the worst health outcomes among this group, according to a Commonwealth Fund report out today. The analysis shows that in the U.S., which spent an average of $9,086 per person annually, life expectancy was 78.8 years. Switzerland, the second-highest-spending country, spent $6,325 per person and had a life expectancy of 82.9 years. Mortality rates for cancer were among the lowest in the U.S., but rates of chronic conditions, obesity, and infant mortality were higher than those abroad.
“Time and again, we see evidence that the amount of money we spend on health care in this country is not gaining us comparable health benefits,” said Commonwealth Fund President David Blumenthal, M.D. “We have to look at the root causes of this disconnect and invest our health care dollars in ways that will allow us to live longer while enjoying better health and greater productivity.”
We don't get better results for the absurd amount of money we spend. Claiming that other countries don't spend enough, while so many of them have better results than us is...well, odd.
-
To follow the off tangent re total health care spending versus results - I have read that because our provinces run our health care systems, the costs are controlled (buying in bulk) and the paperwork is minimized. Also people tend to seek health care earlier when they have issues, so the issues don't escalate until they are urgent. These are all generalities, of course. I do know that when I went for my MRI (paid for with my taxes), the machine was being booked virtually 24/7.
RE older people getting more conservative - when I was young and agnostic (well, to the religious person I was talking about evolution with I probably seemed like an atheist) I was told that when I got old I would be more religious - I suppose because I would be closer to death and worrying about heaven and hell? Well I'm a lot older and closer to being dead, and I still think (not feel, think) evolution is a strong validated theory right up there with plate tectonics, and I am not any more religious than I was then. So I am sure there are lots of assumptions floating around about what people of a particular age should think - but they are not necessarily valid assumptions. If anything I am more agnostic and more left-leaning than I used to be, and I have lots of company. Age is only one factor among many that determines peoples' viewpoints.
-
HaHaHa...Perhaps I should have specified "hard data". Election polls are projections, not data.
HeeHeeHee, exit polls are not data.
Are you serious? Exit polls are data by definition. Not agreeing with a specific interpretation of the data doesn't make it "not data".
-
RE older people getting more conservative - when I was young and agnostic (well, to the religious person I was talking about evolution with I probably seemed like an atheist) I was told that when I got old I would be more religious - I suppose because I would be closer to death and worrying about heaven and hell? Well I'm a lot older and closer to being dead, and I still think (not feel, think) evolution is a strong validated theory right up there with plate tectonics, and I am not any more religious than I was then. So I am sure there are lots of assumptions floating around about what people of a particular age should think - but they are not necessarily valid assumptions. If anything I am more agnostic and more left-leaning than I used to be, and I have lots of company. Age is only one factor among many that determines peoples' viewpoints.
Evolution and religion aren't mutually exclusive. Many Christians are Theistic Evolutionists and believe the creation account in Genesis is primarily concerned with "why" rather than "how." That is, it's really about purpose and meaning rather than a text book. It was written to be understood by the audience at the time, and they had a very different understanding of time, chronology, and the physical world in general. I'm happen to be a theistic evolutionist, and C.S. Lewis was probably one, but we often don't make their beliefs known because it's no fun being attacked on two fronts
- certain Creationists who are convinced that you're a heretic and certain Atheists who insist that any belief in a God is weak minded and irrational. That, and it doesn't make for very good click-bait to state that the whole religion vs. science debate is a false dichotomy.
-
By it's very definition having any faith religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
-
Just stumbled onto this thread today.
As one who is coming upon two years in the MMM community, what I have noticed and I think was summed up well by RetiredAt63 is a shift as we get older. I'm one of the old people here (though not terrible at 47) sitting on the long tail. It seems to me that the vast, vast majority of regular contributors are in their 20s and 30s. But I am just entering the phase of life that I'd prefer not to, but that is giving me a hearty middle finger and telling me very clearly "too bad sucker, you're here" and that is what makes it hard to fit the MMM mold. I used to have no problem doing all my yard work, going to the home improvement store, buying 120 bags of mulch and doing it all in one day over my whole yard. Now I've spent the better part of two months getting 80 bags of top soil into my backyard because all I have energy for is 20 bags at a time and that takes me two hours and then my knees hurt and I have learned if I don't stop I'll be unable to do the next batch next weekend, but will instead need to wait a month before my back or knees, of muscles can deal with it. It sucks. I also have this new problem of getting effected or just having poison ivy new in my yard. So now I'm fighting with the prospect of can I even work in my yard at all without having a three week rash that is irritating as all get out. So now I contemplate is it worth the cost to pay someone to come trim my tree, because all I did for two hours last Sunday was trim a tree and then I break out in a freakin' rash even though I swear nothing was around. Tried to deal with it at home but after a week the rash looked so bad my wife said I looked like a leper and I finally gave in and went to urgent care to get the stupid steroids I had to do last time when it was terrible. I'd love tell my body to not do these things, but even with a strong MMM desire, there are just some things we cannot overcome. So I think this ends up being a bit of the softening that seems to be the point of this thread. I think as more people join the community that are older, more kids and those challenges we definitely bring the "we do the best we can to maximize but there are limits" that Ra63 pointed out.
This is the reason to save like mad and get to FIRE when you're young. It's so much easier when your body will do whatever you wish. As we get older, it's damn nice to have enough money that to DIY or not to DIY isn't a budget-breaking dilemma.
Yes, but since I've yet to find someone who can teach me how to build or can sell me a time machine, I believe it's one of the most valid reasons for the perception that the community has gone soft. It's not totally helpful to indicate it's great to save early, when for those of us who are older, that time has passed. What am I supposed to do with that suggestion in my effort to "harden up" the community?
Us oldsters can't bike as far, walk as far, lift as much. As you indicated, we're past the point when our bodies will do whatever we wish (although as a kid I always wanted to fly, and no matter how much I wished, I never found a way to make it do that). So now we spend, and get face punched because we're spending, which created the "soft" perception. I think perhaps adding that understanding into Mustachianism (and this may be part of what we are seeing with MMM as well) might help to alleviate some of the feeling that the hardcore pushing has gone away. I think as we age, it naturally has to back off. Either that or one of the marks of a Mustachian will be early death from heart attack after over exerting ourselves to save $20.
-
By it's very definition having any faith religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
Oh boy. Didn't we already have this debate through nearly 1,000 posts on another thread?
-
You guys, stop the religion/evolution stuff NOW!!! I was talking about a conversation with ONE PERSON who took the Genesis story literally, who therefore could not accept evolution as a scientific theory because it conflicted with his specific religious beliefs. The point was not religion, it was that "you will change your religious beliefs when you get older" Connecting to an earlier assumption that you will change your political beliefs as you get older. So the theme was attitudes about age (and aging).
Geesh, herding cats is easy compared to posting on the forums.
-
It has nothing to do with "my" interpretation.
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/press-releases/2015/oct/us-spends-more-on-health-care-than-other-nations
The U.S. spent more per person on health care than 12 other high-income nations in 2013, while seeing the lowest life expectancy and some of the worst health outcomes among this group, according to a Commonwealth Fund report out today. The analysis shows that in the U.S., which spent an average of $9,086 per person annually, life expectancy was 78.8 years. Switzerland, the second-highest-spending country, spent $6,325 per person and had a life expectancy of 82.9 years. Mortality rates for cancer were among the lowest in the U.S., but rates of chronic conditions, obesity, and infant mortality were higher than those abroad.
“Time and again, we see evidence that the amount of money we spend on health care in this country is not gaining us comparable health benefits,” said Commonwealth Fund President David Blumenthal, M.D. “We have to look at the root causes of this disconnect and invest our health care dollars in ways that will allow us to live longer while enjoying better health and greater productivity.”
We don't get better results for the absurd amount of money we spend. Claiming that other countries don't spend enough, while so many of them have better results than us is...well, odd.
First, the Commonwealth Fund is fairly biased, agenda driven non-profit, and they only lean the information they want it to, but it also doesn't mean everything is wrong either.
Second, is it causation, correlation regarding health care spending - Maybe we spend a lot more on end of life care, infant care - those seem to be the most expensive situations when money is no object. Or maybe we also spend a lot on self-induced issues that are ultimately unrelated to health care but the outcome is health care dependent such as....
A lot of the emphasis for these conclusions is on life expectancy, but that is not necessarily health care driven only. Unfortunately in the US we have violent crime (many gun related) that far exceed other nations and significantly reduces life expectancy. The US also has significantly worse health standards (diet, exercise, etc) than other nations that lead to what these reports would consider preventable/treatable diseases - this falls more under health education and self-discipline than health care. Automobiles are a another significant factor in national life expectancy and costs.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans-poor-life-expectancy/#5d36ba222b98 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans-poor-life-expectancy/#5d36ba222b98)
Yes, the US spends a lot more on health care than other countries but there are reasons for it both good and bad. Efficiencies can certainly occur, streamlining health care could certainly occur, getting healthier as a nation could certainly occur, preventative medicine and checkups with health education could certainly occur......
The one thing to note is that there is always this notion that the poor are the ones that suffer without health care but they are the ones who have access to nationalized health care via medicare and Medicaid. Its the working poor to lower middle class that really have the issues because they don't make enough to afford it and make to much to get covered - ACA helped with some of this but not all.
-
By it's very definition having any faith religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical. We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe or is otherwise unobservable be it a multiverse, a top-down cosmology, or a computer simulation (https://futurism.com/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-elon-musk-thinks-so/). At some level we are all irrational because we exist yet there is no purely rational provable explanation. Greek philosophers relied on the unmoved or prime mover, for some today it's the big bang, for others a creator being. As the saying goes, it's turtles all the way down.
-
GACK. That link reference had someone in Canada maxing out RRSP's at $22k per year, so paying net tax on $78k, versus someone only contributing $6k to 401k on $110k. Of course someone with 78K per year pays a lot less tax in dollars than someone earning $104k per year!! grrr. One pays 21 % taxes, at a lower income, and the other pays 28% taxes for a higher income. There are many other factors that we can't see in this equation as well.
Property tax is a different situation, by city and state, (ex., NJ appears to be horrendous for taxes, overall, really) for both countries.
The guy in the thread asked for the income taxes for someone in the U.S. with a $100K income, so I gave him the real results of someone with $110K with deductions making it about $103K of taxable income, so that was within 3% of what he was asking for.
We're second highest next to N.J.
I don't have a problem with your reply, it was actually quite generous to provide details as you did. Just with the original poster who did not state very clearly that maxing out retirements brought his income down to around $78k, and with the first $11k tax free, well, it was not really a full $100k taxable income..that op was asking a comparison for.
I was that poster. I assumed as mustachians that we'd be maxing out tax saving vehicles. And I did mention the reduced taxable income as clarification in a subsequent post.
Are you saying that those deductions do not exist in the States? Or that the maximums for tax savings vehicles are lower? Honest question b/c I do not know the answer.
As for the higher sales tax - that doesn't affect us as much as "regulars" since we don't by very much shit, right?
(sorry for being off-topic)
-
What's missing is context. Higher counts do not necessarily equal higher percentages.
When I was a sales rep, someone said to me, "We get more claims for your product than anything else we sell." Hmmm, "What do you sell the most?" I asked. "Oh, yours is the best selling line we carry, by far." "So, as a percentage of total sales, where would you say we rank?" says Dicey. "Oh" says complaining person. After which, I get no more complaints about the number of claims.
Asking for data is kind of a polite way of calling BS. If they can prove it, great, but otherwise, they're likely just spewing unproven nonsense, which seems to be on its way to becoming our new national pastime.
This is true, but it has nothing to do with exit polls. Exit polls are a percentage.
And even if you don't trust people to be honest in the polls, we're really just comparing age groups so in relative terms the claim that more boomers voted Trump could still be made.
-
You guys, stop the religion/evolution stuff NOW!!! I was talking about a conversation with ONE PERSON who took the Genesis story literally, who therefore could not accept evolution as a scientific theory because it conflicted with his specific religious beliefs. The point was not religion, it was that "you will change your religious beliefs when you get older" Connecting to an earlier assumption that you will change your political beliefs as you get older. So the theme was attitudes about age (and aging).
Geesh, herding cats is easy compared to posting on the forums.
Sorry, not trying to derail the thread...I just got stuck on what looked like another example of someone saying religion and evolution are incompatible.
FWIW, as I've aged my faith has deepened, but a big part of the deepening involved deconstructing my beliefs and stripping away the superfluous such that I'm considered a fairly "liberal" believer. On the other hand, I know lots of people who abandoned their faith altogether as they aged.
-
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical.
I think that's a cop out answer and I suspect that you do too. We also can't prove that God isn't a transexual turtle in a Big Bird costume, but that doesn't mean it is equally likely to be true as false.
We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe
We already have a name for things that do not exist in our physical universe. Imaginary. By definition, they don't exist.
I've never understood the argument that separates everything into "things that exist" and "things that don't exist" and then claims they are both equally real. If something doesn't exist in our physical universe then it has no place in our understanding of the universe. It cannot affect us, it has no interactions or impacts or manifestations or reality. They call it "supernatural" to highlight that it is beyond the natural (aka real) world.
If anything, I would like to believe that people get LESS religious as they older and wiser. Children abandon their beliefs about supernatural creatures and magic and Santa as they develop rational thought patterns. We learn how to think better as we age. Why do religion and investing seem to buck this trend?
-
Sigh. I tried to stop the derail re religion.
Can we get back to discussing the need to increase the rate of metaphorical face punches?
-
Sigh. I tried to stop the derail re religion.
Yes you did. Did you forget that none of us have any control over where the forum threads go?
-
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical.
And possibly the physical?
We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe
And we can't even fully observe all that is within our physical universe let alone beyond it!
We already have a name for things that do not exist in our physical universe. Imaginary. By definition, they don't exist.
I've never understood the argument that separates everything into "things that exist" and "things that don't exist" and then claims they are both equally real. If something doesn't exist in our physical universe then it has no place in our understanding of the universe. It cannot affect us, it has no interactions or impacts or manifestations or reality. They call it "supernatural" to highlight that it is beyond the natural (aka real) world.
So a question, do you think any form of life exists in the universe beyond that of earth? I don't know. They don't exist as far as I can tell. But with all the stars and planets out there that are so distant I would seem logical that there is a high probability that life of some kind exists out there (hell we can't even determine yet if there is life in our own solar system beyond earth. But I can't prove it, so is it imaginary and therefore absolutely doesn't exist. If so, why bother trying to find out, and if that's the case then we should cease all forms of discovery and exploration.
Things are referred to supernatural and metaphysical and that's because they don't fit, can't be proved out, or whatever. Personally I don't believe in ghosts, vampires, higher powers, etc but I understand why people might.....but I also am not going to go as far as saying with certainty that these things don't exist....as was said we haven't proven they do or don't exist.
Also its actually been proven that having faith in a higher power does affect us in a very positive way (wish I believed and could turn of the logical rational thoughts) so that qualification alone would make it real, would it not?
If anything, I would like to believe that people get LESS religious as they older and wiser. Children abandon their beliefs about supernatural creatures and magic and Santa as they develop rational thought patterns. We learn how to think better as we age. Why do religion and investing seem to buck this trend?
Or is it because we become programmed to think a certain way and that clouds out the "irrational, creative" thinking? The less rational way of thinking is what leads to discoveries and inventions (or at least the concepts and ideas of them).....although it takes the rational thinking to typically make it whatever it is possible.
Think of all things throughout history that would have been deemed crazy and all it took was some nut job to go after it, and in some cases be persecuted for it.
-
My understanding of voting patterns is that they are more heavily influenced by your voting identification during your first few votes than your changing age. In other words, you pick a tribe when you first become politically active, and then you tend to stick with that tribe, no matter what your age. (Can't remember where I saw these data, will have to hunt). But I suspect many people don't actually become politically active until after college or even later, which might mean their original identification with a party might be slightly more conservative than if they were college freshman or whatever. I wonder if THAT has been studied?
-
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical.
I think that's a cop out answer and I suspect that you do too. We also can't prove that God isn't a transexual turtle in a Big Bird costume, but that doesn't mean it is equally likely to be true as false.
We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe
We already have a name for things that do not exist in our physical universe. Imaginary. By definition, they don't exist.
I've never understood the argument that separates everything into "things that exist" and "things that don't exist" and then claims they are both equally real. If something doesn't exist in our physical universe then it has no place in our understanding of the universe. It cannot affect us, it has no interactions or impacts or manifestations or reality. They call it "supernatural" to highlight that it is beyond the natural (aka real) world.
If anything, I would like to believe that people get LESS religious as they older and wiser. Children abandon their beliefs about supernatural creatures and magic and Santa as they develop rational thought patterns. We learn how to think better as we age. Why do religion and investing seem to buck this trend?
Not a cop out, just stating the obvious that some things are not provable. If you believe God is a transexual turtle in a Big Bird costume then that's up to you, it's a matter of faith, and I'm not going to ridicule your faith. Same for someone who believes the universe is a middle schooler's science fair project. Belief that nothing beyond the natural world exists (philosophical naturalism) is itself a matter of faith, and again I'm not going to deride anyone's unprovable beliefs.
-
Also its actually been proven that having faith in a higher power does affect us in a very positive way (wish I believed and could turn of the logical rational thoughts) so that qualification alone would make it real, would it not?
I don't think this can be proven to be causation and not correlation. Certainly there is something different about a person who truly believes and one who doesn't whether it be the way their brain is wired or the community they were raised in.
-
Sigh. I tried to stop the derail re religion.
Yes you did. Did you forget that none of us have any control over where the forum threads go?
I knew that - I was just happier with the original topic and hoped I could re-rail the thread. ;-) The OT has been hashed out so many times before that it is boring. Maybe in another page or 3 this thread will get interesting again, I can hope.
-
By it's very definition having any faith in religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical. We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe or is otherwise unobservable be it a multiverse, a top-down cosmology, or a computer simulation (https://futurism.com/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-elon-musk-thinks-so/). At some level we are all irrational because we exist yet there is no purely rational provable explanation. Greek philosophers relied on the unmoved or prime mover, for some today it's the big bang, for others a creator being. As the saying goes, it's turtles all the way down.
OK?
It doesn't change the fact that belief in the unprovable is (by definition) irrational. Which is what I was saying . . .
-
This thread (this forum) is like riding a horse you found by a pond and finding out it is a kelpie instead. Wild ride ahead.
-
By it's very definition having any faith in religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical. We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe or is otherwise unobservable be it a multiverse, a top-down cosmology, or a computer simulation (https://futurism.com/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-elon-musk-thinks-so/). At some level we are all irrational because we exist yet there is no purely rational provable explanation. Greek philosophers relied on the unmoved or prime mover, for some today it's the big bang, for others a creator being. As the saying goes, it's turtles all the way down.
OK?
It doesn't change the fact that belief in the unprovable is (by definition) irrational. Which is what I was saying . . .
Fair enough, let me clarify. My point is that religious believe isn't necessarily more or less irrational than being areligious. Yet professing any kind of faith in God, or anything else metaphysical, is often looked down upon as being more irrational than philosophical naturalism. Sol is doing a great job of making this point.
-
It doesn't change the fact that belief in the unprovable is (by definition) irrational. Which is what I was saying . . .
What if believing in god is due to a mental disorder that is entirely explainable by psychology, and that also causes X as a side effect. Would observing X be a proof that god exists in that case?
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't.
We touched this in the debate about differences in intelligence between men and women. We can't prove there is a difference, but we can't prove there is no difference either. The null hypothesis puts the burden of the proof on the existence side, i.e. it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. That's because that's the "reasonable" thing to do. Welcome to science, where you just stick the word "reasonable" to justify any prior belief you have.
-
By it's very definition having any faith in religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
I cannot prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he doesn't. This is true of all things metaphysical. We cannot observe that which is beyond our physical universe or is otherwise unobservable be it a multiverse, a top-down cosmology, or a computer simulation (https://futurism.com/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation-elon-musk-thinks-so/). At some level we are all irrational because we exist yet there is no purely rational provable explanation. Greek philosophers relied on the unmoved or prime mover, for some today it's the big bang, for others a creator being. As the saying goes, it's turtles all the way down.
OK?
It doesn't change the fact that belief in the unprovable is (by definition) irrational. Which is what I was saying . . .
Fair enough, let me clarify. My point is that religious believe isn't necessarily more or less irrational than being areligious. Yet professing any kind of faith in God, or anything else metaphysical, is often looked down upon as being more irrational than philosophical naturalism. Sol is doing a great job of making this point.
Having faith in God or anything else metaphysical isn't looked down upon as being irrational. It is irrational by definition. While you could argue that atheism is not rational either (it is a claim to know the unknowable, just as religion is), agnosticism also falls under the areligious banner while remaining wholly rational.
It doesn't change the fact that belief in the unprovable is (by definition) irrational. Which is what I was saying . . .
What if believing in god is due to a mental disorder that is entirely explainable by psychology, and that also causes X as a side effect. Would observing X be a proof that god exists in that case?
If I'm schizophrenic and hear voices, do the voices exist? To me maybe, but does that carry over to the rest of the world?
Not really, no. You could prove that a chemical imbalance (or whatever the cause is) exists, you could show what the common side effects are. It would be proof of an odd mental condition though, not that god exists.
-
Fair enough, let me clarify. My point is that religious believe isn't necessarily more or less irrational than being areligious. Yet professing any kind of faith in God, or anything else metaphysical, is often looked down upon as being more irrational than philosophical naturalism. Sol is doing a great job of making this point.
You didn't need to turn this into a personal attack.
Philosophical naturalism, as you've defined it, is NOT the same thing as faith in the flying spaghetti monster. You're still stuck equating "things that exist" with "things that do not exist" and claiming they are both equally valid.
I have no problem with believing in supernatural things that are not part of the physical universe. If you think ghosts are real, you're not being inconsistent unless you also believe that ghosts can interact with the real world in some way. An entirely separate universe, independent of ours and without any interaction, is not provable but also not theoretically inconsistent. Unfortunately, people who believe in the supernatural seem to derive 100% of their belief from violating that separation. Ghosts are real because I saw one. Magic crystals are real because they healed me. God is real because he answered my prayers. These are each claims that the supernatural is natural, that it has some physical reality.
Belief in something unprovable, but not impossible, is a useless waste of time. What possible bearing could it ever have on us, if it cannot interact with the real world in any way? It can't be explanatory, or predictive, or contextual, or useful.
And while we're on the topic, I should point out that lots of other things that don't exist in the physical universe are still "real" because they exist inside the mind, and thus impact our behavior. "Patriotism" is my favorite example, because we all recognize it as a primary driver of human history, and yet it only exists within human culture. It's an idea, not a real physical thing, but it's a powerful and consequential idea full of beauty and also the potential seeds of conflict. I put "God(s)" and "patriotism" together in the same category. They exist now as cultural artifacts but will cease to exist when the last human consciousness dies out, while the physical universe continues on for billions more years without noticing the loss.
-
We touched this in the debate about differences in intelligence between men and women. We can't prove there is a difference, but we can't prove there is no difference either. The null hypothesis puts the burden of the proof on the existence side, i.e. it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. That's because that's the "reasonable" thing to do. Welcome to science, where you just stick the word "reasonable" to justify any prior belief you have.
Science is a wonderful tool for describing and understanding the natural world, and I would never advocate defaulting to "God" while conducting science, hence my belief in evolution. But as science peels back each layer of mystery in the universe we find that there's always another layer. It's an infinite regression. It appears that you believe there's a purely natural explanation for every layer in the regression - that science can and will explain the nature of everything. I eagerly await your proof.
-
We touched this in the debate about differences in intelligence between men and women. We can't prove there is a difference, but we can't prove there is no difference either. The null hypothesis puts the burden of the proof on the existence side, i.e. it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. That's because that's the "reasonable" thing to do. Welcome to science, where you just stick the word "reasonable" to justify any prior belief you have.
Science is a wonderful tool for describing and understanding the natural world
What other world is there?
It appears that you believe there's a purely natural explanation for every layer in the regression - that science can and will explain the nature of everything. I eagerly await your proof.
This is a trap question. Science doesn't need to explain an amorphous and undefinable 'everything'. It needs to explain the things that can impact us. The things that exist in our (natural) world. Things that can be observed, studied, and experimented. The reason that science is the default method of learning about things is that it is the most efficient method we've yet developed for doing this. If you believe there is a more efficient method, please enlighten us.
-
But as science peels back each layer of mystery in the universe we find that there's always another layer. It's an infinite regression. It appears that you believe there's a purely natural explanation for every layer in the regression - that science can and will explain the nature of everything. I eagerly await your proof.
That's funny, I would argue that the process you describe is exact what disproves the magical origins theory.
You've heard of the "God of the gaps"? Once upon a time in human history, God was the explanation for everything we didn't understand, from plagues to pregnancy, from seasons to sunshine. Over time, science has continued to solve these mysterious with provable explanations supported by universally observable facts, and religion has continued to retreat down the rabbit hole of remaining mysteries. Then science answers that next mystery, and religion retreats again, finding some remaining crevice that science has not yet fully explained. Rinse and repeat.
Watching this process from the outside looks like religion is fighting a losing battle, running out of ground where God can hide. It's not up to science to fill every crack in human knowledge all at once, and it shouldn't be up to religion to seek out the next mystery as justification for magical thinking. Religion can exist as a beautiful and wondrous (and sometimes horrible) part of our cultural heritage without needing to resort to supernatural explanations for things science is still working on. We don't need talking animals and supernatural miracles to explain our world anymore. We can let those stories persist as just stories, without feeling compelled to research string theory to give them relevance they already have.
-
You didn't need to turn this into a personal attack.
Philosophical naturalism, as you've defined it, is NOT the same thing as faith in the flying spaghetti monster. You're still stuck equating "things that exist" with "things that do not exist" and claiming they are both equally valid.
I have no problem with believing in supernatural things that are not part of the physical universe. If you think ghosts are real, you're not being inconsistent unless you also believe that ghosts can interact with the real world in some way. An entirely separate universe, independent of ours and without any interaction, is not provable but also not theoretically inconsistent. Unfortunately, people who believe in the supernatural seem to derive 100% of their belief from violating that separation. Ghosts are real because I saw one. Magic crystals are real because they healed me. God is real because he answered my prayers. These are each claims that the supernatural is natural, that it has some physical reality.
Belief in something unprovable, but not impossible, is a useless waste of time. What possible bearing could it ever have on us, if it cannot interact with the real world in any way? It can't be explanatory, or predictive, or contextual, or useful.
And while we're on the topic, I should point out that lots of other things that don't exist in the physical universe are still "real" because they exist inside the mind, and thus impact our behavior. "Patriotism" is my favorite example, because we all recognize it as a primary driver of human history, and yet it only exists within human culture. It's an idea, not a real physical thing, but it's a powerful and consequential idea full of beauty and also the potential seeds of conflict. I put "God(s)" and "patriotism" together in the same category. They exist now as cultural artifacts but will cease to exist when the last human consciousness dies out, while the physical universe continues on for billions more years without noticing the loss.
How did I make this personal? Are you or aren't you saying that religious belief is necessarily more irrational than areligious belief? If you're saying that they may be equal in their rationality then I misunderstood your point and we are in violent agreement.
Philosophic naturalism is not something I've defined. AFAIK it's most accurately describes the believe that there is nothing supernatural (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)):
In philosophy, naturalism is the "idea or belief that only natural (as opposed to supernatural or spiritual) laws and forces operate in the world."
If the universe was created, be it an almighty God or a "teenage hacker in the next universe up" (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-we-living-in-a-computer-simulation/) then of course that entity has the power to reach into their creation as they see fit. This would be an anomaly so this would not be empirically provable, so yes, from a scientific point of view it's a waste of time. Which is why we should stop trying mixing science and religion. Science does a great job of explaining how things work, but it can't answer questions about why we exist, meaning, purpose, and such. Unless of course one concludes that nihilism is likely consequence of naturalism (I don't think this is necessarily the case, and I doubt very many people really believe there is no meaning to anything). And it follows that creationists should stop it with their pseudo-science - if you want to believe in literal day young earth creation, fine, but leave science out of it. See, now I've pissed off the other side...
And note that I qualified my statement with "necessarily" as in religious (or areligious) people can be more or less rational in their thinking. Rationality is orthogonal to faith.
-
We touched this in the debate about differences in intelligence between men and women. We can't prove there is a difference, but we can't prove there is no difference either. The null hypothesis puts the burden of the proof on the existence side, i.e. it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. That's because that's the "reasonable" thing to do. Welcome to science, where you just stick the word "reasonable" to justify any prior belief you have.
Science is a wonderful tool for describing and understanding the natural world
What other world is there?
Good question, who knows. Is there a multiverse? Is there a spiritual realm?
It appears that you believe there's a purely natural explanation for every layer in the regression - that science can and will explain the nature of everything. I eagerly await your proof.
This is a trap question. Science doesn't need to explain an amorphous and undefinable 'everything'. It needs to explain the things that can impact us. The things that exist in our (natural) world. Things that can be observed, studied, and experimented. The reason that science is the default method of learning about things is that it is the most efficient method we've yet developed for doing this. If you believe there is a more efficient method, please enlighten us.
It's not a trap question just because you don't want to answer it.
I have no problem with science, the study of that which exists in our world and can be observed and experimented. However, what might more accurately be labled "scienceism" or a belief that science provides an all encompassing philosophy for describing everything, is just as much a religion as other religious beliefs.
-
But as science peels back each layer of mystery in the universe we find that there's always another layer. It's an infinite regression. It appears that you believe there's a purely natural explanation for every layer in the regression - that science can and will explain the nature of everything. I eagerly await your proof.
That's funny, I would argue that the process you describe is exact what disproves the magical origins theory.
You've heard of the "God of the gaps"? Once upon a time in human history, God was the explanation for everything we didn't understand, from plagues to pregnancy, from seasons to sunshine. Over time, science has continued to solve these mysterious with provable explanations supported by universally observable facts, and religion has continued to retreat down the rabbit hole of remaining mysteries. Then science answers that next mystery, and religion retreats again, finding some remaining crevice that science has not yet fully explained. Rinse and repeat.
Watching this process from the outside looks like religion is fighting a losing battle, running out of ground where God can hide. It's not up to science to fill every crack in human knowledge all at once, and it shouldn't be up to religion to seek out the next mystery as justification for magical thinking. Religion can exist as a beautiful and wondrous (and sometimes horrible) part of our cultural heritage without needing to resort to supernatural explanations for things science is still working on. We don't need talking animals and supernatural miracles to explain our world anymore. We can let those stories persist as just stories, without feeling compelled to research string theory to give them relevance they already have.
Huh, interesting POV. The more I learn about the universe - the immensity, intricacy, elegance, and beauty - the more my faith is strengthened. From my perspective, God revealed himself to humanity through ways in which they could understand at the time. It would be overwhelming gibberish if Moses wrote about atoms or quarks or DNA way back in the day.
-
belief that science provides an all encompassing philosophy for describing everything, is just as much a religion as other religious beliefs.
You sound like the Trumpster equivocating about Nazi's who just committed murder by saying "on many sides" over and over again. No. There is no equivalence here.
Science is not a religion, it's a method for finding facts. It's an ever evolving process, a journey of discovery, not a fixed belief system. Please stop conflating the issues at hand, either deliberately or accidentally.
-
Believing that some type of higher form/creator may exist = not irrational
Believing in a specific god who has done specific things without any evidence = irrational
π=irrational
-
We touched this in the debate about differences in intelligence between men and women. We can't prove there is a difference, but we can't prove there is no difference either. The null hypothesis puts the burden of the proof on the existence side, i.e. it doesn't exist unless proven otherwise. That's because that's the "reasonable" thing to do. Welcome to science, where you just stick the word "reasonable" to justify any prior belief you have.
Science is a wonderful tool for describing and understanding the natural world
What other world is there?
Good question, who knows. Is there a multiverse? Is there a spiritual realm?
If a tree falls in a spiritual forest, does it make a sound? Whether it does or not, why should I care?
I have no problem with science, the study of that which exists in our world and can be observed and experimented. However, what might more accurately be labled "scienceism" or a belief that science provides an all encompassing philosophy for describing everything, is just as much a religion as other religious beliefs.
I think we might actually be on the same page here then. Yeah, stuff that doesn't exist in the real (natural) world, stuff that is unknowable (reason for existence) is completely outside of the purview of science. Science doesn't need to explain things that don't matter.
-
This thread was fun up until this past page...
-
"Patriotism" is my favorite example, because we all recognize it as a primary driver of human history, and yet it only exists within human culture. It's an idea, not a real physical thing, but it's a powerful and consequential idea full of beauty and also the potential seeds of conflict.
This is a statement/idea which I've been thinking about lately. I consider "Patriotism" the same as "Religionism" where all they do is separate us from one another. "We" becomes "Us" and "Them".
This idea of "my people, my country, my religion", leads to seeing others as different and therefore "less than". This starts from birth and it is ingrained in our everyday lives.
On the other hand, the idea of inclusivity is forced out of humans by ignorant people in control and we end up killing/hating each other because of it.
I'm happy to live in the US, a free country. But I don't think/judge myself better than people from other countries, considering I wasn't born in the US.
I've seen some interesting articles that say humans only have the capacity to care about a limited number of people (~150), and generally those people come from our "tribe" whether that's religion, country, race, whatever. It's a helpful trait in terms of keeping your own people alive, but anyone outside is considered "other" and is therefore competing for limited resources and must be kept away, killed or at least not shared with, since it would endanger "our" survival. In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead.
-
This thread was fun up until this past page...
Agreed.
-
This thread was fun up until this past page...
Agreed.
The worst part? I can't get it out of my Unread Replies list.
-
Is there no way to mute threads? Happy that folks are having a deep conversation but not really here for this. Anyone talking religion open to moving the convo over to a new thread in Off Topic?
-
Huh, interesting POV. The more I learn about the universe - the immensity, intricacy, elegance, and beauty - the more my faith is strengthened. From my perspective, God revealed himself to humanity through ways in which they could understand at the time. It would be overwhelming gibberish if Moses wrote about atoms or quarks or DNA way back in the day.
More power to you. I would like to see more of that and less of the negativity around here.
-
"Patriotism" is my favorite example, because we all recognize it as a primary driver of human history, and yet it only exists within human culture. It's an idea, not a real physical thing, but it's a powerful and consequential idea full of beauty and also the potential seeds of conflict.
This is a statement/idea which I've been thinking about lately. I consider "Patriotism" the same as "Religionism" where all they do is separate us from one another. "We" becomes "Us" and "Them".
This idea of "my people, my country, my religion", leads to seeing others as different and therefore "less than". This starts from birth and it is ingrained in our everyday lives.
On the other hand, the idea of inclusivity is forced out of humans by ignorant people in control and we end up killing/hating each other because of it.
I'm happy to live in the US, a free country. But I don't think/judge myself better than people from other countries, considering I wasn't born in the US.
I've seen some interesting articles that say humans only have the capacity to care about a limited number of people (~150), and generally those people come from our "tribe" whether that's religion, country, race, whatever. It's a helpful trait in terms of keeping your own people alive, but anyone outside is considered "other" and is therefore competing for limited resources and must be kept away, killed or at least not shared with, since it would endanger "our" survival. In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead.
I haven't seen/read those. Thanks for the info I'll Google them
One of the weird examples of this separatism is when something horrible happens and lives are lost. Our news outlets quickly point out how many Americans were involved or if none were, as if those deaths are more important.
You always hear the newscaster with a normal voice, "The attack in so and so took twenty two lives, (Here comes the change in tone) and four of them are believed to be Americans". So what about the other 18, do they not count?
Sorry for the deviation in the thread. Maybe I'll start one talking about inclusivity/separatism.
They count but not as much as people we associate with. If I hear someone got cancer in my office and has six months to live I'm certainly sorry it happened, but I will not go home and be overwhelmed by grief the same way I would if I heard that my child was the one with that prognosis.
People who live close to us are more like us and more connected. If we were too deviant we'd not get along and one of us would move. I have more in common with Americans (being from here) than I do with Chinese, or Israelis. The culture they live in is different and therefore they will care more or less about different things. So sure, the news organizations understand that people will perk up their hearing when they hear an American was involved because now I have a connection, albeit, a small one where just moments before I had an even smaller one (being a human).
-
One of the weird examples of this separatism is when something horrible happens and lives are lost. Our news outlets quickly point out how many Americans were involved or if none were, as if those deaths are more important.
You always hear the newscaster with a normal voice, "The attack in so and so took twenty two lives, (Here comes the change in tone) and four of them are believed to be Americans". So what about the other 18, do they not count?
Sorry for the deviation in the thread. Maybe I'll start one talking about inclusivity/separatism.
This has always driven me crazy. I'm as patriotic as the next liberal millennial ruining America, and I get that if there was something like a hostage situation, Americans involved would be "our problem" as a country to help solve (as the country/government's duty is to its people). But in the face of tragedy, "these 20 people died but these four in particular you should feel sad for despite " really rubs me the wrong way. The same concept made in uncomfortable in church when I was a kid (apathetic atheist now but grew up in a "casually religious" household): the pastor would pray and first say something generic and wholesome like "Help all those in need and suffering," but then annotate it with "especially Bob, Jane, and Bill" (those being specific "written-in entries" of loved ones of members of the church or whatever). Feel compassion for those members of your "tribe" but implying that they're cosmically more important than the rest of humanity? It just feels wrong.
-
One of the weird examples of this separatism is when something horrible happens and lives are lost. Our news outlets quickly point out how many Americans were involved or if none were, as if those deaths are more important.
You always hear the newscaster with a normal voice, "The attack in so and so took twenty two lives, (Here comes the change in tone) and four of them are believed to be Americans". So what about the other 18, do they not count?
Providing this information in a new story seem very relevant. I haven't heard anyone imply that the other lives weren't important. Whenever I hear about a terrorist attack overseas, one of my first thoughts is whether any Americans were killed. But, even if there are no Americans killed, it doesn't change my feelings about the tragedy.
-
In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead
Turns out technologically driven social change is moving way faster than human cultural evolution can adapt.
-
In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead
Turns out technologically driven social change is moving way faster than human cultural evolution can adapt.
Without technology it was much more difficult to know about anything that was happening of even know that there were different tribes they were happening to. I do not feel that because I hear about something I need to care about it and assuming our culture is not evolving if we do not do that is a bridge too far in my opinion. We all have only so much energy, including for compassion and empathy, and like it or not we will care more about those similar to us that different. You see it in animals too. More intelligent species will at times have other mothers care for babies that are not theirs, but they have not suddenly developed empathy, they just understand that baby is still part of their group, but if that baby is from a pack on the other side of the savanna you can bet they'll eat it for food versus taking care of it. It's funny how we like to think we are going to behave differently just because it makes us feel nice to think we should. Deep down we've got animal instincts just like every other living organism, we can suppress them and join up and sing kumbaya, but that does not change the instincts.
-
In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead
Turns out technologically driven social change is moving way faster than human cultural evolution can adapt.
Without technology it was much more difficult to know about anything that was happening of even know that there were different tribes they were happening to. I do not feel that because I hear about something I need to care about it and assuming our culture is not evolving if we do not do that is a bridge too far in my opinion. We all have only so much energy, including for compassion and empathy, and like it or not we will care more about those similar to us that different. You see it in animals too. More intelligent species will at times have other mothers care for babies that are not theirs, but they have not suddenly developed empathy, they just understand that baby is still part of their group, but if that baby is from a pack on the other side of the savanna you can bet they'll eat it for food versus taking care of it. It's funny how we like to think we are going to behave differently just because it makes us feel nice to think we should. Deep down we've got animal instincts just like every other living organism, we can suppress them and join up and sing kumbaya, but that does not change the instincts.
Does that mean we shouldn't even try to change our instincts?
It's also instinctual for us to consume and accumulate material possessions but denying that instinct is a big part of what this website is about.
It's also instinctual for males to produce many offspring with many partners but denying that instinct allows for more meaningful relationships and slows population growth.
I don't disagree with your original comment. I think it's worth noting that we are animals with instincts and that people aren't evil because they follow those instincts. We also can't take the time to feel compassion for everyone who dies everyday. The trouble is when our feelings lead us to believe we truly are better or more important than others and when we allow those thoughts to influence public policy.
-
belief that science provides an all encompassing philosophy for describing everything, is just as much a religion as other religious beliefs.
You sound like the Trumpster equivocating about Nazi's who just committed murder by saying "on many sides" over and over again. No. There is no equivalence here.
Science is not a religion, it's a method for finding facts. It's an ever evolving process, a journey of discovery, not a fixed belief system. Please stop conflating the issues at hand, either deliberately or accidentally.
Now who's making it personal :)
Agree, science is not religion. Scienceism, or a belief that science can empirically explain all things, that's a different story. I'm still waiting for empirical proof of what caused the big bang, and then what caused that thing, ... Another way of looking at it, what brought about energy and matter, or do we just accept that it came about from nothing, an event which itself would contradict our physical laws.
-
Does that mean we shouldn't even try to change our instincts?
It's not possible to change instinct, but it is possible to suppress it.
It's also instinctual for us to consume and accumulate material possessions but denying that instinct is a big part of what this website is about.
Is the behaviour of hyper-accumulation really instinctual? My suspicion is that we've created a society where advertisers prey upon certain ancient fears/drivers to sell things to us. I don't think that a person's default state is to wish for a large truck and a McMansion.
It's also instinctual for males to produce many offspring with many partners but denying that instinct allows for more meaningful relationships and slows population growth.
Careful here. This is getting into normative lifestyle judgement territory. While it's not my bag, I've been led to believe that it's possible for people with multiple partners to develop meaningful relationships. Multiple partners don't increase population growth, unprotected sex does.
-
I have no problem with science, the study of that which exists in our world and can be observed and experimented. However, what might more accurately be labled "scienceism" or a belief that science provides an all encompassing philosophy for describing everything, is just as much a religion as other religious beliefs.
I think we might actually be on the same page here then. Yeah, stuff that doesn't exist in the real (natural) world, stuff that is unknowable (reason for existence) is completely outside of the purview of science. Science doesn't need to explain things that don't matter.
To be clear, while I don't think science should concern itself with the unknowable, that's not the same as saying religion doesn't matter. Religious beliefs, whether scienceism/naturalism, Judeo/Christian, Eastern Philosophy or whatever the case may be, inform our deepest values and convictions. To me these things matter.
-
This thread was fun up until this past page...
Agreed.
I apologize. I'll stop responding. Those who disagree with me can have the last word(s).
