Poll

You the jury, how do you vote?

Guilty of some form of lying, misrepresentation and/or deceipt or otherwise.
Not guilty of above and completely above board.

Author Topic: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?  (Read 13885 times)

tooqk4u22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2149
Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« on: March 27, 2018, 11:16:40 AM »
Poll is inspired by the What's up with the Frugalwoods? thread as I was curious for a real tally on the matter. 

Vote away.

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2018, 11:43:37 AM »
I must say that I identify with Pandora here.

This feels a bit kangaroo courtish to me, but as I've been one of the people most consistently making the case for willful deception, I can't really blame anyone but myself.

(I did vote, despite my misgivings. Felt wrong not to)

Cranky

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1373
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2018, 11:49:53 AM »
Lifestyle blogs are about a *lifestyle*, not boring old numbers. ;-)

Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

reader321

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2018, 11:52:55 AM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

hadabeardonce

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 233
  • It's never too early to learn the value of money.
    • My Journal
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2018, 12:03:30 PM »
Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
Man... they aren't even on trial.

I follow FI bloggers who are close to what I am or what I want to be. The Frugalwoods are neither, but that doesn't mean they are good or bad. They are who they are, which is fine. The only person who's affected by my opinion of them is me, so I keep it in neutral.

tooqk4u22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2149
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2018, 12:25:37 PM »
Lifestyle blogs are about a *lifestyle*, not boring old numbers. ;-)

Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

Nobody has an issue with the lifestyle part, the issue IS with the numbers part. 




Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
Man... they aren't even on trial.

Aren't they though....the court of public opinion. 

Eric

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3934
  • Location: On my bike
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2018, 12:47:35 PM »
Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
Man... they aren't even on trial.

Aren't they though....the court of public opinion.

Personally, I won't be satisfied until I know what prescription medications they take, how often they bathe, their voting records, and a notarized statement of their belief (or lacktherof) in God.  Without full disclosure of every personal detail upon demand, it's obvious that they're frauds and I hope they die penniless on the streets as retribution for having the gall to write a blog and still want to maintain a modicum of privacy.  Serves them right. 

PoutineLover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 943
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #7 on: March 27, 2018, 12:54:45 PM »
This has gotten so out of hand but it's kinda funny at the same time. The tagline on their book "achieving financial independence through simple living" and their statement that they made "normal, standard salaries" when they were actually in the top 5% of earners is why I voted for misrepresentation. I would like to see a * at the end of the tagline and a disclaimer that having incredibly high incomes made this whole thing possible.
Although they do put "We are not financial professionals and, in fact, some of our posts are written by a dog"
Close enough?

KBecks

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1384
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2018, 12:57:47 PM »
I just started reading the blog the other day.  It's obvious that the house and land are very, very nice and these things don't come free.  The blog is well written.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7150
  • Location: United States
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2018, 12:58:36 PM »
This thread is ridiculous.

But so is the idea of their salaries being standard, average, or typical.

I didn't vote.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7150
  • Location: United States
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2018, 01:32:05 PM »
I just started reading the blog the other day.  It's obvious that the house and land are very, very nice and these things don't come free.  The blog is well written.
Their mortgage is public information. Their homestead wasn't that expensive

Penn42

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 244
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2018, 01:35:01 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

JanetJackson

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 499
  • Location: United States
    • How I actually made $50 just for taking a survey and being in the healthcare marketplace
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2018, 02:03:42 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

Yoooowch, that's 10X my income. 

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2018, 02:06:08 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

PoutineLover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 943
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2018, 02:12:20 PM »
I think that since this forum skews higher income, people here don't really realize how well off they are.
https://wallethacks.com/average-median-income-in-america/
There's some interesting data there, but I'd just like to point out that half of americans earn less than 30K. To the vast majority of americans, incomes like the Frugalwoods are far out of reach and very far from what most americans would consider standard.

reader321

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2018, 02:15:51 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

FW's household income has been estimated at $450-$600k currently, including $290k in executive pay, $60k rental income, a 5-figure blog, and a 6-figure book deal.

That's at least $40k PER MONTH, mang.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 02:18:12 PM by reader321 »

dustinst22

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 524
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2018, 02:18:17 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+.

Really literally?   Not figuratively?