-
Deep down we've got animal instincts just like every other living organism,
Ha, this was exactly my point! The "genetic" aspect of human cultural expression is largely oriented towards life 10000 years ago rather than today. While some cultural expressions have been shown to be primarily driven by environment, others - including group tribalism - appear to be genetically influenced (or at least bounded). It took tens of thousands of years for early group dynamics to develop in humans - ~100 years of globalism is not nearly long enough to change anything naturally.
Now, as our understanding of biology grows, this is the hope that we may come, by degrees, to be able to consciously compensate for these predilections and direct the growth of human culture in a cogent way. We've taken some baby steps in this direction but... We'll probably be cloning supersoldiers using a limitless energy fusion reactor before it actually happens.
-
Does that mean we shouldn't even try to change our instincts?
It's not possible to change instinct, but it is possible to suppress it.
It's also instinctual for us to consume and accumulate material possessions but denying that instinct is a big part of what this website is about.
Is the behaviour of hyper-accumulation really instinctual? My suspicion is that we've created a society where advertisers prey upon certain ancient fears/drivers to sell things to us. I don't think that a person's default state is to wish for a large truck and a McMansion.
It's also instinctual for males to produce many offspring with many partners but denying that instinct allows for more meaningful relationships and slows population growth.
Careful here. This is getting into normative lifestyle judgement territory. While it's not my bag, I've been led to believe that it's possible for people with multiple partners to develop meaningful relationships. Multiple partners don't increase population growth, unprotected sex does.
-I also said denying our instincts. You know what I mean.
-Maybe hyper-accumulation isn't instinctual but the idea still works. If advertisers are playing on fear, avoiding scary things is instinctual.
-I have no problem with polyamorism. I meant in more general terms that it's a good thing that procreation is not our primary driver.
Edit: I can already see ways to argue against myself here. The point is we suppress some of our animal instincts for the betterment of society. Can we agree on that?
-
In our super connected and rich world we'd hope that people would become more generous and inclusive, but somehow we seem to be amplifying and reinforcing these tribal differences instead
Turns out technologically driven social change is moving way faster than human cultural evolution can adapt.
Without technology it was much more difficult to know about anything that was happening of even know that there were different tribes they were happening to. I do not feel that because I hear about something I need to care about it and assuming our culture is not evolving if we do not do that is a bridge too far in my opinion. We all have only so much energy, including for compassion and empathy, and like it or not we will care more about those similar to us that different. You see it in animals too. More intelligent species will at times have other mothers care for babies that are not theirs, but they have not suddenly developed empathy, they just understand that baby is still part of their group, but if that baby is from a pack on the other side of the savanna you can bet they'll eat it for food versus taking care of it. It's funny how we like to think we are going to behave differently just because it makes us feel nice to think we should. Deep down we've got animal instincts just like every other living organism, we can suppress them and join up and sing kumbaya, but that does not change the instincts.
The trouble is when our feelings lead us to believe we truly are better or more important than others and when we allow those thoughts to influence public policy.
Yes, that's the base of your point, and I agree. Never said I think Americans are better, just that it's natural to care more about the group we belong to. It does not hurt anyone to do that unless taken to your point, so I think our thought process aligns, but perhaps you're trying to change how you feel about your caring level of another group.
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
Thanks.
I was recently annoyed by the thread where someone asked if they should hire a professional to paint and caulk the trim on their one story house. So many people thought it was too dangerous or too much work to use a ladder.
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
I hear there's a little blue pill that can fix softness... >_<
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
I hear there's a little blue pill that can fix softness... >_<
Diamonds are anti-Mustachian, so surely blue diamonds are out. ;)
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
I hear there's a little blue pill that can fix softness... >_<
Diamonds are anti-Mustachian, so surely blue diamonds are out. ;)
Blue topaz? Beautiful, good hardness, low cost.
-
There's a current thread asking for advice on which expensive mattress to buy . . . and they refuse to even try sleeping on the floor first. Sigh.
-
There is another one about getting a pilot's license for fun. I'm sure it is fun, but it certainly isn't mustachian.
-
There's a current thread asking for advice on which expensive mattress to buy . . . and they refuse to even try sleeping on the floor first. Sigh.
Hmmph. I find floors are often more comfortable than beds.
-
By it's very definition having any faith religion is irrational - it's the belief in something without proof.
Yeah, isn't it amazing?!
-
GACK. That link reference had someone in Canada maxing out RRSP's at $22k per year, so paying net tax on $78k, versus someone only contributing $6k to 401k on $110k. Of course someone with 78K per year pays a lot less tax in dollars than someone earning $104k per year!! grrr. One pays 21 % taxes, at a lower income, and the other pays 28% taxes for a higher income. There are many other factors that we can't see in this equation as well.
Property tax is a different situation, by city and state, (ex., NJ appears to be horrendous for taxes, overall, really) for both countries.
The guy in the thread asked for the income taxes for someone in the U.S. with a $100K income, so I gave him the real results of someone with $110K with deductions making it about $103K of taxable income, so that was within 3% of what he was asking for.
We're second highest next to N.J.
I don't have a problem with your reply, it was actually quite generous to provide details as you did. Just with the original poster who did not state very clearly that maxing out retirements brought his income down to around $78k, and with the first $11k tax free, well, it was not really a full $100k taxable income..that op was asking a comparison for.
I was that poster. I assumed as mustachians that we'd be maxing out tax saving vehicles. And I did mention the reduced taxable income as clarification in a subsequent post.
Are you saying that those deductions do not exist in the States? Or that the maximums for tax savings vehicles are lower? Honest question b/c I do not know the answer.
As for the higher sales tax - that doesn't affect us as much as "regulars" since we don't by very much shit, right?
(sorry for being off-topic)
i have found that even some Canadians think that maxing out is far, far less than the total allowed to most, due to mis-understandings about their pensions mainly... for the US resident, similar confusion occurs (and doubly so if you are trying to think about across the border conditions). Also, the difference in SS and medicare versus CPP, Welfare, EI, and Medical etc. Very different systems. SS pays out double the benefits but costs double in payments upfront...
US / Canada Comparisons (SmartAsset.com calculator and EY tax calculator),
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE FICA, CPP or EI Taxes paid by the employee, because these provide very real benefits in very different amounts in each country. Assume your own USA Health care costs are still to be added... could be $300 to $1000 per month.
Just State and Federal taxes
==> $80k family income, with one high earner, and one SAH spouse, no kids, standard deduction not itemized.
Canada, Taxes are $15.5k to $20k ; US are $13k (Ohio, WA state is $3k less, etc.)
==> $100k family income, single high earner, married no kids.
Canada Taxes $17k to $22k ; USA $18.5k (ohio)
==> $150k family income
Canada Taxes are $44k to $52k; USA $34k (ohio); Wa state is $6k less...
etc.
One thing that I noted, was that in USA, there are far more possible deductions, on base taxes, too. Canada has the ccb for kids, etc.
-
Maybe you can start a sticky with "the original meaning of mustachianism" or something. Or an "I will tell you if you are a bad*ss" thread. I'm not being facetious and actually think something like that would be sort of fun.
Just take everything in this this thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/our-mustachian-sacred-cows/) and remove the sarcasm.
-
I was that poster. I assumed as mustachians that we'd be maxing out tax saving vehicles. And I did mention the reduced taxable income as clarification in a subsequent post.
Are you saying that those deductions do not exist in the States? Or that the maximums for tax savings vehicles are lower? Honest question b/c I do not know the answer.
It would be unmustachian for me to do so.
At my age, the maximum contribution is $24,000 through my company retirement plan (401k, 403b, etc). But the problem is that any tax savings can be eaten up quickly over a several years when your company retirement plan has high fees. Ours used to have a 1.5% management fee on top of the fund expense ratios, which are high as well. The management fee is half that much now, but within 5 years, a post-tax investment comes out ahead. So I invest $6000 in the company pre-tax retirement plan to take advantage of the company match to that level, I am not qualified for a standard IRA because of my income, but I am under the threshold that allows me to invest in a Roth, so I max out $6500 there, but since it's post-tax, the contributions don't lower my tax bill. Due to my high savings rate, most of my savings still goes to non-retirement savings in my Vanguard account.
So, for a single earner in the U.S., I'm paying about $26,000 in taxes on $103,000 adjusted gross income (before subtracting about $10,000 in additional deductions). Then $3700 property tax, 8% to 10% sales tax, gas taxes, etc. Health insurance is extra - I'm actually getting a great deal there with a very low deductible.
-
Has the MMM community gone soft?
.....I'm trying to get the 'fun' thread back on track. :)
I hear there's a little blue pill that can fix softness... >_<
Diamonds are anti-Mustachian, so surely blue diamonds are out. ;)
I like Blue Diamond Almonds.
-
I think we have a lot of people just beginning to dip their toes in Mustachianism, so they haven't fully escaped from the Consumerist Matrix yet. We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
There was a time when my wife suggested that we not subscribe to cable TV and I felt a panicky feeling in my chest. How were we supposed to survive without 24 hour continuous coverage of millionaires playing ball games and TV channels devoted to weddings/little people/little people getting married? It was a little scary.
-
I was that poster. I assumed as mustachians that we'd be maxing out tax saving vehicles. And I did mention the reduced taxable income as clarification in a subsequent post.
Are you saying that those deductions do not exist in the States? Or that the maximums for tax savings vehicles are lower? Honest question b/c I do not know the answer.
It would be unmustachian for me to do so.
At my age, the maximum contribution is $24,000 through my company retirement plan (401k, 403b, etc). But the problem is that any tax savings can be eaten up quickly over a several years when your company retirement plan has high fees. Ours used to have a 1.5% management fee on top of the fund expense ratios, which are high as well. The management fee is half that much now, but within 5 years, a post-tax investment comes out ahead. So I invest $6000 in the company pre-tax retirement plan to take advantage of the company match to that level, I am not qualified for a standard IRA because of my income, but I am under the threshold that allows me to invest in a Roth, so I max out $6500 there, but since it's post-tax, the contributions don't lower my tax bill. Due to my high savings rate, most of my savings still goes to non-retirement savings in my Vanguard account.
So, for a single earner in the U.S., I'm paying about $26,000 in taxes on $103,000 adjusted gross income (before subtracting about $10,000 in additional deductions). Then $3700 property tax, 8% to 10% sales tax, gas taxes, etc. Health insurance is extra - I'm actually getting a great deal there with a very low deductible.
Oh, that's interesting. Is the States, are the only tax-advantaged vehicles the company provided plans? In Canada, we can use Vangaard or whatever we like.
-
We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
No we weren't. :P
-
I think we have a lot of people just beginning to dip their toes in Mustachianism, so they haven't fully escaped from the Consumerist Matrix yet. We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
There was a time when my wife suggested that we not subscribe to cable TV and I felt a panicky feeling in my chest. How were we supposed to survive without 24 hour continuous coverage of millionaires playing ball games and TV channels devoted to weddings/little people/little people getting married? It was a little scary.
Sure, but when I was new and suggested that maybe I needed a new car, I was not met with "Oh yes, you deserve it, if you can afford it', and such I was met with WTF is wrong with you, no one needs a new car check craigs list.
I am seeing much more of the "you deserve it" comments now.
-
People should come here to have their spending decisions challenged, not to give each other a pat on the back for spending money to make ourselves happy.
-
I think we have a lot of people just beginning to dip their toes in Mustachianism, so they haven't fully escaped from the Consumerist Matrix yet. We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
There was a time when my wife suggested that we not subscribe to cable TV and I felt a panicky feeling in my chest. How were we supposed to survive without 24 hour continuous coverage of millionaires playing ball games and TV channels devoted to weddings/little people/little people getting married? It was a little scary.
Sure, but when I was new and suggested that maybe I needed a new car, I was not met with "Oh yes, you deserve it, if you can afford it', and such I was met with WTF is wrong with you, no one needs a new car check craigs list.
I am seeing much more of the "you deserve it" comments now.
Maybe we need to counteract those kind of comments more aggressively then, instead of just complaining and doing nothing about it. I see far fewer face punches on this forum than in days past and I wonder if it's because we're all becoming timid. If someone is doing something ridiculous, you need to call them out on it and be prepared to be nasty to them if necessary.
I've been doing that for a couple weeks on the "eating out" thread on the Anti-Mustachian Shame and Comedy sub-forum.
-
I think we have a lot of people just beginning to dip their toes in Mustachianism, so they haven't fully escaped from the Consumerist Matrix yet. We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
There was a time when my wife suggested that we not subscribe to cable TV and I felt a panicky feeling in my chest. How were we supposed to survive without 24 hour continuous coverage of millionaires playing ball games and TV channels devoted to weddings/little people/little people getting married? It was a little scary.
Sure, but when I was new and suggested that maybe I needed a new car, I was not met with "Oh yes, you deserve it, if you can afford it', and such I was met with WTF is wrong with you, no one needs a new car check craigs list.
I am seeing much more of the "you deserve it" comments now.
Maybe we need to counteract those kind of comments more aggressively then, instead of just complaining and doing nothing about it. I see far fewer face punches on this forum than in days past and I wonder if it's because we're all becoming timid. If someone is doing something ridiculous, you need to call them out on it and be prepared to be nasty to them if necessary.
I've been doing that for a couple weeks on the "eating out" thread on the Anti-Mustachian Shame and Comedy sub-forum.
Eating out at all is facepunch worthy. Doing it on a weekly basis is patently ridiculous.
-
Eating out at all is facepunch worthy. Doing it on a weekly basis is patently ridiculous.
But what if "my values" tell me that my regular Wednesday Applebee's run really adds happiness and joy to my life? Don't I deserve it? Isn't this a forum about prioritizing your spending on the best restaurants you can afford? What if I cut back on buying beans from the bulk foods isle so that I have more money for Applebee's, since Applebee's makes me truly happy and beans don't?
-
A woman started a "gauntlet" thread about trying to see if she could lay off buying clothes for one month. I suggested she might have a shopping addiction and was scolded by a high-post-count regular (who often wants green lights for her own shopping addiction)
-
A woman started a "gauntlet" thread about trying to see if she could lay off buying clothes for one month. I suggested she might have a shopping addiction and was scolded by a high-post-count regular (who often wants green lights for her own shopping addiction)
Yeah, that's weird. Shouldn't it be "only ever buy clothes if I actually need them"? Which reminds me, I need to buy some jeans as mine are starting to disintegrate.
-
Is it because there are a lot more newbies asking the stupid questions and the oldsters are fed up of answering the same damn things over and over again so it's only the semi-newbies who actually reply? I don't read case studies any more, I find them too annoying.
I wonder if we could crowdsource a Mustachian FAQ with all these stupid questions and answers which are quotes from (and links to) MMM posts and quotes from (and links to) the best ever answers on the forum. Then all we'd have to do is see the stupid question, copy and paste the correct answer, and move on with our day.
-
You mean the stickied thread in the "Forum information & FAQs" section of the forum?
-
But what if "my values" tell me that my regular Wednesday Applebee's run really adds happiness and joy to my life? Don't I deserve it?
No! No one's happiness should ever by tied to Applebee's.
-
No! No one's happiness should ever by tied to Applebee's.
Words to live by.
-
I think we have a lot of people just beginning to dip their toes in Mustachianism, so they haven't fully escaped from the Consumerist Matrix yet. We need to remember that we were all at that point at one time.
There was a time when my wife suggested that we not subscribe to cable TV and I felt a panicky feeling in my chest. How were we supposed to survive without 24 hour continuous coverage of millionaires playing ball games and TV channels devoted to weddings/little people/little people getting married? It was a little scary.
Sure, but when I was new and suggested that maybe I needed a new car, I was not met with "Oh yes, you deserve it, if you can afford it', and such I was met with WTF is wrong with you, no one needs a new car check craigs list.
I am seeing much more of the "you deserve it" comments now.
Maybe we need to counteract those kind of comments more aggressively then, instead of just complaining and doing nothing about it. I see far fewer face punches on this forum than in days past and I wonder if it's because we're all becoming timid. If someone is doing something ridiculous, you need to call them out on it and be prepared to be nasty to them if necessary.
I've been doing that for a couple weeks on the "eating out" thread on the Anti-Mustachian Shame and Comedy sub-forum.
Eating out at all is facepunch worthy. Doing it on a weekly basis is patently ridiculous.
I was explaining on the thread how to make filet mignon for two with gourmet starch and vegetables and wine for only $18, so it wouldn't be necessary to go out and spend a lot for a special occasion dinner (like an anniversary or holiday) and some idiot told me that wasn't a good deal. Those are the kinds of people who need to get a verbal slap upside the head.
-
Maybe you can start a sticky with "the original meaning of mustachianism" or something. Or an "I will tell you if you are a bad*ss" thread. I'm not being facetious and actually think something like that would be sort of fun.
Just take everything in this this thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/our-mustachian-sacred-cows/) and remove the sarcasm.
I miss that discussion. Especially the folks who couldn't comprehend the entire thing was tongue in cheek.
-
But what if "my values" tell me that my regular Wednesday Applebee's run really adds happiness and joy to my life? Don't I deserve it?
No! No one's happiness should ever by tied to Applebee's.
Words to live by.
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
-
Maybe you can start a sticky with "the original meaning of mustachianism" or something. Or an "I will tell you if you are a bad*ss" thread. I'm not being facetious and actually think something like that would be sort of fun.
Just take everything in this this thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/our-mustachian-sacred-cows/) and remove the sarcasm.
I miss that discussion. Especially the folks who couldn't comprehend the entire thing was tongue in cheek.
Resurrected it, just for you, and this thread :)
-
But what if "my values" tell me that my regular Wednesday Applebee's run really adds happiness and joy to my life? Don't I deserve it?
No! No one's happiness should ever by tied to Applebee's.
Words to live by.
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
How's the new blender working out though? Life changing? :P
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
-
I was that poster. I assumed as mustachians that we'd be maxing out tax saving vehicles. And I did mention the reduced taxable income as clarification in a subsequent post.
Are you saying that those deductions do not exist in the States? Or that the maximums for tax savings vehicles are lower? Honest question b/c I do not know the answer.
It would be unmustachian for me to do so.
At my age, the maximum contribution is $24,000 through my company retirement plan (401k, 403b, etc). But the problem is that any tax savings can be eaten up quickly over a several years when your company retirement plan has high fees. Ours used to have a 1.5% management fee on top of the fund expense ratios, which are high as well. The management fee is half that much now, but within 5 years, a post-tax investment comes out ahead. So I invest $6000 in the company pre-tax retirement plan to take advantage of the company match to that level, I am not qualified for a standard IRA because of my income, but I am under the threshold that allows me to invest in a Roth, so I max out $6500 there, but since it's post-tax, the contributions don't lower my tax bill. Due to my high savings rate, most of my savings still goes to non-retirement savings in my Vanguard account.
So, for a single earner in the U.S., I'm paying about $26,000 in taxes on $103,000 adjusted gross income (before subtracting about $10,000 in additional deductions). Then $3700 property tax, 8% to 10% sales tax, gas taxes, etc. Health insurance is extra - I'm actually getting a great deal there with a very low deductible.
Oh, that's interesting. Is the States, are the only tax-advantaged vehicles the company provided plans? In Canada, we can use Vangaard or whatever we like.
No. If it wasn't for my income level and having a retirement plan through work, I would be able to put $6500 into a traditional IRA pre-tax. Here is the rule for a traditional IRA that I copied / pasted:
"If you have a workplace retirement plan, the deduction for your traditional IRA contribution is phased out completely if your AGI is $118,000 or more (married couple filing jointly) or $71,000 or more (individual), or $10,000 for a married person filing separately."
Since my AGI is well over $71,000, I can't take advantage of it, which is why I do the Roth instead.
-
Maybe you can start a sticky with "the original meaning of mustachianism" or something. Or an "I will tell you if you are a bad*ss" thread. I'm not being facetious and actually think something like that would be sort of fun.
Just take everything in this this thread (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/our-mustachian-sacred-cows/) and remove the sarcasm.
that was fun :)
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
-
Ha Kraft dinner wins again. 49c per box.
Two boxes makes three meals! 33c a meal!
Healthy is for other people. I need to FI.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
You are both consumer suckas. I'm not eating lunch today.
-
Ha Kraft dinner wins again. 49c per box.
Two boxes makes three meals! 33c a meal!
Healthy is for other people. I need to FI.
Hmm, that's hard to beat. I can do healthy for around $2/day with rice/beans/cheap vegetables but that would be a 100% increase in food budget for you! AND your in Quebec City. Good luck.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
You are both consumer suckas. I'm not eating lunch today.
I skipped breakfast and ate my $1 lunch early. Bad idea.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
I hope that's your only meal of the day or that you live in a tent in the woods and have no other bills ever because at that rate you are far exceeding the $1/day Sol left us.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
You are both consumer suckas. I'm not eating lunch today.
I killed both my hunger and solved our ant problem simultaneously at lunch today. Mmmm crunchy high protein.
-
Ha Kraft dinner wins again. 49c per box.
Two boxes makes three meals! 33c a meal!
Healthy is for other people. I need to FI.
Um I don't know if you want to have children some day but . . .
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/12/well/eat/the-chemicals-in-your-mac-and-cheese.html?mcubz=0&_r=0
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/07/25/new_study_shows_sperm_count_among_western_men_has_shrunk_by_half_since_the.html
might want to rethink that Mac and Cheese.
Or not . . but . . The More You Know!
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
You are both consumer suckas. I'm not eating lunch today.
I killed both my hunger and solved our ant problem simultaneously at lunch today. Mmmm crunchy high protein.
If you are talented enough to have eliminated every single ant and eliminated the ant problem so that not a single one emerges again by consuming them, you can make some real money.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I giggled into my ~$0.75 homemade lunch.
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
You are both consumer suckas. I'm not eating lunch today.
I killed both my hunger and solved our ant problem simultaneously at lunch today. Mmmm crunchy high protein.
If you are talented enough to have eliminated every single ant and eliminated the ant problem so that not a single one emerges again by consuming them, you can make some real money.
But then he would have to start bringing lunch to work again.
-
Ha Kraft dinner wins again. 49c per box.
Two boxes makes three meals! 33c a meal!
Healthy is for other people. I need to FI.
Um I don't know if you want to have children some day but . . .
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/12/well/eat/the-chemicals-in-your-mac-and-cheese.html?mcubz=0&_r=0
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/07/25/new_study_shows_sperm_count_among_western_men_has_shrunk_by_half_since_the.html
might want to rethink that Mac and Cheese.
Or not . . but . . The More You Know!
I can say that is patently false. I ate almost exclusively mac and cheese for years and when my wife and I were trying to get pregnant all three happened on the first try.
-
I think he's saying that he could work in de-infesting area of ants as his job. So his lunch would always be present on location where he's working!
-
Dang. I thought I could beat that but my gumbo & rice came out to $1.23. It's also 1100 calories though, so I don't feel too bad.
Gumbo and rice sounds good though. Though Canadian Ben has us both beat rather soundly though.
-
Wait, are you telling me that my personal value system for how to spend my money shouldn't be the sole determining factor of whether or not I am making financially prudent decisions? That's become hearsay around these parts. It wasn't that long ago that I had 30 people from this forum tell me to buy a $600 blender because it would radically change my life for the better.
As a quick reminder to everyone, approximately one billion human beings on planet earth currently live on less than one dollar per day. That's a total annual income of less than what this forum recommends you spend on a fucking blender. Screw all of you who think like that, right in the ear. Your wasteful consumer spending is a disgrace to every moral principle humanity is supposed to embody, and I have no reservations about calling you out for it.
I'm pretty disgusted by what this place has become.
I was one of the people who argued that in theory an expensive blender could be worthwhile if it somehow delivered a value greater than the cost. But I also pointed out that a $600 ($800/$400 whatever) blender is extremely unlikely to actually provide that value. Chances are someone is trying to make justifications for their bad decisions. The only scenario I can imagine would be if the durability exceeded that of a $50 blender by 12 times AND you couldn't buy it used. And of course consider the opportunity cost of the upfront purchase vs. $50 every however often it dies...
Point is, I sometimes engage in these analytical conversations because I enjoy considering all of the possibilities and want to be open minded. However, I can see where other less dedicated frugalites might read this as justification for foolish purchases even though they don't meet the specific criteria.
And regarding the forums getting soft, I agree that sometimes it goes too far but I also agree that being more strict will scare some people off.
-
You mean the stickied thread in the "Forum information & FAQs" section of the forum?
Just like that, but with stupid questions. "Isn't it actually a great deal to lease a car? There's no maintenance!" "Isn't it impossible to mow your own lawn?" "I earn $100/hr. Isn't it a better use of my time to pay someone minimum wage to cook my meals and deliver them?"
-
Healthy is for other people. I need to FI.
You may get away with this when you're 27 (according to your profile) but watch out, health issues can creep up on you and middle age is just around the corner .
-
You mean the stickied thread in the "Forum information & FAQs" section of the forum?
Just like that, but with stupid questions. "Isn't it actually a great deal to lease a car? There's no maintenance!" "Isn't it impossible to mow your own lawn?" "I earn $100/hr. Isn't it a better use of my time to pay someone minimum wage to cook my meals and deliver them?"
I'd be happy to point people in the direction of such a sticky if someone were willing to create one. Are you volunteering?
-
I guess we have to assume some people don't read the blog before asking questions in the forum?
Oh bother
-
I guess we have to assume some people don't read the blog before asking questions in the forum?
Oh bother
Its not even the questions. I get someone new asking about dollar cost averaging, etc. But the responses are what is getting me.
It is not ok to buy a brand new car unless you are a multi millionaire.
-
I can say that is patently false. I ate almost exclusively mac and cheese for years and when my wife and I were trying to get pregnant all three happened on the first try.
Sperm counts are honestly overrated. The article even mentions this:
The good news is that 47.1 million sperm per milliliter is still pretty healthy. A person’s sperm count is considered “low” when he has fewer than 15 million sperm per milliliter of semen, and plenty of men with low sperm counts are still able to conceive children.
Male infertility is poorly studied and poorly understood, though. Doing some quick reading right now: in more than 50% of male infertility cases, the cause is unknown.
-
I can say that is patently false. I ate almost exclusively mac and cheese for years and when my wife and I were trying to get pregnant all three happened on the first try.
Sperm counts are honestly overrated. The article even mentions this:
The good news is that 47.1 million sperm per milliliter is still pretty healthy. A person’s sperm count is considered “low” when he has fewer than 15 million sperm per milliliter of semen, and plenty of men with low sperm counts are still able to conceive children.
Male infertility is poorly studied and poorly understood, though. Doing some quick reading right now: in more than 50% of male infertility cases, the cause is unknown.
Username checks out
-
I can say that is patently false. I ate almost exclusively mac and cheese for years and when my wife and I were trying to get pregnant all three happened on the first try.
Sperm counts are honestly overrated. The article even mentions this:
The good news is that 47.1 million sperm per milliliter is still pretty healthy. A person’s sperm count is considered “low” when he has fewer than 15 million sperm per milliliter of semen, and plenty of men with low sperm counts are still able to conceive children.
Male infertility is poorly studied and poorly understood, though. Doing some quick reading right now: in more than 50% of male infertility cases, the cause is unknown.
Username checks out
Roflmao, well I can appreciate the joke.
-
I guess we have to assume some people don't read the blog before asking questions in the forum?
Oh bother
Its not even the questions. I get someone new asking about dollar cost averaging, etc. But the responses are what is getting me.
It is not ok to buy a brand new car unless you are a multi millionaire.
Good point. Bad questions can be directed to articles and past threads. Bad responses make people feel justified in their bad decisions.
-
A woman started a "gauntlet" thread about trying to see if she could lay off buying clothes for one month. I suggested she might have a shopping addiction and was scolded by a high-post-count regular (who often wants green lights for her own shopping addiction)
Whoa, I think I missed that one. I totally would have backed you up on that one, calimom!
-
You mean the stickied thread in the "Forum information & FAQs" section of the forum?
Just like that, but with stupid questions. "Isn't it actually a great deal to lease a car? There's no maintenance!" "Isn't it impossible to mow your own lawn?" "I earn $100/hr. Isn't it a better use of my time to pay someone minimum wage to cook my meals and deliver them?"
I'd be happy to point people in the direction of such a sticky if someone were willing to create one. Are you volunteering?
I'd probably be willing to take on creating answers to maybe the dozen most common stupid questions if other people could collate the questions. I've got a bit of time on my hands coming up, and I am pretty good at collating information.
-
Lentils. Let's get back on track with this conversation, folks.
-
Lentils. Let's get back on track with this conversation, folks.
What!? Are you saying the the MMM community makes soft lentils?
-
A woman started a "gauntlet" thread about trying to see if she could lay off buying clothes for one month. I suggested she might have a shopping addiction and was scolded by a high-post-count regular (who often wants green lights for her own shopping addiction)
Whoa, I think I missed that one. I totally would have backed you up on that one, calimom!
Thanks, Dicey! I'm pretty sure most of us can (and do) go a year or more without buying clothes. Ya know, shop the closet and all that. Or do a clothing exchange where everyone throws a bunch of stuff on the floor and then you grab what you want. For free.
And can we add Olive Garden to the no-no list along with Applebee's? People shouldn't eat there, either. It's gross!
-
Now 'scuze me as my maid has finished whipping up my avocado toast lunch in my $800 blender I bought to match my $500 toaster to match the curtains in my mcmansion. Maybe I'll eat it in my new BMW SUV. Nah... don't want to mess up the leather seats ;-)
Sounds perfectly reasonable as long as this makes you happy and aligns with your values. You work hard and you deserve it.
-
Now 'scuze me as my maid has finished whipping up my avocado toast lunch in my $800 blender I bought to match my $500 toaster to match the curtains in my mcmansion. Maybe I'll eat it in my new BMW SUV. Nah... don't want to mess up the leather seats ;-)
Sounds perfectly reasonable as long as this makes you happy and aligns with your values. You work hard and you deserve it.
Hey, I have my concubine make avocado toast using a $100 blender and $200 toaster in my 1900sqft house I share with a cat, and *my* BMW SUV with leather seats is 5 years old. So it doesn't have to be too expensive. And totally worth it.
-
Now 'scuze me as my maid has finished whipping up my avocado toast lunch in my $800 blender I bought to match my $500 toaster to match the curtains in my mcmansion. Maybe I'll eat it in my new BMW SUV. Nah... don't want to mess up the leather seats ;-)
Sounds perfectly reasonable as long as this makes you happy and aligns with your values. You work hard and you deserve it.
Hey, I have my concubine make avocado toast using a $100 blender and $200 toaster in my 1900sqft house I share with a cat, and *my* BMW SUV with leather seats is 5 years old. So it doesn't have to be too expensive. And totally worth it.
Why not just make avocado toast on the heated leather seats of the Beamer while you mindless drive around? Optimize, people, optimize?
-
Now 'scuze me as my maid has finished whipping up my avocado toast lunch in my $800 blender I bought to match my $500 toaster to match the curtains in my mcmansion. Maybe I'll eat it in my new BMW SUV. Nah... don't want to mess up the leather seats ;-)
Sounds perfectly reasonable as long as this makes you happy and aligns with your values. You work hard and you deserve it.
Hey, I have my concubine make avocado toast using a $100 blender and $200 toaster in my 1900sqft house I share with a cat, and *my* BMW SUV with leather seats is 5 years old. So it doesn't have to be too expensive. And totally worth it.
Why not just make avocado toast on the heated leather seats of the Beamer while you mindless drive around? Optimize, people, optimize?
If you get black seats and live in the south it will speed up the process...
-
I killed both my hunger and solved our ant problem simultaneously at lunch today. Mmmm crunchy high protein.
Ants are high in formic acid and not really edible to humans. I have however grabbed a flying termite and popped in my mouth before, and lived to post about. Problem is, I don't want to dig them out of the woodwork whenever I'm hungry, so I only got them occasionally when they swarm.
Glad the tread is back on track, I too have seen the threads about blenders and cars. Yet I agree with the sentiment of looking for alternatives and treading gently on the newer crowd--facepunching is the part where I never aligned with full-on mustachianism.
-
I always try to be kind and not dole out facepunches right, left and centre, and I do think that everyone not in debt should get a free pass on one thing. My husband buys a stupid amount of books that he could totally get from the library. Mine used to be clothes but I think it might now be food/the garden (intertwined because I grow many vegetables, but we also buy fancypants cheeses etc). But we don't spend unnecessary amounts of money on everything. I pack lunches. I cycle again now. We buy rice and dried beans. We're not big on travel. Also, I bought a huge bag of topsoil and moved the whole damn lot through to the back myself. I grow things from seed mostly rather than plug plants. My garden is not an unending stream of leaking money, I just recognise it as a want, not a need. So we've picked what really makes us happy and spend on that, and are frugal everywhere else.
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
-
I always try to be kind and not dole out facepunches right, left and centre, and I do think that everyone not in debt should get a free pass on one thing.
...
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I'm even softer than you SLTD. I agree that once you are out of debt you get one thing, and would add that when you are FI you can get two things. If you are Warren Buffett, I might even permit three things, but one of them had better benefitting a whole lotta people in the wider world (NB Elon Musk, Mars doesn't count).
-
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I see your point but buying that blender is still unmustachian, IMO. It is not environmentally responsible. Buying a used blender reduces fossil fuels that were used to make all the plastic and glass of a new blender. It also prevents the used blender from ending up in a landfill.
-
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I see your point but buying that blender is still unmustachian, IMO. It is not environmentally responsible. Buying a used blender reduces fossil fuels that were used to make all the plastic and glass of a new blender. It also prevents the used blender from ending up in a landfill.
I bought a used blender for $15 at a virtual garage sale. It's the same glass jar as my current blender, which I am diligently attempting to burn out. Wait! What? You say I didn't need that $15 blender because the first one (a gift, twenty years ago from an ex-bf*) still works? Huh? How does this mustachian thing work again? I'm so confused!
* Ex bf, because, blender for Christmas and no, I didn't ask for one.
-
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I see your point but buying that blender is still unmustachian, IMO. It is not environmentally responsible. Buying a used blender reduces fossil fuels that were used to make all the plastic and glass of a new blender. It also prevents the used blender from ending up in a landfill.
I just went on my local Kijiji and there are no second hand Vitamix blenders. BUT, there are some very nice blenders for sale because the owners just got a Vitamix. ;-)
-
Off topic, but seriously how do you guys find usable used blenders (aka how do you get a blender to last more than a couple of uses)? My household refuses to buy another blender as we burn out the motors every single time. We even bought a slightly more expensive blender and burned that one out as well (well, we did get the cost per use down into the cents instead of dollars but still). Food processors on the other hand can blend without burning up so they are our "blenders" of choice.
-
Off topic, but seriously how do you guys find usable used blenders (aka how do you get a blender to last more than a couple of uses)? My household refuses to buy another blender as we burn out the motors every single time. We even bought a slightly more expensive blender and burned that one out as well (well, we did get the cost per use down into the cents instead of dollars but still). Food processors on the other hand can blend without burning up so they are our "blenders" of choice.
What are you doing with your blender that it doesn't last more than a couple uses? I've used a 1970's Osterizer for literally thousands of smoothies and crushed ice party drinks. Just throw the stuff in, pulse it until smooth. The actual physical buttons on it are dying now, but the motor is still going strong.
-
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I see your point but buying that blender is still unmustachian, IMO. It is not environmentally responsible. Buying a used blender reduces fossil fuels that were used to make all the plastic and glass of a new blender. It also prevents the used blender from ending up in a landfill.
I mean yeah, I agree, it's not Mustachian. But I'm saying that people get a free pass to do one unmustachian thing without getting a facepunch. I absolutely get that Mustachianism is about the planet as well as money, but you're allowed to buy one new thing without having your MMM card revoked - you're just not allowed to do it for everything. Maybe they would pick blending things with their gold-plated $800 blender as their one unmustachian extravagance. (Imho, some people on this forum travel in a horrendously unmustachian (I.e. Environmental death) way, but if everything else they do is Mustachian, I'm not going to haul them over the coals for that - despite the fact that my husband and I just decided to holiday in Bath rather than Rome because we didn't want to fly and couldn't make the trains work out for us this time. #justsaying)
ETA: Actually, you know what my real unmustachian, unfrugal, unenvironmental extravagance is? Copious amounts of hot water. You would have to pry my piping hot baths (not even a shower!!!) out of my cold dead hands. A five minute cold shower would get me just as clean as an hour-long bath, and I can read on the sofa just as well as in the bath. But my nightmare apocalypse scenario would be having to choose between hot baths and toilet paper. That's the level I regard this abundant wasteful extravagance of water and electricity.
-
I don't disagree that one or two luxuries is probably fine if you're debt free or FI. But even if everyone gets just one unmustachian luxury and then comes on the forum to justify it you end up with one thread justifying blenders, another fancypants mattresses, another new SUVs etc. It creates the appearance that mustachians consider all of those things as valid purchases, even if no individual mustachian indulges in more than one frivolous luxury. This might be some of the reason that it seems the forum seems to have gone soft. Then you get new users coming on here and coming to the conclusion that they are mustachian too even though they have expensive coffee/food/wine/car/blender/watch/travel habits because those things bring them value, and they don't mind working for a few extra years to pay for them.
-
You might get one or two luxuries . . . but you should acknowledge that they're luxuries and feel shame for indulging. SHAME!
-
Off topic, but seriously how do you guys find usable used blenders (aka how do you get a blender to last more than a couple of uses)? My household refuses to buy another blender as we burn out the motors every single time. We even bought a slightly more expensive blender and burned that one out as well (well, we did get the cost per use down into the cents instead of dollars but still). Food processors on the other hand can blend without burning up so they are our "blenders" of choice.
What are you doing with your blender that it doesn't last more than a couple uses? I've used a 1970's Osterizer for literally thousands of smoothies and crushed ice party drinks. Just throw the stuff in, pulse it until smooth. The actual physical buttons on it are dying now, but the motor is still going strong.
Also, what's the wattage? (if it only lists amps just multiply by the voltage). I can see someone picking up a 300 watt blender (they all look about the same) and then burning it out trying to make dough or nut butter or some other intensive use. Prices increase with wattage, but that doesn't mean you have to pay vitamix prices to get a high wattage blender.
I have a food processor for the heavy lifting, though we only use it when cooking large meals. The blender is for making drinks. Got both as wedding gifts 17 years ago.
-
TL:DR: I see a shift here from a more ERE crowd who were lower earners but saved a ton in order to reachbFI and possibly RE asap to a younger higher earning crowd that saves a lot but also spends a lot.
Good observation, spartana.
I would agree with your assessment. (speaking in generalities, of course)
-
Off topic, but seriously how do you guys find usable used blenders (aka how do you get a blender to last more than a couple of uses)? My household refuses to buy another blender as we burn out the motors every single time. We even bought a slightly more expensive blender and burned that one out as well (well, we did get the cost per use down into the cents instead of dollars but still). Food processors on the other hand can blend without burning up so they are our "blenders" of choice.
What are you doing with your blender that it doesn't last more than a couple uses? I've used a 1970's Osterizer for literally thousands of smoothies and crushed ice party drinks. Just throw the stuff in, pulse it until smooth. The actual physical buttons on it are dying now, but the motor is still going strong.
Also, what's the wattage? (if it only lists amps just multiply by the voltage). I can see someone picking up a 300 watt blender (they all look about the same) and then burning it out trying to make dough or nut butter or some other intensive use. Prices increase with wattage, but that doesn't mean you have to pay vitamix prices to get a high wattage blender.
I have a food processor for the heavy lifting, though we only use it when cooking large meals. The blender is for making drinks. Got both as wedding gifts 17 years ago.
Smoothies are the guaranteed blender killers. Never used ice but ice cream and cut up frozen bananas is apparently difficult (yes we softened them first). We have tried the full range of wattages. Our last one was a beast and had as much or more wattage than a vitamix but 1/3 the price. We still killed it but it took much longer then the wedding gift blender that died after 4 uses (I think we even owned one blender that died after one use, we were not impressed). We have killed 6? blenders, including a hand blender that was only used on soups so nothing difficult. We have tried varying brands. Yeah, we won't own a blender again. The cost per use is just too high and I hate having to throw them out. Food processors on the other hand never, ever die. It's glorious. And they are so much cheaper than blenders. You just have to be careful with liquid sloshing and get one with high sides.
No nut butters or dough in blenders ever, blenders are way too delicate for those. Food processors however have no problem. We had a mini cheap one that we used extensively for 3 years before getting a bigger version and neither ever showed signs of wanting to die. Everyone we talk to with blenders is shocked at the fact that we kill them so quickly. We are shocked by you not killing them given our track record. I think everyone's final verdict is we like our smoothies too thick for blenders to handle.
-
How often and how many smoothies are you making a day?
We must not be using ours enough: all we have/had for making smoothies is a magic bullet, which I'm fairly certain is a cheap shitty infomercial product, and it didn't burn out the motor after years of use.
-
I posit that anyone who has burned out multiple blenders in a single-digit number of uses is probably using their blenders incorrectly, and is thus personally responsible for the failures.
Discuss.
I broke a urinal once, by using it incorrectly. I didn't blame the urinal (no further details will be provided on this event). I have made thousands of smoothies in <$10 used blenders and never burned one out. You have to pulse, people. Go to a JambaJuice sometime and watch how they do it. Stop blaming the appliances for your appliance abuses.
-
I don't disagree that one or two luxuries is probably fine if you're debt free or FI. But even if everyone gets just one unmustachian luxury and then comes on the forum to justify it you end up with one thread justifying blenders, another fancypants mattresses, another new SUVs etc. It creates the appearance that mustachians consider all of those things as valid purchases, even if no individual mustachian indulges in more than one frivolous luxury. This might be some of the reason that it seems the forum seems to have gone soft. Then you get new users coming on here and coming to the conclusion that they are mustachian too even though they have expensive coffee/food/wine/car/blender/watch/travel habits because those things bring them value, and they don't mind working for a few extra years to pay for them.
I suppose the scenario I'm imagining is that if you have to ask, you're not Mustachian enough to be permitted it. Therefore the facepunches should pile in. However, perhaps the facepunches should come with the small caveat that you may be permitted it as your single unjustifiable extravagance if the rest of your life is optimised to the hilt.
-
Sol Urinalbane, Destroyer of All that is Porcelain
-
I posit that anyone who has burned out multiple blenders in a single-digit number of uses is probably using their blenders incorrectly, and is thus personally responsible for the failures.
Discuss.
I broke a urinal once, by using it incorrectly. I didn't blame the urinal (no further details will be provided on this event). I have made thousands of smoothies in <$10 used blenders and never burned one out. You have to pulse, people. Go to a JambaJuice sometime and watch how they do it. Stop blaming the appliances for your appliance abuses.
LOL I am not sure I want any details.
As far as blenders go, I have burnt out a couple, but it was always my fault. I have learnt, and now do better.
-
This thread tempts me to troll the forums asking if I should buy a $600 pizza ove (https://www.roccbox.com/us/product/)n just to see what kind of responses I get :)
-
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the nutribullet yet. It's a bigger more powerful magic bullet.
~$80 and easy to buy with a coupon, or as always, used. I've used one for 3 years now averaging probably 5 uses per week and that includes lots of frozen things, almonds, hot soups/sauces and several spills into the base (biggest flaw is base design that can't be cleaned well).
-
This thread tempts me to troll the forums asking if I should buy a $600 pizza ove (https://www.roccbox.com/us/product/)n just to see what kind of responses I get :)
If you claim it adds real value to your life, and you don't have any debt, I suspect the forum would tell you that $600 spent on a pizza oven is a better idea than $600 spent on malaria nets (http://www.givewell.org/charities/against-malaria-foundation) to literally save a life. Because we all know that our personal value systems are unassailable, even if they prioritize having multiple pizza cooking options over dying children.
-
This thread tempts me to troll the forums asking if I should buy a $600 pizza ove (https://www.roccbox.com/us/product/)n just to see what kind of responses I get :)
Depends on how often you eat pizza ;)
-
This thread tempts me to troll the forums asking if I should buy a $600 pizza ove (https://www.roccbox.com/us/product/)n just to see what kind of responses I get :)
I've been tempted in the past to consider making my own brick wood oven pizza oven. Which if I did would probably be applauded as a great DIY project.
In reality, once you consider materials, time, and my shitty DIY skills, buying a $600 pizza oven is probably the better idea, and would be safer for all involved, (would probably make better pizza too?)
-
I posit that anyone who has burned out multiple blenders in a single-digit number of uses is probably using their blenders incorrectly, and is thus personally responsible for the failures.
Discuss.
I broke a urinal once, by using it incorrectly. I didn't blame the urinal (no further details will be provided on this event). I have made thousands of smoothies in <$10 used blenders and never burned one out. You have to pulse, people. Go to a JambaJuice sometime and watch how they do it. Stop blaming the appliances for your appliance abuses.
LOL I am not sure I want any details.
I do!
-
Cheap ~$20 blender here and no problem with smoothies. I don't make them often, though.
-
The 2017 estimates suggest that, statistically speaking, you can save the life of a child under five years old for every $974 you donate to Deworm the World (https://www.evidenceaction.com/dewormtheworld/). Have you ever saved the life of a child? Is that maybe on your bucket list? Still want a new pizza oven?
-
All spending gets questionable when you start thinking of it in terms of human life.
-
All spending gets questionable when you start thinking of it in terms of human life.
This statement presupposed the reader's valuation of human life.
-
All spending gets questionable when you start thinking of it in terms of human life.
This statement presupposed the reader's valuation of human life.
Also, there's no reason to believe the person asking if they can justify an expensive appliance will make a donation in lieu making the purchase. I would assume the alternative to spending is keeping it in the stash.
On the other hand pointing out that the appliance costs nearly as much as saving a life may make them realize how stupid the purchase would be.
-
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
I see your point but buying that blender is still unmustachian, IMO. It is not environmentally responsible. Buying a used blender reduces fossil fuels that were used to make all the plastic and glass of a new blender. It also prevents the used blender from ending up in a landfill.
I mean yeah, I agree, it's not Mustachian. But I'm saying that people get a free pass to do one unmustachian thing without getting a facepunch. I absolutely get that Mustachianism is about the planet as well as money, but you're allowed to buy one new thing without having your MMM card revoked - you're just not allowed to do it for everything. Maybe they would pick blending things with their gold-plated $800 blender as their one unmustachian extravagance. (Imho, some people on this forum travel in a horrendously unmustachian (I.e. Environmental death) way, but if everything else they do is Mustachian, I'm not going to haul them over the coals for that - despite the fact that my husband and I just decided to holiday in Bath rather than Rome because we didn't want to fly and couldn't make the trains work out for us this time. #justsaying)
ETA: Actually, you know what my real unmustachian, unfrugal, unenvironmental extravagance is? Copious amounts of hot water. You would have to pry my piping hot baths (not even a shower!!!) out of my cold dead hands. A five minute cold shower would get me just as clean as an hour-long bath, and I can read on the sofa just as well as in the bath. But my nightmare apocalypse scenario would be having to choose between hot baths and toilet paper. That's the level I regard this abundant wasteful extravagance of water and electricity.
I don't mean to point fingers. The real point that I want to make is this: To me, MMM isn't about rationalizing extravagant purchases, nor is it about comparing one unmustachian purchase to another, nor comparing one person's Mustachian (or Unmustachian) habits to another.
MMM is really an idea. The purpose is to challenge EVERY aspect of your life. Is X item bringing me joy? Could I do without it? Is it environmentally and socially responsible?
Really, I don't care about an $800 blender or taking long hot baths. I don't need to compare these things against my own habits. I just want people to think about the decisions they are making, and encourage a community of people who live positive, purposeful lives, making the world a little bit better. The power to make these decisions is to the individual, the community is here to challenge one another (not condemn), learn and grow.
-
Taking the logic a step further...shouldn't we all donate our staches to save lives? FI requires a large amount of wealth that we put to use for our own benefit.
-
This thread tempts me to troll the forums asking if I should buy a $600 pizza ove (https://www.roccbox.com/us/product/)n just to see what kind of responses I get :)
If you claim it adds real value to your life, and you don't have any debt, I suspect the forum would tell you that $600 spent on a pizza oven is a better idea than $600 spent on malaria nets (http://www.givewell.org/charities/against-malaria-foundation) to literally save a life. Because we all know that our personal value systems are unassailable, even if they prioritize having multiple pizza cooking options over dying children.
The 2017 estimates suggest that, statistically speaking, you can save the life of a child under five years old for every $974 you donate to Deworm the World (https://www.evidenceaction.com/dewormtheworld/). Have you ever saved the life of a child? Is that maybe on your bucket list? Still want a new pizza oven?
Holy shit, I was JUST reading about these two causes. Love them both. Need to do some more research on them.
-
Taking the logic a step further...shouldn't we all donate our staches to save lives? FI requires a large amount of wealth that we put to use for our own benefit.
I intend to do so when I'm gone. No use for money when I'm dead. The point of FIRE is to live comfortably, but with as little as you can. Everything else you can really give away when your basic needs are met.
-
I posit that anyone who has burned out multiple blenders in a single-digit number of uses is probably using their blenders incorrectly, and is thus personally responsible for the failures.
Discuss.
In college I worked on a senior design project diagnosing why a blender had fairly high warranty failures - it turned out that if the blender rotated more than a fraction on the base, the coupler had interference (and then easily wore out).
In order for this not to happen you had to be incredibly precise in how you applied pressure to the removable blender part - if it was anything other than straight down you likely wore away the coupler.
While this is technically user error, the ease of which you could wear away the coupler mechanism to me makes it hard to really fault people who hit that situation.
-
I posit that anyone who has burned out multiple blenders in a single-digit number of uses is probably using their blenders incorrectly, and is thus personally responsible for the failures.
Discuss.
I broke a urinal once, by using it incorrectly. I didn't blame the urinal (no further details will be provided on this event). I have made thousands of smoothies in <$10 used blenders and never burned one out. You have to pulse, people. Go to a JambaJuice sometime and watch how they do it. Stop blaming the appliances for your appliance abuses.
But I don't blame the blenders (though in our defense the 2 in the single digit uses were cheap quality blenders, both received as wedding presents, we got more uses out of our other ones). You noticed my final sentence said that the verdict was that we make our smoothies too thick for blenders. That states outright user error or rather incorrect tool for the job, which is why we only use food processors now.
The more expensive (higher wattage) blender got used multiple times a day for 1 1/2 years before it broke. I said we got that per use down into the cents. But why buy a blender again when a food processor will last longer in my household and do the job even better? We try to minimize our buying of gadgets so delicate gadgets are the first on the chopping block.
-
Taking the logic a step further...shouldn't we all donate our staches to save lives? FI requires a large amount of wealth that we put to use for our own benefit.
And should we continue to work after achieving FI so that we can give our income away?
If I can save hundreds or even thousands of lives by working to 65, would it be immoral to RE?
Of course this is no longer a question of mustachianism but of morality. While there is overlap they are not one in the same.
-
Taking the logic a step further...shouldn't we all donate our staches to save lives? FI requires a large amount of wealth that we put to use for our own benefit.
I intend to do so when I'm gone. No use for money when I'm dead. The point of FIRE is to live comfortably, but with as little as you can. Everything else you can really give away when your basic needs are met.
Living comfortably comes at a price vs. living with as little as you can while donating the excess of your earnings. Instead of saving 80% of your income for FIRE (and then sitting on a nest egg for decades after FIRE) you could just donate all excess income to worthy causes while forgoing the comforts of RE. It's a rhetorical question and I don't think there's an easy or clear cut answer.
-
Living comfortably comes at a price vs. living with as little as you can while donating the excess of your earnings. Instead of saving 80% of your income for FIRE (and then sitting on a nest egg for decades after FIRE) you could just donate all excess income to worthy causes while forgoing the comforts of RE. It's a rhetorical question and I don't think there's an easy or clear cut answer.
My proposed solution is to give whatever is required to ease your conscience while working toward FI, then give away half of your income while you continue to work after FI. This initial 50/50 split allows you to do serious good in the world while also providing personal incentive to keep it up. Very few people in America donate half of their income, though lots of us here easily live on half (or less) of our salaries.
With this strategy you can save one life AND buy your pizza oven, instead of quitting/retiring and doing neither. (Also instead of saving two lives.)
-
Taking the logic a step further...shouldn't we all donate our staches to save lives? FI requires a large amount of wealth that we put to use for our own benefit.
And should we continue to work after achieving FI so that we can give our income away?
If I can save hundreds or even thousands of lives by working to 65, would it be immoral to RE?
Of course this is no longer a question of mustachianism but of morality. While there is overlap they are not one in the same.
Again, this comes down to your belief in the value of human life.
If you believe that human life in intrinsically more precious than anything on Earth, then you're obviously going give all of your money and keep working forever to try to maximize the lives saved. This is a pretty uncommon viewpoint.
If you believe that human life is kinda important, but your (and your families) happiness is much more important, then you'll give some small fraction of your net worth and feel happy about helping out.
If you believe that humans are animals, and human life is not intrinsically worth more than the life of an animal then the death of more humans is probably a net moral benefit . . . and I'd suggest that the best course of action is probably somewhere between giving nothing and actively killing people. (Every living human will likely cause the death of multiples of animals.)
-
It's something I've thought a lot about since FIRE, and is the one thing that would get me back into the workforce. Not right now, my kids are young enough that we would be "robbing Peter to pay Paul" w.r.t. daycare, but once both kids are in school full time I think it's likely. Would have to be something local within reasonable biking distance, and with somewhat flexible unpaid leave.
-
My theory is that some of this is due to the inability to search easily. People, particularly newbs, ask questions that have been thoroughly and even recently discussed. Costco membership, anyone?
I know ARS has posted a helpful tutorial, but the search function needs a working "Search" box, not a tutorial. OTOH, I am enormously grateful that this is a free, and moderated, site.
My theory is that the case study category attracts more newbs. I begged for that topic, but after the mods created it, I hate it. When I joined the forum, it took a while and all my guts to post my case study. And I got ripped! Nowadays, people don't get ripped because if they do, they just don't come back.
-
Also, instead of leaving your assets to your entitled kids when you die, you might instead consider leaving everything to a good cause for the greater benefit of society.
-
If you believe that humans are animals, and human life is not intrinsically worth more than the life of an animal then the death of more humans is probably a net moral benefit . . . and I'd suggest that the best course of action is probably somewhere between giving nothing and actively killing people. (Every living human will likely cause the death of multiples of animals.)
"I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we... are the cure." - Agent Smith, "The Matrix"
-
My theory is that some of this is due to the inability to search easily. People, particularly newbs, ask questions that have been thoroughly and even recently discussed. Costco membership, anyone?
I know ARS has posted a helpful tutorial, but the search function needs a working "Search" box, not a tutorial. OTOH, I am enormously grateful that this is a free, and moderated, site.
This. Especially as the search function shows no results, so leads the newbie to believe that there are no threads on this and they are the very first person here to have a question about (Costco, private school, charity, engagement rings etc). Would it be a quicker fix to have the tutorial pop up as the only search result every time?
-
I broke a urinal once, by using it incorrectly. I didn't blame the urinal (no further details will be provided on this event). I have made thousands of smoothies in <$10 used blenders and never burned one out. You have to pulse, people. Go to a JambaJuice sometime and watch how they do it. Stop blaming the appliances for your appliance abuses.
Did you throw a blender at the urinal?
-
My theory is that some of this is due to the inability to search easily. People, particularly newbs, ask questions that have been thoroughly and even recently discussed. Costco membership, anyone?
I know ARS has posted a helpful tutorial, but the search function needs a working "Search" box, not a tutorial. OTOH, I am enormously grateful that this is a free, and moderated, site.
This. Especially as the search function shows no results, so leads the newbie to believe that there are no threads on this and they are the very first person here to have a question about (Costco, private school, charity, engagement rings etc). Would it be a quicker fix to have the tutorial pop up as the only search result every time?
I think it would be awesome to replace the search box with a Google search box.
-
Is it because there are a lot more newbies asking the stupid questions and the oldsters are fed up of answering the same damn things over and over again so it's only the semi-newbies who actually reply? I don't read case studies any more, I find them too annoying.
I'm guilty of this also. I tend to hang out mainly on journals of my choosing and avoid all the "Can I have a...?". No , if you need to ask you can't have it. Also the forums have got so big I don't have time to read everything anymore.
One thing I've never understood is the American obsession with soft towels..." I tried line drying my washing but the towels were too stiff and hard, not all soft and fluffy like when I use the drier". Are you kidding me? And the poster always claims its their partner who is complaining. I did tell one moaner he needed a thicker skin and received a very offensive reply.
Maybe as an act of service I need to venture forth and swing a few punches from time to time.
-
Regarding the is it mustachian to buy X? Let's see what five years ago said...
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/dear-mustachians-may-i-have-a-pony/
We have gone soft. We don't recommend DIY, or buy used, or go without. Instead we say spend to your values. It isn't just that, it's optimized spending to your values. People seem to miss the optimization bit.
-
Regarding the is it mustachian to buy X? Let's see what five years ago said...
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/dear-mustachians-may-i-have-a-pony/
We have gone soft. We don't recommend DIY, or buy used, or go without. Instead we say spend to your values. It isn't just that, it's optimized spending to your values. People seem to miss the optimization bit.
Yesterday I responded to someone asking how to go about painting the exterior of his house. The day before I posted in the Thrift Store Finds thread. Not sure what part of the forum you're referring to. This place has gotten so big that perhaps it's some sort of selection bias that makes it seem things have gone soft to you. ("You" in this response refers to any forum reader who feels this way.)
When this forum was smaller, everyone was reading the same stuff. Now, there are so many choices that what you choose to read is strongly influenced by your own selections. Perhaps the more apt question is "Have You Gone Soft?"
If you don't want "soft", stop clicking on "soft" topics.
Here's a fun little trick I stumbled on one day when all the topics seemed stale. Choose someone you admire on the forum. Click on their user name. Select "Show Posts". Then look at their recent posts. You will be surprised at all the threads you haven't seen. Therefore, if you want more hard-core stuff to read, try following someone whose thinking is closer to your own. You are sure to find new threads that reinforce your particular convictions.
This is also a good way to find a thread you've commented on but can't find: click on your own name and follow your own tracks.
-
Dude you're 47 not 87! You are in the prime of life and there's no reason you shouldn't be able to do most everything physical at your age (assuming no disability, illness or injuries). Lots of people on this forum didn't even discover fitness until their 40s or 50s and are now stronger, faster, more flexible, better endurance and healthier then many young 'uns half their age. Don't use age an excuse.
Going all the way back to this one... I was feeling pretty rough by my late 30's. I can personally vouch for adopting the way of the mustache to be very effective at getting me in better shape. Things I struggled to do in my 30's I can now do barely breaking a sweat in my 40's! I'd thought I was on my way to a knee replacement due to how much it hurt all the time. Now it's perfectly fine. My problem was lounging around in luxury. Don't do that. It's bad for the body!
-
Dude you're 47 not 87! You are in the prime of life and there's no reason you shouldn't be able to do most everything physical at your age (assuming no disability, illness or injuries). Lots of people on this forum didn't even discover fitness until their 40s or 50s and are now stronger, faster, more flexible, better endurance and healthier then many young 'uns half their age. Don't use age an excuse.
Going all the way back to this one... I was feeling pretty rough by my late 30's. I can personally vouch for adopting the way of the mustache to be very effective at getting me in better shape. Things I struggled to do in my 30's I can now do barely breaking a sweat in my 40's! I'd thought I was on my way to a knee replacement due to how much it hurt all the time. Now it's perfectly fine. My problem was lounging around in luxury. Don't do that. It's bad for the body!
+1. Similar experience here.
-
I think the forums have certainly gotten softer. They were getting softer a few years ago when I first felt like I could actually post something (as opposed to the lurking I'd previously done).
The MMM brand got big and then MMM himself stopped making regular blog posts, and the few recent blog posts are not the same type of worldview challenging topics that first drew me in.
The blog used to draw people to the forums but I wonder if now it's the forums themselves that bring people in. At one point most posters probably had a rudimentary MMM education from reading the blog. Now they may come in as uneducated masses? And the rest of us are also bereft of regular new blog posts to keep our MMM values honed.
Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
-
My theory is that some of this is due to the inability to search easily. People, particularly newbs, ask questions that have been thoroughly and even recently discussed. Costco membership, anyone?
I know ARS has posted a helpful tutorial, but the search function needs a working "Search" box, not a tutorial. OTOH, I am enormously grateful that this is a free, and moderated, site.
My theory is that the case study category attracts more newbs. I begged for that topic, but after the mods created it, I hate it. When I joined the forum, it took a while and all my guts to post my case study. And I got ripped! Nowadays, people don't get ripped because if they do, they just don't come back.
I just posted a case study and I would love it if you came and tore me apart. I promise I'll come back.
-
One thing I've never understood is the American obsession with soft towels..." I tried line drying my washing but the towels were too stiff and hard, not all soft and fluffy like when I use the drier". Are you kidding me? And the poster always claims its their partner who is complaining. I did tell one moaner he needed a thicker skin and received a very offensive reply.
Ahhhh, the towels. How about the need to "soften" them even further with fabric softener? IMO slick, coated towels are NOT soft. Also not absorbent. And not fresh smelling, whatever the commercials may say.
-
One thing I've never understood is the American obsession with soft towels..." I tried line drying my washing but the towels were too stiff and hard, not all soft and fluffy like when I use the drier". Are you kidding me? And the poster always claims its their partner who is complaining. I did tell one moaner he needed a thicker skin and received a very offensive reply.
Ahhhh, the towels. How about the need to "soften" them even further with fabric softener? IMO slick, coated towels are NOT soft. Also not absorbent. And not fresh smelling, whatever the commercials may say.
I dislike soft, fluffy towels. I love thin, scratchy towels and love rubbing them against my skin because it feels like I'm exfoliating while drying off. As long as they are absorbent, I love them. If they're line-dried in the winter, even better. I grew up with line-dried, ragged towels with strings hanging off them. My towels now are still very thin, but they look much better.
-
I dislike soft, fluffy towels. I love thin, scratchy towels and love rubbing them against my skin because it feels like I'm exfoliating while drying off.
I'm the exact opposite. I like big fluffy towels from the dryer and use fabric softener. I've gotten stuck with those thin rough towels when staying somewhere else before - hate em. I'll make my cuts elsewhere to get my 83% savings rate.
-
I'm the exact opposite. I like big fluffy towels from the dryer and use fabric softener. I've gotten stuck with those thin rough towels when staying somewhere else before - hate em. I'll make my cuts elsewhere to get my 83% savings rate.
Walks off, shaking head. (all the while resisting the temptation to make a generational dig)
-
If you believe that humans are animals, and human life is not intrinsically worth more than the life of an animal then the death of more humans is probably a net moral benefit . . . and I'd suggest that the best course of action is probably somewhere between giving nothing and actively killing people. (Every living human will likely cause the death of multiples of animals.)
"I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we... are the cure." - Agent Smith, "The Matrix"
I always thought that was a silly diatribe. What do you think deer do in the absence of predators?
-
If you believe that humans are animals, and human life is not intrinsically worth more than the life of an animal then the death of more humans is probably a net moral benefit . . . and I'd suggest that the best course of action is probably somewhere between giving nothing and actively killing people. (Every living human will likely cause the death of multiples of animals.)
"I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you aren’t actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with its surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply, and multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You are a plague, and we... are the cure." - Agent Smith, "The Matrix"
I always thought that was a silly diatribe. What do you think deer do in the absence of predators?
And lemmings. (http://www.nature.com/news/2000/000601/full/news000601-10.html): Lemming numbers, on the other hand, crash when they exhaust their plant food...this happens, say the researchers, because lemmings 'prey' upon moss. Moss regrows slowly, and so a horde of hungry lemmings can empty the larder in short order. And then hit the road in search of food.
-
I always try to be kind and not dole out facepunches right, left and centre, and I do think that everyone not in debt should get a free pass on one thing. My husband buys a stupid amount of books that he could totally get from the library. Mine used to be clothes but I think it might now be food/the garden (intertwined because I grow many vegetables, but we also buy fancypants cheeses etc). But we don't spend unnecessary amounts of money on everything. I pack lunches. I cycle again now. We buy rice and dried beans. We're not big on travel. Also, I bought a huge bag of topsoil and moved the whole damn lot through to the back myself. I grow things from seed mostly rather than plug plants. My garden is not an unending stream of leaking money, I just recognise it as a want, not a need. So we've picked what really makes us happy and spend on that, and are frugal everywhere else.
If blending things is your one extravagance and you don't have any debt and have an emergency fund, whatever. Buy the multiple-hundred-dollar blender. But that is your one extravagance. Don't come crying about how you NEED a pumped-up SUV for safeteeeey, or a huge wardrobe for wooooork, or takeaway for nutritiiiiiooon. No, you picked blending things. Go and cycle, thrift shop and soak your beans.
Here's the thing -- the person posting about the blender / car / fancy pants thing is generally not the debt free, have a stash, about to FIRE person. Once in a while someone posts to ask if X is high quality before a purchase, but not about whether they can afford it...
e.g., I bet you, yourself, have bought something frivolous in the past 2 years and never mentioned it here, because it was something you could totally afford and not worthy of this forum to post about...
-
One of the most annoying trends is when newbies come and say that they are 27 years old with a stache of $1.2 million and they are about to inherit $500,000 from their grandmother and their question is "How am I doing?" Go somewhere else to fish for praise. Nobody wants that shit here.
-
No the MOST annoying thing is people paying down mortgages. And a whole thread dedicated to it.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
-
No, the MOST annoying thing is people paying down mortgages who should be killing other debt first or contributing more to their retirement and investment accounts.
There. FTFY.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I actually think that one of the reasons the forums have "gone soft" is that the majority of regulars pretty much exclusively post in journals now.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
Excellent point. I never used to respond because I lacked post-cred and then I didn't post because I don't do face punches. But I can do non-face punch gentle course corrections. Especially if no one else responds to the case studies.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
Excellent point. I never used to respond because I lacked post-cred and then I didn't post because I don't do face punches. But I can't do non-face punch gentle course corrections. Especially if no one else responds to the case studies.
Mine are pretty damn gentle. And I personally would argue against the "softening" of the forums being a bad thing. Change psychology and all that, if some people at least approach a little more gently and with more understanding, we're way more likely to maximize how many people are helped. Personally, I care way more about saving people from the angst of unstable financial lives than I do feeling like my club is extra cool and small. I *do* think there's a place for some face punches, don't get me wrong, but we need many voices in the chorus. And if it's just a couple of us, it ends up weighted too far one way or another, by virtue of small sample size!
And hey, no shame in a low post count. The quality of your response should be your own credentials, not how much time you've wasted around here (like me, haha).
I mean, look at Sol. He doesn't have a crazy high post count, but anything he posts, people pause to read in depth. His quality content:post number ratio is exceptional. Half the "best thing I read on the forum today" thread is posts by him, with good reason.
-
Half the "best thing I read on the forum today" thread is posts by him, with good reason.
Thanks for the love.
Wait, I meant to say "posting to follow" like fifty times in a row.
-
Half the "best thing I read on the forum today" thread is posts by him, with good reason.
Thanks for the love.
Wait, I meant to say "posting to follow" like fifty times in a row.
Although now I see you have way more posts than I remember! Ha. Point stands though. =)
-
Dude you're 47 not 87! You are in the prime of life and there's no reason you shouldn't be able to do most everything physical at your age (assuming no disability, illness or injuries). Lots of people on this forum didn't even discover fitness until their 40s or 50s and are now stronger, faster, more flexible, better endurance and healthier then many young 'uns half their age. Don't use age an excuse.
Going all the way back to this one... I was feeling pretty rough by my late 30's. I can personally vouch for adopting the way of the mustache to be very effective at getting me in better shape. Things I struggled to do in my 30's I can now do barely breaking a sweat in my 40's! I'd thought I was on my way to a knee replacement due to how much it hurt all the time. Now it's perfectly fine. My problem was lounging around in luxury. Don't do that. It's bad for the body!
+1. Similar experience here.
Despite my crappy knees I lasted longer doing yard work yesterday than my DD did. Office jobs do not build arm muscles. ;-)
-
Half the "best thing I read on the forum today" thread is posts by him, with good reason.
Thanks for the love.
Wait, I meant to say "posting to follow" like fifty times in a row.
I'd estimate 5% is him trying to make people be rational about blenders.
Pretty sure he loves Vitamix.
... Or was it the other way round? He seems so undecided.
-
Half the "best thing I read on the forum today" thread is posts by him, with good reason.
Thanks for the love.
Wait, I meant to say "posting to follow" like fifty times in a row.
Haha. That moment when you get an email notification that a response has been posted to a thread you are following, and it turns out to be "posting to follow". :/
-
No the MOST annoying thing is people paying down mortgages. And a whole thread dedicated to it.
Just to annoy you, I posted about a tax reason for possibly paying off your motgage: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/taxes/earned-income-tax-credit/msg1672304/#msg1672304
(Ok, it was a hypothetical corner case, and even then not fully compelling)
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
creating a section for case studies has hurt them the most i think. when they were in ask a mustachian i would see them and comment on a few every now and then. but with them in their own section i never really venture to they have been hurt in their value.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
creating a section for case studies has hurt them the most i think. when they were in ask a mustachian i would see them and comment on a few every now and then. but with them in their own section i never really venture to they have been hurt in their value.
Yeah, I never even go into that section of the forum. It's weird...it's like when we first moved to this city, and the 'small' Barnes and Noble was on 'our side' of the highway loop in a small strip mall. We used to stop in every week. Then it moved to become a 'huge' Barnes and Noble in the mall, which was approximately 1 km further up the same street on the other side of the highway loop. And all of a sudden, we just stopped going there. I can't figure out if it was the mental hurdle of 'going to the mall' to go there, or if it was purely not wanting to drive through that extra couple of lights. Brains are strange.
-
Dude you're 47 not 87! You are in the prime of life and there's no reason you shouldn't be able to do most everything physical at your age (assuming no disability, illness or injuries). Lots of people on this forum didn't even discover fitness until their 40s or 50s and are now stronger, faster, more flexible, better endurance and healthier then many young 'uns half their age. Don't use age an excuse.
Going all the way back to this one... I was feeling pretty rough by my late 30's. I can personally vouch for adopting the way of the mustache to be very effective at getting me in better shape. Things I struggled to do in my 30's I can now do barely breaking a sweat in my 40's! I'd thought I was on my way to a knee replacement due to how much it hurt all the time. Now it's perfectly fine. My problem was lounging around in luxury. Don't do that. It's bad for the body!
+1. Similar experience here.
Despite my crappy knees I lasted longer doing yard work yesterday than my DD did. Office jobs do not build arm muscles. ;-)
I guess I was little harsh in my response (I've gone soft!) and am a bit overly sensitive to the "people over 40 are too old to do physical stuff" I see around here often. In my real life I see so many people who are extremely fit and healthy in their upper 40s, 50s, and beyond - and this forum is littered with them too - that I hate it when people make generalizations about how older people are less capable of physical DIY things just because they are over 40. Although we may be a bit creakier after our 100 mile bike rides, our 20 mile hikes just to get to a place to climb, our 50 mile ocean kayaks, or our ultra marathons than the young uns but we can still now our own damn lawns with our push/reel mowers ourselfs ;-)!
Preach it!
-
Thanks, Dicey! I'm pretty sure most of us can (and do) go a year or more without buying clothes.
Wait, you can buy clothes? Mine all come from IT conferences and bike races.
-
Dude you're 47 not 87! You are in the prime of life and there's no reason you shouldn't be able to do most everything physical at your age (assuming no disability, illness or injuries). Lots of people on this forum didn't even discover fitness until their 40s or 50s and are now stronger, faster, more flexible, better endurance and healthier then many young 'uns half their age. Don't use age an excuse.
Going all the way back to this one... I was feeling pretty rough by my late 30's. I can personally vouch for adopting the way of the mustache to be very effective at getting me in better shape. Things I struggled to do in my 30's I can now do barely breaking a sweat in my 40's! I'd thought I was on my way to a knee replacement due to how much it hurt all the time. Now it's perfectly fine. My problem was lounging around in luxury. Don't do that. It's bad for the body!
+1. Similar experience here.
Despite my crappy knees I lasted longer doing yard work yesterday than my DD did. Office jobs do not build arm muscles. ;-)
I guess I was little harsh in my response (I've gone soft!) and am a bit overly sensitive to the "people over 40 are too old to do physical stuff" I see around here often. In my real life I see so many people who are extremely fit and healthy in their upper 40s, 50s, and beyond - and this forum is littered with them too - that I hate it when people make generalizations about how older people are less capable of physical DIY things just because they are over 40. Although we may be a bit creakier after our 100 mile bike rides, our 20 mile hikes just to get to a place to climb, our 50 mile ocean kayaks, or our ultra marathons than the young uns but we can still mow our own damn lawns (and yell at you to get off them) with our push/reel mowers ourselfs ;-)!
I agree. An otherwise reasonably healthy 30-70 (at least) year-old person's stamina and ability to do physical stuff is pretty damn dependent on their level of activity versus sedentary-ness. It's amazing how little physical activity it takes to make a huge difference. If you're feeling old and creaky, get off the couch and start doing the stuff you don't think you can do. You'll soon find out that you can.
-
I have seen 80 year olds who make me ashamed of my fitness level so while aging does happen, a lot of people could do more to preserve their health. When I found myself starting to get lazy, I upped my exercise and it makes a huge difference to your long term abilities.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
Dammit, now I'm curious. Can someone link to that case study, or PM me?
-
Thanks, Dicey! I'm pretty sure most of us can (and do) go a year or more without buying clothes.
Wait, you can buy clothes? Mine all come from IT conferences and bike races.
I get my short sleeve shirts from second hand stores. But I'm 6'6" with 36" inseam and have never found a pair of used pants that fit so, unfortunately, I must buy these new from online stores that carry tall sizes.
-
I get my short sleeve shirts from second hand stores. But I'm 6'6" with 36" inseam and have never found a pair of used pants that fit so, unfortunately, I must buy these new from online stores that carry tall sizes.
I wear 38x38 trousers. Solidarity, brother.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
I've largely given up on case studies too, because there are far too many newbies coming in who want to know how to become wealthy without changing any of their behavior at all. The truth is that they don't really want to become wealthy. They want to get more material goods.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
I've largely given up on case studies too, because there are far too many newbies coming in who want to know how to become wealthy without changing any of their behavior at all. The truth is that they don't really want to become wealthy. They want to get more material goods.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
I've largely given up on case studies too, because there are far too many newbies coming in who want to know how to become wealthy without changing any of their behavior at all. The truth is that they don't really want to become wealthy. They want to get more material goods.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
there are ways to have both.
1. earn a lot but save alot
2. spend your money very wisely <- this needs a lot more work done on it the FIRE community does not nearly delve deeep enough into how to intelligently spend money and stretch a dollar
3. side hustle in the areas of your extra spending.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
I've largely given up on case studies too, because there are far too many newbies coming in who want to know how to become wealthy without changing any of their behavior at all. The truth is that they don't really want to become wealthy. They want to get more material goods.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.
there are ways to have both.
1. earn a lot but save alot
2. spend your money very wisely <- this needs a lot more work done on it the FIRE community does not nearly delve deeep enough into how to intelligently spend money and stretch a dollar
3. side hustle in the areas of your extra spending.
Yes. But the second desire is antithetical to mustachianism.
-
I will say, those who think the whole forum has gone soft- help on the damn case studies then. There's like 3 of us that reply. I literally keep a file of useful links for them. Do I always love answering questions about the same like 4 scenarios that get posted? No. But people always feel like their numbers are unique, and their situation is unique, and want unique answers. Even if it's the same links I give everyone else, it's on their thread, and so they're more likely to pay attention.
If you think the forums have gone soft, then don't isolate yourself on the threads that are purely theoretical in nature or later in the "saving cycle", and venture out into the posts by newcomers. Aka, don't complain about it if you aren't going to do anything to change it and shape it.
I'll be on a case study on occasion, but my advice tends to be limited to the basic "here's how to fix your spending" stuff that gets answered in the first 6 posts. I don't own real estate, don't pay for my own healthcare, and I know squat about taxes so there's only so much I can do to help. I look at the case studies every day, but if I missed the OP by the first couple hours the conversation leaves me behind.
I got pretty much burned out during the beatles case study and have not felt up to posting in case studies since. Plus Americans - situations are too different.
The Beatles case study ended my desire to offer advise too. That one was such a train wreck. Just too much "NO! I don't wanna give up buying $800 blenders even though I'm $500k in debt! I neeeeeeeddddd them" going on in the case studies it gets frustrating after awhile.
Dammit, now I'm curious. Can someone link to that case study, or PM me?
Possibly this one: The beatles Case Study (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/the-beatles-case-study/)
-
The original beatles thread (some edited but after the first page you'll get the idea):
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/help-please/msg1368640/#msg1368640
-
Despite the frustrating back and forth, those who contributed to the beatles' threads seemed to make a real impact (last post on their blog):
https://stackingpennies.org/tens-thousands-debt-tens-thousands-savings-2/
tl:dr; They sold the rental and paid off their loan shark loans. Whether the changes in spending habits are long lasting is another question.
-
OMFG. I was not previously familiar with the beatles threads. There's 30 minutes I'll never get back...and I didn't even attempt the actual case study
thread novel, other than perusing a few posts on the last couple of pages. Train. Wreck. (Or troll? Wait...never mind...don't answer that.)
-
there are ways to have both.
1. earn a lot but save alot
2. spend your money very wisely <- this needs a lot more work done on it the FIRE community does not nearly delve deeep enough into how to intelligently spend money and stretch a dollar
3. side hustle in the areas of your extra spending.
There are threads on this. And it shows up all over the place - i.e. all the Craig`s List/Kijiji/thrift shop shopping, the sales purchases, the shift from eating out to eating in to really good food spending, etc. Basically the MMM way of budgeting - i.e. examine every purchase for real value, only buy what is of true value - when you go that route you can trim all the low-hanging fruit and lots of less obvious stupid spending. And t e joy of it is that each time a spending area is examined, more "needs" turn into "wants" and are eliminated. --> no cable, no car, no whatever was realized to be irrelevant for a joyful life.
-
Despite the frustrating back and forth, those who contributed to the beatles' threads seemed to make a real impact (last post on their blog):
https://stackingpennies.org/tens-thousands-debt-tens-thousands-savings-2/
tl:dr; They sold the rental and paid off their loan shark loans. Whether the changes in spending habits are long lasting is another question.
Wow -- I'm pleasantly surprised they turned things around so quickly. Sometimes the facepunches do work, I guess!
Sometimes it felt a little more like a hostage negotiation than facepunches ;) Haha. But yeah, always amazing to see when you start to get through to people!
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
With the infrequent blog posts and increasing media coverage, it seems like there are more people who wander in and don't realise that spending less and saving more are key tenets to what we do here. It would be good if we could direct people to a sticky to see if they are lost. Like if you checked into a budget motel and started asking where is the pool and what time is turndown; you'd want to be gently redirected someplace else.
I'm thinking particularly of I Want My Lifestyle Inflation, there are others. I'm not sure that there have been many people that start off with "tell me the magic secret so that I can buy more stuff" and then stick around long term, so it wouldn't be a massive loss to the community. Unless Beatles has a new handle, they kinda gathered up the guidance and then used it as a springboard to their blog; it didn't make me feel good for all the people here who put time into helping Beatles out.
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work.
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work.
I don't think the blog necessarily makes that assumption. He says on several occasions that high earners who spend too much were the reason he started the blog, but there are principles that apply to most people. It's a matter of knowing what does and doesn't apply to you. Articles like Hedonic Adaptation apply to everyone and to me the principle based articles are the most important. I am not a high earner but once I started reading articles I remember feeling like I had written some of it myself. I hadn't really thought about ER per se but I did think I could save enough to choose jobs based on what I wanted to do rather than the pay.
I do get your point though. If a new reader sees the awesome possibility that some people have, they want a piece too. For those people I think we can help by pointing them to the right articles and to temper their expectations.
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/08/29/reader-case-study-how-can-i-climb-out-of-the-gutter/
-
Yep, I think it has to an extent. That case study on wanting lifestyle inflation (if not a straight up troll) was pretty gross. I joined to comment (long time reader and MMM weirdo) partially because it seemed like a lot of the conversations were going the way of "you deserve that" and "here's why a brand new car makes sense for me".
The softness here is actually probably a good sign, it means MMM has gone more mainstream and more people are getting involved. Yes, we will eventually probably lose the hardcore ERE vibe completely, but if it means lots of people who were otherwise in debt start saving even 30% of their incomes and paying off debt...maybe it's worth it? If that happens, we're all resourceful enough that I'm sure we'll find a new place to congregate and talk about our crazy public transit/bike commutes and 20+ year old shoes :)
Also, I second that lots of the more serious folks are still here in the Journals section, and I'm going to make more of an effort to do case studies in the future based on what a pp wrote here.
-
Guys, I've definitely already noticed an uptick in people replying to case studies. THANK YOU =) The message from many voices with carry way more weight! Consider it a weird digital version of community service. That mindset always helps me reply to the "meh" ones, that haven't gotten any answers after a day or more!
-
Yup. I haven't looked at case studies in a while but this thread served as a reminder. I guess we all need a little poke in the ribs every once in a while.
And even though I don't always have much to add due to lack of experience (never transitioned, always been cheap :) I can rehash the same old responses for newbies, sometimes that's what people need. Make them feel like their case is unique even when it's not.
-
Yup. I haven't looked at case studies in a while but this thread served as a reminder. I guess we all need a little poke in the ribs every once in a while.
And even though I don't always have much to add due to lack of experience (never transitioned, always been cheap :) I can rehash the same old responses for newbies, sometimes that's what people need. Make them feel like their case is unique even when it's not.
Exactly. Most of it is NOT anything you need expertise for. It's just like: track your expenses. No, you don't get to have a "misc" category, what does that mean? Don't assume renting is throwing money away. There's a thing called an IRA, it's neat, you should learn about that.
Basically, anyone that's been around a bit is definitely "qualified" to help =)
-
I don't get the whole "well I'm not high income and my life is hard therefore I deserve a break on this or that". On the contrary, the more precarious your situation, the more on top of your shit you need to be. This is not a value statement or social commentary on the issue of the day- just the fastest path to resolution.
Look, there's a not insignificant number of people here who can set a $100 bill on fire every morning when they go to work, and still retire 30 years before normal retirement age. Fair or not, that's the math.
Looking for exculpatory ways to justify bad choices you cannot afford to make is silly.
Case studies: I still read them but it's rare to find one with interesting circumstances. There's only so many times you can point to MDM's investment order thread and tell people to stop doing silly things they already know they shouldn't be doing.
-
I don't get the whole "well I'm not high income and my life is hard therefore I deserve a break on this or that". On the contrary, the more precarious your situation, the more on top of your shit you need to be. This is not a value statement or social commentary on the issue of the day- just the fastest path to resolution.
This is one of those mystical elements of money based in emotion and not reason. It's been discussed to death in the blog and forums both but the idea of "I deserve it" still escapes my grasp. I have trouble comprehending this line of thinking since I've always recognized that it's MY money and it doesn't matter what I deserve. If I'm the one who pays then deserving it has nothing to do with the decision. If some other person is buying it for me then sure but... I just don't know what to say to people with this mentality. I can explain it as I have here but I don't think it really gets through to most people.
Any ideas on how to explain this concept to someone who has a fundamentally different view of money? Tall order, I know
-
I don't get the whole "well I'm not high income and my life is hard therefore I deserve a break on this or that". On the contrary, the more precarious your situation, the more on top of your shit you need to be. This is not a value statement or social commentary on the issue of the day- just the fastest path to resolution.
Look, there's a not insignificant number of people here who can set a $100 bill on fire every morning when they go to work, and still retire 30 years before normal retirement age. Fair or not, that's the math.
Looking for exculpatory ways to justify bad choices you cannot afford to make is silly.
Case studies: I still read them but it's rare to find one with interesting circumstances. There's only so many times you can point to MDM's investment order thread and tell people to stop doing silly things they already know they shouldn't be doing.
Re:Case studies-this is why I haven't posted one yet. I've read enough of them to know what I'm doing wrong. I'm working on changing a few things and then I will probably post one. I know where I deserve facepunhes. :)
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work.
I politely call BS. The math DOES work, it just takes a little or (even a lot) longer. The five years won't happen, but FIRE can still be reached eventually. Earn more, spend less, invest the difference is solid advice, no matter what your situation.
-
WOW, I was just reading a new thread. Someone is looking for an alternative to having a TV in their living room for when guests come over, for entertainment. Some one says "the frame by Samsung" which is a fancy pant TV designed to look like a picture frame, starting at 2000...