Cranky

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1373
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2018, 02:28:20 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

And I know plenty of people (alas, we are not among them) who make that kind of money and spend ever penny of it, and more. So again - don’t care what they make, but enjoy reading about how they have made their life.

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2018, 02:31:10 PM »
Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

Interpolating United States Census Bureau Household income data, if we were to use $40k - $200k as the range for average or normal, then ~34% of households are below average or normal, where just 7% are above average or normal.

You did say "family" though. If we look only at family households, the numbers are ~25% below average, and 9% above average. Better, but still pretty lopsided in favor of high income people who wish to be thought of as average.

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #19 on: March 27, 2018, 02:31:21 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

I guess if I really cared, I'd want a tax transcript of every year since graduation until the date she claimed they make normal salaries to give my final judgement.  If they started out making $40k each and by the time they were FI were making 150k each, I'd say that's not too out of the norm for college educated professionals in their area.  But again I don't really care.  And I would consider their rental income investment income.  I don't include my rental income if someone were to ask how much I make just like I wouldn't include my dividends, interest, or cap gains. 

FW's household income has been estimated at $450-$600k currently, including $290k in executive pay, $60k rental income, a 5-figure blog, and a 6-figure book deal.

That's at least $40k PER MONTH, mang.

reader321

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2018, 02:37:21 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

And I know plenty of people (alas, we are not among them) who make that kind of money and spend ever penny of it, and more. So again - don’t care what they make, but enjoy reading about how they have made their life.

I enjoy reading about how they became financially independent too. The problem is, they have intentionally misled, misdirected, and misinformed their audience about how they've attained financial freedom.

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2018, 02:38:37 PM »
Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

Interpolating United States Census Bureau Household income data, if we were to use $40k - $200k as the range for average or normal, then ~34% of households are below average or normal, where just 7% are above average or normal.

You did say "family" though. If we look only at family households, the numbers are ~25% below average, and 9% above average. Better, but still pretty lopsided in favor of high income people who wish to be thought of as average.

If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have to look at income data for their specific location.  And for two income full-time workers or full-time workers 2x.  She said they made standard salaries not standard household income. 

And my point was that if you asked me what average is, then thats how I would reply off the cuff.  So if someone else thinks that too, then I think its plausible that they actually believe that. 

I do tax returns for a living and if I were to guess what the average family's income was on the returns we prepare I would say $90k-200k. 

reader321

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #22 on: March 27, 2018, 02:41:42 PM »
Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

Interpolating United States Census Bureau Household income data, if we were to use $40k - $200k as the range for average or normal, then ~34% of households are below average or normal, where just 7% are above average or normal.

You did say "family" though. If we look only at family households, the numbers are ~25% below average, and 9% above average. Better, but still pretty lopsided in favor of high income people who wish to be thought of as average.

If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have to look at income data for their specific location.  And for two income full-time workers or full-time workers 2x.  She said they made standard salaries not standard household income. 

And my point was that if you asked me what average is, then thats how I would reply off the cuff.  So if someone else thinks that too, then I think its plausible that they actually believe that. 

I do tax returns for a living and if I were to guess what the average family's income was on the returns we prepare I would say $90k-200k.

People who use tax preparation services are a self-selected population with above-average incomes.

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2018, 02:44:22 PM »
Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!

Interpolating United States Census Bureau Household income data, if we were to use $40k - $200k as the range for average or normal, then ~34% of households are below average or normal, where just 7% are above average or normal.

You did say "family" though. If we look only at family households, the numbers are ~25% below average, and 9% above average. Better, but still pretty lopsided in favor of high income people who wish to be thought of as average.

If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have to look at income data for their specific location.  And for two income full-time workers or full-time workers 2x.  She said they made standard salaries not standard household income. 

And my point was that if you asked me what average is, then thats how I would reply off the cuff.  So if someone else thinks that too, then I think its plausible that they actually believe that. 

I do tax returns for a living and if I were to guess what the average family's income was on the returns we prepare I would say $90k-200k.

People who use tax preparation services are a self-selected population with above-average incomes.

Exactly my point.  Unless you figure out the statistics, everyone's opinion of average is going to depend on context.  To accuse someone of lying or deliberate misrepresentation based on their concept of normal is a little extreme.