What has this forum come to?
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
With the infrequent blog posts and increasing media coverage, it seems like there are more people who wander in and don't realise that spending less and saving more are key tenets to what we do here. It would be good if we could direct people to a sticky to see if they are lost. Like if you checked into a budget motel and started asking where is the pool and what time is turndown; you'd want to be gently redirected someplace else.
I'm thinking particularly of I Want My Lifestyle Inflation, there are others. I'm not sure that there have been many people that start off with "tell me the magic secret so that I can buy more stuff" and then stick around long term, so it wouldn't be a massive loss to the community. Unless Beatles has a new handle, they kinda gathered up the guidance and then used it as a springboard to their blog; it didn't make me feel good for all the people here who put time into helping Beatles out.
Oh, the Beatles thread was outrageously fun, in retrospect. I did try, too....
The stickies is a neat idea... but we all fall into the trap of wanting stuff, from time to time, and most of us belong here, so I would not be too harsh about it...
-
Guys, I've definitely already noticed an uptick in people replying to case studies. THANK YOU =) The message from many voices with carry way more weight! Consider it a weird digital version of community service. That mindset always helps me reply to the "meh" ones, that haven't gotten any answers after a day or more!
B_J
Truthfully, sometimes there are just so many numbers in the case studies. I used to love doing all the analysis, but then got tired of so many case studies and the numbers, it makes my head swim to do more than one if I focus on the numbers, and then the questions start about backdoor Roths (and I am not american so never bothered to review that concept in detail).
I don't mind posting general feedback comments on line items that seem to be out of whack, though, or entirely missing budget line items... will do more....
-
Wait, do we think we should give up on helping people with case studies just because they are still at the beginning of their journey or don't have the same circumstances to contend with? All of us had to unlearn bad habits at some point, and this forum shouldn't be limited to people who already know everything. I'm on a middle of the road path to FIRE (not extreme frugality, but also very conscious of my spending) and there's a lot I can learn here. I did a case study a while back and found it pretty helpful actually, so thanks if you responded there.
Everyone has a different number, timeline and circumstances to deal with, and I don't think this forum should be a cult of WWMMMD. He had the high income, early savings, paid off house, DIY skills, no disability path to FIRE. I have the average income, early savings, renting, limited DIY, no disability path. These will look different. There are other variables. We should be using our skills to help those who ask for it, facepunch them when needed, but with actual options not just "thats stupid why would you ever do that". My personal goal is to live a life centered around my values, with minimum environmental impact, and reach financial independence so I can choose how to spend my time and money. Let's not become the ERpolice around here, even MMM doesn't like them.
-
Guys, I've definitely already noticed an uptick in people replying to case studies. THANK YOU =) The message from many voices with carry way more weight! Consider it a weird digital version of community service. That mindset always helps me reply to the "meh" ones, that haven't gotten any answers after a day or more!
B_J
Truthfully, sometimes there are just so many numbers in the case studies. I used to love doing all the analysis, but then got tired of so many case studies and the numbers, it makes my head swim to do more than one if I focus on the numbers, and then the questions start about backdoor Roths (and I am not american so never bothered to review that concept in detail).
I don't mind posting general feedback comments on line items that seem to be out of whack, though, or entirely missing budget line items... will do more....
Honestly, stuff like "wait, where is your fuel and electric?" helps a TON. 75% of the time I miss that that stuff is missing, haha. So when someone mentions it I'm like "OH!" And that's why having more people in helps.
But yes, the wash of numbers and tax code can get tedious. That's why a lot of times I just offer links on that stuff, rather than addressing it directly. I am DEFINITELY not the ideal person to be replying to case studies. But if the alternative is no one? Well, then I guess me, my links, and my inattentiveness will have to do ;) haha.
-
I also hereby pledge to put at least a token amount of effort into finding and responding to the UK case studies if I would like to continue complaining about how it's not like it was in my day.
-
True confession time: I never crunch the numbers in the Case Studies. I look at where the money is going, read the words, listen for tone, and then decide to engage, if I spot anything that might be useful, or move along. There are people to whom I know I've been able to provide helpful insight and advice, and then there are cases like the "beatles". Sigh, such a fucking train wreck. Happily it seems there's been some progress on that front, but the update was posted by the OP's wife, so who really knows? Still hate to see "beatles" instead of "Beatles", but that's the least of that story. There's another guy who had a rocky start, but hung in there and eventually started to turn his ship around. He changed his user name, but he's still here. It tickles me every time I see his user
name initials pop up. He's getting there, with everyone's help.
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
With the infrequent blog posts and increasing media coverage, it seems like there are more people who wander in and don't realise that spending less and saving more are key tenets to what we do here. It would be good if we could direct people to a sticky to see if they are lost. Like if you checked into a budget motel and started asking where is the pool and what time is turndown; you'd want to be gently redirected someplace else.
I'm thinking particularly of I Want My Lifestyle Inflation, there are others. I'm not sure that there have been many people that start off with "tell me the magic secret so that I can buy more stuff" and then stick around long term, so it wouldn't be a massive loss to the community. Unless Beatles has a new handle, they kinda gathered up the guidance and then used it as a springboard to their blog; it didn't make me feel good for all the people here who put time into helping Beatles out.
Oh, the Beatles thread was outrageously fun, in retrospect. I did try, too....
The stickies is a neat idea... but we all fall into the trap of wanting stuff, from time to time, and most of us belong here, so I would not be too harsh about it...
Oh sure, I'm not trying to be mean to people who are looking to end up in an MMM-place, no matter how long it takes to turn the ship around. Just some ships are pointed in the opposite direction and calling for more steam.
We all want stuff now and then, some of us want lots of stuff all the time, but if someone plans to buy ALL the stuff ALL the time, maybe this forum isn't their place (yet?).
-
I also hereby pledge to put at least a token amount of effort into finding and responding to the UK case studies if I would like to continue complaining about how it's not like it was in my day.
Please encourage them to add a [UK] tag to it, so that we can reduce the hunting time.
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work.
I politely call BS. The math DOES work, it just takes a little or (even a lot) longer. The five years won't happen, but FIRE can still be reached eventually. Earn more, spend less, invest the difference is solid advice, no matter what your situation.
The people who have an easy time reaching FIRE are people who have high income and suddenly realize that they spend $3000 a month on Starbucks. That is true. (I love hyperbole.) But lower income people can also FIRE. A lot of lower income people are convinced that there is no possible way to increase their income, but really it's a lot of mental blockage and unwillingness to take risks, because they have learned throughout their lives that the only way to survive is to play it safe, even when that "safety" is really a cage.
My advice with the lower income folks on the forum is to explain what's possible and give them some facepunches, because sometimes people need to get some sense knocked into them. Either they will accept the criticism and make some changes in their lives or they will get huffy and leave. Either way, it's their choice.
-
Someone wrote, "I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work."
I strongly disagree, and I don't think people making $30k or less are typically that delusional. When I started reading MMM I made minimum wage, and I knew immediately that there was no way I'd be able to retire in 5 years. Many of the articles on cutting back (and many forum threads) didn't even apply to me: I already wasn't eating out, I already didn't have a car, I already didn't go on vacations. I was already working 7 days a week and picking up doubles. My problem wasn't keeping up with the joneses, it was buying food without relying on credit cards.
I stayed out of debt by living like a rat, but I tracked nothing and had no plan. Because of MMM I switched jobs, my husband went back to school (community college then state school, graduated with $6k debt which we paid off before interest kicked in), I learned that investing isn't scary, I learned to think about spending differently. I went from feeling depressed about not having what others had to realizing I was kind of a badass! I'm all about stoicism!
Now we're making more money and on track to retire by our early 40s, yeah that's way later than MMM and his lady, but for a couple that started at minimum wage it's pretty fucking awesome.
(sorry for weird formatting, when i tried to do a quote it was all wonky looking)
-
Would it be inappropriate to have a sticky titled "10 signs MMM may not be for you" or similar?
I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work.
I politely call BS. The math DOES work, it just takes a little or (even a lot) longer. The five years won't happen, but FIRE can still be reached eventually. Earn more, spend less, invest the difference is solid advice, no matter what your situation.
Agreed with Dicey. I make a grad student stipend in an extremely HCOL area. "The math doesn't work" in terms of, no, 80% savings isn't accessible to me - but the attitude is what I'm looking for. The day-to-day tips, the community support, learning to be satisfied with what I can afford, and the confidence that I can hit the ground running when I do start making more than 30K. I'm already learning to metaphorically jog!
-
Someone wrote, "I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work."
I strongly disagree, and I don't think people making $30k or less are typically that delusional. When I started reading MMM I made minimum wage, and I knew immediately that there was no way I'd be able to retire in 5 years. Many of the articles on cutting back (and many forum threads) didn't even apply to me: I already wasn't eating out, I already didn't have a car, I already didn't go on vacations. I was already working 7 days a week and picking up doubles. My problem wasn't keeping up with the joneses, it was buying food without relying on credit cards.
I stayed out of debt by living like a rat, but I tracked nothing and had no plan. Because of MMM I switched jobs, my husband went back to school (community college then state school, graduated with $6k debt which we paid off before interest kicked in), I learned that investing isn't scary, I learned to think about spending differently. I went from feeling depressed about not having what others had to realizing I was kind of a badass! I'm all about stoicism!
Now we're making more money and on track to retire by our early 40s, yeah that's way later than MMM and his lady, but for a couple that started at minimum wage it's pretty fucking awesome.
(sorry for weird formatting, when i tried to do a quote it was all wonky looking)
As a fellow former minimum wage worker, I salute you. Well done. I wish MMM had existed earlier in my life because it's made a huge difference for people like us.
-
Look, there's a not insignificant number of people here who can set a $100 bill on fire every morning when they go to work, and still retire 30 years before normal retirement age. Fair or not, that's the math.
Looking for exculpatory ways to justify bad choices you cannot afford to make is silly.
You are right, too many people probably are still car commuting. I'll go to case studies and tell a few people to go get a bike ;)
Thanks for the reminder!
-
There is a choice with the lower earning folks to accept that it will take longer or to investigate higher paying work.
There is a parallel between people who are reluctant to look for higher paying work and people who are reluctant to cut their costs. It isn't the same thing, but some of the reasoning sounds similar.
I'm in awe of the long-haul lower earning people on the board; I learn more from them than someone who cut their lattes down.
-
The maths does work for lower earners. The savings rate table goes from 0% to 100%. You decide where on the table you are. Our household income is fairly low and I am considering taking a break from work soon. My priorities are saving for emergencies, saving for old age retirement, and downshifting right now. But I have learnt that: I can cut expenses and still live well; I can invest in a non-scary way; it's my choice what I do with my life.
-
I too salute those starting out and working to find better income streams. I think it is still a huge step to progress from the consumer focused mentality we are culturally taught to embrace of "I can't wait to make more so I can buy X" to "I don't need or want X and my life is just fine". It's a lesson I try and succeed or fail at to various degrees imparting into my kids as they are heading out on their own. Some of them cannot accumulate two pennies to rub together and others can save but still have the consumer itch way to hard.
-
There is a choice with the lower earning folks to accept that it will take longer or to investigate higher paying work.
There is a parallel between people who are reluctant to look for higher paying work and people who are reluctant to cut their costs. It isn't the same thing, but some of the reasoning sounds similar.
I'm in awe of the long-haul lower earning people on the board; I learn more from them than someone who cut their lattes down.
Absolutely, especially those who are open to change and interested in suggestions to make more income, spend down debt, and learn saving technique. The willfully ignorant are puzzling. The ones with low income, student loans, 'non-negotiable- tithing to a church and a SAHM with an expensive unpaid-for degree who refuses to look at any suggestion for improvement to their situation. Some think that just by signing up here, some magic dust might wear off on them.
-
Someone wrote, "I think one thing that needs to be emphasized is that MMM assumes that readers are in a relatively high income household, preferably one with dual incomes and no or few children. The basic core of the message is "make a lot of money, but live as if you don't, and invest the surplus". Sometimes people show up with three kids and a household income of $30k and expect advice that will enable them to retire in five years. The math doesn't work."
I strongly disagree, and I don't think people making $30k or less are typically that delusional. When I started reading MMM I made minimum wage, and I knew immediately that there was no way I'd be able to retire in 5 years. Many of the articles on cutting back (and many forum threads) didn't even apply to me: I already wasn't eating out, I already didn't have a car, I already didn't go on vacations. I was already working 7 days a week and picking up doubles. My problem wasn't keeping up with the joneses, it was buying food without relying on credit cards.
I stayed out of debt by living like a rat, but I tracked nothing and had no plan. Because of MMM I switched jobs, my husband went back to school (community college then state school, graduated with $6k debt which we paid off before interest kicked in), I learned that investing isn't scary, I learned to think about spending differently. I went from feeling depressed about not having what others had to realizing I was kind of a badass! I'm all about stoicism!
Now we're making more money and on track to retire by our early 40s, yeah that's way later than MMM and his lady, but for a couple that started at minimum wage it's pretty fucking awesome.
(sorry for weird formatting, when i tried to do a quote it was all wonky looking)
As a fellow former minimum wage worker, I salute you. Well done. I wish MMM had existed earlier in my life because it's made a huge difference for people like us.
Thanks, agreed. MMM is for everyone! In his blog posts, MMM does show his background a bit, but the general advice here is still applicable to low earners, plus it's a nice place for motivation.
-
This thread has inspired me to start posting on case studies. Into the breach!
-
This thread has inspired me to start posting on case studies. Into the breach!
(http://www.fitocracy.com/knowledge/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Its-Dangerous-to-Go-Alone-copy.png)
-
This thread has inspired me to start posting on case studies. Into the breach!
Yes, I've made comments on my first one this week based on the push from this thread as well.
-
This thread has inspired me to start posting on case studies. Into the breach!
Yes, I've made comments on my first one this week based on the push from this thread as well.
Yay!!!!
(https://rlv.zcache.com/custom_message_gold_star_with_gold_glitter_texture_star_sticker-r8c6018b4e6f64bd4b7386ba858eb00be_v9w09_8byvr_324.jpg)
I actually am seriously grateful people are participating more. And honestly, when a case study gets "into the weeds" is often when I learn the most about things I don't know much about (ie, deciding if investments are a good deal, specific tax situations, so on). So honestly- thanks all!
-
Going soft...
Thanks for asking this question, because it's definitely got me thinking a bit more about myself. I am soft and have been since day one. My case study helped me identify some things that I didn't know about and make positive changes, but I didn't focus on things that I, myself, had to change. Lifestyle changes -- those are the hardest, aren't they? so I've decided to identify some of the things that have always been soft and still are and the changes I'll make for the next month.
1. Groceries -- need to focus on less waste and better choices. Grocery store is 2 blocks from my home. I need to only buy enough produce for one or two days and then buy more.
2. Less prepared food purchases. To attack my dependence on prepared and processed foods, I'm going to ONLY shop in the first two aisles of the supermarket for one month. (produce and meat).
3. Transportation -- I've started depending on my car more. No more local trips in car. Get the bike muscles going again.
4. Outsourcing -- was planning to hire someone to plant a few bushes. I'm putting it on my list to plant the bushes myself. Also paint and possibly even build a new platform bed by myself.
That's enough for now. Groceries are my biggest waste and I really want to fix that!
-
Going soft...
Thanks for asking this question, because it's definitely got me thinking a bit more about myself. I am soft and have been since day one. My case study helped me identify some things that I didn't know about and make positive changes, but I didn't focus on things that I, myself, had to change. Lifestyle changes -- those are the hardest, aren't they? so I've decided to identify some of the things that have always been soft and still are and the changes I'll make for the next month.
1. Groceries -- need to focus on less waste and better choices. Grocery store is 2 blocks from my home. I need to only buy enough produce for one or two days and then buy more.
2. Less prepared food purchases. To attack my dependence on prepared and processed foods, I'm going to ONLY shop in the first two aisles of the supermarket for one month. (produce and meat).
3. Transportation -- I've started depending on my car more. No more local trips in car. Get the bike muscles going again.
4. Outsourcing -- was planning to hire someone to plant a few bushes. I'm putting it on my list to plant the bushes myself. Also paint and possibly even build a new platform bed by myself.
That's enough for now. Groceries are my biggest waste and I really want to fix that!
Don't neglect the spices aisle, that makes a big difference!
-
Going soft...
Thanks for asking this question, because it's definitely got me thinking a bit more about myself. I am soft and have been since day one. My case study helped me identify some things that I didn't know about and make positive changes, but I didn't focus on things that I, myself, had to change. Lifestyle changes -- those are the hardest, aren't they? so I've decided to identify some of the things that have always been soft and still are and the changes I'll make for the next month.
1. Groceries -- need to focus on less waste and better choices. Grocery store is 2 blocks from my home. I need to only buy enough produce for one or two days and then buy more.
2. Less prepared food purchases. To attack my dependence on prepared and processed foods, I'm going to ONLY shop in the first two aisles of the supermarket for one month. (produce and meat).
3. Transportation -- I've started depending on my car more. No more local trips in car. Get the bike muscles going again.
4. Outsourcing -- was planning to hire someone to plant a few bushes. I'm putting it on my list to plant the bushes myself. Also paint and possibly even build a new platform bed by myself.
That's enough for now. Groceries are my biggest waste and I really want to fix that!
Don't neglect the spices aisle, that makes a big difference!
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
I also pick up something in the produce section that I don't know how to cook, then go home and jump on Google. Sometimes it takes a few tries to get it right. In the last 3 years I have discovered that I really like Brussels sprouts, kale, parsnips, and butternut squash. None of those were ever in my diet before. I have found various ways to make each and have enjoyed the process.
-
P2F
(but not wanting to really get into the fray on this one)
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one.
Instant Pot. Put in what you want. Go enjoy yourself for a while. Eat it up 20 minutes later.
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
Yogurt -- yogurt is a meal for one.... (?!)
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
Yogurt -- yogurt is a meal for one.... (?!)
Have you ever tried to cook a single serving of yogurt? Totally not worth the effort - I make at least a half gallon at a time ;)
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
Yogurt -- yogurt is a meal for one.... (?!)
Have you ever tried to cook a single serving of yogurt? Totally not worth the effort - I make at least a half gallon at a time ;)
i do it by the gallon and get about a quart of greek yogurt per time maybe a little bit more.
-
I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I'm cooking for 2, so YMMV, but some things that help us:
-- Cook just a few large meals each week (I do use an Instant Pot!). Freeze leftovers into individual portions - I use lidded glass bowls. It was a lot of work the first few times, and got easier as I streamlined my "batch" meals...like I'll sort some ingredients ahead of time, and other corner-cutting.
-- Most produce can be frozen and used later. If I buy spinach, for instance, and don't eat it in the first few days, I freeze the rest. Next time I make a stew/soup/curry/chili, the frozen spinach goes in. Same with a lot of veggies. Or I just chop & freeze them as soon as I get home, when I find an especially good deal on one of our staples.
-- some veggies can just be bought frozen. Uturn mentions Brussels sprouts; where I live, they're cheaper frozen than fresh. So I have a bag in the freezer, and can take out as much as I need at any point, rather than worrying about wasting fresh produce.
-- try to eat the food we have before buying more (this is an ongoing challenge for me!).
I'm working on trimming groceries (better meal planning seems to be the skill I need to exercise most), eating out less, riding my bike more, and building some necessary household improvements too! Seems like there is always something to work on. Maybe we need a September food costs challenge, get us back on track after a lazy summer ;-)
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
Yogurt -- yogurt is a meal for one.... (?!)
Have you ever tried to cook a single serving of yogurt? Totally not worth the effort - I make at least a half gallon at a time ;)
i do it by the gallon and get about a quart of greek yogurt per time maybe a little bit more.
I'm not making greek yogurt, but for a gallon of milk I get 3 quarts of yogurt and almost 2 quarts of whey. Since greek is thicker, makes sense it would produce less, though I'm surprised it's that big a difference - maybe I'll have to try it out :)
-
i do it by the gallon and get about a quart of greek yogurt per time maybe a little bit more.
LOL. You make greek yogurt the way I do - keep straining, keep straining, keep straining - until it's nearly cheese.
You must be using non-fat milk. I can't strain nearly as much whey out when I'm making greek yogurt from whole milk as when I make it for me from skim milk.
Every so often, I buy a quart of yogurt for fresh starter and am reminded what the actual consistency is supposed to be.
-
No doubt...but I think I have enough spices, enough rice and beans, enough everything to feed an army! I need a reset on how to purchase for one person without wasting food. :( And also want to reduce packaging.
I have found it almost impossible to cook a meal for one. So I cook enough for 2-4, and have leftovers. I cook the vast majority of my own meals, but only cook about 3 times a week.
Yogurt -- yogurt is a meal for one.... (?!)
Have you ever tried to cook a single serving of yogurt? Totally not worth the effort - I make at least a half gallon at a time ;)
Haha.. I make about a half gallon to a gallon at a time, and add homemade jam and finish it off over several servings... So with the homemade jam it likely takes longer in total....
-
Some of us have definitely gotten softer as a result of moving up the food chain in terms of wealth/income.
I just spent $100 on cheese and I'm not even sorry.
I've definitely loosened the purse strings a bit. Never claimed to be one of those "I'd spend the same amount even if I had a billion dollars" people.
-
Some of us have definitely gotten softer as a result of moving up the food chain in terms of wealth/income.
I just spent $100 on cheese and I'm not even sorry.
I've definitely loosened the purse strings a bit. Never claimed to be one of those "I'd spend the same amount even if I had a billion dollars" people.
If I had a billion dollars, I definitely donate more money to charity. However, I can't think of anything that I want and didn't buy because of money reasons.
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
I totally would do this also, except with a chunk of land just outside a medium sized city. Oh, and if it were available, I'd add an invisible barrier that prevents humans and all of their human-caused noise from entering without permission, but allows natural noise and all non human living creatures to pass (with the exception of dogs, which bark...they are only allowed in with permission also). Except apparently this hasn't been invented yet, DAMMIT.
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
I totally would do this also, except with a chunk of land just outside a medium sized city. Oh, and if it were available, I'd add an invisible barrier that prevents humans and all of their human-caused noise from entering without permission, but allows natural noise and all non human living creatures to pass (with the exception of dogs, which bark...they are only allowed in with permission also). Except apparently this hasn't been invented yet, DAMMIT.
I call them earplugs. :P
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
Good news! You can afford to do that in Detroit for about $20k!
Busy urban area != deserted post apocalyptic hell hole.
-
The city would probably be delighted to sell you a park in one of the inhabited zones. You wouldn't even need to bulldoze buildings! Although I guess you could do that in any city, if money weren't an obstacle... Detroit even fails in imagination-land.
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
Good news! You can afford to do that in Detroit for about $20k!
Busy urban area != deserted post apocalyptic hell hole.
More importantly, if you put a big walled area in a busy urban city, you actually reduce the busy urbanness of it because there are few reasons for anyone to walk by. You end up contributing to a blight.
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
Another OP looking for cooking and meal planing tips as they don't really cook much now and want to get rid of $20k in cc debt...
Posters suggesting all sorts of good ideas, but most involving a need to first purchase an instaPot, crockpots, special to go mugs with lids, etc...
I don't think the way to save $300 off your food bill because you used to have a spending problem is to first buy an InstaPot $100+.
-
A childhood fantasy of mine that I would indulge in were money no option:
- buy a couple very large city blocks in a busy urban area
- bulldoze all the buildings
- build a large wall around there area
- plant myself a forest where the buildings used to be
- live in a small hut in the middle
I totally would do this also, except with a chunk of land just outside a medium sized city. Oh, and if it were available, I'd add an invisible barrier that prevents humans and all of their human-caused noise from entering without permission, but allows natural noise and all non human living creatures to pass (with the exception of dogs, which bark...they are only allowed in with permission also). Except apparently this hasn't been invented yet, DAMMIT.
I call them earplugs. :P
I wish. I try to use earplugs from time to time, but I get even more annoyed with them than I do by unwelcome noise. The best ones are still poor at blocking low frequency noises. At least, it's not too bad where I live now - a lawnmower from time to time is about as bad as it gets.
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
Another OP looking for cooking and meal planing tips as they don't really cook much now and want to get rid of $20k in cc debt...
Posters suggesting all sorts of good ideas, but most involving a need to first purchase an instaPot, crockpots, special to go mugs with lids, etc...
I don't think the way to save $300 off your food bill because you used to have a spending problem is to first buy an InstaPot $100+.
Especially when it is being bought using credit card funds at high interest rates.
$5 saucepan from target and a stove top. There. Sorted.
-
Why pay even $5? When I visited Canada, I got an RV relocation very cheaply, but it didn't include bedding or kitchen stuff (they would have been $160 extra). I went to the local thrift, and got everything I needed (cutlery, plates, knife, wooden spoon, saucepan, fryingpan, microwave big bowl, cutting board, towels, sheets, eiderdown... ) for less than $10. I have gone camping before and bought similar stuff at a local thrift - they all have quite a variety. Of course, if you want a matching set, you need to go elsewhere.
-
Why pay even $5? When I visited Canada, I got an RV relocation very cheaply, but it didn't include bedding or kitchen stuff (they would have been $160 extra). I went to the local thrift, and got everything I needed (cutlery, plates, knife, wooden spoon, saucepan, fryingpan, microwave big bowl, cutting board, towels, sheets, eiderdown... ) for less than $10. I have gone camping before and bought similar stuff at a local thrift - they all have quite a variety. Of course, if you want a matching set, you need to go elsewhere. pay down your sodding debt and then think about such wildly indulgent fanciness.
FTFY ;-)
-
Why pay even $5? When I visited Canada, I got an RV relocation very cheaply, but it didn't include bedding or kitchen stuff (they would have been $160 extra). I went to the local thrift, and got everything I needed (cutlery, plates, knife, wooden spoon, saucepan, frying pan, microwave big bowl, cutting board, towels, sheets, eiderdown... ) for less than $10. I have gone camping before and bought similar stuff at a local thrift - they all have quite a variety. Of course, if you want a matching set, you need to go elsewhere.
Depends on the thrift store, depends on the day - I have had amazing luck, and also walked out empty-handed. I think I paid $5 for my crock-pot, but that took more than one visit. $3 for my Melitta carafe and cone filter holder. $10 for a super stock pot (originally from Ikea, $40). These were Montreal and Ottawa, where were you shopping? But yes, no need to buy new and fancy.
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
Another OP looking for cooking and meal planing tips as they don't really cook much now and want to get rid of $20k in cc debt...
Posters suggesting all sorts of good ideas, but most involving a need to first purchase an instaPot, crockpots, special to go mugs with lids, etc...
I don't think the way to save $300 off your food bill because you used to have a spending problem is to first buy an InstaPot $100+.
Especially when it is being bought using credit card funds at high interest rates.
$5 saucepan from target and a stove top. There. Sorted.
To be fair, one person did call them out on not be able to "buy their way out of debt".
-
Why pay even $5? When I visited Canada, I got an RV relocation very cheaply, but it didn't include bedding or kitchen stuff (they would have been $160 extra). I went to the local thrift, and got everything I needed (cutlery, plates, knife, wooden spoon, saucepan, fryingpan, microwave big bowl, cutting board, towels, sheets, eiderdown... ) for less than $10. I have gone camping before and bought similar stuff at a local thrift - they all have quite a variety. Of course, if you want a matching set, you need to go elsewhere.
When I moved to the Flatlands, I had two ceramic plates, two sets of cheap eating utensils, one mug, two ceramic bowls, and two wooden bowls. I purposefully rented a room from Craigslist that came with a shared kitchen with pots and pans included (and a microwave) and when I moved in, I scrubbed and sanitized every pot and pan and surface in the entire kitchen and I was easily able to prepare all my meals for cheap. All for only $525/month. The sharing economy is wonderful. I saved so much money.
It's helpful to have things like crockpots, bread machines, deep fryers, etc., but they aren't really necessary. Those are really for when you own your own house with a kitchen and you want to reduce meal prep time so you can work a side hustle (which is what I do). I never understand the people who say to buy expensive kitchen appliances at retail, because there is absolutely no need for it. This is why Craigslist, eBay, Amazon, yard sales, etc. exist. So you can get super-cheap stuff for far below retail price (and often tax-free if your state doesn't have a use tax.) I got a bread machine for $30 when it retailed for $120 brand new and a deep fryer for $17 when it retailed for $25 brand new.
-
It's helpful to have things like crockpots, bread machines, deep fryers, etc., but they aren't really necessary. Those are really for when you own your own house with a kitchen and you want to reduce meal prep time so you can work a side hustle (which is what I do). I never understand the people who say to buy expensive kitchen appliances at retail, because there is absolutely no need for it. This is why Craigslist, eBay, Amazon, yard sales, etc. exist. So you can get super-cheap stuff for far below retail price (and often tax-free if your state doesn't have a use tax.) I got a bread machine for $30 when it retailed for $120 brand new and a deep fryer for $17 when it retailed for $25 brand new.
Agree, not necessary. Crockpots are nice for starting a meal before work that's ready on return. But these days I prefer to braise and stew using a dutch oven, which means I can brown proteins and build up a really nice flavor on the stovetop and finish in the oven for 3-4 hours. IMO the flavor is way better than the crockpot meals. Also use the dutch oven for baking sourdough loaves, made by hand and way more delicious than any machine produces. Admittedly this only works for us because we are FIRE and have the time/flexibility to start and/or attend to dishes in the middle of the day when most people are at work.
-
Ah, yard sales - when I left Ex I was basically starting my kitchen from nothing. I have 4 Henckel steak knives, $5 at a yard sale. Auctions/estate sales are good too, since it is a whole household being sold.
-
Yard sales are the best! Dangerous for me though as I am a bit of a shopaholic/pack rat and have a hard time resisting a killer deal. So I limit the number of yard sales I go to :) Still, hitting up yard sales and thrift stores are amongst our favourite date activities!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Right now yard sales/thrift stores are off limits. I am trying to cut down on stuff,not accumulate more. But when you need them they are great (think Tony the Tiger GRREEAAATTTT!)
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
Another OP looking for cooking and meal planing tips as they don't really cook much now and want to get rid of $20k in cc debt...
Posters suggesting all sorts of good ideas, but most involving a need to first purchase an instaPot, crockpots, special to go mugs with lids, etc...
I don't think the way to save $300 off your food bill because you used to have a spending problem is to first buy an InstaPot $100+.
Especially when it is being bought using credit card funds at high interest rates.
$5 saucepan from target and a stove top. There. Sorted.
To be fair, one person did call them out on not be able to "buy their way out of debt".
There was a time when I read literally every post on this message board. That was years ago. Now I can barely keep up with my "unreadreplies" threads. I guess I'm really missing out on new ways to buy essential oils
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
To be fair that post was from super frugal Jo-Jo and she didn't say you should go to Bali to get oils but that you should look for them if you are on vacation somewhere as they might be much cheaper. She merely mentioned that she happened to pick some up cheap in Bali while travelling (which she does frugally).
I know, but without the backstory, the post could have been read by the general guest as an endorsement for Bali travel, too, as a way to save money... espeicially as the OP was simply looking for an answer like "here is a link to make your own"... "go to walmart"... etc.
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
To be fair that post was from super frugal Jo-Jo and she didn't say you should go to Bali to get oils but that you should look for them if you are on vacation somewhere as they might be much cheaper. She merely mentioned that she happened to pick some up cheap in Bali while travelling (which she does frugally).
I know, but without the backstory, the post could have been read by the general guest as an endorsement for Bali travel, too, as a way to save money... espeicially as the OP was simply looking for an answer like "here is a link to make your own"... "go to walmart"... etc.
That's true. Lots of new members here that could take her Bali post wrong. Personally I think she should have paid $12k to get her private pilots license, then $100k to buy a small plane, then a few thousand for fuel to fly herself to Bali to but discounted oils. DIY MMM style! Or maybe hit a local Head shop (do they still have those) and but some Patchouli oil cheap ;-).
LOL! Now that's the way to optimize that $12K pilot's license expense! Fly to Bali for some essential oils! (they were thinking of going there anyhow)
Certainly better than the poster who thought a $15K Disney vacation for the family was "a pretty good deal". There are no words.
-
There was a time when I read literally every post on this message board. That was years ago. Now I can barely keep up with my "unreadreplies" threads.
You really fucked up by posting in the baby chat thread then..
I guess I'm really missing out on new ways to buy essential oils
Aside from looking up what essential oils are (I think I've decided that olive oil counts), I also had to look up some celebrity divorce or other to understand a forum thread
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
Another OP looking for cooking and meal planing tips as they don't really cook much now and want to get rid of $20k in cc debt...
Posters suggesting all sorts of good ideas, but most involving a need to first purchase an instaPot, crockpots, special to go mugs with lids, etc...
I don't think the way to save $300 off your food bill because you used to have a spending problem is to first buy an InstaPot $100+.
Especially when it is being bought using credit card funds at high interest rates.
$5 saucepan from target and a stove top. There. Sorted.
To be fair, one person did call them out on not be able to "buy their way out of debt".
There was a time when I read literally every post on this message board. That was years ago. Now I can barely keep up with my "unreadreplies" threads. I guess I'm really missing out on new ways to buy essential oils
Dude . . . they're called essential because you can't live a life without them. Obvs.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I thought about doing the same thing, but it seems kind of dead over there. Maybe I just didn't look around enough.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
OK, looking at your post it seems you asked for people to agree with you (at least in the way it's worded) and then are upset because they did?! Were you testing the waters to see if the community had gone soft so you intentionally set out a topic that ended with "Seems like a good expense to me!"?
-
This thread was timely. My DH decided he is more on board than he used to be right around when I started reading this.
I'll never be hardcore but this puts me in a place to be hardercore than usual.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I thought about doing the same thing, but it seems kind of dead over there. Maybe I just didn't look around enough.
The grass is always greener somewhere else until you get there. Then again on the ERE forum the grass may be dead because they do nothing to care for it, or perhaps they felt grass was too much of an expense.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I thought about doing the same thing, but it seems kind of dead over there. Maybe I just didn't look around enough.
Start a thread here! "The ERE side of MMM" type thing. I bet you would attract a lot of interested parties. Just make clear that it's for people who lean more that way, if you like your creature comforts don't bother joining, and then you've got a good group with similar values to share tips/ideas/thoughts with, within an already active community. (Plus, I think people would lurk and learn things even if they are far from ERE, so it would benefit the forums as a whole!)
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I had to LMAO when I went over there and saw Jacob's post on the front page from September 4th explaining how $170 pressure cooker was a justified expense for his minimalist kitchen. Seems even ERE may have gone soft. As I said, grass is always greener.....until you get there..... and scroll to the bottom of the home page.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I had to LMAO when I went over there and saw Jacob's post on the front page from September 4th explaining how $170 pressure cooker was a justified expense for his minimalist kitchen. Seems even ERE may have gone soft. As I said, grass is always greener.....until you get there..... and scroll to the bottom of the home page.
dios.del.sol, it seemed like most people responded constructively to your post -- do you just expect nobody to disagree with you? FWIW I also like sleeping in a bed, and they don't have to be expensive.
caracarn, that ERE post was originally posted a decade ago. In other words, Jacob has always had that pressure cooker. I wonder if he still has and uses it 10 years later. If so, it might very well be justified. I'm pretty sure he chose it because the manufacturer is dedicated to making the replaceable seals available for eternity.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I had to LMAO when I went over there and saw Jacob's post on the front page from September 4th explaining how $170 pressure cooker was a justified expense for his minimalist kitchen. Seems even ERE may have gone soft. As I said, grass is always greener.....until you get there..... and scroll to the bottom of the home page.
dios.del.sol, it seemed like most people responded constructively to your post -- do you just expect nobody to disagree with you? FWIW I also like sleeping in a bed, and they don't have to be expensive.
caracarn, that ERE post was originally posted a decade ago. In other words, Jacob has always had that pressure cooker. I wonder if he still has and uses it 10 years later. If so, it might very well be justified. I'm pretty sure he chose it because the manufacturer is dedicated to making the replaceable seals available for eternity.
Yes, I saw that but on the hardcore end of badassity I do not think that would matter. Isn't that the point of the bed post to which I responded? The intent was not to discuss an affordable bed, but to drive to not having a bed (pressure cooker) at all. I was just pointing out that even on ERE they buy things they would be considered sacrilege.
-
Link to Jacob's pressure cooker post?
-
Oh, it's a blog post, not a forum post. Found it!
https://earlyretirementextreme.com/the-minimalist-kitchen.html
-
Oh, it's a blog post, not a forum post. Found it!
https://earlyretirementextreme.com/the-minimalist-kitchen.html
Also, this:
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/a-tribute-to-my-pressure-cooker.html
(so by now it could be 16 years old, also it could fall under the "I bought it before I developed my full frugality" exception MMM likes to use)
Of course,, there are less expensive pressure cookers out there, including the extremely popular Instant Pot
and in action:
http://earlyretirementextreme.com/cooking-for-6-days-in-30-minutes-for-less-than-4.html
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
Right? And they save electricity by shortening the cook time, so they literally do have a break even point, even if you don't count things like "more likely to eat at home while still working a full schedule" and the like.
ERE =/= never buying anything expensive.
-
I'm grumpy because my latest post (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/i-only-sleep-in-a-bed-so-i-can-sleep-with-my-wife/) generated a whole lot of "You're crazy. That's not realistic. I need my comforts. Blah, blah, blah." I'm about to go over to ERE. More manageable volume of posts and people who will actually challenge me. Bah humbug.
I had to LMAO when I went over there and saw Jacob's post on the front page from September 4th explaining how $170 pressure cooker was a justified expense for his minimalist kitchen. Seems even ERE may have gone soft. As I said, grass is always greener.....until you get there..... and scroll to the bottom of the home page.
dios.del.sol, it seemed like most people responded constructively to your post -- do you just expect nobody to disagree with you? FWIW I also like sleeping in a bed, and they don't have to be expensive.
Thanks for the reality check. Indignance is now dialed down a few notches. I was reacting to a minority of the posts, but they rubbed me the wrong way. Not a good habit on the interwebs.
Not sure what I was expecting - probably just sentiments along the lines of: "doing things for your SO is smart in the grand scheme". Certainly I wasn't expecting the few posts of the form "X is comfortable, therefore X is justified". Catheters and bedpans anyone?
ERE - I lurk. Never posted. They tend to digress into philosophical rabbit holes quite a bit. I'm not sure I have the time to keep up with their intensity!
Here, though. So hard to keep up with the sheer volume!
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
Right? And they save electricity by shortening the cook time, so they literally do have a break even point, even if you don't count things like "more likely to eat at home while still working a full schedule" and the like.
ERE =/= never buying anything expensive.
I guess my only (negative) take on the pressure-cooker thing is that these things seem to be a dime-a-dozen at every flea market, swap meet and second-hand store. You don't need to spend $170 on a new shiny model when you can find plenty of functional ones for $20 or less. Kuhn is a luxury brand within the culinary world - not really having commerical-level durability nor a competitive price point - but pretty to look at.
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
Right? And they save electricity by shortening the cook time, so they literally do have a break even point, even if you don't count things like "more likely to eat at home while still working a full schedule" and the like.
ERE =/= never buying anything expensive.
I guess my only (negative) take on the pressure-cooker thing is that these things seem to be a dime-a-dozen at every flea market, swap meet and second-hand store. You don't need to spend $170 on a new shiny model when you can find plenty of functional ones for $20 or less. Kuhn is a luxury brand within the culinary world - not really having commerical-level durability nor a competitive price point - but pretty to look at.
Okay, that's fair, I didn't know the particulars. I assumed it was an electric version that worked with his RV (didn't he live in an RV for a while?) or a fancy one that works on induction if he uses an induction hob, something like that. I tend to assume the best of people though, and I probably shouldn't so often!
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
Right? And they save electricity by shortening the cook time, so they literally do have a break even point, even if you don't count things like "more likely to eat at home while still working a full schedule" and the like.
ERE =/= never buying anything expensive.
I guess my only (negative) take on the pressure-cooker thing is that these things seem to be a dime-a-dozen at every flea market, swap meet and second-hand store. You don't need to spend $170 on a new shiny model when you can find plenty of functional ones for $20 or less. Kuhn is a luxury brand within the culinary world - not really having commerical-level durability nor a competitive price point - but pretty to look at.
Okay, that's fair, I didn't know the particulars. I assumed it was an electric version that worked with his RV (didn't he live in an RV for a while?) or a fancy one that works on induction if he uses an induction hob, something like that. I tend to assume the best of people though, and I probably shouldn't so often!
My response to it all is "meh". I'm certainly not an ERE type, and I'll admit to having several expensive component to my fairly compact kitchen. I think its just interesting how the 'power of self-justification' can lead someone to do something that objectively they'd probably be against. In this case paying ~$200 for something when sub $30 (https://www.amazon.com/Presto-6-Quart-Aluminum-Pressure-Cooker/dp/B00006ISG3/ref=sr_1_fkmr2_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1504696529&sr=8-2-fkmr2&keywords=Kuhn+6-Quart+Aluminum) alternatives exist.
-
I'm slightly confused about the pressure cooker thing. If you want to cook under pressure, what's the alternative, make your own pressure cooker? That seems like a recipe to have something blow up
Right? And they save electricity by shortening the cook time, so they literally do have a break even point, even if you don't count things like "more likely to eat at home while still working a full schedule" and the like.
ERE =/= never buying anything expensive.
I guess my only (negative) take on the pressure-cooker thing is that these things seem to be a dime-a-dozen at every flea market, swap meet and second-hand store. You don't need to spend $170 on a new shiny model when you can find plenty of functional ones for $20 or less. Kuhn is a luxury brand within the culinary world - not really having commerical-level durability nor a competitive price point - but pretty to look at.
Okay, that's fair, I didn't know the particulars. I assumed it was an electric version that worked with his RV (didn't he live in an RV for a while?) or a fancy one that works on induction if he uses an induction hob, something like that. I tend to assume the best of people though, and I probably shouldn't so often!
My response to it all is "meh". I'm certainly not an ERE type, and I'll admit to having several expensive component to my fairly compact kitchen. I think its just interesting how the 'power of self-justification' can lead someone to do something that objectively they'd probably be against. In this case paying ~$200 for something when sub $30 (https://www.amazon.com/Presto-6-Quart-Aluminum-Pressure-Cooker/dp/B00006ISG3/ref=sr_1_fkmr2_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1504696529&sr=8-2-fkmr2&keywords=Kuhn+6-Quart+Aluminum) alternatives exist.
Who are you talking about? If Jacob, I don't know if he's objectively against all unnecessary expenses (or no luxuries ever)
-
There was a time when I read literally every post on this message board. That was years ago. Now I can barely keep up with my "unreadreplies" threads. I guess I'm really missing out on new ways to buy essential oils
Ditto.
Now I only check in every few months, and do massive skims and "mark all read."
This check in (after a few month gap) I actually marked some of my "unread replies" ones as read without reading them for the first time.
Glad that the forum has grown so much though--a lot of people are kicking ass, and improving their lives. It's great!
-
Glad that the forum has grown so much though--a lot of people are kicking ass, and improving their lives. It's great!
It's a lot less great if you actually still live here. Virtually everything I used to love about this place is gone, and that includes rebel spies.
-
Glad that the forum has grown so much though--a lot of people are kicking ass, and improving their lives. It's great!
It's a lot less great if you actually still live here. Virtually everything I used to love about this place is gone, and that includes rebel spies.
Awwww <3.
Don't worry, once you FIRE, you find yourself spending way less time here. Just hard to fit it into a FIRE'd life. You're, what, a year or so away? :)
There's still some kickass posts when I pop in. Some old members drop off, then newer people come around like Maizeman step up with some awesome analysis.
But it's likely true that the signal to noise ratio is much lower.
A lot more people with a 50% savings rate is better than a much smaller group with a 75% savings rate.
We can all push ourselves to be a little more badass though. Definitely.
-
But it's likely true that the signal to noise ratio is much lower.
The problem (which has always plagued internet discussion boards that experience growth) is that a decline in the signal-to-noise ratio can become self-reinforcing, because the more the noise starts to drown out the signal, the more likely it becomes for signal-producers to decide that it's no longer worth the effort to contribute. I hope the forum can continue to grow and remain a place of high value, but it's possible that we're now in the early stages of a full-blown mustachian death spiral.
-
But it's likely true that the signal to noise ratio is much lower.
The problem (which has always plagued internet discussion boards that experience growth) is that a decline in the signal-to-noise ratio can become self-reinforcing, because the more the noise starts to drown out the signal, the more likely it becomes for signal-producers to decide that it's no longer worth the effort to contribute. I hope the forum can continue to grow and remain a place of high value, but it's possible that we're now in the early stages of a full-blown mustachian death spiral.
I also wonder how much can be attributed to being largely without a rudder. Pete's off doing his thing and rarely even writes blog postings anymore. Arebelspy is busy with his globetrotting and only occasionally pops in. There's enough traffic for this forum to be keep popping up on google searches but the more senior posters can't make a big dent in the volume of posts being made.
Like any large ship that loses steering we seem to keep heading in roughly the same direction - for a while - but ultimately we just wind up going in large, lazy circles.
-
early stages of a full-blown mustachian death spiral.
So.... The top is in? Great, I'll call my broker!
-
But it's likely true that the signal to noise ratio is much lower.
The problem (which has always plagued internet discussion boards that experience growth) is that a decline in the signal-to-noise ratio can become self-reinforcing, because the more the noise starts to drown out the signal, the more likely it becomes for signal-producers to decide that it's no longer worth the effort to contribute. I hope the forum can continue to grow and remain a place of high value, but it's possible that we're now in the early stages of a full-blown mustachian death spiral.
I also wonder how much can be attributed to being largely without a rudder. Pete's off doing his thing and rarely even writes blog postings anymore. Arebelspy is busy with his globetrotting and only occasionally pops in. There's enough traffic for this forum to be keep popping up on google searches but the more senior posters can't make a big dent in the volume of posts being made.
Like any large ship that loses steering we seem to keep heading in roughly the same direction - for a while - but ultimately we just wind up going in large, lazy circles.
Excellent analysis! We need Pete and Joe!
(When I was growing up in Louisville, KY, there was a radio show called "The Pete and Joe Morning Show" on WDJX.)
-
early stages of a full-blown mustachian death spiral.
So.... The top is in? Great, I'll call my broker!
Don't try to time the market. Buy and hold.
But if you do sell, I'll give you $1/thousand posts
-
I've noticed a few good facepunches recently. Lhamo gave one in all caps about car payments in a case study. Gave me a warm fuzzy.
I've always refrained from diving into giving advice here, like someone said upthread, because I don't feel like I'm an expert. But maybe I'll chime in on the case studies more to encourage/punch newbies.
-
I've always refrained from diving into giving advice here, like someone said upthread, because I don't feel like I'm an expert. But maybe I'll chime in on the case studies more to encourage/punch newbies.
Yeah, everyone likes to punch the new kid...
:-P
-
I've noticed a few good facepunches recently. Llamo gave one in all caps about car payments in a case study. Gave me a warm fuzzy.
I've always refrained from diving into giving advice here, like someone said upthread, because I don't feel like I'm an expert. But maybe I'll chime in on the case studies more to encourage/punch newbies.
I've noticed some lately as well. Frankiesgirl has had some great posts. Another person actually posted a picture of a facepunch.
-
I've noticed a few good facepunches recently. Llamo gave one in all caps about car payments in a case study. Gave me a warm fuzzy.
I've always refrained from diving into giving advice here, like someone said upthread, because I don't feel like I'm an expert. But maybe I'll chime in on the case studies more to encourage/punch newbies.
I've noticed some lately as well. Frankiesgirl has had some great posts. Another person actually posted a picture of a facepunch.
That's funny. During the same time, I gave a whiny newb a suggestion of a facepunch and she complained to the mods. Several weeks later, she's all but disappeared. When I saw lhamo's CAPS, read FG's pithy responses, and saw the facepunch meme, I cheered.
Don't call the coroner just yet. The collective mind is far from life support.
-
Anyone have a link to the posts discussed above with Lhamo & Frankiesgirl?
-
Anyone have a link to the posts discussed above with Lhamo & Frankiesgirl?
Gladly. https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431 (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431)
I'm forgetting which one had the actual facepunch picture though, but it also was pretty fantastic.
-
Anyone have a link to the posts discussed above with Lhamo & Frankiesgirl?
I think this has the all caps Lhamo response. It also has the image of a facepunch from one poster.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/
-
Anyone have a link to the posts discussed above with Lhamo & Frankiesgirl?
Gladly. https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431 (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431)
I'm forgetting which one had the actual facepunch picture though, but it also was pretty fantastic.
Caracarn had it:
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1693224/#msg1693224 (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1693224/#msg1693224)
-
I've noticed a few good facepunches recently. Llamo gave one in all caps about car payments in a case study. Gave me a warm fuzzy.
I've always refrained from diving into giving advice here, like someone said upthread, because I don't feel like I'm an expert. But maybe I'll chime in on the case studies more to encourage/punch newbies.
I've noticed some lately as well. Frankiesgirl has had some great posts. Another person actually posted a picture of a facepunch.
That's funny. During the same time, I gave a whiny newb a suggestion of a facepunch and she complained to the mods. Several weeks later, she's all but disappeared. When I saw lhamo's CAPS, read FG's pithy responses, and saw the facepunch meme, I cheered.
Don't call the coroner just yet. The collective mind is far from life support.
:-)
I too, get my knickers in a knot when someone tells me to put on my big girl pants..... especially if deserved!
One needs to read Dicey over a few days to appreciate the humour.
-
I have been following this post, and explicitly because Bracken_joy called us all out on not helping on case studies I made a point to try and give advice to the poster of the $800,000 referenced below.
The facepunch pic in that thread was great, needed, and done for a purpose. Lhamo's post was not. IMO Facepunch is a term used to say the harsh truth in order to teach. Calling someone unbelievably stupid or insane isn't a facepunch, it is a personal attack that is itself insane or unbelievably stupid.
Worse, the criticism was off mark, and reflects that lhamo responded with an admitted lack of patience instead of an actual attempt to help. In two weeks time, this person has paid off massive CC debt, begun selling an investment property to pay off massive personal loans, and is wrapping his head around how to best get out of two terrible car loans. He is on fire, but in the grand breakdown of his debts, the cars and any cost he may have to spend to get out of those loans is best served addressing his 10%+ personal loan fire, not the car loan. Once again-this is in two weeks time.
I'll be the first to admit the gung ho blog/facebook/twitter etc. of that OP is extremely odd (I dunno, maybe he needs to social affirmation to keep going?) but he isn't Beatles, and his sig line explicitly states: Please don't mistake my ignorance for arrogance.
I think there is a fine line between facepunching someone along the path, and knocking them out. Indoctrination takes more than a day---blenders not included :)
Lastly, lhamo, I am not trying to pick an internet fight, you're almost exclusively super great and positive, I just think for this particular person's path that Super Saiyan facepunch was premature, but we can agree to disagree!
-
Blenders, Gah... No one that posted about a vitamix was doing so because they were caring for a person that could not chew...
Actually, that's not true. But you had to make it to the end of the thread.
-
OP -- thanks for posing the question. I haven't read all of the posts (am still dragging through the blender insanity). Have been here a long time, post seldom but used to learn a lot and enjoy the 'vibe'. Many of the old posters are not as active -- they have moved on (FIRE or something else). I agree with the softening/tolerating complainy pants of the forums. We are surrounded by wimps -- that is why we fled the real world to MMM. To me the issue is best summed up in the diminution of profanity. I believe that MMM had a posting about the importance of profanity. Hey, complaining sheeple/consumer suckas, STFU!
-
https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll/intelligent-people-more-likely-to-use-cuss-words-study/1134317
"Scientifically" proven that more intelligent people cuss more. So maybe we do need a bit more cussing on this forum.
Personally I prefer the stat included in the above article that also imply more intelligent people are more likely to wander around their house naked, though I am not too how that would apply to a forum.
-
(https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/what-small-things-did-you-do-today-to-save-money/msg1695982/#msg1695982)And, this is SO non mustachian, but I only did Botox today instead of Botox and filler. Saved several hundred dollars. <ducks the face punches>
[/url]
I had to look up hadilly, when I saw this.... many typical posts, about batch cooking veggies and Goodwill.. and then a suggestion to buy Eileen Fischer pants, because they wear like iron. (These are $US168 to $US248, sometimes on sale for $US89)... me thinks that blowing a few hundred dollars here and there throughout the year is not an issue....
Oh, and I had to check how often Botox needs to repeat -- something like 2-3x per year..$500+ per time without fillers.
-
https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll/intelligent-people-more-likely-to-use-cuss-words-study/1134317
"Scientifically" proven that more intelligent people cuss more. So maybe we do need a bit more cussing on this forum.
Personally I prefer the stat included in the above article that also imply more intelligent people are more likely to wander around their house naked, though I am not too how that would apply to a forum.
Oh fuck, that's funny!
-
I am soooo happy to know I
guilted encouraged so many of you to participate in case studies ;)
I actually HAVE noticed a massive increase in replies! And have you noticed- a big corresponding increase in more UNIQUE case studies being posted as a result? Pretty cool. It's like when the case studies sub was introduced, all over again.
Thanks you guys! Lets keep it up. I think the nice balance of some face-punchy/some softer/all good'n'MMM indoctrinating really helps get people moving in the right direction =D
-
https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll/intelligent-people-more-likely-to-use-cuss-words-study/1134317
"Scientifically" proven that more intelligent people cuss more. So maybe we do need a bit more cussing on this forum.
Personally I prefer the stat included in the above article that also imply more intelligent people are more likely to wander around their house naked, though I am not too how that would apply to a forum.
I'm guessing quite a few members are already posting naked on this forum.
Just food for thought...
-
The real question is . . . why would you wear clothes to post?
-
I have posted a few times naked on the forum.
Several times in combination with being drunk as well...
-
I have been following this post, and explicitly because Bracken_joy called us all out on not helping on case studies I made a point to try and give advice to the poster of the $800,000 referenced below.
The facepunch pic in that thread was great, needed, and done for a purpose. Lhamo's post was not. IMO Facepunch is a term used to say the harsh truth in order to teach. Calling someone unbelievably stupid or insane isn't a facepunch, it is a personal attack that is itself insane or unbelievably stupid.
Worse, the criticism was off mark, and reflects that lhamo responded with an admitted lack of patience instead of an actual attempt to help. In two weeks time, this person has paid off massive CC debt, begun selling an investment property to pay off massive personal loans, and is wrapping his head around how to best get out of two terrible car loans. He is on fire, but in the grand breakdown of his debts, the cars and any cost he may have to spend to get out of those loans is best served addressing his 10%+ personal loan fire, not the car loan. Once again-this is in two weeks time.
I'll be the first to admit the gung ho blog/facebook/twitter etc. of that OP is extremely odd (I dunno, maybe he needs to social affirmation to keep going?) but he isn't Beatles, and his sig line explicitly states: Please don't mistake my ignorance for arrogance.
I think there is a fine line between facepunching someone along the path, and knocking them out. Indoctrination takes more than a day---blenders not included :)
Lastly, lhamo, I am not trying to pick an internet fight, you're almost exclusively super great and positive, I just think for this particular person's path that Super Saiyan facepunch was premature, but we can agree to disagree!
You're right -- my post was inappropriate/unhelpful and I have apologized and tried to explain what made me go crazy. The guy is totally stuck in a sunk cost fallacy. He didn't want to take the immediate hit on the cars because somehow he doesn't realize that that money is gone, gone gone. He put off the pain of dealing with the upsidedown lease four years ago, got into an even worse loan, and now somehow thinks that letting that situation drag out for four more years is going to make it ok.
I'm enjoying that thread because 1) I had something useful to say at the beginning and 2) he has to be one of the most appreciative and cooperative case study posters in a while. It floored me when he came back the next day and said "credit cards are done, now what?" He still has a lot to learn and is stuck in some financial and psychological traps, but he's enthusiastic about identifying and fixing them.
-
I just wish posters would put their country in the title - I am not going to be of more than general use in case studies, except for Canadians. But I will happily discuss RRSPs versus TFSAs, and point out that you can't compare yourself to Americans when you are Canadian, because our % of expenses differs and so do our tax rules.
-
I have posted a few times naked on the forum.
Several times in combination with being drunk as well...
I'm posting naked and drunk right now, and loving it!
-
I don't want to distract from the naked and/or drunken areas but wanted to add that I think we are getting too many 'regular' people to the forums rather than engineers who are interested in optimizing everything. The sheer volume of postings and their repetitive nature can be a turn off (especially if you are drunk or naked). I do think that these forums are helping neophytes and lurkers -- patience testers for mustachians. OP -- thanks for letting us vent here!
-
(https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/what-small-things-did-you-do-today-to-save-money/msg1695982/#msg1695982)And, this is SO non mustachian, but I only did Botox today instead of Botox and filler. Saved several hundred dollars. <ducks the face punches>
[/url]
I had to look up hadilly, when I saw this.... many typical posts, about batch cooking veggies and Goodwill.. and then a suggestion to buy Eileen Fischer pants, because they wear like iron. (These are $US168 to $US248, sometimes on sale for $US89)... me thinks that blowing a few hundred dollars here and there throughout the year is not an issue....
But maybe hadilly buys used Eileen Fischer pants. I know I purchase expensive brands used on eBay for about 10% of the new price.
Oh, and I had to check how often Botox needs to repeat -- something like 2-3x per year..$500+ per time without fillers.
WHAT?! I guess I thought it would stick for a few years. No way would I want to get vanity shots 2-3x/year. And spend over $1k/year to have a forehead that doesn't move.
To everyone posting without clothing, where do you set your laptop? Do you sit in a chair with no pants? I have too many questions.
-
(https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/what-small-things-did-you-do-today-to-save-money/msg1695982/#msg1695982)And, this is SO non mustachian, but I only did Botox today instead of Botox and filler. Saved several hundred dollars. <ducks the face punches>
[/url]
I had to look up hadilly, when I saw this.... many typical posts, about batch cooking veggies and Goodwill.. and then a suggestion to buy Eileen Fischer pants, because they wear like iron. (These are $US168 to $US248, sometimes on sale for $US89)... me thinks that blowing a few hundred dollars here and there throughout the year is not an issue....
But maybe hadilly buys used Eileen Fischer pants. I know I purchase expensive brands used on eBay for about 10% of the new price.
Oh, and I had to check how often Botox needs to repeat -- something like 2-3x per year..$500+ per time without fillers.
WHAT?! I guess I thought it would stick for a few years. No way would I want to get vanity shots 2-3x/year. And spend over $1k/year to have a forehead that doesn't move.
To everyone posting without clothing, where do you set your laptop? Do you sit in a chair with no pants? I have too many questions.
On a tray attached to a pole clamped to my desk. Standing desk + dictation software for a fully no-touch naked experience!
-
On MMM today:
I just saw a post to OP asking where to buy essential oils (for less).
One poster suggested buying them while on vacation in Bali because they are so cheap there. !!!
---------------------
To be fair that post was from super frugal Jo-Jo and she didn't say you should go to Bali to get oils but that you should look for them if you are on vacation somewhere as they might be much cheaper. She merely mentioned that she happened to pick some up cheap in Bali while travelling (which she does frugally).
I know, but without the backstory, the post could have been read by the general guest as an endorsement for Bali travel, too, as a way to save money... espeicially as the OP was simply looking for an answer like "here is a link to make your own"... "go to walmart"... etc.
That's true. Lots of new members here that could take her Bali post wrong. Personally I think she should have paid $12k to get her private pilots license, then $100k to buy a small plane, then a few thousand for fuel to fly herself to Bali to but discounted oils. DIY MMM style! Or maybe hit a local Head shop (do they still have those) and but some Patchouli oil cheap ;-).
I was the OP on the essential oils thread. About halfway done with earning my pilot's license. Those cheap essential oils will be mine...
Actually I just lost interest and never bothered with them. Which is what I do with almost all of my consumer wishes. After posting about them in the MMM forums.
-
I didn't read the thread, but I do feel like essential oils are one of those things that are produced industrially very cheaply and marked up like crazy. So there's nothing inherently wrong with buying some cheap essential oils if you can find them.
-
What, prey tell, are the oils essential for?
(I am fully clothed on a public train posting this time FWIW).
-
(I am fully clothed on a public train posting this time FWIW).
Who's a clever boy. :P
-
My husband asked the same question enough times that I gave up on getting the essential oils, even on the cheap. He said they should be called optional oils.
They just make a room smell nice if you put them in the cute little diffusers all my friends have. They're just nice, ok? Optional, but nice oils.
-
I didn't read the thread, but I do feel like essential oils are one of those things that are produced industrially very cheaply and marked up like crazy. So there's nothing inherently wrong with buying some cheap essential oils if you can find them.
IME some brands do not smell as strong as others. And smelling is the whole point.
My husband asked the same question enough times that I gave up on getting the essential oils, even on the cheap. He said they should be called optional oils.
They just make a room smell nice if you put them in the cute little diffusers all my friends have. They're just nice, ok? Optional, but nice oils.
Luxury oils, maybe? :-)
I am not one of those people who thinks that essential oils do anything. I just like to add them to my bath with coconut oil because I try to avoid artificial fragrance.
-
Y'all do know that essential oils aren't called essential because you can't live without them, right? It's because they contain the 'essence' of whatever plant it is. (Please excuse me if my sense of humour just failed. To atone, have some 'essential' humour: https://www.buzzfeed.com/floperry/sesame-and-poppy-seed-thins?utm_term=.kpX52wnPK#.xn8QoV9Zd)
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
I believe essential oils have LOTS of properties. Specific gravity, viscosity, compressibility, temperature...
I am not one of those people who thinks that essential oils do anything. I just like to add them to my bath with coconut oil because I try to avoid artificial fragrance.
You try to avoid artificial fragrance? By buying artificial fragrance? What do we think essential oils are, if not artificial? Any time you extract a chemical from a substance using an industrial process, you have created an artificial product.
Like just because there is ammonia in guano doesn't make ammonia a natural product. Essential oils are NOT natural.
-
Throw Basil from your garden directly into the bathwater.
100% natural.
-
Any time you extract a chemical from a substance using an industrial process, you have created an artificial product.
I don't really agree with this. I'm not saying extracted chemicals are healthier by virtue of their natural occurrence, but there is a difference between naturally occurring chemicals (physically extracted) and a synthetic substance (created through chemistry).
I mean, we industrially extract milk from cows, process and redistribute the fat content, etc. That doesn't make milk "artificial" IMO
... unless you are another "one of those" I've been running into so much recently :-P
-
Any time you extract a chemical from a substance using an industrial process, you have created an artificial product.
I don't really agree with this. I'm not saying extracted chemicals are healthier by virtue of their natural occurrence, but there is a difference between naturally occurring chemicals (physically extracted) and a synthetic substance (created through chemistry).
This isn't strictly true. I'm sure some essential oils fall into each category, and a lot of fragrances can be pinpointed to a single or very few molecules. In such a case, there is absolutely no chemical difference between the molecule extracted from its natural source and the same molecule synthesized in a lab. As long as it's purified reasonably well, there's no difference whatsoever.
Milk is a different story because it's a very complicated substance. "Synthesizing" it would mean creating a huge variety of proteins and fats and getting them mixed together in the right ratios. If it's not impossible it's certainly not cost-effective.
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
I believe essential oils have LOTS of properties. Specific gravity, viscosity, compressibility, temperature...
I am not one of those people who thinks that essential oils do anything. I just like to add them to my bath with coconut oil because I try to avoid artificial fragrance.
You try to avoid artificial fragrance? By buying artificial fragrance? What do we think essential oils are, if not artificial? Any time you extract a chemical from a substance using an industrial process, you have created an artificial product.
Like just because there is ammonia in guano doesn't make ammonia a natural product. Essential oils are NOT natural.
My wording was imprecise. I do not care for petroleum-based (ie, synthetic) fragrances. You may agree or disagree. It is a personal preference. I prefer the smell and feel of an EV coconut oil/essential oil bath to other methods and it is one of my relatively low-cost little luxuries.
Nope, the community has not gone soft...
Throw Basil from your garden directly into the bathwater.
100% natural.
Sigh. I live in a 565-square foot apartment (with my kids) and my balcony does not get much sun. I didn't even get enough basil for my caprese.
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
Thanks!!! I have studiouly avoided all "essential oil" woo-woo (really NOT a new-agey person). But we are now having serious problems with the cat litter (new rescue cat is missing a front leg, which means she can't cover up effectively -- something that seems so obvious in retrospect but that never occurred to me before we took her home). I have just picked up some eucalyptus oil and will give it a shot -- if it works, that may be the best $6 I've ever spent. :-)
-
Anyone have a link to the posts discussed above with Lhamo & Frankiesgirl?
Gladly. https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431 (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/case-studies/case-study-$800-000-in-debt-and-where-to-start/msg1696431/#msg1696431)
I'm forgetting which one had the actual facepunch picture though, but it also was pretty fantastic.
The picture was posted by me. It was also in that same case study. He is listening, yet not, so it remains to be seen what steps he'll take. He's got a lot of complexity to dig through to no way he can do this quickly but still a lot more push back than someone who's just going to dig in and figure it out.
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
Thanks!!! I have studiouly avoided all "essential oil" woo-woo (really NOT a new-agey person). But we are now having serious problems with the cat litter (new rescue cat is missing a front leg, which means she can't cover up effectively -- something that seems so obvious in retrospect but that never occurred to me before we took her home). I have just picked up some eucalyptus oil and will give it a shot -- if it works, that may be the best $6 I've ever spent. :-)
I hope it works for you. I found out about it because we have a cat that used to pee outside the box somewhat frequently, due in part to an undiagnosed kidney issue. I read that cats do not like the smell of eucalyptus, and so decided to get some in an attempt to get the cat to stop peeing in a particular area. But the bonus was the instantly-fresh smell, and now I sprinkle it around our laundry room (which is also where the cat boxes are) whenever I start to think things are beginning to smell a bit less than fresh. (By the way, I wouldn't sprinkle it in the cat box, due to the cat-repelling qualities I mentioned above...)
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
Thanks!!! I have studiouly avoided all "essential oil" woo-woo (really NOT a new-agey person). But we are now having serious problems with the cat litter (new rescue cat is missing a front leg, which means she can't cover up effectively -- something that seems so obvious in retrospect but that never occurred to me before we took her home). I have just picked up some eucalyptus oil and will give it a shot -- if it works, that may be the best $6 I've ever spent. :-)
I hope it works for you. I found out about it because we have a cat that used to pee outside the box somewhat frequently, due in part to an undiagnosed kidney issue. I read that cats do not like the smell of eucalyptus, and so decided to get some in an attempt to get the cat to stop peeing in a particular area. But the bonus was the instantly-fresh smell, and now I sprinkle it around our laundry room (which is also where the cat boxes are) whenever I start to think things are beginning to smell a bit less than fresh. (By the way, I wouldn't sprinkle it in the cat box, due to the cat-repelling qualities I mentioned above...)
So my cat poops directly outside of the litter box. If I put the oil around the box, will that compel to look for somewhere else in the house to poop?
-
I don't "believe" in any essential oils' properties.
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
Thanks!!! I have studiouly avoided all "essential oil" woo-woo (really NOT a new-agey person). But we are now having serious problems with the cat litter (new rescue cat is missing a front leg, which means she can't cover up effectively -- something that seems so obvious in retrospect but that never occurred to me before we took her home). I have just picked up some eucalyptus oil and will give it a shot -- if it works, that may be the best $6 I've ever spent. :-)
I hope it works for you. I found out about it because we have a cat that used to pee outside the box somewhat frequently, due in part to an undiagnosed kidney issue. I read that cats do not like the smell of eucalyptus, and so decided to get some in an attempt to get the cat to stop peeing in a particular area. But the bonus was the instantly-fresh smell, and now I sprinkle it around our laundry room (which is also where the cat boxes are) whenever I start to think things are beginning to smell a bit less than fresh. (By the way, I wouldn't sprinkle it in the cat box, due to the cat-repelling qualities I mentioned above...)
So my cat poops directly outside of the litter box. If I put the oil around the box, will that compel to look for somewhere else in the house to poop?
It has not had that effect on our cat -- and I worried about that, too. He also sometimes poops directly outside the litter box. I sprinkle the oil on the spot where he has pooped after cleanup, it seems to coax him back into the litter box -- or at least, he doesn't poop "on" the spot with the eucalyptus oil, nor does he go elsewhere in the house.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
-
Apparently cat tastes a lot like rabbit. I'm just sayin' . . . you could solve your kitty litter problem AND save on meat next week.
-
Apparently cat tastes a lot like rabbit. I'm just sayin' . . . you could solve your kitty litter problem AND save on meat next week.
Ha. You sound like my husband.
-
However: Eucalyptus oil is freaking fantastic for freshening up a room with a cat box in it. I always have that stuff on hand. I sprinkle a little bit around and it smells clean and amazing.
Eucalyptus oil is also great at removing sticky labels/residue.
-
Any time you extract a chemical from a substance using an industrial process, you have created an artificial product.
I don't really agree with this. I'm not saying extracted chemicals are healthier by virtue of their natural occurrence, but there is a difference between naturally occurring chemicals (physically extracted) and a synthetic substance (created through chemistry).
This isn't strictly true. I'm sure some essential oils fall into each category, and a lot of fragrances can be pinpointed to a single or very few molecules. In such a case, there is absolutely no chemical difference between the molecule extracted from its natural source and the same molecule synthesized in a lab. As long as it's purified reasonably well, there's no difference whatsoever.
Milk is a different story because it's a very complicated substance. "Synthesizing" it would mean creating a huge variety of proteins and fats and getting them mixed together in the right ratios. If it's not impossible it's certainly not cost-effective.
Yeah sorry I wasn't saying you can't synthetically reproduce an otherwise naturally occurring substance (intersection on the venn diagram). I was saying that the sets of chemicals obtained by each process are distinguishable (non-zero set difference).
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
MODERATED!!!
lol
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
MODERATED!!!
lol
Nah, that's just 'rebs giving his input. You know you've been MODERATED when he whips out his red pen. :-)
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
I interpreted the suggestion as a thread where members give their own anti-mustachian experiences inspired by the forums. For example, if you bought an expensive pressure cooker or something like that based on a mention here.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
I interpreted the suggestion as a thread where members give their own anti-mustachian experiences inspired by the forums. For example, if you bought an expensive pressure cooker or something like that based on a mention here.
Ah. I read it as a "seen on the forums" where you post other people's comments you decide are anti-mustachian as a "really???" type thing.
-
So like, a compendium of unmustachian things we should all go out and buy?
Jk, sounds like a good idea. You can't get better until you admit you have a problem.
-
Recently I've been involved in a thread about the financial costs of having your own pool. The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
Fair enough. What i've found most interesting thought is to date not one person has asked the OP about his/her finances, and whether s/he is FI for considering such a luxury. I've avoided bringing it up and tried to just answer direct questions about costs given my former occupation as a 'pool boy'.
-
The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
That doesn't even seem as terrible as some other similar discussions we've had here recently.
Wait, does it also make smoothies?
-
The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
That doesn't even seem as terrible as some other similar discussions we've had here recently.
Wait, does it also make smoothies?
No, so you'll need a second Vitamix for outdoor margarita making.
-
The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
That doesn't even seem as terrible as some other similar discussions we've had here recently.
Wait, does it also make smoothies?
No, so you'll need a second Vitamix for outdoor margarita making.
Well . . . I won't need it, but I'm sure the servants will appreciate one.
-
I don't know if the community has gone soft, but now it's gone to (cat) crap.
True.
Isn't it great that the "let's kvetch about how spendy everyone is getting" thread helped me find a potentially awesome new luxury good that I had never realized I needed before?
:) Sometimes I think there should be a "seen on the forum" section in the anti-mustachian wall of shame and comedy
Start a thread.
Or not. We don't need to mock and shame other members of our own community. If they need some gentle face punches in their own threads when requested, cool. Please give them frank feedback. That's helpful to them.
Copy/pasting their posts for the sole purpose of mocking them? That's not helpful, it's just mean.
Eh, you're right, but some people are pretty obstinate in their make-it-rain mentality on here.
-
So like, a compendium of unmustachian things we should all go out and buy?
Jk, sounds like a good idea. You can't get better until you admit you have a problem.
I guess that already exists: http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/what's-the-stupidest-thing-you're-lusting-after-right-now/?topicseen
Recently I've been involved in a thread about the financial costs of having your own pool. The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
Fair enough. What i've found most interesting thought is to date not one person has asked the OP about his/her finances, and whether s/he is FI for considering such a luxury. I've avoided bringing it up and tried to just answer direct questions about costs given my former occupation as a 'pool boy'.
The difference may be the mustachianness of the owners. If you do all the maintenance yourself, and don't heat the pool, have an efficient pump on a timer, it might cost $50/month plus some of your time. IMO that ain't bad if it's something you use regularly and derive a lot of joy. Of course that ignores the upfront cost, which you can only amortize over about 15 years before it needs bigly work.
On the other hand, you can spend a hundred per week on a "pool guy"
-
Recently I've been involved in a thread about the financial costs of having your own pool. The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
Fair enough. What i've found most interesting thought is to date not one person has asked the OP about his/her finances, and whether s/he is FI for considering such a luxury. I've avoided bringing it up and tried to just answer direct questions about costs given my former occupation as a 'pool boy'.
The difference may be the mustachianness of the owners. If you do all the maintenance yourself, and don't heat the pool, have an efficient pump on a timer, it might cost $50/month plus some of your time. IMO that ain't bad if it's something you use regularly and derive a lot of joy. Of course that ignores the upfront cost, which you can only amortize over about 15 years before it needs bigly work.
On the other hand, you can spend a hundred per week on a "pool guy"
All decent points. I guess what's surprising to me is that the financial stability of the OP (and others) hasn't even entered into the conversation. In years past I think when someone floated the idea of an ongoing expense that was clearly a non-necessity one of the first questions to come up would be "well, are you already in good financial shape? lots of savings, no crushing debt"? Now those questions don't seem to come up. To me it's moving more towards the 'YOLO' mentality than 'financial freedom through badassity'.
-
Recently I've been involved in a thread about the financial costs of having your own pool. The responses seem evenly split between "I'd advise against/had one &never again" and "why not, it's only a few thousand$ each year"
Fair enough. What i've found most interesting thought is to date not one person has asked the OP about his/her finances, and whether s/he is FI for considering such a luxury. I've avoided bringing it up and tried to just answer direct questions about costs given my former occupation as a 'pool boy'.
The difference may be the mustachianness of the owners. If you do all the maintenance yourself, and don't heat the pool, have an efficient pump on a timer, it might cost $50/month plus some of your time. IMO that ain't bad if it's something you use regularly and derive a lot of joy. Of course that ignores the upfront cost, which you can only amortize over about 15 years before it needs bigly work.
On the other hand, you can spend a hundred per week on a "pool guy"
All decent points. I guess what's surprising to me is that the financial stability of the OP (and others) hasn't even entered into the conversation. In years past I think when someone floated the idea of an ongoing expense that was clearly a non-necessity one of the first questions to come up would be "well, are you already in good financial shape? lots of savings, no crushing debt"? Now those questions don't seem to come up. To me it's moving more towards the 'YOLO' mentality than 'financial freedom through badassity'.
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
-
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
Can you imagine if we talked to our coworkers the same way we talk to each other on the forum.
CW: so I'm thinking about getting a new truck...
Me: New truck? What's wrong with your current truck? Do you even need a truck? What would you use it for and how many times per year? What's your current savings rate? Net worth? Are you already FI?
CW: *backs away slowly*
-
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
Can you imagine if we talked to our coworkers the same way we talk to each other on the forum.
CW: so I'm thinking about getting a new truck...
Me: New truck? What's wrong with your current truck? Do you even need a truck? What would you use it for and how many times per year? What's your current savings rate? Net worth? Are you already FI?
CW: *backs away slowly*
Haha. I do talk to co workers like that. I don't talk to my family like that though. My BIL just dropped $50k on a brand new truck.
-
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
Can you imagine if we talked to our coworkers the same way we talk to each other on the forum.
CW: so I'm thinking about getting a new truck...
Me: New truck? What's wrong with your current truck? Do you even need a truck? What would you use it for and how many times per year? What's your current savings rate? Net worth? Are you already FI?
CW: *backs away slowly*
Haha. I do talk to co workers like that. I don't talk to my family like that though. My BIL just dropped $50k on a brand new truck.
Screw that, I'm talking to ANYONE like that, because it's the truth and the interesting thing to ask!
-
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
Can you imagine if we talked to our coworkers the same way we talk to each other on the forum.
CW: so I'm thinking about getting a new truck...
Me: New truck? What's wrong with your current truck? Do you even need a truck? What would you use it for and how many times per year? What's your current savings rate? Net worth? Are you already FI?
CW: *backs away slowly*
Not quite so directly or dramatically, but I asked those same questions to one of my coworkers last year regarding his desire to buy a new vs used SUV. His response "Well, if I want my wife to make my life a living hell for 5 years I could buy a used one."
I had no comeback.
-
I understand the sentiment to encourage low impact living, but many younger forum members may find that frugal living, good market returns and an independent lifestyle leave them in a situation with more wealth then they need.
In that situation, a modest luxury, like a pool, should not be a horror. We should enjoy the fruits of our labor and not feel obligated to donate any spare penny to charity. This is especially true if one spends wisely (e.g. vacation with full travel hacking, homestays, etc.). Each of us should be confident enough with our own choices to support well reasoned decisions. Buy that iPhone 10, if you REALLY want it, can afford it, and the value is worth it to you.
No outside person should judge our individual choices once FI is reached (IMHO).
-
Today's blog post reminded me of this thread. "Try giving up something you enjoy, and replacing it with something that improves your life."
-
But aren't pools subject to hedonic adaptation just like so many other "modest" luxuries? I mean, why not walk or bike to your nearest beach, lake, river or public swimming pool?
Interestingly in Australia, the highest density of swimming pools is on the coastal fringe where there is fairly easy access to nice swimming spots.
Seriously guys this thread has gone soft, I can't believe we're now justifying having a personal swimming pool.
-
I understand the sentiment to encourage low impact living, but many younger forum members may find that frugal living, good market returns and an independent lifestyle leave them in a situation with more wealth then they need.
In that situation, a modest luxury, like a pool, should not be a horror. We should enjoy the fruits of our labor and not feel obligated to donate any spare penny to charity. This is especially true if one spends wisely (e.g. vacation with full travel hacking, homestays, etc.). Each of us should be confident enough with our own choices to support well reasoned decisions. Buy that iPhone 10, if you REALLY want it, can afford it, and the value is worth it to you.
No outside person should judge our individual choices once FI is reached (IMHO).
this forum exists to judge choices. even after FI. this goal around here should be to always push people to improve not to just give in to luxuries. coming to this forum to get support for buying an iPhone 10 or to put in a pool should never cross someones mind.
sure if you want to do those things b/c you are FI and can afford it thats awesome but this isnt a FAT FIRE forum its a FIRE forum.
-
One of my neighbors has a swimming pool. Both the husband and wife work full-time, so there's nobody at home to do maintenance on that backyard pool. It got really dirty (along with their very cluttered and unmowed backyard, so they ended up hiring a service to clean it for them (along with doing their lawn maintenance on a tiny plot of land.)
I wonder how many hours of work per week they have to put in so they can use their pool a few times a year. Any way you cut it, a pool is not a worthwhile expense for most people. I can't believe anybody would argue in favor of them.
If you really want to go swimming, I bet a membership with a community pool club would be much less expensive.
-
Each of us should be confident enough with our own choices to support well reasoned decisions.
If someone is truly in the state you describe, what need have they of going on a forum to get a bunch of strangers to validate their choices?
-
I've never really understood the "You're FI so you can do anything you like!" statements. Surely it's more "You're FI so have to live within your budget or else you will have to go back to work, so you need to be even more conscious of what you're spending than someone who's working with a 50% savings rate."
And let us not forget one of the three main goals of the blog: To save the whole Human Race from destroying itself through overconsumption of its over habitat. [source: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/]
-
Oh yeah sorry I missed that point. For some reason I was thinking this was like at work where people typically avoid asking personal financial questions. But here on these forums? Yeah totally that should be the first question
Can you imagine if we talked to our coworkers the same way we talk to each other on the forum.
CW: so I'm thinking about getting a new truck...
Me: New truck? What's wrong with your current truck? Do you even need a truck? What would you use it for and how many times per year? What's your current savings rate? Net worth? Are you already FI?
CW: *backs away slowly*
Not quite so directly or dramatically, but I asked those same questions to one of my coworkers last year regarding his desire to buy a new vs used SUV. His response "Well, if I want my wife to make my life a living hell for 5 years I could buy a used one."
I had no comeback.
And THIS is usually the driver of most poor spending choices. If your spouse is not on board with optimizing/frugality/mustachianism it's not always that you think you cam't do it, it's that you can't do it for sake of relationship stability.
I try to keep this in mind whenever I respond to anyone. In the case studies (the one everyone like here was a great example) if it shows that the other party (wife in that case) is not involved in the discussions of aware I go there pretty fast because the best laid plans fall to pieces without a united front.
-
No outside person should judge our individual choices once FI is reached (IMHO).
I ask this as a rather new member (a little less than two years), so if it seems a bit dumb, sorry, but I have never been clear on this.
When is one FI versus RE? I think the challenge is that those two are always conflated on these forum discussions, so it really becomes if one if not already retired before making some purchase it gets hammered and if anyone supports it it is viewed as softening on the forums. Per you fuller point, that if you discover you will have a boatload of cash in the end and that's not that important, you will perhaps choose to do a lot of non-mustachian things. In my case, a recent analysis shows that if I work until 67 and then retire I'd likely have about $5MM left after I kick the bucket. If I'm OK not RE, does that situation make me FI? So therefore if I go buy a new Porsche it's no biggie, because it will lower my leftover to $3MM instead which is still more than enough?
-
I understand the sentiment to encourage low impact living, but many younger forum members may find that frugal living, good market returns and an independent lifestyle leave them in a situation with more wealth then they need.
In that situation, a modest luxury, like a pool, should not be a horror. We should enjoy the fruits of our labor and not feel obligated to donate any spare penny to charity. This is especially true if one spends wisely (e.g. vacation with full travel hacking, homestays, etc.). Each of us should be confident enough with our own choices to support well reasoned decisions. Buy that iPhone 10, if you REALLY want it, can afford it, and the value is worth it to you.
No outside person should judge our individual choices once FI is reached (IMHO).
this forum exists to judge choices. even after FI. this goal around here should be to always push people to improve not to just give in to luxuries. coming to this forum to get support for buying an iPhone 10 or to put in a pool should never cross someones mind.
sure if you want to do those things b/c you are FI and can afford it thats awesome but this isnt a FAT FIRE forum its a FIRE forum.
boarder this make sense to me. Coming to a frugality forum at whatever point in your financial journey to discuss buying something extra is a poor idea.
-
...
When is one FI versus RE? I think the challenge is that those two are always conflated on these forum discussions, so it really becomes if one if not already retired before making some purchase it gets hammered and if anyone supports it it is viewed as softening on the forums. Per you fuller point, that if you discover you will have a boatload of cash in the end and that's not that important, you will perhaps choose to do a lot of non-mustachian things. In my case, a recent analysis shows that if I work until 67 and then retire I'd likely have about $5MM left after I kick the bucket. If I'm OK not RE, does that situation make me FI? So therefore if I go buy a new Porsche it's no biggie, because it will lower my leftover to $3MM instead which is still more than enough?
FI = Financial(ly) Independent
RE = REtire(d) Early
FI/RE = Financially Independent & Retired Early
Adding to the confusion, FI is not even a single point, but can have many levels. For example, someone whoo says they are "fully FI" could quit work today and never earn another dime and be financially fine. Others might call themselves "moderately FI" if they have a large stash, a cash surplus each month but aren't entirely comfortable with retirement just yet (i.e. they don't have enough savings to hit their ultimate WR, whatever that may be for that person).
You can be FI and not retire (though its hard or impossible to claim retirement if you are not FI - you are just unemployed:-P ).
Many of us here strive to be FI but we won't necessarily RE right away. For various reasons people who are fully FI may not retire right away, may switch to part-time or may switch fields entirely but continue to work. Which brings us to...
the Internet Retirement Police (IRP). Basically these are the people who yell "that's not really retirement" if an individual who is fully FI does anything which provides a financial benefit. Because of the IRP its often easier to just say "I'm FI" instead of "I retired early (ER)."
clear?
-
...
When is one FI versus RE? I think the challenge is that those two are always conflated on these forum discussions, so it really becomes if one if not already retired before making some purchase it gets hammered and if anyone supports it it is viewed as softening on the forums. Per you fuller point, that if you discover you will have a boatload of cash in the end and that's not that important, you will perhaps choose to do a lot of non-mustachian things. In my case, a recent analysis shows that if I work until 67 and then retire I'd likely have about $5MM left after I kick the bucket. If I'm OK not RE, does that situation make me FI? So therefore if I go buy a new Porsche it's no biggie, because it will lower my leftover to $3MM instead which is still more than enough?
FI = Financial(ly) Independent
RE = REtire(d) Early
FI/RE = Financially Independent & Retired Early
Adding to the confusion, FI is not even a single point, but can have many levels. For example, someone whoo says they are "fully FI" could quit work today and never earn another dime and be financially fine. Others might call themselves "moderately FI" if they have a large stash, a cash surplus each month but aren't entirely comfortable with retirement just yet (i.e. they don't have enough savings to hit their ultimate WR, whatever that may be for that person).
You can be FI and not retire (though its hard or impossible to claim retirement if you are not FI - you are just unemployed:-P ).
Many of us here strive to be FI but we won't necessarily RE right away. For various reasons people who are fully FI may not retire right away, may switch to part-time or may switch fields entirely but continue to work. Which brings us to...
the Internet Retirement Police (IRP). Basically these are the people who yell "that's not really retirement" if an individual who is fully FI does anything which provides a financial benefit. Because of the IRP its often easier to just say "I'm FI" instead of "I retired early (ER)."
clear?
crystal mud
-
Per you fuller point, that if you discover you will have a boatload of cash in the end and that's not that important, you will perhaps choose to do a lot of non-mustachian things. In my case, a recent analysis shows that if I work until 67 and then retire I'd likely have about $5MM left after I kick the bucket. If I'm OK not RE, does that situation make me FI? So therefore if I go buy a new Porsche it's no biggie, because it will lower my leftover to $3MM instead which is still more than enough?
My focus is on figuring out what is enough rather than spending money on luxuries because I can "afford it." I want to optimize my life, not spend money on things.
-
And if you are fully FI but really like your job, or think it benefits society, or whatever, you can be a SWAMI (Satisfied Working Advanced Mustachian Individual)(http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/04/30/weekend-edition-retire-in-your-mind-even-if-you-love-your-job/). I was a SWAMI for my last three years of work.
Coming back to FIRE, once you have adapted your life to Mustachian principles (you know, think before you buy, does this add value to your life, etc.) then once you are retired it is not difficult to keep on living the way you did before, because you have unhooked yourself from (most of) the consumerist lures society throws out. Just because you have time to read them, you are not going to start reading all the circulars for all the stuff in your mailbox, you have learned that they do not bring joy to your life. If you have dropped cable and let it stay dropped, you will continue to not be exposed to ads on TV. So Mustachian retirement, early or not, will not look like standard retirement.
A bit more back to topic, I have a swimming pool because it came with the house. So I maintain it and use it. I would say it costs about $650/summer to run. It doesn't give me $650 worth of satisfaction, but it does give me some, and looking at a swamp wold give me less satisfaction, and ripping it out and making the vacant space nice would be expensive and not give me more satisfaction, my back yard doesn't need anything added. So I keep it and use it. So looking at trade-offs, using the pool is the best of the 3 choices. If it were not there I would not put one in, though.
-
I lived in an area where everyone had a pool (including us). Hated having the pool, but you'd have a hard(er) time selling the house without it.
-
But aren't pools subject to hedonic adaptation just like so many other "modest" luxuries? I mean, why not walk or bike to your nearest beach, lake, river or public swimming pool?
Interestingly in Australia, the highest density of swimming pools is on the coastal fringe where there is fairly easy access to nice swimming spots.
Seriously guys this thread has gone soft, I can't believe we're now justifying having a personal swimming pool.
They can be, but the only negative I see with a swimming pool you enjoy and can afford is the environmental impact, for example if you are in drought stricken area or burn fossil fuels to heats it.
It's true a lot of people who have pools don't get much enjoyment out of them, and certainly not in proportion to their cost.
But that's not to say there aren't people who swim every day and love it. My local public pool doesn't let me swim nude, float around on an inflatable lounge, or invite a bunch of people over to drink beer and grill. They don't let me swim at night or in the rain. They don't let me control the urine and chlorine levels.
These are are all things I actually did growing up with a pool (don't have one now) and they are awesome. They aren't really equivalent goods.
-
A bit more back to topic, I have a swimming pool because it came with the house. So I maintain it and use it. I would say it costs about $650/summer to run. It doesn't give me $650 worth of satisfaction, but it does give me some, and looking at a swamp wold give me less satisfaction, and ripping it out and making the vacant space nice would be expensive and not give me more satisfaction, my back yard doesn't need anything added. So I keep it and use it. So looking at trade-offs, using the pool is the best of the 3 choices. If it were not there I would not put one in, though.
Our house came with a pool as well (17 years ago). It was ok with the kids, but now they're gone. I compared the cost of a new liner to the cost of removing the pool last year... the answer was clear. The extra cost for removal will be covered end of next summer. Plus no more chemicals, vacuuming, minor repairs, occasional fights with algae. And it was too small to swim in. I mean 40 feet long? That's like "turn, 2 strokes, turn, 2 strokes" Life is much better now.
Does your $650/year include capital costs such as a new liner?
I think a pool is a silly thing to purchase, but I didn't see the thread asking for advice. 30K so you can splash around in 12000 gallons of water with your friends? Not to mention the risk factor if you have little kids. Our youngest fell in the pool at a BBQ once and it could have been bad news if I didn't see him.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
I thought the answers were quite sensible, Some people should not or cannot do some DIY things.
-
Does your $650/year include capital costs such as a new liner?
No, $650 is operational. If anything major needs repairs, it goes (pump more likely than liner). Water is not an issue, here in soggy wet south-eastern Ontario. 27' diameter pool means 5 little strokes and hit an edge - I drift a lot instead. If I were going to spend money on a pool it would be one of those endless ones, where you can swim forever against a current. I much prefer lakes, but no cottage.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
I thought the answers were quite sensible, Some people should not or cannot do some DIY things.
I agree. One poster said her husband had been horrifically injured using a ladder. Some people can do it, for some it's a terrible idea.
-
You want spendy and soft? Go read Also $800,000 in debt; in a good position but still interested in your help in Case Studies.
-
I've never really understood the "You're FI so you can do anything you like!" statements. Surely it's more "You're FI so have to live within your budget or else you will have to go back to work, so you need to be even more conscious of what you're spending than someone who's working with a 50% savings rate."
And let us not forget one of the three main goals of the blog: To save the whole Human Race from destroying itself through overconsumption of its over habitat. [source: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/]
This
I've never really understood the "You're FI so you can do anything you like!" statements. Surely it's more "You're FI so have to live within your budget or else you will have to go back to work, so you need to be even more conscious of what you're spending than someone who's working with a 50% savings rate."
And let us not forget one of the three main goals of the blog: To save the whole Human Race from destroying itself through overconsumption of its over habitat. [source: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/]
This. I've been FI and RE a long time and while I'm able to live a comfortable lifestyle on my passive income its not like I can send the maid out to buy me multiple $800 blenders or the chauffeur out to buy me a new Beemer or the pool boy to do...er....pool boy stuff. I still have to watch what I spend or would eventually have to go back to work (the HORROR).
MMM is about recognizing and letting go of comsumerist drives and the emotional baggage that causes that drive. Learning that consumption isn't the key to happiness and that your life can be better without all the accoutrements of wealth or the desire to attain those things. Its not about "living like no one else so you can eventually live like no one else". There's another dude out there for that kind of high spending retired life ;-).
This
And finally this:
this forum exists to judge choices. even after FI. this goal around here should be to always push people to improve not to just give in to luxuries. coming to this forum to get support for buying an iPhone 10 or to put in a pool should never cross someones mind.
sure if you want to do those things b/c you are FI and can afford it thats awesome but this isnt a FAT FIRE forum its a FIRE forum.
boarder this make sense to me. Coming to a frugality forum at whatever point in your financial journey to discuss buying something extra is a poor idea.
And thats all I have to say on the matter.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
I thought the answers were quite sensible, Some people should not or cannot do some DIY things.
Excellent reason to stick with a reasonably sized single story home. At that height there's risk, but it's still relatively manageable. Once you go up to that second story you're very nearly guaranteed a bad time in a fall.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
I thought the answers were quite sensible, Some people should not or cannot do some DIY things.
But that thread IS about a single story home!
Excellent reason to stick with a reasonably sized single story home. At that height there's risk, but it's still relatively manageable. Once you go up to that second story you're very nearly guaranteed a bad time in a fall.
-
This thread: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/send-hubby-up-a-ladder-or-pay-$400/ blows my mind. I had forgotten about it but it keeps popping up. I cannot fathom the number of people who refuse to climb a ladder.
I thought the answers were quite sensible, Some people should not or cannot do some DIY things.
Excellent reason to stick with a reasonably sized single story home. At that height there's risk, but it's still relatively manageable. Once you go up to that second story you're very nearly guaranteed a bad time in a fall.
The poster about the $400 ladder work was painting a 1 storey home... I can understand paying for the painters to save you all your weekends over summer...its a value for time equation.. but I had trouble wrapping my head around this one, a single storey... two healthy adults means at least one should be able to do it..
-
I have to admit falling off a ladder a few years ago while trimming a storm-damaged tree. Four cracked ribs. I still do ladder work but am now much more careful about how I do it. Take your time, think about what could go wrong, etc.
-
Is it just because I grew up with construction workers that I understand the cost of falling off a ladder or is it that you guys have too much faith in ladders? Every single person I know who has done construction work has fallen from a ladder at one time or another. Sometimes the ladder fails, sometimes you slip, sometimes the ground gives. They know what they are doing and there are still accidents. My father is on his 3rd back surgery from a fall during his younger years, my grandfather gave up going up ladders when he was younger because it isn't worth the risk (he's in his 90s and still doing carpentry, so this is a fit experienced person).
I am not saying don't ever go up a ladder. I am saying, always have someone else there and know that eventually you will fall. That's why past a certain point, you should be using scaffolding not ladders, especially not extension ladders. If someone doesn't feel safe going up an extension ladder, they shouldn't do it. My single story house can't have the top of the steeple painted from the ladder I do trust (you will never get me up an extension ladder again, I own an awesome step ladder instead). I helped to build my previous home. I felt that stupid extension ladder shift even on solid footing. No, just no. For painting, scaffolding or a much taller step ladder is the safer bet.
-
Is it just because I grew up with construction workers that I understand the cost of falling off a ladder or is it that you guys have too much faith in ladders? Every single person I know who has done construction work has fallen from a ladder at one time or another. Sometimes the ladder fails, sometimes you slip, sometimes the ground gives. They know what they are doing and there are still accidents. My father is on his 3rd back surgery from a fall during his younger years, my grandfather gave up going up ladders when he was younger because it isn't worth the risk (he's in his 90s and still doing carpentry, so this is a fit experienced person).
I am not saying don't ever go up a ladder. I am saying, always have someone else there and know that eventually you will fall. That's why past a certain point, you should be using scaffolding not ladders, especially not extension ladders. If someone doesn't feel safe going up an extension ladder, they shouldn't do it. My single story house can't have the top of the steeple painted from the ladder I do trust (you will never get me up an extension ladder again, I own an awesome step ladder instead). I helped to build my previous home. I felt that stupid extension ladder shift even on solid footing. No, just no. For painting, scaffolding or a much taller step ladder is the safer bet.
As an engineer who's out inspecting the progress of construction all the time I have to say you know exactly what you're talking about. Give me a sturdy A-frame, I'm not going up that extension ladder. The arms in my dad's extension ladder broke off on me as a teenage going to help him on top of the roof. I rode it down until it clamped my feet, the ladder feet slid back and caught something in the ground as the top fell off the eave to the masonry, it flipped upside down, and I somehow dropped down about six feet to the ground without injuring myself all in one maneuver.
In my professional life I've seen no less than two architects fall off of extension ladders. One of them was hospitalized. No thank you.
-
Is it just because I grew up with construction workers that I understand the cost of falling off a ladder or is it that you guys have too much faith in ladders? Every single person I know who has done construction work has fallen from a ladder at one time or another. Sometimes the ladder fails, sometimes you slip, sometimes the ground gives. They know what they are doing and there are still accidents. My father is on his 3rd back surgery from a fall during his younger years, my grandfather gave up going up ladders when he was younger because it isn't worth the risk (he's in his 90s and still doing carpentry, so this is a fit experienced person).
I am not saying don't ever go up a ladder. I am saying, always have someone else there and know that eventually you will fall. That's why past a certain point, you should be using scaffolding not ladders, especially not extension ladders. If someone doesn't feel safe going up an extension ladder, they shouldn't do it. My single story house can't have the top of the steeple painted from the ladder I do trust (you will never get me up an extension ladder again, I own an awesome step ladder instead). I helped to build my previous home. I felt that stupid extension ladder shift even on solid footing. No, just no. For painting, scaffolding or a much taller step ladder is the safer bet.
As an engineer who's out inspecting the progress of construction all the time I have to say you know exactly what you're talking about. Give me a sturdy A-frame, I'm not going up that extension ladder. The arms in my dad's extension ladder broke off on me as a teenage going to help him on top of the roof. I rode it down until it clamped my feet, the ladder feet slid back and caught something in the ground as the top fell off the eave to the masonry, it flipped upside down, and I somehow dropped down about six feet to the ground without injuring myself all in one maneuver.
In my professional life I've seen no less than two architects fall off of extension ladders. One of them was hospitalized. No thank you.
What are your feelings on aluminum pump-jack systems in lieu of extension ladders?
(Yeah, i aks because that's what I"m using right now...)
-
Is it just because I grew up with construction workers that I understand the cost of falling off a ladder or is it that you guys have too much faith in ladders? Every single person I know who has done construction work has fallen from a ladder at one time or another. Sometimes the ladder fails, sometimes you slip, sometimes the ground gives. They know what they are doing and there are still accidents. My father is on his 3rd back surgery from a fall during his younger years, my grandfather gave up going up ladders when he was younger because it isn't worth the risk (he's in his 90s and still doing carpentry, so this is a fit experienced person).
I am not saying don't ever go up a ladder. I am saying, always have someone else there and know that eventually you will fall. That's why past a certain point, you should be using scaffolding not ladders, especially not extension ladders. If someone doesn't feel safe going up an extension ladder, they shouldn't do it. My single story house can't have the top of the steeple painted from the ladder I do trust (you will never get me up an extension ladder again, I own an awesome step ladder instead). I helped to build my previous home. I felt that stupid extension ladder shift even on solid footing. No, just no. For painting, scaffolding or a much taller step ladder is the safer bet.
As an engineer who's out inspecting the progress of construction all the time I have to say you know exactly what you're talking about. Give me a sturdy A-frame, I'm not going up that extension ladder. The arms in my dad's extension ladder broke off on me as a teenage going to help him on top of the roof. I rode it down until it clamped my feet, the ladder feet slid back and caught something in the ground as the top fell off the eave to the masonry, it flipped upside down, and I somehow dropped down about six feet to the ground without injuring myself all in one maneuver.
In my professional life I've seen no less than two architects fall off of extension ladders. One of them was hospitalized. No thank you.
What are your feelings on aluminum pump-jack systems in lieu of extension ladders?
(Yeah, i aks because that's what I"m using right now...)
You didn't "aks" me, but I think you should not mix using ladders and communication devices. Use them sequentially, not in tandem. Focus, nereo, we like you.
ETA: Ya, I misspelled your name, but I still like you😂
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
Yea, especially when great smartphones can be had for 200-400$.
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
Yea, especially when great smartphones can be had for 200-400$.
I think the iPads are misprinted relative to iPhones. Compare the specs and price of the iPad mini (cellular) with the iPhone plus. There’s a very large premium for that phone app!
Wonder if you can jailbreak the iPad to install the phone app
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
Yea, especially when great smartphones can be had for 200-400$.
Still too many zeroes.
:-}
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
Yea, especially when great smartphones can be had for 200-400$.
Still too many zeroes.
:-}
I guess, but for something I use every day for 3+ years 200$ is not bad.
-
So yet another post goes incredibly soft
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/antimustachian-wall-of-shame-and-comedy/your-new-phone-will-probably-cost-you-$1-000!
I almost commented on ooeeii's justification on how buying the phone was more environmentally friendly. I stopped myself as it was pointless. The sheep are being led to the slaughter every day.
Yea, especially when great smartphones can be had for 200-400$.
I think the iPads are misprinted relative to iPhones. Compare the specs and price of the iPad mini (cellular) with the iPhone plus. There’s a very large premium for that phone app!
Wonder if you can jailbreak the iPad to install the phone app
Could you install whatsapp/skype or something similar for making calls /texts?
-
I think the iPads are misprinted relative to iPhones. Compare the specs and price of the iPad mini (cellular) with the iPhone plus. There’s a very large premium for that phone app!
Wonder if you can jailbreak the iPad to install the phone app
Could you install whatsapp/skype or something similar for making calls /texts?
If you want a real phone number, I use Talkatone. Freetone is another good one. It gives you an actual US phone number that other people can call/text. I have installed them successfully on an iPod. I also use Whatsapp and Skype frequently - but people actually need to be on those platforms to use them.
Currently my DH has an iPhone but has a prepaid data only plan and uses those various apps to call/text on data/wifi. Call quality is not as good but it is dramatically cheaper.
-
TL:DR: I see a shift here from a more ERE crowd who were lower earners but saved a ton in order to reachbFI and possibly RE asap to a younger higher earning crowd that saves a lot but also spends a lot.
I feel like the forum has gotten blasted with super high earners in the last year or so. I don't see a pattern with age as much, but I definitely used to feel motivated by and interested in more threads. Now so many conversations are either consumery-y and about buying things (usually things way too expensive for me to ever consider) or just wildly unrelatable (i.e. lots of people saving 60% of income but still spending double or triple what I spend, doing $20k of lawn work, etc).
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
That being said, I don't know why people in the forums are so stuck on frugality. All the MMM articles are just about cutting out the truly ridiculous wasteful things that don't actually help your happiness. I don't think many people here are planning on going without luxuries like hot water, 21st century health care, or a cell phone. That's true frugality.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
I should have clarified. I didn't mean 100k as an amount of money, I meant as a yearly salary.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
That being said, I don't know why people in the forums are so stuck on frugality. All the MMM articles are just about cutting out the truly ridiculous wasteful things that don't actually help your happiness. I don't think many people here are planning on going without luxuries like hot water, 21st century health care, or a cell phone. That's true frugality.
How is going without healthcare “true frugality”?
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
That being said, I don't know why people in the forums are so stuck on frugality. All the MMM articles are just about cutting out the truly ridiculous wasteful things that don't actually help your happiness. I don't think many people here are planning on going without luxuries like hot water, 21st century health care, or a cell phone. That's true frugality.
How is going without healthcare “true frugality”?
He said 21st century healthcare. You can still take aspirin and get prescriptions. Just no fancy surgery.
-
It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
Thank you, rdaneel0. Your post is why I visit the MMM forums.
-
So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas...
Ah, you haven't been paying attention my friend! This isn't a forum about frugality and intentional hardship. It's a forum about "balance" and "spending your values "!
Also, we have always been at war with Eurasia.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
That being said, I don't know why people in the forums are so stuck on frugality. All the MMM articles are just about cutting out the truly ridiculous wasteful things that don't actually help your happiness. I don't think many people here are planning on going without luxuries like hot water, 21st century health care, or a cell phone. That's true frugality.
How is going without healthcare “true frugality”?
I think my healthcare provider is still stuck in the 1990's.. some regions rurally are stuck in the 1970's... is that non-21st century "frugality"? Actually, some of the healthcare that fully qualified and support UN refugees get is better than the healthcare here. (Thanks Germany and UK for setting that standard...)
-
So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas...
Ah, you haven't been paying attention my friend! This isn't a forum about frugality and intentional hardship. It's a forum about "balance" and "spending your values "!
Also, we have always been at war with Eurasia 800$ Vitamix blenders.
Fixed that for you.
-
The lack of perspective from high earners troubles me deeply sometimes. A $100k household income is huge! Yes, one can achieve it with two adults earning $50k (thinking of MMM's 50 jobs article) but that is still totally out of the picture for huge huge numbers of people in first world countries, America included. "It's not that much..." YES IT IS.
-
As one of those high earners, I do understand this, both on the forums and in real life conversations. I believe I am very cognizant of that and try hard to make sure that I do not make statements of "it's not that much" about either income or expenses. In case studies and such with those high earners (the $800,000 debt one that was popular lately is one) I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
-
As one of those high earners, I do understand this, both on the forums and in real life conversations. I believe I am very cognizant of that and try hard to make sure that I do not make statements of "it's not that much" about either income or expenses. In case studies and such with those high earners (the $800,000 debt one that was popular lately is one) I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
For this reason it's impossible for me to give much advice at work or with my friends since I'm the second highest earner in my organization and make as much as my three best friends combined. It's easier if I just don't mention money to anybody around me except with you all. Even if the advice is logical or sought out by that person, I've found they don't want to hear it from someone who is much more financially secure than they are.
-
As one of those high earners, I do understand this, both on the forums and in real life conversations. I believe I am very cognizant of that and try hard to make sure that I do not make statements of "it's not that much" about either income or expenses. In case studies and such with those high earners (the $800,000 debt one that was popular lately is one) I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
For this reason it's impossible for me to give much advice at work or with my friends since I'm the second highest earner in my organization and make as much as my three best friends combined. It's easier if I just don't mention money to anybody around me except with you all. Even if the advice is logical or sought out by that person, I've found they don't want to hear it from someone who is much more financially secure than they are.
I find this sort of thing true even at lower income levels. My girlfriend and I make about double what her sister and sister's boyfriend make (we make just over median, and they make about half of median), but they scorn any money-saving advice thrown their way.
-
As one of those high earners, I do understand this, both on the forums and in real life conversations. I believe I am very cognizant of that and try hard to make sure that I do not make statements of "it's not that much" about either income or expenses. In case studies and such with those high earners (the $800,000 debt one that was popular lately is one) I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
For this reason it's impossible for me to give much advice at work or with my friends since I'm the second highest earner in my organization and make as much as my three best friends combined. It's easier if I just don't mention money to anybody around me except with you all. Even if the advice is logical or sought out by that person, I've found they don't want to hear it from someone who is much more financially secure than they are.
I find this sort of thing true even at lower income levels. My girlfriend and I make about double what her sister and sister's boyfriend make (we make just over median, and they make about half of median), but they scorn any money-saving advice thrown their way.
I would agree. Even earlier in my career, when people asked for advice when you provided anything that contradicted the spend, spend, spend ads on TV, it made no sense to them. "Why would you want to do that?" What they usually wanted was how to get the best deal on whatever it was they wanted to get, not to hear how there would be other alternatives that were less expensive or that perhaps they could forgo it entirely and just save so they could do something better later. Delayed gratification is always the enemy no matter how little money you have.
When I do give advice I usually stay away from income. Obviously people at work know my position and understand I make a lot, but others are less aware.
-
As one of those high earners, I do understand this, both on the forums and in real life conversations. I believe I am very cognizant of that and try hard to make sure that I do not make statements of "it's not that much" about either income or expenses. In case studies and such with those high earners (the $800,000 debt one that was popular lately is one) I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
For this reason it's impossible for me to give much advice at work or with my friends since I'm the second highest earner in my organization and make as much as my three best friends combined. It's easier if I just don't mention money to anybody around me except with you all. Even if the advice is logical or sought out by that person, I've found they don't want to hear it from someone who is much more financially secure than they are.
I find this sort of thing true even at lower income levels. My girlfriend and I make about double what her sister and sister's boyfriend make (we make just over median, and they make about half of median), but they scorn any money-saving advice thrown their way.
Ha, yeah. Reminds me of something my husband said to me once when we were first dating. We were talking about his brother and sister-in-law, who have a big fancy house and lots of expensive stuff in it, and he was telling me his brother was lamenting how long it had been since they've been on vacation (they are self-employed and own their own very successful business). I remarked on how nice their house is and said, "I don't get why they don't just go on vacation if they want to. They clearly have the money." Husband said with a smirk, "No, they had money."
-
I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
Why not? If X% is small enough, it does become negligible. If you spend 18% of your take home pay, and increase it to 22% (yes, these are my actual numbers), why would it matter? You're FIRing in <3 years anyway, so adding 2.5 weeks of work per year isn't much. You need to understand the reality of high-earners. They don't have time to be frugal and waste time savings pennies. They can solve a problem by throwing money at it and FIRing 1 hour later.
Don't get me wrong, I'm able to be VERY frugal if I put my mind to it, but that shit takes time and energy, sometimes. It's fun, and I may do that after FIRE, but for now it makes so much more sense to focus on channelling the gravy train while it's there.
The point of this MMM philosophy is that you're aware of the time you trade for money, aka Your Money or Your Life, i.e. you don't want to spend $5k on a toy if it takes your 6 months of drudgery to save that amount. BUT you do want to spend $5k to eliminate a major 6-month long inconvenience if it takes you 2 weeks to save that. Same philosphy, different application from low earner to high earner.
It may be that a high salary makes you somewhat complacent, I'm not sure... but then again, excess always does.
-
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
Yes yes YES!
Savings percentages perhaps should shift to Enough percentages. "Am I at 100% Enough? What could possibly bring me more Enough?" Alas, that begs the question. Percentages need sound philosophical pilings.
-
I point out how one should not justify any expense as "but it's only X% of my take home pay" versus do you even need it, but yes there has been a tendency by many to be more lenient on this. I think that's a big part of what started this thread to begin with.
Why not? If X% is small enough, it does become negligible. If you spend 18% of your take home pay, and increase it to 22% (yes, these are my actual numbers), why would it matter? You're FIRing in <3 years anyway, so adding 2.5 weeks of work per year isn't much. You need to understand the reality of high-earners. They don't have time to be frugal and waste time savings pennies. They can solve a problem by throwing money at it and FIRing 1 hour later.
Don't get me wrong, I'm able to be VERY frugal if I put my mind to it, but that shit takes time and energy, sometimes. It's fun, and I may do that after FIRE, but for now it makes so much more sense to focus on channelling the gravy train while it's there.
The point of this MMM philosophy is that you're aware of the time you trade for money, aka Your Money or Your Life, i.e. you don't want to spend $5k on a toy if it takes your 6 months of drudgery to save that amount. BUT you do want to spend $5k to eliminate a major 6-month long inconvenience if it takes you 2 weeks to save that. Same philosphy, different application from low earner to high earner.
It may be that a high salary makes you somewhat complacent, I'm not sure... but then again, excess always does.
Part of the MMM philosophy is to use your money and time wisely to buy your freedom. The other part is to stop destroying yourself and the planet. The latter part applies no matter how much you earn. See the post about % of Enough - enough is enough. And we all get the same 24 hours in each day. Low earners don't have time to be frugal either but they do it because they have to and because they're badass.
-
Why not? If X% is small enough, it does become negligible. If you spend 18% of your take home pay, and increase it to 22% (yes, these are my actual numbers), why would it matter? You're FIRing in <3 years anyway, so adding 2.5 weeks of work per year isn't much. You need to understand the reality of high-earners. They don't have time to be frugal and waste time savings pennies. They can solve a problem by throwing money at it and FIRing 1 hour later.
Don't get me wrong, I'm able to be VERY frugal if I put my mind to it, but that shit takes time and energy, sometimes. It's fun, and I may do that after FIRE, but for now it makes so much more sense to focus on channelling the gravy train while it's there.
The point of this MMM philosophy is that you're aware of the time you trade for money, aka Your Money or Your Life, i.e. you don't want to spend $5k on a toy if it takes your 6 months of drudgery to save that amount. BUT you do want to spend $5k to eliminate a major 6-month long inconvenience if it takes you 2 weeks to save that. Same philosphy, different application from low earner to high earner.
It may be that a high salary makes you somewhat complacent, I'm not sure... but then again, excess always does.
shelivesthedream made some good points about the philosophy.
I'd add that its your response is merely an excuse wrapped up in flawed logic. Its purpose is, to be blunt, self-justification, one of the most powerful mental forces we have, and a dangerous one at that. I sometimes refer to this kind of justification as the "so called 'plight' of the high earner". There's also a non-trivial amount of financial elitism buried in there, that cost-efficiency is something for 'poor' people but is somehow beneath us wealthy folks. We delude ourselves into thinking a purchase is such a small portion of our income its negligible, or that our time is so valuable we can't be bothered to lose a few hours doing something ourselves vs. contracting it out. The former isn't true because all money has an absolute and cumulative value (see the 'latte effect' or buying lunches effect). The latter makes assumptions that we are already 100% efficient, that we'd use any time save to work more (kind of against the grain of this forum) and that we gain nothing from undertaking these tasks ourselves.
Finally, I'll just add that if you think this forum is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/) and there's a difference between being frugal and cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
-
So neoreo addressing gerardc's point is very similar to my view. First, I want to address the fact that gerardc's response seems to come at me from a point of I do not understand how a high earner thinks. I certainly do, as I said I'm a high earner myself, but then I deviate to neoreo's line in that I do not fall into the excuse that "that shit takes time and energy" as you determine where to avoid paying someone to do something you're totally capable.
The flawed logic is that as a high earner my time is somehow more valuable than someone elses, and it is while I'm at work. But as we are talking about in another thread about if long hours are needed to be successful, you don't need to be a your job for insance amounts of hours. In fact I'd argue, because I've done it myself for over two decades, that to be a high earner you do not need to work more than a blue collar 9-5er. Therefore I have the same amount of non-work time as the low earner who by necessity must be more frugal than I HAVE to be. So at this point the view that it's not not worth it becomes and excuse to be lazy. Sure I can pay a landscaping company $20/week to mow my lawn. After all the $1,000/year that costs is just 0.5% of my annual income so why bother. neoreo pointed out what I'm getting at here. You're not going to use that time you free up to work and make more money. You're making that trade off to sit on your ass and/or do something you find fun. We all love fun. Let's have fun, but let's not justify that we can have fun because we're rolling in cash and so we can make that choice and try to align that in anyway with a MMM viewpoint. You can say increasing your spend by 4% of your take home is negligible but don't try to say that aligns with MMM in any way. It's spendypants if you do not need that extra expense.
-
Work hours are going to be dictated by industry and company culture. They aren't the same from industry to industry or firm to firm. I am making more money at my current job working fewer hours. The only way to succeed in Last Job was to plow in 60+ hour weeks...that's despite doing the same function at both firms.
Other anecdotes:
1. A married couple friend have one working in Law, working 50-60 hour weeks, and one working in IT at a health system, working 40 hours a week. The guy makes more.
2. Mother has had the same position at her company for a decade+. Changed 5 or so years ago from a 40 hour per week job to a 60 hour per week job.
3. Friend is a manager at a large marketing firm. She was moved from a functional team to a dysfunctional team (with expectation to fix it) and her hours went from 40 hours a week to 60-70 hours per week.
4. Friend the architect has the same XP: His last job he didn't even have enough to do. At his first job, he regularly was putting in 70-80 hours per week.
All qualify as high-earners now (well I don't), and all have had some sprints with crazy hours. Well, except for the IT guy.
-
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
Given MMM's stats about how many software engineers there are in the US and how many of them potentially read his site, unscientific as that article may have been, that's to be expected to a degree. You *can* get paid under $100k as a software engineer, but you almost have to try to. By which I mean, want to work in the video game industry, suck at your job/are only in it "for the money", or are fresh out of school.
Not trying to be a dick about it -- that's just what the math says. When BS in CS when I graduated was earning an *average* of 60k+ straight out of school years ago, hitting 100k is simply a matter of time/being better than average/location.
-
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
Given MMM's stats about how many software engineers there are in the US and how many of them potentially read his site, unscientific as that article may have been, that's to be expected to a degree. You *can* get paid under $100k as a software engineer, but you almost have to try to. By which I mean, want to work in the video game industry, suck at your job/are only in it "for the money", or are fresh out of school.
Not trying to be a dick about it -- that's just what the math says. When BS in CS when I graduated was earning an *average* of 60k+ straight out of school years ago, hitting 100k is simply a matter of time/being better than average/location.
The median salary for a software engineer in Canada is 70k a year. If you're making 98k or over you're in the 90th percentile of software engineers. (https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary (https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary)) It is higher in the US (median salary being 81k), but you're still going to have to be in the 75th percentile to be making over 100 grand a year. (https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary (https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary))
The vast majority of software engineers must be trying to get paid less?
-
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
Given MMM's stats about how many software engineers there are in the US and how many of them potentially read his site, unscientific as that article may have been, that's to be expected to a degree. You *can* get paid under $100k as a software engineer, but you almost have to try to. By which I mean, want to work in the video game industry, suck at your job/are only in it "for the money", or are fresh out of school.
Not trying to be a dick about it -- that's just what the math says. When BS in CS when I graduated was earning an *average* of 60k+ straight out of school years ago, hitting 100k is simply a matter of time/being better than average/location.
The median salary for a software engineer in Canada is 70k a year. If you're making 98k or over you're in the 90th percentile of software engineers. (https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary (https://www.payscale.com/research/CA/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary)) It is higher in the US (median salary being 81k), but you're still going to have to be in the 75th percentile to be making over 100 grand a year. (https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary (https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Salary))
The vast majority of software engineers must be trying to get paid less?
Also, I'm not a software engineer (though not too far off - I work in IT). I realize they are disproportionally represented among Mustachians but that hardly means a given member should be expected to be a software engineer.
-
Interesting turn to the discussion.
I always thought a big part of Mustachianism is realizing what is "enough". And that it really shouldn't have that much to do with income. If $60k/yr is "enough" for me and my family (that's the number we're at now and it's pretty luxurious and definitely makes me feel "soft"!), then that should stay relatively stable and not inflate based on my salary. So if next year, we make $200k, we should still be spending $60/k. I really don't get % of income as a justification for spending more. Why is "enough" not enough?
Then again, I don't claim to have it perfect. Not all that many years ago, I was a SAHM and we lived luxuriously on $40k/yr) so we have definitely succumbed to a bit of lifestyle inflation. To my mind, that is something to battle against - not celebrate.
-
Everyone has a different baseline of enough though, and what seems like hardship to one person might be luxury for another. I live on 20k per year(single) and I have everything I need plus I can travel, and I don't feel like I'm lacking anything important. I could even live on less, but I pretty much spend according to my values and don't think it would increase my happiness if I cut out stuff I enjoy, although I do try to save when it makes sense. Not everyone on the forum could or would live the way I do, but it works for me. I don't even know what I would buy if I was spending 60k a year (although I guess for families it's a little different), so some of the case studies on here seem absolutely ridiculous from my perspective. I want to make more just so I can save more and accelerate FIRE, but I'm also really lucky to have discovered MMM before building a lot of fancy spending into my budget in the first place.
-
Everyone has a different baseline of enough though, and what seems like hardship to one person might be luxury for another.
From a philosophical point of view, I think it's fine for everyone to have a different baseline of "enough". The exact number would depend on your values and circumstances. What I have gained most from MMM and the forum is a different understanding of "enough". I think that is so much more valuable than being able to spend more because you earn more. IMO, your spending should be more divorced from your earning and more in line with your "enough". That said, if your "enough" is higher than your earning, you either need to earn more or figure out a new baseline for "enough"!
The main reason I'm here is to challenge my assumption of "enough" and to get that baseline lower. The general philosophy of consuming less appeals to me. And of course, the side benefits of having more money/requiring less money to live an awesome life is also very appealing.
-
Everyone has a different baseline of enough though, and what seems like hardship to one person might be luxury for another.
From a philosophical point of view, I think it's fine for everyone to have a different baseline of "enough". The exact number would depend on your values and circumstances. What I have gained most from MMM and the forum is a different understanding of "enough". I think that is so much more valuable than being able to spend more because you earn more. IMO, your spending should be more divorced from your earning and more in line with your "enough". That said, if your "enough" is higher than your earning, you either need to earn more or figure out a new baseline for "enough"!
The main reason I'm here is to challenge my assumption of "enough" and to get that baseline lower. The general philosophy of consuming less appeals to me. And of course, the side benefits of having more money/requiring less money to live an awesome life is also very appealing.
It is bad to experience hardship. The hardship that you experience in many cases is directly linked to how you think about what's happening, not what's happening. You can't always control your circumstances, but you can control how you think about them.
Conditioning yourself to be satisfied with less should be a goal that everyone pursues, it will only increase your happiness.
-
So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas...
Ah, you haven't been paying attention my friend! This isn't a forum about frugality and intentional hardship. It's a forum about "balance" and "spending your values "!
Also, we have always been at war with Eurasia.
Nah, I think I've been paying attention :) I think this forum did used to be more about frugality, and I recall quite a few posts about stoicism and intentional discomfort. That said, I don't think frugality and intentional hardship are synonymous. Since when is not going to spas or having a fancy new car a hardship?
-
Re: "having" to work long hours as a high earner... Have you not heard of FU money? That is the entire point of it, that you can say no to crazy long hours that the paycheque to paycheque folks have to accept.
-
So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas...
Ah, you haven't been paying attention my friend! This isn't a forum about frugality and intentional hardship. It's a forum about "balance" and "spending your values "!
Also, we have always been at war with Eurasia.
Nah, I think I've been paying attention :) I think this forum did used to be more about frugality, and I recall quite a few posts about stoicism and intentional discomfort. That said, I don't think frugality and intentional hardship are synonymous. Since when is not going to spas or having a fancy new car a hardship?
Even stoicism is relative. I can't tell you the number of people who have told us they couldn't live like we do, yet we don't feel like we suffer in any way and are trying to figure out how to cut a few more thousand from our annual spending.
-
Of course I think high earners should be welcome here, but it just feels like there's almost not a place for average or lower earning MMM people. There also seems to be a real lack of perspective regarding wealth and income, which makes a lot of conversations unproductive. I always loved how MMM was about being positive and making yourself better and stronger no matter the circumstances, but some of these posts have people saying things like "we're not even that high earning, we only make about $150k a year combined!" It's like, newsflash: you are in the top 3% of the United States. And no, living in a HCOL area doesn't completely erase that, because low income people also live in HCOL areas.
I think this also skews people's ideas of spending because most people here just use savings percentages in casual conversations. It's like, yeah 50% sounds great, but if you're making a huge salary it's really not that impressive or even frugal. So there's this idea floating around here now that being frugal can totally include new cars, remodeling projects, tons of travel, expensive appliances, fancy gyms, spas, and basically a bunch of other trappings of wealth. Just because you can technically afford those things and still save money doesn't make them prudent choices, and it doesn't make the saver someone who really buys into (pardon the pun) a lot of what first attracted me to MMM, which is the philosophy.
And, scene.
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
This forum is not at all a representative sample of the US, less yet the world as a whole. There are plenty of people in some parts of the world that could take that $100k and live what they would consider a pretty decent lifestyle off the $4k SWA. Cost of living may be cheaper where they are, but not that much cheaper.
That being said, I don't know why people in the forums are so stuck on frugality. All the MMM articles are just about cutting out the truly ridiculous wasteful things that don't actually help your happiness. I don't think many people here are planning on going without luxuries like hot water, 21st century health care, or a cell phone. That's true frugality.
I disagree with your definition of frugality. I think frugality is about cutting out truly ridiculous wasteful things, but everyone defines wasteful differently. The idea of reaching "enough" is, in my opinion, a key aspect of frugal living and high saving. I also think a key missing component is optimization. I recall past conversations here, even among very high earners, about driving down costs in certain areas, learning to diy, or going without things simply in an effort to optimize and outsource less. . Going without hot water (which is inexpensive to get in the first place) is not optimization, neither is not getting a surgery you really need.
On a separate note, I don't think the MMM forum has ever been representative of most people in the country or the world. Overall, it has always been a high income group, but the ethos was a bit more diy, frugal, optimization-facing and general anti-complainypants than it is now. There seemed to be a little more awareness about how most people live.
I started here as a minimum wager years ago, and I could tell there were loads of high earners, but the advice I got from them and many of the threads were still applicable to my life. I didn't feel like I couldn't even add anything to the conversation or like the threads were just totally unattainable high earner/high consumer slanted. Ironically I make a lot more money now, but feel I fit in here even less than I did before!
-
Re: "having" to work long hours as a high earner... Have you not heard of FU money? That is the entire point of it, that you can say no to crazy long hours that the paycheque to paycheque folks have to accept.
These people should be looking for other jobs, and in most cases have, but it takes a substantial amount of time to find a new job. It took me a good 9 months to make a good transition, and that's with >5% unemployment. One of my friends recently lost his job and spent his entire 3 month PIP time and another 2 months to find a new job that still works him crazy hours...he's already looking for a new job (started a month ago).
I wouldn't advise anyone to quit a job without another job lined up. A 6 month resume gap is something that can count as a black mark against you for decades. I suppose it's different in different industries, but I wouldn't take the risk.
-
I disagree with your definition of frugality. I think frugality is about cutting out truly ridiculous wasteful things, but everyone defines wasteful differently. The idea of reaching "enough" is, in my opinion, a key aspect of frugal living and high saving. I also think a key missing component is optimization. I recall past conversations here, even among very high earners, about driving down costs in certain areas, learning to diy, or going without things simply in an effort to optimize and outsource less. . Going without hot water (which is inexpensive to get in the first place) is not optimization, neither is not getting a surgery you really need.
just thought I'd throw this out there:
frugal just means displaying some skill and good judgement in the way you spend your money – and thus it is a mark of status far greater than conspicuous consumption - MMM
link here: frugal vs. cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
-
Yes, yes, 100% yes. People will claim that ~100k isn't "that much" and it makes me do a double take every time. GF and I combined make a bit above my area's household median, which is more like $60k, and it still feels to me like we make silly amounts of money. It's all about perspective.
Given MMM's stats about how many software engineers there are in the US and how many of them potentially read his site, unscientific as that article may have been, that's to be expected to a degree. You *can* get paid under $100k as a software engineer, but you almost have to try to. By which I mean, want to work in the video game industry, suck at your job/are only in it "for the money", or are fresh out of school.
Not trying to be a dick about it -- that's just what the math says. When BS in CS when I graduated was earning an *average* of 60k+ straight out of school years ago, hitting 100k is simply a matter of time/being better than average/location.
yeah, erm. Lots of ego in this note. DH works programming for a small manufacturer in industrial sensors. Makes $60k. Not saying that he couldn't make more (15 years ago, he topped $125k/yr, which would be more today), just that there are reasons beyond the facile list that you put here. Where you live being one of them. Having a job for 35 hours a week that you can bike to, that lets you buy and run 3D printers as an experiment in R&D is another. The primary one really is that his industry is not programming for office software, but industrial manufacturing, at a small business locally.
-
I disagree with your definition of frugality. I think frugality is about cutting out truly ridiculous wasteful things, but everyone defines wasteful differently. The idea of reaching "enough" is, in my opinion, a key aspect of frugal living and high saving. I also think a key missing component is optimization. I recall past conversations here, even among very high earners, about driving down costs in certain areas, learning to diy, or going without things simply in an effort to optimize and outsource less. . Going without hot water (which is inexpensive to get in the first place) is not optimization, neither is not getting a surgery you really need.
just thought I'd throw this out there:
frugal just means displaying some skill and good judgement in the way you spend your money – and thus it is a mark of status far greater than conspicuous consumption - MMM
link here: frugal vs. cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
Agreed.
-
I wouldn't advise anyone to quit a job without another job lined up.
Isn't that exactly the point of this forum, though?
Aren't we all desperately looking forward to the day we quit a job without another one lined up?
-
I wouldn't advise anyone to quit a job without another job lined up.
Isn't that exactly the point of this forum, though?
Aren't we all desperately looking forward to the day we quit a job without another one lined up?
And again, the entire point of FU money is that you can do that and be fine. 6 months without a job is only a gap if you tell it like that. "I took six months off to travel/write a novel/work on my house" is purposeful, and with your FU money you won't stink of desperation.
-
Wow, just wow. I love this blog it radicalised my financial life and redefined my social existence. Forum wise I mostly read the journals and selectively read the general topics. I randomly clicked this topic as I feel that Mr Money Mustache has reached the end of his blog topics and its up to people in their communities to take up the baton and create their mini mustache real life communities. To the people talking shit in this thread they should take the time to eat a bag of dicks and consider exactly where their negativity is coming from. Seriously, regardless of where I started from, or my circumstances, Mr Money Mustache has been nothing but a positive financial influence on my life.
-
I wouldn't advise anyone to quit a job without another job lined up.
Isn't that exactly the point of this forum, though?
Aren't we all desperately looking forward to the day we quit a job without another one lined up?
Yeah, but if I had FIRE money, I'd quit my job even if it was only 40 hours a week. Hell, I'd quit it if it were 20 hours a week. If I wanted to be there, they wouldn't have to pay me.
shelives,
I don't know how it works in different industries, but in corp accounting/finances, I don't think anyone would take you seriously if you said you took 6 months off for anything other than taking care of family members. Upper management is heavily drawn from people who fell out of the tournament at the Big 4 accounting firms. So the pedigree they are looking for is "I worked 60-70 hours a week for years on end."
This culture filters down to the lower levels and filters to the rest of the organization, to some extent.
If unemployment is low, your chances are still pretty good as long as you are competent. If we are in another recession, or a multi-year jobless recovery, a large number of hiring managers will auto-DQ you JUST for having a resume gap, and then you're taking a crap shoot if the manager likes your excuse for taking a 6 month break. You will also be in competition against many people who do not have those resume gaps. I might be biased, because I graduated in the middle of the Great Recession. All of us started off making $7-8/hour in crappy collections jobs. We didn't have full-time jobs for years. My mindset is entirely about never going through that ever again.
-
Wow, just wow. I love this blog it radicalised my financial life and redefined my social existence. Forum wise I mostly read the journals and selectively read the general topics. I randomly clicked this topic as I feel that Mr Money Mustache has reached the end of his blog topics and its up to people in their communities to take up the baton and create their mini mustache real life communities. To the people talking shit in this thread they should take the time to eat a bag of dicks and consider exactly where their negativity is coming from. Seriously, regardless of where I started from, or my circumstances, Mr Money Mustache has been nothing but a positive financial influence on my life.
great post, dusty! Thanks.
-
removed...withdrawing from this thread discussion.
-
Not to apologize for the spendy hugh earners, but i see you are 26 and i think some of this is an age thing. At 26, it is hard to really contextualize the application of mustacian principles and what you end up with at 50.
Most of these folks have worked hard to grow their stash and often the income is coming from both decades of good career development choices and investing wisely. Even MMM is in that income range now due to his blog, the markets, etc.
The challenge is how to live wisely and low impact even when your strategies end up accumulating surplus wealth. The forum dialog can help, though not every thread will be for everyone. We can be inclusive and respectful, and avoid annoying phrases, i agree. But at the same time, we should not demonize people for their success at saving and investing either. No one should reject a pay raise, for example. No one should begrudge a mustacian who gained 10% growth of their stash. If a side hustle is a huge success and they are not needing to spend down their stash at 4%, i am happy for a forum member.
Anyway, it is a tough issue to deal with that perhaps 20 somethings cant resonate with...i get it. Hang in there. With good support and effort, i bet you will be able to achieve your dreams too.
I don't think it's just an age thing (I'm early 30s, fyi). There are lots of younger and older super high income people here and in real life. I know lots of couples who hit the $150k and up mark in their 20s.
I know your response wasn't directly to me, but I don't think ketchup or I were demonizing people for their success. I'm always psyched to read about people doing amazing things, and it was largely high earners who helped me when I started here and was asking REALLY basic questions (like, what's an IRA?) I mean, those were some patient people! I love that this community gives me access to people who are farther along and smarter than I am. I don't think the issue is a youthful jealousy thing, like, "there are too many evil high earners here!", it's "there are a lot of totally unaware high earners who don't even realize they're high earners or high spenders, so conversations are getting weird".
I mean, MMM was a high earner, and when I started reading here I was 22 and had about -$2,000 to my name and a minimum wage job, and he was already retired, so I have zero problem taking advice from higher earners who are older and more accomplished. If you make smart decisions you should be better off at 40 than at 20, I think that's part of why we're all here! At the same time, I think it's good to stay grounded in why we have success. It simply isn't possible for all people to amass $500k (or whatever) after just a few years of working, and that's ok. Living an optimized life still works for lower earners, it just isn't quite as fast or dramatic.
I honestly consider myself to be a pretty high earner. I'm now netting $75k (two person family), which feels like a lot to me. I never want to forget about how I made things work on $7.50 an hour or take our income for granted. I want to be grateful and realize that while, yes, DH and I have worked very hard, we've also been extremely fortunate. Especially when so many people in the country and world are struggling, I think it's vital for those of us with resources to realize that we have them not only because we are motivated and hard working, but also because we are fortunate, fortunate to be smart, or able bodied, or white, or living in a certain area of the world, or given education, or with supportive spouses, etc.
Just my two cents, I don't think this particular issue is an inability for young people to contextualize how finances change through different stages of life. I'm a big fan of many of the high earners here, but there has definitely been an influx of a different type of high earner and it has changed the conversations a bit. All in all it's no huge tragedy, I've gotten so much from this community and will always be grateful to the people here. I'll continue to stick around, especially in the journals, I just wonder if the overall attitude shift will scare away and discourage newcomers who are lower earners, which would be a shame. This place saved my financial life.
-
Why not? If X% is small enough, it does become negligible. If you spend 18% of your take home pay, and increase it to 22% (yes, these are my actual numbers), why would it matter? You're FIRing in <3 years anyway, so adding 2.5 weeks of work per year isn't much. You need to understand the reality of high-earners. They don't have time to be frugal and waste time savings pennies. They can solve a problem by throwing money at it and FIRing 1 hour later.
Don't get me wrong, I'm able to be VERY frugal if I put my mind to it, but that shit takes time and energy, sometimes. It's fun, and I may do that after FIRE, but for now it makes so much more sense to focus on channelling the gravy train while it's there.
The point of this MMM philosophy is that you're aware of the time you trade for money, aka Your Money or Your Life, i.e. you don't want to spend $5k on a toy if it takes your 6 months of drudgery to save that amount. BUT you do want to spend $5k to eliminate a major 6-month long inconvenience if it takes you 2 weeks to save that. Same philosphy, different application from low earner to high earner.
It may be that a high salary makes you somewhat complacent, I'm not sure... but then again, excess always does.
shelivesthedream made some good points about the philosophy.
I'd add that its your response is merely an excuse wrapped up in flawed logic. Its purpose is, to be blunt, self-justification, one of the most powerful mental forces we have, and a dangerous one at that. I sometimes refer to this kind of justification as the "so called 'plight' of the high earner". There's also a non-trivial amount of financial elitism buried in there, that cost-efficiency is something for 'poor' people but is somehow beneath us wealthy folks. We delude ourselves into thinking a purchase is such a small portion of our income its negligible, or that our time is so valuable we can't be bothered to lose a few hours doing something ourselves vs. contracting it out. The former isn't true because all money has an absolute and cumulative value (see the 'latte effect' or buying lunches effect). The latter makes assumptions that we are already 100% efficient, that we'd use any time save to work more (kind of against the grain of this forum) and that we gain nothing from undertaking these tasks ourselves.
Finally, I'll just add that if you think this forum is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/) and there's a difference between being frugal and cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
Look, my credit card expenses (everything but rent) average $600/month in a very HCOL area. I'm talking things like going out and buying a $10 drink once in a while so that you can see your friends without pestering them with "frugal options", or paying $99 to have IKEA deliver your minimalist furniture instead of renting a truck for $50 and wasting half of your day. You need to look at the big picture. Just because some have a tendency to overspend and thus need to remind themselves to spend less every second of their life, doesn't mean that some people like myself can't allow themselves some conveniences so they don't burn themselves out to the ground. See? We need a balance between spending and saving, and more saving isn't always the best option; even MMM is pretty lenient in some areas.
So, like I said, it depends on the value of X. If X is small enough and you earn high enough, I'd say go for it, at least for people like me. If you're a weak non-badass and you need to constantly kick yourself in the butt not to overspend then fine, "restrict yourself", but I'm willing to bet they indulge in the same kind of conveniences I describe, they just don't think twice about it because it's "necessary".
It reminds me of the Weight Watchers community, where everyone is overweight and encourages each other, but they're still pretty much all out of shape. Meanwhile in a Crossfit gym, they work hard, get results and even talk about the dangers of overtraining. Why? because they actually work hard, so it's a real danger, and working less hard sometimes is necessary. But the weight watchers overweight guys don't see that and think "no, you ALWAYS need to do more" which just reflects the limited/flawed view you get when you suck.
-
shelivesthedream made some good points about the philosophy.
I'd add that its your response is merely an excuse wrapped up in flawed logic. Its purpose is, to be blunt, self-justification, one of the most powerful mental forces we have, and a dangerous one at that. I sometimes refer to this kind of justification as the "so called 'plight' of the high earner". There's also a non-trivial amount of financial elitism buried in there, that cost-efficiency is something for 'poor' people but is somehow beneath us wealthy folks. We delude ourselves into thinking a purchase is such a small portion of our income its negligible, or that our time is so valuable we can't be bothered to lose a few hours doing something ourselves vs. contracting it out. The former isn't true because all money has an absolute and cumulative value (see the 'latte effect' or buying lunches effect). The latter makes assumptions that we are already 100% efficient, that we'd use any time save to work more (kind of against the grain of this forum) and that we gain nothing from undertaking these tasks ourselves.
Finally, I'll just add that if you think this forum is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/) and there's a difference between being frugal and cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
Look, my credit card expenses (everything but rent) average $600/month in a very HCOL area. I'm talking things like going out and buying a $10 drink once in a while so that you can see your friends without pestering them with "frugal options", or paying $99 to have IKEA deliver your minimalist furniture instead of renting a truck for $50 and wasting half of your day. You need to look at the big picture. Just because some have a tendency to overspend and thus need to remind themselves to spend less every second of their life, doesn't mean that some people like myself can't allow themselves some conveniences so they don't burn themselves out to the ground. See? We need a balance between spending and saving, and more saving isn't always the best option; even MMM is pretty lenient in some areas.
So, like I said, it depends on the value of X. If X is small enough and you earn high enough, I'd say go for it, at least for people like me. If you're a weak non-badass and you need to constantly kick yourself in the butt not to overspend then fine, "restrict yourself", but I'm willing to bet they indulge in the same kind of conveniences I describe, they just don't think twice about it because it's "necessary".
It reminds me of the Weight Watchers community, where everyone is overweight and encourages each other, but they're still pretty much all out of shape. Meanwhile in a Crossfit gym, they work hard, get results and even talk about the dangers of overtraining. Why? because they actually work hard, so it's a real danger, and working less hard sometimes is necessary. But the weight watchers overweight guys don't see that and think "no, you ALWAYS need to do more" which just reflects the limited/flawed view you get when you suck.
There were a few areas in your response where I was nodding along, until I got to the phrase: If X is small enough and you earn high enough, I'd say go for it, at least for people like me. To me that's exactly the wrong attitude to have towards money. If something is a stupid expense at $20 for your average $40k/year worker, it doesn't suddenly become a 'smart' thing to do just because you are earning $140k. To me that's exactly the messaging that marketing has been trying to convince us of; that an on-going monthly expense is affordable because it's such a small percentage of our take-home pay, or that we shouldn't think twice about $10 'luxuries' because they bring 'daily joy' to our lives. If the latter is true that's all fine and good, but most of the time there are much better, healthier and cheaper solutions but we've been trained not to look.
I'm not trying to pick on you per se, but rather attack this belief that we should view what is a 'reasonable' expense based on the individual's income. It's an almost impulsive reflex but I think it is dead wrong. Regarding your comment about 'allowing some conveniences so they don't burn themselves into the ground" - well again we've tied spending to happiness and justified it by thinking its such a small portion of takehome pay.
-
There's a difference in being frugal because you have to and because you can be.
-
shelivesthedream made some good points about the philosophy.
I'd add that its your response is merely an excuse wrapped up in flawed logic. Its purpose is, to be blunt, self-justification, one of the most powerful mental forces we have, and a dangerous one at that. I sometimes refer to this kind of justification as the "so called 'plight' of the high earner". There's also a non-trivial amount of financial elitism buried in there, that cost-efficiency is something for 'poor' people but is somehow beneath us wealthy folks. We delude ourselves into thinking a purchase is such a small portion of our income its negligible, or that our time is so valuable we can't be bothered to lose a few hours doing something ourselves vs. contracting it out. The former isn't true because all money has an absolute and cumulative value (see the 'latte effect' or buying lunches effect). The latter makes assumptions that we are already 100% efficient, that we'd use any time save to work more (kind of against the grain of this forum) and that we gain nothing from undertaking these tasks ourselves.
Finally, I'll just add that if you think this forum is about extreme frugality, you're missing the point (http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2014/11/23/not-extreme-frugality/) and there's a difference between being frugal and cheap (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/10/24/frugal-vs-cheap/).
Look, my credit card expenses (everything but rent) average $600/month in a very HCOL area. I'm talking things like going out and buying a $10 drink once in a while so that you can see your friends without pestering them with "frugal options", or paying $99 to have IKEA deliver your minimalist furniture instead of renting a truck for $50 and wasting half of your day. You need to look at the big picture. Just because some have a tendency to overspend and thus need to remind themselves to spend less every second of their life, doesn't mean that some people like myself can't allow themselves some conveniences so they don't burn themselves out to the ground. See? We need a balance between spending and saving, and more saving isn't always the best option; even MMM is pretty lenient in some areas.
So, like I said, it depends on the value of X. If X is small enough and you earn high enough, I'd say go for it, at least for people like me. If you're a weak non-badass and you need to constantly kick yourself in the butt not to overspend then fine, "restrict yourself", but I'm willing to bet they indulge in the same kind of conveniences I describe, they just don't think twice about it because it's "necessary".
It reminds me of the Weight Watchers community, where everyone is overweight and encourages each other, but they're still pretty much all out of shape. Meanwhile in a Crossfit gym, they work hard, get results and even talk about the dangers of overtraining. Why? because they actually work hard, so it's a real danger, and working less hard sometimes is necessary. But the weight watchers overweight guys don't see that and think "no, you ALWAYS need to do more" which just reflects the limited/flawed view you get when you suck.
There were a few areas in your response where I was nodding along, until I got to the phrase: If X is small enough and you earn high enough, I'd say go for it, at least for people like me. To me that's exactly the wrong attitude to have towards money. If something is a stupid expense at $20 for your average $40k/year worker, it doesn't suddenly become a 'smart' thing to do just because you are earning $140k. To me that's exactly the messaging that marketing has been trying to convince us of; that an on-going monthly expense is affordable because it's such a small percentage of our take-home pay, or that we shouldn't think twice about $10 'luxuries' because they bring 'daily joy' to our lives. If the latter is true that's all fine and good, but most of the time there are much better, healthier and cheaper solutions but we've been trained not to look.
I'm not trying to pick on you per se, but rather attack this belief that we should view what is a 'reasonable' expense based on the individual's income. It's an almost impulsive reflex but I think it is dead wrong. Regarding your comment about 'allowing some conveniences so they don't burn themselves into the ground" - well again we've tied spending to happiness and justified it by thinking its such a small portion of takehome pay.
I mostly agree with you, I think we agree with each other on the specific examples, just the wording and principles sound different.
When I say "If X is high enough and you earn high enough, go for it", it's understood that you also need the thing, there are no cheaper options, etc. With a low income you were basically on the fence buying it, you decided not to; with a high income, it may shift the decision barrier a little bit, and you'd end up buying it because, for example, saving $50 would drain you and you'd be tired at work, which would put you at risk, etc. High income doesn't change much drastically, it may increase your expenses by a few percents, but the basic lifestyle is roughly the same. You'll just spend more e.g. on holidays because you don't have many vacation days and you need to make the most of Thanksgiving weekend, which makes the flights more expensive... things like that. It doesn't give you permission to buy lattes to feel better, that's not what I'm talking about at all.
-
When I say "If X is high enough and you earn high enough, go for it", it's understood that you also need the thing, there are no cheaper options, etc.
I don't think people ever mean that phrase in the "you need the thing" but more in the "yeah, you want the thing and can afford it" manner on this forum.
-
The median salary for a software engineer in Canada is 70k a year. If you're making 98k or over you're in the 90th percentile of software engineers.
...
The vast majority of software engineers must be trying to get paid less?
Different sources find different salary ranges for software engineers, but there is a big discrepancy geographically, especially whether you live in the US or not.
There is a good article, that I can't find now, which uses some consolidated data to show even higher average US software engineer salaries than usually reported. They go on to argue there is an inefficiency in the market due to US immigration issues (which presumably hurts tech companies and the population as a whole, maybe helps some developers): a software engineer in Pittsburgh can always threaten to move to Silicon Valley to get a higher wage, which in turn drives up wages in Pittsburgh (or you can work for Google in Pittsburgh), a developer in London can't make the same threat credibly, which keeps their wages depressed by international (US) standards.
Hired also has a decent salary survey, based on actual job offers: https://hired.com/state-of-salaries-2017
(https://hired.com/assets/reports/state_of_salaries/img1@2x-2019388cdd8acc250c2dfd42b9b50dfb0476a617d511d8193e96e1fbb1bf1843.png)
I wouldn't go as far as the original comment, but I will say that it's likely that in many US markets, and industries, it is very possible for most competent developers, who can interview well, and who have the right credentials or experience to make $100k barring circumstances (don't work for non-profits, certain other industries). I wanted to add compotent, but based on my limited experience interviewing, competent assumes a lot.
Don't ask me though, I've been unemployed for a year :)
-
...eat a bag of dicks..
Brilliant idiom :)
Archer call-out, I assume? Man, I love that show.
-
As one of the higher-earning and spendier members, I would please, please ask the longstanding hard-core members to continue to weigh in and call bullshit when you see it. I am surrounded by a world that tells me I need to spend more and do less, to seek comfort and laziness and bling and escapist fun above all else. Including my own family. This is the only place in my life that reminds me that I don't actually have to do any of that to be happy, and that in fact giving in to the laziness of Papa Johns and my recliner buys short-term happiness but gets in the way of a long-term happy and fulfilled life.
I am never going to aspire to living MMM's life; that's not me, and it wouldn't make me happy. But I can absolutely do better optimizing the money that I throw away on meaningless crap. An echo chamber of "of course you can afford it" isn't helpful, because I am fortunate to be able to afford a shit-ton of useless stuff that I don't need. I need you guys to keep me honest on that and make me take a hard look at choices I tend to take for granted.
Tl;dr: My personal thanks to all of the hard-asses here. Your time and insight is tremendously important -- even when I ultimately choose something different.
-
yeah, erm. Lots of ego in this note. DH works programming for a small manufacturer in industrial sensors. Makes $60k. Not saying that he couldn't make more (15 years ago, he topped $125k/yr, which would be more today), just that there are reasons beyond the facile list that you put here. Where you live being one of them. Having a job for 35 hours a week that you can bike to, that lets you buy and run 3D printers as an experiment in R&D is another. The primary one really is that his industry is not programming for office software, but industrial manufacturing, at a small business locally.
Yeah that came across a little aggressive. Sorry. I still stand by the basic math and assertion, though. 60k average starting salary was ~15 years ago. So if you'll give me 3% inflation just like for the 4% rule, 60k * 1.03^15 = 93.5k. For a large enough sample, close to 50% of today's graduating class should be making over 100k, if not now, then very very soon (2 years). Looks like that 3% assumption isn't too far off based on current numbers: https://cs.illinois.edu/about-us/statistics
You can say, "oh that's a top school" and sure that's true, but there's a lot of top schools graduating very large CS classes. You're going to have to work to pull that number down.
-
I'm not trying to pick on you per se, but rather attack this belief that we should view what is a 'reasonable' expense based on the individual's income. It's an almost impulsive reflex but I think it is dead wrong.
Preach.
My current spend is too high. Not because I can't afford it but, because it's still badly inefficient in several categories.
In this forum TODAY sometime defended having a cleaner on the grounds that they "aren't good at it" and then, defended eating out a lot on the grounds that they "are an emotional eater" and thus can only relieve stress by overpaying for takeout.
-
As one of the higher-earning and spendier members, I would please, please ask the longstanding hard-core members to continue to weigh in and call bullshit when you see it. I am surrounded by a world that tells me I need to spend more and do less, to seek comfort and laziness and bling and escapist fun above all else. Including my own family. This is the only place in my life that reminds me that I don't actually have to do any of that to be happy, and that in fact giving in to the laziness of Papa Johns and my recliner buys short-term happiness but gets in the way of a long-term happy and fulfilled life.
I am never going to aspire to living MMM's life; that's not me, and it wouldn't make me happy. But I can absolutely do better optimizing the money that I throw away on meaningless crap. An echo chamber of "of course you can afford it" isn't helpful, because I am fortunate to be able to afford a shit-ton of useless stuff that I don't need. I need you guys to keep me honest on that and make me take a hard look at choices I tend to take for granted.
Tl;dr: My personal thanks to all of the hard-asses here. Your time and insight is tremendously important -- even when I ultimately choose something different.
I totally agree. I KNOW I'm not as efficient as I could be and I love getting challenged to be better at it.
And when I make choices and get facepunched for it here - I actually think that is a good thing. It forces me to take a step back, re-evaluate my choice and then purposefully decide whether to proceed or not. And if I willingly choose to do it, I'm then secure enough in my decision not to "feel bad" because someone else doesn't agree with my choices. And if I choose to spend on something frivolously, it's also nice to KNOW that it is frivolous and make a purposeful choice to do it anyway.
I've never been hardcore at this and am unlikely to get to the low spending I see some other members achieve. But it's sad when the more frugal and minimalistic Mustachians on here get told they aren't "enjoying life" because they are too thrifty. I still remember the days when members would challenge each other to get their home energy use as low as possible and celebrated when pennies were saved.
Those were also the days when people wouldn't get away with being a "complainypants" (this was an eyeopening concept to me). There are so many ways in which we make excuses for spending on stuff. It's sooo easy to say "But...XYZ". Just look at all those comments on articles about MMM/other early retirees about how they were "special" and the average Joe can never do what they did. I loved being here where people talked about how they COULD do better and brainstormed innovative solutions or gave each other a kick in the butt to JUST DO IT.
This does not involve shaming other forum members. People should always be free to make their own decisions on spending and saving. Still, as a community, it's not a bad idea to stop and take a look at what we're trying to achieve here together. But why do we all gather here? MMM promotes his blog as "Financial Freedom Through Badassity". What do we hope to gain together? For me, the point is to be challenged to see the world differently. To see my spending differently.
-
yeah, erm. Lots of ego in this note. DH works programming for a small manufacturer in industrial sensors. Makes $60k. Not saying that he couldn't make more (15 years ago, he topped $125k/yr, which would be more today), just that there are reasons beyond the facile list that you put here. Where you live being one of them. Having a job for 35 hours a week that you can bike to, that lets you buy and run 3D printers as an experiment in R&D is another. The primary one really is that his industry is not programming for office software, but industrial manufacturing, at a small business locally.
Yeah that came across a little aggressive. Sorry. I still stand by the basic math and assertion, though. 60k average starting salary was ~15 years ago. So if you'll give me 3% inflation just like for the 4% rule, 60k * 1.03^15 = 93.5k. For a large enough sample, close to 50% of today's graduating class should be making over 100k, if not now, then very very soon (2 years). Looks like that 3% assumption isn't too far off based on current numbers: https://cs.illinois.edu/about-us/statistics
You can say, "oh that's a top school" and sure that's true, but there's a lot of top schools graduating very large CS classes. You're going to have to work to pull that number down.
I see where you are going with this, but your CPI is stated higher than the actual 1-2% that it has been for the past 15 years.
Our area is currently 128 index (2017) when the 2002 index was 100.
So $60k x 1.28 = $76.8k, not $100k
But programmers in 2002 locally did not start at $60k... that was the starting salary here in about 2009 (same as the engineering starting salary if you had 1 year work experience through another job or co-ops).
So it looks more like $52k x 1.28 = $66.5k is the 2017 starting salary. It is all about local markets.... Now it makes the $90k average across Canada that the other poster mentioned look realistic, and your assertion that "you are going to have to work to pull [$100k avg] down" simply is tunnel visioned to your local market.
I mean, there is a reason that Microsoft, Intel, Google and Amazon are all coming to Canada for secondary offices, and it is not just about the exchange rate and taxation splitting.
-
92.5k is the *average* starting salary for the UIUC CS class who graduated in the spring of 2016. Hit the link if you don't believe me. They graduate a bit over 300 students a year. That's not a local market, that's the average of the market where those graduates went -- and you're right, a lot of that market is going to be NYC/SF/Seattle/Portland/Silicon Valley and similar... but a lot won't go that route either, choosing to work somewhere less expensive, or choosing a lower stress path.
-
92.5k is the *average* starting salary for the UIUC CS class who graduated in the spring of 2016. Hit the link if you don't believe me. They graduate a bit over 300 students a year. That's not a local market, that's the average of the market where those graduates went -- and you're right, a lot of that market is going to be NYC/SF/Seattle/Portland/Silicon Valley and similar... but a lot won't go that route either, choosing to work somewhere less expensive, or choosing a lower stress path.
Of course I believe you... for UIUC and mega urban markets of NY, Seattle, and Silicon Valley...... my point is that salaries are very much based on local market conditions and the specific industry one is programming for. Heck, a friend of mine programs for a firm in NY from his home office in Canada... he has done this specialized financial markets programming and support for over 20 years now, and I think he makes about $85k CAD, despite his NJ peers that go into an office making well over $120kUS, and the NYC based ones for the same company make even more. Your tone and implication that "all software programmers should be making over $100k per year or they suck at their career" (paraphrased, obviously you were not this blunt) is what has me posting these responses.
Do you not get the idea that every career's salary is equally driven by local market conditions, as much sometimes as
-
92.5k is the *average* starting salary for the UIUC CS class who graduated in the spring of 2016. Hit the link if you don't believe me. They graduate a bit over 300 students a year. That's not a local market, that's the average of the market where those graduates went -- and you're right, a lot of that market is going to be NYC/SF/Seattle/Portland/Silicon Valley and similar... but a lot won't go that route either, choosing to work somewhere less expensive, or choosing a lower stress path.
Of course I believe you... for UIUC and mega urban markets of NY, Seattle, and Silicon Valley...... my point is that salaries are very much based on local market conditions and the specific industry one is programming for. Heck, a friend of mine programs for a firm in NY from his home office in Canada... he has done this specialized financial markets programming and support for over 20 years now, and I think he makes about $85k CAD, despite his NJ peers that go into an office making well over $120kUS, and the NYC based ones for the same company make even more. Your tone and implication that "all software programmers should be making over $100k per year or they suck at their career" (paraphrased, obviously you were not this blunt) is what has me posting these responses.
Do you not get the idea that every career's salary is equally driven by local market conditions, as much sometimes as
They can just move then? The point is any software engineer can make $100k if they try, and if they don't suck.
Funny how buying a $5 latte is "complainypants", but refusing to move to grow your salary 2X is "totally justified, because you deserve it", or because your family can't stop whining?
Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.
-
.. any software engineer can make $100k if they try, and if they don't suck.
Funny how buying a $5 latte is "complainypants", but refusing to move to grow your salary 2X is "totally justified, because you deserve it", or because your family can't stop whining?
Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.
!?!!
For the record I am not complaining about income differentials by region at all. Certainly not. It is a fact of life and I am just pointing that out to you and the Accident. But to claim that the only reason programmers who don't make $100k is because they suck..?!! Wow.
......
Not many people would be called "complainypants" for hesitating about moving to another country, honestly, that immigration process is two steps forward, 4.5 steps back until all the PR status processing is complete, which puts your life on hold for over 5 years.
-
But to claim that the only reason programmers who don't make $100k is because they suck..?!! Wow.
Either you're being disingenuous or you can't read. Which is it?
-
92.5k is the *average* starting salary for the UIUC CS class who graduated in the spring of 2016. Hit the link if you don't believe me. They graduate a bit over 300 students a year. That's not a local market, that's the average of the market where those graduates went -- and you're right, a lot of that market is going to be NYC/SF/Seattle/Portland/Silicon Valley and similar... but a lot won't go that route either, choosing to work somewhere less expensive, or choosing a lower stress path.
Of course I believe you... for UIUC and mega urban markets of NY, Seattle, and Silicon Valley...... my point is that salaries are very much based on local market conditions and the specific industry one is programming for. Heck, a friend of mine programs for a firm in NY from his home office in Canada... he has done this specialized financial markets programming and support for over 20 years now, and I think he makes about $85k CAD, despite his NJ peers that go into an office making well over $120kUS, and the NYC based ones for the same company make even more. Your tone and implication that "all software programmers should be making over $100k per year or they suck at their career" (paraphrased, obviously you were not this blunt) is what has me posting these responses.
Do you not get the idea that every career's salary is equally driven by local market conditions, as much sometimes as
They can just move then? The point is any software engineer can make $100k if they try, and if they don't suck.
Funny how buying a $5 latte is "complainypants", but refusing to move to grow your salary 2X is "totally justified, because you deserve it", or because your family can't stop whining?
Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.
There are many reasons not to move just for a higher salary. Some people want to stay near their families, they have bigger support network in their current location, the cost of living won't make the move worth it, they have a spouse with a career that is not so easily transferable.. It's not complainypants to evaluate the tradeoffs and decide that the lower salary is worth it for the other benefits.
-
But to claim that the only reason programmers who don't make $100k is because they suck..?!! Wow.
Either you're being disingenuous or you can't read. Which is it?
If you try to write better, maybe more people will understand what you are trying to say. Unless you suck at writing, that is.
-
Forum rule 1.
-
92.5k is the *average* starting salary for the UIUC CS class who graduated in the spring of 2016. Hit the link if you don't believe me. They graduate a bit over 300 students a year. That's not a local market, that's the average of the market where those graduates went -- and you're right, a lot of that market is going to be NYC/SF/Seattle/Portland/Silicon Valley and similar... but a lot won't go that route either, choosing to work somewhere less expensive, or choosing a lower stress path.
Of course I believe you... for UIUC and mega urban markets of NY, Seattle, and Silicon Valley...... my point is that salaries are very much based on local market conditions and the specific industry one is programming for. Heck, a friend of mine programs for a firm in NY from his home office in Canada... he has done this specialized financial markets programming and support for over 20 years now, and I think he makes about $85k CAD, despite his NJ peers that go into an office making well over $120kUS, and the NYC based ones for the same company make even more. Your tone and implication that "all software programmers should be making over $100k per year or they suck at their career" (paraphrased, obviously you were not this blunt) is what has me posting these responses.
Do you not get the idea that every career's salary is equally driven by local market conditions, as much sometimes as
They can just move then? The point is any software engineer can make $100k if they try, and if they don't suck.
Funny how buying a $5 latte is "complainypants", but refusing to move to grow your salary 2X is "totally justified, because you deserve it", or because your family can't stop whining?
Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.
From the way you interact with people, it's easy to see that you would be moving alone, which is pretty easy with low downside. Moving as a family? very much less so.
MOD NOTE: Don't be rude, please.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
My favorite is:
OP: Please tell me why this crazy thing doesn't make sense, I can't figure out how it would be a bad idea.
Answer from multiple people: Yes, it's crazy and doesn't make any sense because X, Y, and Z. You could do A, B, or C instead.
OP: But I wanna!
Paraphrased but that's how it comes off. If you want to buy something outrageous, well, you're an adult and you don't need to ask anyone's permission to make mistakes.
-
I know! I often come on to ask for information/advice about things I don't end up doing, but then I put on my big girl pants and decide I don't have the time or energy or whatever and move on with my life. I just want to make an informed decision, not to justify doing things that no reason on Earth would stop me doing.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
My favorite is:
OP: Please tell me why this crazy thing doesn't make sense, I can't figure out how it would be a bad idea.
Answer from multiple people: Yes, it's crazy and doesn't make any sense because X, Y, and Z. You could do A, B, or C instead.
Answer from multiple people 2: Oh, we have two and it's totally worth it!
OP: But I wanna!
Paraphrased but that's how it comes off. If you want to buy something outrageous, well, you're an adult and you don't need to ask anyone's permission to make mistakes.
Fixed that for you.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
My favorite is:
OP: Please tell me why this crazy thing doesn't make sense, I can't figure out how it would be a bad idea.
Answer from multiple people: Yes, it's crazy and doesn't make any sense because X, Y, and Z. You could do A, B, or C instead.
Answer from multiple people 2: Oh, we have two and it's totally worth it!
OP: But I wanna!
Paraphrased but that's how it comes off. If you want to buy something outrageous, well, you're an adult and you don't need to ask anyone's permission to make mistakes.
Fixed that for you.
GAH, you're right. Fuck.
-
They can just move then? The point is any software engineer can make $100k if they try, and if they don't suck.
Funny how buying a $5 latte is "complainypants", but refusing to move to grow your salary 2X is "totally justified, because you deserve it", or because your family can't stop whining?
Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.
For sure. Do all the math. I've walked away from potential big salary increases because they also come along with much larger COL increases! I only make half here as I could somewhere else, but even basic expenses in those other places would consume more than the excess... I'd *lose* moving to a big city for those high paying jobs in my field!
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
+1. I mean why do that?
None of us are perfect, and I for one, on occasion engage in an activity/purchase thats not fully mustachian. I know that, and its a choice I make and take responsibility for. But I definitely wouldn't ask on the forum should I do/buy whatever.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
+1. I mean why do that?
None of us are perfect, and I for one, on occasion engage in an activity/purchase thats not fully mustachian. I know that, and its a choice I make and take responsibility for. But I definitely wouldn't ask on the forum should I do/buy whatever.
This is the part I find weirdest also, I do things that I know I shouldn't, but I would never come this group to get the "okay" for them. That's what the rest of the world is for. They will tell me I "deserve" and can "afford" a latte a day and a new car payment. I'm here because, when my financial wonderlust sets in, I want a facepunch to get me back to earth.
-
I do find the people seeking permission to be antimustachian a bit weird. Sure, ask for advice, but some of them really seem to need permission and then get upset when they don't get it.
+1. I mean why do that?
None of us are perfect, and I for one, on occasion engage in an activity/purchase thats not fully mustachian. I know that, and its a choice I make and take responsibility for. But I definitely wouldn't ask on the forum should I do/buy whatever.
This is the part I find weirdest also, I do things that I know I shouldn't, but I would never come this group to get the "okay" for them. That's what the rest of the world is for. They will tell me I "deserve" and can "afford" a latte a day and a new car payment. I'm here because, when my financial wonderlust sets in, I want a facepunch to get me back to earth.
but you have to care about others feelings now ... its no longer cool to give face punches ... its cool to be offended. regardless of what was said, if it can be construed as offensive people will immediately jump on it. and face punches are by their very nature offensive... so as society goes so does the forum and you're now a bad guy for face punching and a good guy for supporting those 5 starbucks a week b/c YOLO, Enjoy your money now why are you saving for what may never come.
at its core the money saving retire early side of mustachianism is mathmatical and every decision can be put into a math equation. purchases are emotional and most people cant set that aside and see numbers
-
If we post a trigger warning before facepunching does that make it OK?
-
If you do it right, eventually someone will call you condescending and unrealistic. It means you are doing something right.
The easiest way is usually to tell someone to ride a bike instead of their car
Hasn't happened in a while, I should post some more.
-
This is the part I find weirdest also, I do things that I know I shouldn't, but I would never come this group to get the "okay" for them. That's what the rest of the world is for. They will tell me I "deserve" and can "afford" a latte a day and a new car payment. I'm here because, when my financial wonderlust sets in, I want a facepunch to get me back to earth.
Ditto. I come here FOR facepunches and to get a dose to reality. Otherwise, I can post on FB and have plenty of people tell me congratulate me for buying such and such.
That said, journals should be a safe zone unless facepunches are requested.
-
If we post a trigger warning before facepunching does that make it OK?
I've often wondered this...at what point does the word trigger become a trigger? Like a Pavlovian trigger?
-
[/quote]
Ditto. I come here FOR facepunches and to get a dose to reality. Otherwise, I can post on FB and have plenty of people tell me congratulate me for buying such and such.
That said, journals should be a safe zone unless facepunches are requested.
[/quote]
But doesn't it seem odd to have a journal on a forum that's devoted to financial independence and smarter living and then post things like: "I spent more than I made for the 17th month in a row! Silly me. Doh" or "I bought a ring from a mall jeweler for my loser boyfriend to pretend to give me and put it on 120 easy monthly payments. Now to plan my dream Disney wedding. We'll charge that too, of course."
There are great journals and people who really seem to live up to the tenets of this community, and others who seem to just be seeking attention and justification.
-
In journals, you can be nicer, just point it out. In case studies, Attack!
-
In journals, you can be nicer, just point it out. In case studies, Attack!
LOL - I like it!
-
In case studies punch them in the face, in journals hold their hand, and then punch them in the face?
-
In case studies punch them in the face, in journals hold their hand, and then punch them in the face?
(https://simpsonswiki.com/w/images/thumb/0/03/Stop_Hitting_Yourself.png/250px-Stop_Hitting_Yourself.png)
?
-
There is no reason to feel bad about pushing people to be better, so long as you aren't a complete condescending dick while doing it.
-
This thread reminds me of Nords's wisdom (http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/has-the-vibeconsistency-of-advice-changed-around-here-or-is-it-just-me/msg147912/#msg147912) from back in 2013:
This forum is following the typical growth curve... from a relatively quiet meetup at a local park to a gigantic chaotic festival with a mosh pit, security guards, and an infirmary run by Wavy Gravy. The tone's going to change because the crowd grows to resemble a greater slice of society's lower common denominator instead of a small group of like-minded yet radical-thinking individuals.
It happened with Early-Retirement.org about 6-8 years ago and it happened with Bogleheads.org from the beginning (the Vanguard Diehards core that escaped Morningstar's implosion). Those of you who grow weary of this forum will eventually splinter off to form your own new radical group, and so the cycle will continue.
Jacob Lund Fisker burned out after a few years. How much longer can MMM keep up the refrain? Hard to predict. But someone else will always take up the torch.
I'm curious who's going to be this person. (Secretly, I'm hoping that Sol will be looking for a new project to occupy some of his free time, but I'm not holding my breath).
Like y'all, I do miss "the old days" of a few years ago. Without the threat of face-punches, I feel like I've gone a bit flabby myself.
-
(Secretly, I'm hoping that Sol will be looking for a new project to occupy some of his free time, but I'm not holding my breath).
You're not the only person to express this thought, and I do like to write and I think I would enjoy writing a blog. I intended to start one this summer, but then family relocations and a bunch of tenant turnover sucked up a lot of my free time on top of my 9-5 and three kids.
So I'll get around to it eventually. You're all invited. I'll start a thread soliciting ideas, when the time comes.
-
(Secretly, I'm hoping that Sol will be looking for a new project to occupy some of his free time, but I'm not holding my breath).
You're not the only person to express this thought, and I do like to write and I think I would enjoy writing a blog. I intended to start one this summer, but then family relocations and a bunch of tenant turnover sucked up a lot of my free time on top of my 9-5 and three kids.
So I'll get around to it eventually. You're all invited. I'll start a thread soliciting ideas, when the time comes.
Let's hope you do. Your writing and viewpoint are great. And when you do confess to driving your new leased Denali through the Starbucks to get Grande Mochacinos on your way to buy a Vitamix and Instapot on your maxed out 23% VISA card we'll just titter and say "oh Sol, you rascal". The wrath we'll save for a 25 year old noob with a 75% savings rate in a Case Study who confesses to hiking along a trail with his Friday night treat of a Dos Equis. Why didn't you just slurp water out of the stream in the cow pasture??If you get giardia you'll spend less on food next week!!!
-
The thing about journals is that you're spending a sustained amount of time following along with one person who posts whatever they want, so presumably you'd be able to get a sense of whether they would welcome facepunches there or not. I've had lots of encouragement and a few stern talking tos but I think it's pretty evident from what I post there (both tone and topic) that I wouldn't welcome someone charging in with all fists blazing. Others are different and hopefully one can see that.
When I post elsewhere, if it's something I am really not interested in receiving any facepunches about then I'll put that in the OP and ask people to be gentle. Likewise, if I know I need a good shake up I'll request people don't hold back their facepunches!
-
(Secretly, I'm hoping that Sol will be looking for a new project to occupy some of his free time, but I'm not holding my breath).
You're not the only person to express this thought, and I do like to write and I think I would enjoy writing a blog. I intended to start one this summer, but then family relocations and a bunch of tenant turnover sucked up a lot of my free time on top of my 9-5 and three kids.
So I'll get around to it eventually. You're all invited. I'll start a thread soliciting ideas, when the time comes.
Even me??
What shall it be called? Sol's Sunny Outlook on Life (a bit tongue in cheek)....?
-
Part of the problem is that people aren't really taught to be tactful anymore. There's a way of giving face punches that will result in the person saying "Thank you, sir. May I please have another?" There are also people who simply aren't prepared for accepting criticism of any kind. We need to know when forceful criticism is necessary, when it's welcome, and when it's a lost cause.
-
Gotta say, this facepunch topic has been bugging me. Recently, I've said things like "Do you realize you're asking for advice in Facepunch Land?" to a few people. I've then been called out for face punching. WTF? Since when is using the term in a sentence the same as delivering an actual facepunch? Answer: When the community's gone soft. Caveat: I do not believe the community actually HAS gone soft. I've noticed that the overwhelming majority of whingers are comparative newbs.
Many of us old-timers (Ha!) came over from the MMM blog. We knew and appreciated Pete's* tough-love, stoic style. Perhaps a lot of newbs are jumping straight onto the forum with no understanding of the environment they've launched themselves into.
Sidebar: An early member, Serpentstooth, started a thread called "Facepunch Me". She has long moved on, but her thread still gets hits. I smile and wish her well each time someone bumps the thread. I do hope she's found her happy ever after.
*In my general vicinity, there's a place called "Pete's Brass Rail and Car Wash". The subtitle is "There is no Brass Rail. There is no Car Wash. And who the hell is Pete?" I think of that every time I use MMM's given name.
-
Well, when I started reading the blog and participating in the forum, the US seemed a lot less volatile and a 'facepunch' was a silly hyperbole. Nowadays 'facepunching' (and violence in general) literally happens at 'peaceful' protests, on college campuses, and even at professional sports (https://www.instagram.com/p/BaLQ36zhws7/). Maybe I've become sensitized, but I've had enough with that part of the community and don't want to see it make a comeback.
-
Well, when I started reading the blog and participating in the forum, the US seemed a lot less volatile and a 'facepunch' was a silly hyperbole. Nowadays 'facepunching' (and violence in general) literally happens at 'peaceful' protests, on college campuses, and even at professional sports (https://www.instagram.com/p/BaLQ36zhws7/). Maybe I've become sensitized, but I've had enough with that part of the community and don't want to see it make a comeback.
Interesting point. I think the underlying intention behind the "face punch" are still the same - giving someone an acute dose of fiscal reality when their actions are needlessly wasteful - but sadly I'd have to agree that the enviornment has changed so that the word itself carries a much darker tone. After all, in practice isn't a "facepunch" here the same as "tough love" or "the brutal truth" or a "bucket of ice-cold reality"? Yet when we talk about facepunching now i can't help but relate it to our political enviornment where the exact opposite is happening; people are literally getting punched in the face for telling people what they honestly believe.
-
Well, when I started reading the blog and participating in the forum, the US seemed a lot less volatile and a 'facepunch' was a silly hyperbole. Nowadays 'facepunching' (and violence in general) literally happens at 'peaceful' protests, on college campuses, and even at professional sports (https://www.instagram.com/p/BaLQ36zhws7/). Maybe I've become sensitized, but I've had enough with that part of the community and don't want to see it make a comeback.
Interesting point. I think the underlying intention behind the "face punch" are still the same - giving someone an acute dose of fiscal reality when their actions are needlessly wasteful - but sadly I'd have to agree that the enviornment has changed so that the word itself carries a much darker tone. After all, in practice isn't a "facepunch" here the same as "tough love" or "the brutal truth" or a "bucket of ice-cold reality"? Yet when we talk about facepunching now i can't help but relate it to our political enviornment where the exact opposite is happening; people are literally getting punched in the face for telling people what they honestly believe.
Thanks for your thoughts on it. When I started, people gave me a few facepunches (and called me complainypants) and I took it all in stride since I was pretty close to FI anyway and could handle a little criticism, although the delivery felt a little childish. Just like in real life, sometimes I agreed that my decisions were not optimal or efficient, but calling out violence and names in the middle of a discussion usually distracted me from the message. I think for a newer member or someone getting started on FI, there is a more effective delivery of "wake up and figure out if you want FIRE or consumer slavery". Maybe the community has 'softened' but to me that's a sign of maturity.
-
A lot of it was originally based on MMM's blogs and the terminology he chose to highlight his points. Perhaps the currently politically sensitive environment is time to change up our community's "traditions" and use words like "tough love" instead?
For me, Pete's concept of complainypants really resonated with me. For most of us, the gut reaction to suggestions is to come up with a litany of excuses as to why it can't work that way for me. Just read the comments from the general population about any FIRE-ee (like MMM) and you'll see a whole bunch of
- "it can't work because.."
- "well, he's different because..."
- "he's an arrogant whatever showing off his specialness..."
- "his numbers are wrong because he categorized XX incorrectly.."
- "average Joe cannot FIRE because he's laden with student debt, has a house, kids, and God forbid those kids don't get to play travel hockey!"
It's like everyone has to drag everybody else to the lowest common denominator to prove that obviously such specialness is not achievable by the regular human. His posts on this syndrome finally opened my eyes to my own inclinations to do the exact same thing.
Many many times, we need to quit trying to figure out why something can't work and focus on getting creative to make something work. Which is what I love about the community here. So many incredibly smart people coming up with creative solutions to achieve a goal.
-
[quote author=elaine amj .
Many many times, we need to quit trying to figure out why something can't work and focus on getting creative to make something work. Which is what I love about the community here. So many incredibly smart people coming up with creative solutions to achieve a goal.
[/quote]
What most of us get out of a site like this is solution based thinking. Agree 100% about finding creative ways to make something happen as opposed to whining about how the deck is stacked against you. It can be a head scratcher when people who've been here for awhile present some financial/work/home/spending issue, receive lots of feedback, and then do nothing much about it. Their zoo, their monkeys of course, but they seem to be missing some crucial point.
-
I don't think this forum has gone soft, I think it has gone more mainstream. My perspective it the major first world countries. I don't think many folks from Zimbabwe or Afghanistan frequent this site.
The vast majority of us, going down to lower middle and upper poor class, get in our reliable cars and drive paved roads to a stable job. We work in safe environments, and if they are not safe, it can be resolved with a phone call or two. We work our shift and drive our reliable car on paved roads back to our weather tight home. We might stop by a well stocked grocery store to pick up some affordable food. We walk into those weather tight homes, turn on the tv, take a leak and flush the toilet with running water, and have a nice dinner. Over dinner we discuss how bad our lives are and we need to improve them. We decide to finance our way out of this hard life. We open monthly subscriptions to various services, we finance a nicer reliable car, and upgrade to a bigger weather tight house, we pay someone to mow the nice lawn. We eat out because our jobs are too stressful to worry about cooking, we watch tv instead of interacting with our neighbors, we build 6' wooden fences to keep people out instead of getting to know who lives next door, then we drink or other such indulgences because we are fighting loneliness and stress from jobs and stress.
I think Pete's original message is for us to take a step back and analyze our situation. We are social beings. Why are we actively configuring our lives to remove the social aspect? Why are we trying to outdo our neighbors instead of getting to know them? We are also physical beings. Why are we sitting in an office chair in order to make more money to pay someone to do our physical things that we are perfectly capable of? Why drive a 2 ton vehicle 1.5 mile to the store when we can walk it in half an hour or cycle it in 4 minutes? What will your kids have better memories of, the well made movies 3 times a week, or the same hours of your poorly played ukulele and singing?
We all know the guy who works 60+ hours a week to afford the $50k truck that pulls the $40k boat to the lake on the weekend, and always seems stressed out. We also know the guy who drive a reasonable used car, no boat, but has a good relationship with his friends and neighbors. Who do you want to be, and who do you want to spend your time with?
-
... well then there's this. A poster literally asked to be facepunched ofr considering a $3500 stereo system while he is still accumulating wealth and has young kinds. The very first response said "sure, you cna't deny yourself all luxuries!"
thankfully a nice platoon of other posters came in to give the required facepunches, with some good advice to boot.
-
... well then there's this. A poster literally asked to be facepunched ofr considering a $3500 stereo system while he is still accumulating wealth and has young kinds. The very first response said "sure, you cna't deny yourself all luxuries!"
thankfully a nice platoon of other posters came in to give the required facepunches, with some good advice to boot.
I saw that post and considered linking this post. Lol
-
... well then there's this. A poster literally asked to be facepunched ofr considering a $3500 stereo system while he is still accumulating wealth and has young kinds. The very first response said "sure, you cna't deny yourself all luxuries!"
thankfully a nice platoon of other posters came in to give the required facepunches, with some good advice to boot.
I saw that post and considered linking this post. Lol
same i couldnt help but laugh... mustachianism is about balance. no not when it comes to 3500 dollar stereos
-
... well then there's this. A poster literally asked to be facepunched ofr considering a $3500 stereo system while he is still accumulating wealth and has young kinds. The very first response said "sure, you cna't deny yourself all luxuries!"
thankfully a nice platoon of other posters came in to give the required facepunches, with some good advice to boot.
I saw that post and considered linking this post. Lol
same i couldnt help but laugh... mustachianism is about balance. no not when it comes to 3500 dollar stereos
Somebody should reply to that poster - with a facepunch.
-
... well then there's this. A poster literally asked to be facepunched ofr considering a $3500 stereo system while he is still accumulating wealth and has young kinds. The very first response said "sure, you cna't deny yourself all luxuries!"
thankfully a nice platoon of other posters came in to give the required facepunches, with some good advice to boot.
I saw that post and considered linking this post. Lol
same i couldnt help but laugh... mustachianism is about balance. no not when it comes to 3500 dollar stereos
Somebody should reply to that poster - with a facepunch.
see above - several people already have, plus some useful advice given.
-
I don't think this forum has gone soft, I think it has gone more mainstream. My perspective it the major first world countries. I don't think many folks from Zimbabwe or Afghanistan frequent this site.
The vast majority of us, going down to lower middle and upper poor class, get in our reliable cars and drive paved roads to a stable job. We work in safe environments, and if they are not safe, it can be resolved with a phone call or two. We work our shift and drive our reliable car on paved roads back to our weather tight home. We might stop by a well stocked grocery store to pick up some affordable food. We walk into those weather tight homes, turn on the tv, take a leak and flush the toilet with running water, and have a nice dinner. Over dinner we discuss how bad our lives are and we need to improve them. We decide to finance our way out of this hard life. We open monthly subscriptions to various services, we finance a nicer reliable car, and upgrade to a bigger weather tight house, we pay someone to mow the nice lawn. We eat out because our jobs are too stressful to worry about cooking, we watch tv instead of interacting with our neighbors, we build 6' wooden fences to keep people out instead of getting to know who lives next door, then we drink or other such indulgences because we are fighting loneliness and stress from jobs and stress.
I think Pete's original message is for us to take a step back and analyze our situation. We are social beings. Why are we actively configuring our lives to remove the social aspect? Why are we trying to outdo our neighbors instead of getting to know them? We are also physical beings. Why are we sitting in an office chair in order to make more money to pay someone to do our physical things that we are perfectly capable of? Why drive a 2 ton vehicle 1.5 mile to the store when we can walk it in half an hour or cycle it in 4 minutes? What will your kids have better memories of, the well made movies 3 times a week, or the same hours of your poorly played ukulele and singing?
We all know the guy who works 60+ hours a week to afford the $50k truck that pulls the $40k boat to the lake on the weekend, and always seems stressed out. We also know the guy who drive a reasonable used car, no boat, but has a good relationship with his friends and neighbors. Who do you want to be, and who do you want to spend your time with?
Thanks for posting this. I think this is a concept most of us understand by now (at least in this particular thread) but it's worth repeating often; for those who haven't thought about it and as a reminder for those who have. Sometimes people say his advice is for high earners but I think it applies to just about every person living in a developed country regardless of whether you want to be retired or not.
And I like that first paragraph. As a society we've come to believe that only being able to afford the necessities qualifies as being poor. Our discontent is no longer a matter of having the necessities but of being bored with them.
-
This thread has been popping into my head a lot over the last few weeks. While I tend to fall more in the category of "it's only money" and "you only live once" (though I'm no spendthrift by any means), my family has been cleaning out my FIL's house in preparation for moving in with him next year.
He has lived in the same 5 bedroom house for the last 40 years. He didn't own a pickup truck most of his adult life and had a large dose of cheapness so he wasn't one to want to pay to take things to the landfill. Throw in some Depression era hoarding tendencies, an unwillingness to deal with his own parents' stuff when they died and a large house with a lot of places you can store things and you end up where we are now. My husband and our employee worked for several days building a trash pile, taking two full truckloads to the landfill in the meantime. Then I helped my FIL find someone to haul off the '33 Buick that he'd purchased in '61 to work on as a hobby. Then we had a 21 yard rolloff delivered. Between DH, employee, me and our 3 daughters, we had the rolloff filled in 5ish hours. We estimate there is at least another 1-2 dumpsters worth of stuff left to be tossed. And this is stuff that couldn't be given to Goodwill. We've delivered truckloads of stuff there, including so many glassware sets, plated silver items and furniture. Not to mention another carload of stuff that I delivered to my brother, a drama teacher, for use in plays.
It was sobering, to say the least.
The experience has shifted my thinking to "if I buy this now, will it end up in the landfill?" "Can I use it all up?" "Do I need more stuff?" "Can I give this away to someone else while it still has useful life?" There were so many things that went into the aforementioned dumpster that might have been useful to someone had they only been given away sooner rather than stuffed in a crawlspace to mildew and rot. And this all came from the house of a pretty frugal man. I can't imagine what the average American home of the same size wastes over the same time period ...
-
There's a thread running currently that illustrates the free pass for gratuitous travel that people get here - the "shall I go to Vietnam/Cambodia or Bali on holiday?" one.
Everyone is congratulating the OP instead of delivering a giant facepunch for wasting money whilst screwing the environment.
-
I think Pete's original message is for us to take a step back and analyze our situation. We are social beings. Why are we actively configuring our lives to remove the social aspect? Why are we trying to outdo our neighbors instead of getting to know them? We are also physical beings. Why are we sitting in an office chair in order to make more money to pay someone to do our physical things that we are perfectly capable of? Why drive a 2 ton vehicle 1.5 mile to the store when we can walk it in half an hour or cycle it in 4 minutes? What will your kids have better memories of, the well made movies 3 times a week, or the same hours of your poorly played ukulele and singing?
+1. For me it's been largely about seriously examining what genuinely contributes to my happiness. It's about not considering anything that requires effort a chore - enjoying things for the work I put into them rather than despite it. About recognizing the huge luxuries that already exist all around me. And about analyzing whether there's good reason to continue doing things the way they've always been done.
-
There's a thread running currently that illustrates the free pass for gratuitous travel that people get here - the "shall I go to Vietnam/Cambodia or Bali on holiday?" one.
Everyone is congratulating the OP instead of delivering a giant facepunch for wasting money whilst screwing the environment.
Explain again why someone pursuing their dream of travel after saving for retirement needs " a giant face punch "?
Per the above post about wanting to exist in a society with thoughtful people who support each other rather than waste, I abhore the embracing of violent metaphors for something obviously not destructive or wrong. Perhaps I dont belong. If this is a forum becomes a site for militant anti consumption using violence as an acceptable mechanism or even metaphoric violence, rather than thoughful self-determination, I will withdraw from many threads.
Note that the next step after violent speech is violent action. I live in a community where folks claiming to be fighting for affordable housing have escalated from squating in tents in public spaces (occupy), which by the way they systematically trash, to setting fires in new developments they deem buildings for the rich, destroying whole city blocks. I have seen a lot of aggressive posts that worry me, though we have excellemt moderators keeping it within reason. Thanks for their hard work.
Look, I get it, but given that one of Pete/MMM's best-known catch phrases is giving someone who needs an attitude adjustment a "facepunch", then yeah, I'd say you're probably on the wrong forum if you don't like that phrase.
-
There's a thread running currently that illustrates the free pass for gratuitous travel that people get here - the "shall I go to Vietnam/Cambodia or Bali on holiday?" one.
Everyone is congratulating the OP instead of delivering a giant facepunch for wasting money whilst screwing the environment.
In that person's sort-of defense, full disclosure of "Un-Mustachian" is in the title.
-
Do that many people not understand the difference between a metaphorical facepunch and actual violence?
-
Do that many people not understand the difference between a metaphorical facepunch and actual violence?
It really seems that way. You should have to answer a test made up of questions from the first couple years of MMM's blog posts to join this forum . . . I think we could solve most of the problems outlined in this thread that way.
-
Do that many people not understand the difference between a metaphorical facepunch and actual violence?
It really seems that way. You should have to answer a test made up of questions from the first couple years of MMM's blog posts to join this forum . . . I think we could solve most of the problems outlined in this thread that way.
I like this idea
-
Do that many people not understand the difference between a metaphorical facepunch and actual violence?
It really seems that way. You should have to answer a test made up of questions from the first couple years of MMM's blog posts to join this forum . . . I think we could solve most of the problems outlined in this thread that way.
Haha -- I started a post a couple of days ago saying this exact same thing.
-
well said PizzaSteve.
-
In line with PSteve's comment, it is very much like this commentary (https://youtu.be/DxphJ-dnX2Y) on why PewDiePie's Fiverr joke failed (the one where he paid people in a 3rd world country to dance around with a sign 'Death to All Jews'). Basically, Pete / MMM sets up his 'facepunch' with a thought out criticism on a 'mainstream' accepted lifestyle choice. The fact that it ends with a 'facepunch' exclamation does not then feel threatening, more like a wake-up call, although the argument and ultimate facepunch might otherwise seem 'extreme' and uncomfortable for some. Contrast that to someone that jumps straight in to ridiculing and facepunching someone and you see why that is not advancing the 'cause' and could make others 'not in on the joke' (and even those that get it) somewhat uncomfortable.
Easiest thing is to move on entirely from the facepunching and name-calling now that there is a critical mass, which mostly seems to be the case for the blog and what few parts of the forum that I have seen lately. Otherwise you risk the Fiverr scenario, even from MMM-himself, which just sucks for everyone.
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
I don't see how this is an example of the scenario you described at all. I think you were offended by Person B (who is obviously Kris) and are hiding behind an "example" to retaliate :)
But seriously, I'm pretty sure most of us agree on the point you're trying to make, the first post just didn't get that point across. You want a more analytical conversation as opposed to "I disagree with your use of funds→FACEPUNCH!!!!"
And I never saw any indication that SpreadsheetMan's comment was anything other than metaphorical (although maybe bit self righteous). Didn't read the thread so maybe I'm missing something?
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
...You want a more analytical conversation...
Has anyone read Pizza Steve's current siggy line? It's clear that he's not actually seeking "conversation", analytical or otherwise...
I have used the words "metaphor" and "facepunches" more than once in this thread, I'd like to clarify that I never said that anyone "doesn't belong here", just that there are lots of choices. Suggesting that there are other great sites with different perspectives is not the same as telling someone they don't belong here. Sheesh.
On a general note: Is there anyone who doesn't understand that the whole MMM persona is a hook, created by a guy named Pete, just to facilitate getting his points across? Pete is real, MMM is made up. Same with Facepunches. IMO, it's just a more attention-getting way of saying "Wake up!" In PF land it's all about distinguishing your voice from all the others. Pete's been very successful because he's found a unique voice with which to tell his story.
Heck, there are those who eschew the blog and forum because of the colorful language. Others look past the profanity and/or choose not to use it in their own posts. For example, ever notice how much arebelspy contributes here, yet he very seldom swears? If you don't like Facepunches, you don't have to use them. If you don't want them, don't seek them.
There are financial blogs and forums galore, surely it's possible to find others that better suit your personal style.
Two blogs I love, that I've followed since long before Pete sprung MMM on the world, are The Non-Consumer Advocate and The Frugal Girl. Katy at NCA has a wicked sense of humor and Kristen at TFG models kindness in everything she does. Neither have forums, but both have very active comment sections and use other social media. The difference is that everyone understands that they are real people writing as themselves. I don't swear there, and I don't even hint at Facepunches. I enjoy their sites and this one in roughly equal measure. Now that JD's back at GRS, I'll add that pre-MMM site back into my reating list.
Interestingly, neither Katy or Kristen support themselves with their blog income, whereas Pete, as MMM, and JD at GRS seem to be doing quite well financially.
There are lots of great PF options out there, and plenty of paths to FIRE.
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
...You want a more analytical conversation...
Has anyone read Pizza Steve's current siggy line? It's clear that he's not actually seeking "conversation", analytical or otherwise...
Yeah, I noticed that, too. Which struck me as... odd, to put it mildly. I mean, if you aren’t interested in communicating with other people, then, why communicate, KWIM?
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
I don't see how this is an example of the scenario you described at all. I think you were offended by Person B (who is obviously Kris) and are hiding behind an "example" to retaliate :)
But seriously, I'm pretty sure most of us agree on the point you're trying to make, the first post just didn't get that point across. You want a more analytical conversation as opposed to "I disagree with your use of funds→FACEPUNCH!!!!"
And I never saw any indication that SpreadsheetMan's comment was anything other than metaphorical (although maybe bit self righteous). Didn't read the thread so maybe I'm missing something?
No-one could see that I was smiling when I made the comment. MMMs facepunch trademark is a metaphorical wake up call rather than an actual thing.
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
...You want a more analytical conversation...
Has anyone read Pizza Steve's current siggy line? It's clear that he's not actually seeking "conversation", analytical or otherwise...
On a general note: Is there anyone who doesn't understand that the whole MMM persona is a hook, created by a guy named Pete, just to facilitate getting his points across? Pete is real, MMM is made up. Same with Facepunches. IMO, it's just a more attention-getting way of saying "Wake up!" In PF land it's all about distinguishing your voice from all the others. Pete's been very successful because he's found a unique voice with which to tell his story.
Heck, there are those who eschew the blog and forum because of the colorful language. Others look past the profanity and/or choose not to use it in their own posts. For example, ever notice how much arebelspy contributes here, yet he very seldom swears? If you don't like Facepunches, you don't have to use them. If you don't want them, don't seek them.
There are financial blogs and forums galore, surely it's possible to find others that better suit your personal style.
Two blogs I love, that I've followed since long before Pete sprung MMM on the world, are The Non-Consumer Advocate and The Frugal Girl. Katy at NCA has a wicked sense of humor and Kristen at TFG models kindness in everything she does. Neither have forums, but both have very active comment sections and use other social media. The difference is that everyone understands that they are real people writing as themselves. I don't swear there, and I don't even hint at Facepunches. I enjoy their sites and this one in roughly equal measure. Now that JD's back at GRS, I'll add that pre-MMM site back into my reating list.
Interestingly, neither Katy or Kristen support themselves with their blog income, whereas Pete, as MMM, and JD at GRS seem to be doing quite well financially.
There are lots of great PF options out there, and plenty of paths to FIRE.
Finally, DabnastyPizzaSteve, since I have used the words "metaphor" and "facepunches" more than once in this thread, I'd like to clarify that IKris never said that anyone "doesn't belong here", just that there are lots of choices. Suggesting that there are other great sites with different perspectives is not the same as telling someone they don't belong here. Sheesh.
This quoting business is getting real mixed up. I never suggested anyone said such a thing. PizzaSteve said that Person B said "doesn't belong here". In fact I would say Person B's (assuming that was Kris) wording was much less harsh to begin with
Look, I get it, but given that one of Pete/MMM's best-known catch phrases is giving someone who needs an attitude adjustment a "facepunch", then yeah, I'd say you're probably on the wrong forum if you don't like that phrase.
Regarding the siggy line, even if PizzaSteve is not looking to be involved in the conversations I would assume he still cares about the conversations being had. Why else would he read the forum or in this case interject?
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
I don't see how this is an example of the scenario you described at all. I think you were offended by Person B (who is obviously Kris) and are hiding behind an "example" to retaliate :)
But seriously, I'm pretty sure most of us agree on the point you're trying to make, the first post just didn't get that point across. You want a more analytical conversation as opposed to "I disagree with your use of funds→FACEPUNCH!!!!"
And I never saw any indication that SpreadsheetMan's comment was anything other than metaphorical (although maybe bit self righteous). Didn't read the thread so maybe I'm missing something?
No-one could see that I was smiling when I made the comment. MMMs facepunch trademark is a metaphorical wake up call rather than an actual thing.
That's usually how these things get off track, hard to see intentions without body language and tone of voice. I think we tend to project our own feelings and mood onto others' comments.
-
...
Two people who are frequently critical (and i suspect a male and female version of the same person) are on my ignore list and that has greatly improved my forum experience.
...there's an ignore list function?!
-
What i dont like are agressively rude posters who hide behind the facepunch metaphor when they are just argumentative and critical people, in general, often with their own personal agenda or chip on their shoulder (especially with respect to wealth distribution).
A perfect example. Person A says they dont like the use of a metaphor based on a violent act. Person B says, well someone who cant tell the difference between a true violent act and a metaphor doesnt belong here.
...You want a more analytical conversation...
Has anyone read Pizza Steve's current siggy line? It's clear that he's not actually seeking "conversation", analytical or otherwise...
On a general note: Is there anyone who doesn't understand that the whole MMM persona is a hook, created by a guy named Pete, just to facilitate getting his points across? Pete is real, MMM is made up. Same with Facepunches. IMO, it's just a more attention-getting way of saying "Wake up!" In PF land it's all about distinguishing your voice from all the others. Pete's been very successful because he's found a unique voice with which to tell his story.
Heck, there are those who eschew the blog and forum because of the colorful language. Others look past the profanity and/or choose not to use it in their own posts. For example, ever notice how much arebelspy contributes here, yet he very seldom swears? If you don't like Facepunches, you don't have to use them. If you don't want them, don't seek them.
There are financial blogs and forums galore, surely it's possible to find others that better suit your personal style.
Two blogs I love, that I've followed since long before Pete sprung MMM on the world, are The Non-Consumer Advocate and The Frugal Girl. Katy at NCA has a wicked sense of humor and Kristen at TFG models kindness in everything she does. Neither have forums, but both have very active comment sections and use other social media. The difference is that everyone understands that they are real people writing as themselves. I don't swear there, and I don't even hint at Facepunches. I enjoy their sites and this one in roughly equal measure. Now that JD's back at GRS, I'll add that pre-MMM site back into my reating list.
Interestingly, neither Katy or Kristen support themselves with their blog income, whereas Pete, as MMM, and JD at GRS seem to be doing quite well financially.
There are lots of great PF options out there, and plenty of paths to FIRE.
Finally, DabnastyPizzaSteve, since I have used the words "metaphor" and "facepunches" more than once in this thread, I'd like to clarify that IKris never said that anyone "doesn't belong here", just that there are lots of choices. Suggesting that there are other great sites with different perspectives is not the same as telling someone they don't belong here. Sheesh.
This quoting business is getting real mixed up. I never suggested anyone said such a thing. PizzaSteve said that Person B said "doesn't belong here". In fact I would say Person B's (assuming that was Kris) wording was much less harsh to begin with
Look, I get it, but given that one of Pete/MMM's best-known catch phrases is giving someone who needs an attitude adjustment a "facepunch", then yeah, I'd say you're probably on the wrong forum if you don't like that phrase.
Regarding the siggy line, even if PizzaSteve is not looking to be involved in the conversations I would assume he still cares about the conversations being had. Why else would he read the forum or in this case interject?
Dabnasty, You are correct. The first mistake is mine, all mine. I have corrected the comment. I do not understand the second change you made, as I was speaking about myself, not about someone else.
As to Pizza Steve,
1. He got mad when some people disagreed with him.
2. He "left" the forum.
3. He came back, with his new siggy line.
4. He is not interested in anyone's opinion but his own, which he repeats over and over, including in this very thread. Further citations can be provided, if necessary.
5. As to your final question, again the siggy line makes it clear that he is not here to help anyone and he doesn't want anyone's feedback. Seems he just wants others to know and understand what his opinion is. Which is fine, it's his decision to make.
-
...Two people who are frequently critical (and i suspect a male and female version of the same person) are on my ignore list and that has greatly improved my forum experience.
...there's an ignore list function?!
It's a "ignore user" feature. Works great when needed. Blocks all the posts, (but you see that it is there) unless you click on the "view post" link.
-
...Two people who are frequently critical (and i suspect a male and female version of the same person) are on my ignore list and that has greatly improved my forum experience.
...there's an ignore list function?!
It's a "ignore user" feature. Works great when needed. Blocks all the posts, (but you see that it is there) unless you click on the "view post" link.
Yes, it works until the blocked person is quoted by someone else who isn't blocked. Rather than block everyone, I'd rather just try to tune out the scratchy voice. Funny though, years ago, there was someone whose posts drove me crazy, primarily because they were so poorly written. Eventually, I just got used to his writing style and now he's absolutely one of my favorites. Go figure.
-
Hey PizzaSteve and GuitarStv... are you guys related?
Also, when am I gonna taste yer pizza?
-
Hey PizzaSteve and GuitarStv... are you guys related?
Also, when am I gonna taste yer pizza?
And hear your gee-tar?
-
Hey PizzaSteve and GuitarStv... are you guys related?
Also, when am I gonna taste yer pizza?
And hear your gee-tar?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgVJC9eNb-g
watching this again, I realize there is a pizza steve trophy conspiracy
-
...Two people who are frequently critical (and i suspect a male and female version of the same person) are on my ignore list and that has greatly improved my forum experience.
...there's an ignore list function?!
It's a "ignore user" feature. Works great when needed. Blocks all the posts, (but you see that it is there) unless you click on the "view post" link.
Yes, it works until the blocked person is quoted by someone else who isn't blocked. Rather than block everyone, I'd rather just try to tune out the scratchy voice. Funny though, years ago, there was someone whose posts drove me crazy, primarily because they were so poorly written. Eventually, I just got used to his writing style and now he's absolutely one of my favorites. Go figure.
you realize he is saying you and i are the same person in this statement.
-
...Two people who are frequently critical (and i suspect a male and female version of the same person) are on my ignore list and that has greatly improved my forum experience.
...there's an ignore list function?!
It's a "ignore user" feature. Works great when needed. Blocks all the posts, (but you see that it is there) unless you click on the "view post" link.
Yes, it works until the blocked person is quoted by someone else who isn't blocked. Rather than block everyone, I'd rather just try to tune out the scratchy voice. Funny though, years ago, there was someone whose posts drove me crazy, primarily because they were so poorly written. Eventually, I just got used to his writing style and now he's absolutely one of my favorites. Go figure.
you realize he is saying you and i are the same person in this statement.
Hmmm, what are the odds that I could I be talking about you in mine? ;-)
God, I'd love to be that clever! No such luck, I'm afraid.
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
-
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
The only point may be to keep the real train wrecks off the forum, or contained on FB?
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0535/6917/products/mistakesdemotivator.jpeg?v=1416776264)
I try not to go in too much, but off the top of my head I think I saw posts asking for help with picking a clown car SUV, and justifying a 90 mile commute or something
-
Okay, I axed them all except the lower incomes one and the local Vancouver one. Much better!
-
Okay, I axed them all except the lower incomes one and the local Vancouver one. Much better!
most things on facebook are train wrecks.
-
Examples of facebook group shitshows, please.
-
Okay, I axed them all except the lower incomes one and the local Vancouver one. Much better!
most things on facebook are train wrecks.
Hah! I actually quite like the local Vancouver Mustachian group. It's small enough that I personally know just about everyone, at least in passing, and nobody posts stupid shit. We also have pretty regular meetups, which probably keeps people more civil than more anonymous groups.
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
I'm subscribed to a couple - on one (not a Mustachian group, but FI minded) a lady was bragging about her 102% savings rate this month (102% of take home pay). When asked how she could save more than she took home, she said something like "budgeting and I had overflow in my checking account that I didn't want to sit at 0% so I invested it - it helps that I prepay expenses 1-2 months in advance." Uhhh that's not a 102% savings rate, that's an Asset Allocation reset because you decided to move a bulk of your cash into investments. You didn't "save" any extra you just decided to move cash into the market.
Plus, it's not like people who front load their 401ks and Roth IRAs in January & February go around bragging about a 150% savings rate for that month...it'll even out later in the year most likely.
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
I'm subscribed to a couple - on one (not a Mustachian group, but FI minded) a lady was bragging about her 102% savings rate this month (102% of take home pay). When asked how she could save more than she took home, she said something like "budgeting and I had overflow in my checking account that I didn't want to sit at 0% so I invested it - it helps that I prepay expenses 1-2 months in advance." Uhhh that's not a 102% savings rate, that's an Asset Allocation reset because you decided to move a bulk of your cash into investments. You didn't "save" any extra you just decided to move cash into the market.
Plus, it's not like people who front load their 401ks and Roth IRAs in January & February go around bragging about a 150% savings rate for that month...it'll even out later in the year most likely.
even worse she's pre payiing expenses 1-2 months in andvance. how is that for making your money work for other people.
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
I'm subscribed to a couple - on one (not a Mustachian group, but FI minded) a lady was bragging about her 102% savings rate this month (102% of take home pay). When asked how she could save more than she took home, she said something like "budgeting and I had overflow in my checking account that I didn't want to sit at 0% so I invested it - it helps that I prepay expenses 1-2 months in advance." Uhhh that's not a 102% savings rate, that's an Asset Allocation reset because you decided to move a bulk of your cash into investments. You didn't "save" any extra you just decided to move cash into the market.
Plus, it's not like people who front load their 401ks and Roth IRAs in January & February go around bragging about a 150% savings rate for that month...it'll even out later in the year most likely.
...wait, what does the "shockingly simple math" say about a 102% savings rate?
:-)
-
If if you think any of the discussions here are soft, you should peek around at the discussions in Mustachian Facebook groups (or whatever they are called)
You will be wanting to face punch your screen
And you get the joy of using FB as a platform
Ack! I haven't ventured in those yet. Sounds like that might be a good thing.
The Facebook groups have totally turned into a shitshow. I honestly don't know what the point of them is anymore. I'm subscribed to like six of them. I should probably cut that down to just Canadian Mustachians and our local group.
I'm subscribed to a couple - on one (not a Mustachian group, but FI minded) a lady was bragging about her 102% savings rate this month (102% of take home pay). When asked how she could save more than she took home, she said something like "budgeting and I had overflow in my checking account that I didn't want to sit at 0% so I invested it - it helps that I prepay expenses 1-2 months in advance." Uhhh that's not a 102% savings rate, that's an Asset Allocation reset because you decided to move a bulk of your cash into investments. You didn't "save" any extra you just decided to move cash into the market.
Plus, it's not like people who front load their 401ks and Roth IRAs in January & February go around bragging about a 150% savings rate for that month...it'll even out later in the year most likely.
even worse she's pre payiing expenses 1-2 months in andvance. how is that for making your money work for other people.
Haha, right? If you're calculating savings rate based on investments, that's fine...but you obviously sat on a pile of cash for a couple months so your savings rate in the prior months must have been pretty poor. It'll even itself out over 12 months.
If you're calculating based on take home pay, in theory you could reach 100%...your employer 401k match + HSA contribution could equal your expenses. Say they contribute $35k to your 401k (unlikely) and $3k to your HSA - that's $38k of savings right there. It's possible I guess, but I highly doubt there's anyone out there in that situation.
-
If you're calculating based on take home pay, in theory you could reach 100%...your employer 401k match + HSA contribution could equal your expenses. Say they contribute $35k to your 401k (unlikely) and $3k to your HSA - that's $38k of savings right there. It's possible I guess, but I highly doubt there's anyone out there in that situation.
My goal for this year is to save 100% of my post tax salary for my main job. I'm calling it a 100*% savings rate where the "*" stands for clearly cheating. I hope I won't be considered soft or clueless. Also, I'm cheating by using a different tax system to you!
Edited to clarify: I'm not counting gains or dividends from investments, only new money saved.
-
^No not at all. As long as you don't count moving cash to investments as "savings." LOL.
Jealous of your 100% plan!
-
I've always assumed 401k match is counted as income and I want to know what % of my income I save vs. spend. Those two numbers should add up to 100% I guess if you really want to know what % of your on paper salary is going into your savings accounts you wouldn't count match but I don't see much use for that number.
Unless you just like playing with maths in which case, carry on.
-
If you're calculating based on take home pay, in theory you could reach 100%...your employer 401k match + HSA contribution could equal your expenses. Say they contribute $35k to your 401k (unlikely) and $3k to your HSA - that's $38k of savings right there. It's possible I guess, but I highly doubt there's anyone out there in that situation.
My goal for this year is to save 100% of my post tax salary for my main job. I'm calling it a 100*% savings rate where the "*" stands for clearly cheating. I hope I won't be considered soft or clueless. Also, I'm cheating by using a different tax system to you!
It's probably me being soft (or lazy) but I don't claim a 100% saving rate although my passive income (dividends, interest) is higher than my annual spending. In a sense, I could withdraw those funds and shove all of my after-tax pay back in to investments, but that would just be silly.
For example, if I bring home 100k and spend 60k, I have a 40% saving rate. I may have a 5MM portfolio that yields 2%, so 100k passive income, but that seems too much like cheating.
-
But that income does count when you are looking at SR to FIRE, the income from your passive investments will cut down your time, so counting it as income is not incorrect.
the 80% savings rate for 5.5 years is valid if the person saves 70% of their income, and gets another 10% extra from investments, bringing them up to a 80% SR.
-
Savings rates are a hook from the shockingly simple math. Manipulate them anyway you will but they aren't too relevant once you understand everything else about FIRE
-
I'm chiming in to say yes it has gone soft. Someone cries about needing a bigger hous and everyone pets them and encourages them to follow their heart. Check out the comparison is the thief of joy thread. Instead of telling op to make do and get real help for her problems everyone just enables her. Maybe I went a little far and I did get modded. Facepunching is a little hard if you have to be all polite about it
3 warnings so far, not sure if I'm really cut out for facepunching. People juat want to be told what they want to hear.
-
I'm chiming in to say yes it has gone soft. Someone cries about needing a bigger hous and everyone pets them and encourages them to follow their heart. Check out the comparison is the thief of joy thread. Instead of telling op to make do and get real help for her problems everyone just enables her. Maybe I went a little far and I did get modded. Facepunching is a little hard if you have to be all polite about it
3 warnings so far, not sure if I'm really cut out for facepunching. People juat want to be told what they want to hear.
Dude, she was living in a basement. With cockroaches. For nine years. To save up for a $180k house. And she was tired of it, but not willing to increase her budget because it would impact her savings. If that is soft, MMM himself is soft.
And there's a difference between facepunching and being an asshole.
-
That's the biggest problem with this forum. Millions and millions of your fellow americans making below the median salary for the country live like this. I lived like this when I made no money. Don't put all your hopes in ahouse!!
Their income is not going to increase any time soon they are better offinvesting then saving forever to buy a house. You're not doing her any favours.
-
Their income is not going to increase any time soon they are better offinvesting then saving forever to buy a house.
Maybe to maximize your net worth. But the point of MMM isn't to maximize your net worth, otherwise no one would FIRE.
Edit: I think that's the problem we're running into, actually. The point is to maximize your happiness, but that includes being realistic about what makes you happy, which does not mean indulging every want. It means being serious about evaluating what will genuinely improve your life and keeping sight of the psychology of happiness through the haze of consumerist stuff.
-
Not sure I get your point, you can't FIRE when you are house poor which is where these people are headed. A house is not an asset that can easily be converted into cash to pay for living expenses while investments are.
-
I don't know what specific thread you're referring to, I'm just commenting on general principles.
-
Still not sure what principles you are referring to, you need something to draw from when you aren't working or are you going to reverse mortgage your house?
-
Still not sure what principles you are referring to, you need something to draw from when you aren't working or are you going to reverse mortgage your house?
Mate, MMM is not about living in a roach infested basement. A $180k house is not the end of the world in terms of FIRE, and I'll bet a significant chunk of the forum lives in residences worth significant multiples of that.
Having a high value house (in markets that appreciate in value) does not make you house poor. I personally view it view it as an investment that one day you can use to downsize.
Ask any homeowner in Sydney, London, Vancouver, SF Bay, New York etc etc and you'll get a very different perspective to your own.
Open your mind.
-
You're not doing her any favours.
Neither are you. Someone says "I've been saving and sacrificing for X for nine years, and now I find it's still not enough, and I'm upset, so how can I get over being upset?"
Option 1: "You're stupid for wanting X, so stop whining."
Option 2: "That's hard [a/k/a empathy]. You are doing the right thing not increasing your budget. Why do you want X? Maybe you don't actually need X to give you that. So think about how you can achieve the most important things that X would give you in some other way that will cost less."
Which do you think most human beings will be more likely to listen to?
If you're here to make yourself feel superior by bashing people who live in a worse situation than you, feel free to continue to follow option 1. But if you are in fact trying to help, you might want to start by not repeatedly calling someone an idiot for wanting to live somewhere that is above-ground and doesn't have cockroaches.* Really, that's a pretty low bar.
Tl;dr: if "wanting something better than a cockroach-infested basement apartment" and "wanting to own a $150k home" is the standard for "soft," then the vast majority of people on this board don't belong. And if people responding with "good job sticking to your budget, maybe you get a slightly nicer apartment that still costs less than a house while you keep saving and looking" is the best example of the community going soft that you can think of, well, you might just have proved the opposite.
*This is especially true when you personally have chosen to get out of those very circumstances, and there is not one whit of evidence that the OP can't afford to make the same choice. You said yourself you used to live in that kind of place. But you don't any more -- once you could afford better, you apparently got the hell out of Dodge. If roach-infested basements are so awesome, why aren't you still living in one?
-
You gotta read the real situation not live in blog land where some white guy with a mustache plays nouveau jesus and does a post about 50k a year jobs and suddenly everything will change for the better.
She was crying in her cups and not going to be changing her situation any time soon. All I saw on that thread was keep house hunting you'll find your magical place soon. No help at all.
Yes I lived in not so great digs but it's always liveable. I even told her to dump her shit and quit hoarding but that got modded down. Real facepunches aren't really welcome anymore.
-
MOD NOTE:
Gonna go ahead and lock this thread, it has served its purpose.
Some people think the forums are now too soft.
Some think it's too mean, with unnecessary face punches.
It's a delicate balance.
The bottom line: If someone is asking for advice, when you reply, think of the phrase "tough love"--that doesn't include being a jerk, but it does include giving them a dose of reality. If it's in the journal section, be even nicer.
If you think someone is trolling, being rude, etc., please use the button on the bottom right of the post to "report to moderators" (big thank you to those who do this.)
Cheers!