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #24 on: March 27, 2018, 02:49:01 PM »
If you really wanted to be accurate, you would have to look at income data for their specific location.  And for two income full-time workers or full-time workers 2x.  She said they made standard salaries not standard household income. 

My comments weren't about the FW specifically, but about all Americans, and their misguided ideas about what middle class is. I also generally reject the idea that (at least within a given country), rich or poor gets redefined all that much by where you live. Living in nice areas, or in destination cities is a luxury. That's why people pay more to live there.

To satisfy curiosities though, the median household income of Middlesex County Mass. is $90K per the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Significantly higher than the country at large, but not astronomically so. The people of Middlesex county still demand retail workers, fast food cooks, and housekeepers, after all.

And my point was that if you asked me what average is, then thats how I would reply off the cuff.  So if someone else thinks that too, then I think its plausible that they actually believe that. 

That's certainly reasonable, though I would expect a bit more from personal finance junkies.

I do tax returns for a living and if I were to guess what the average family's income was on the returns we prepare I would say $90k-200k.

I'd expect that the pool of people whose tax situation is too complicated for a 1040EZ would skew higher income. Though there's also the possibility of low income immigrants who don't speak English needing help to prepare their taxes as well. So I guess it could go either way. 

BTDretire

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #25 on: March 27, 2018, 02:52:38 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!
  I''ll get a gang of $40,000 a year families together and ask them if they think 
a family making $200,000 is average, like them.
 Do you have a preferred sight for your lockup?
                            :-)

CNM

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 393
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2018, 03:00:36 PM »
Are there any FIRE bloggers who did not save most of their money as a high income earner?  I'm not aware of any.

Eric

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3934
  • Location: On my bike
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2018, 03:03:58 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

And I know plenty of people (alas, we are not among them) who make that kind of money and spend ever penny of it, and more. So again - don’t care what they make, but enjoy reading about how they have made their life.

I enjoy reading about how they became financially independent too. The problem is, they have intentionally misled, misdirected, and misinformed their audience about how they've attained financial freedom.

Regardless of their income, they attained financial freedom the same way as everyone else.  They spent little, saved and invested the rest, and over time it allowed them to achieve their dream.  Do you really think that there's some other secret?  There's nothing misleading about how they did it.  Your jealously is showing. 

trollwithamustache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 566
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2018, 03:04:52 PM »
Actual income for their location doesn't really matter.

The only people who happily talk about how much they truthfully make are the higher end income earners. The rest of people either say nothing or lie high.  So yeah tag team FW is sitting there legit knowing a mess of professionals making more than them and thinking a whole bunch of other people make more than them. Perceptions tend to skew high.

They also have always stated that they had good jobs and he is still working remotely.  Which is enough for me to think they have been honest about income that de-risks decisions they have made.

neil

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 215
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2018, 03:07:30 PM »
I don't know if any of the YMOYL authors ever proved they followed their advice.  Maybe Thomas Stanley is a UAW.  Bogle probably doesn't index, and he certainly didn't get there by doing so.  I think the whole field is a little odd because you can know the best way to attack the problem without following it because your circumstances are different.  Ultimately, you still need to take a little bit from everywhere and build your own plan.  I think having more information available is useful, not less. If you go and dismiss everything because some things don't match up to your situation, you're never going to find any advice to fit your exact situation.

But, it is also obvious that $40K can't live the same lifestyle as $200K saving 80% and if they try, they end up a wage slave for life.  Is that not obvious for some reason? 

A lot of the FIRE blogs seem to be run by workaholics in the good sense - they can't help but be profoundly productive and in a sense that results in monetary compensation.  People who aren't will also not create successful blogs.  Mainstream success doesn't happen overnight and it becomes harder as each niche is filled.  Does that mean any successful blogger, book, etc, useless by definition?

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2018, 03:09:16 PM »
I've got to come clean: I'm kinda loving this mild drama.  Maybe this is the internet mustachion version of reality TV.  I don't even like reality TV, but this has been entertaining.

Haha, I agree.  I had to go back and see what they were "guilty" of.  I thought she violated copyright laws or breached a contract.  I consider any family with an income of $40k - $200k average or normal.  Better lock me up too!
  I''ll get a gang of $40,000 a year families together and ask them if they think 
a family making $200,000 is average, like them.
 Do you have a preferred sight for your lockup?
                            :-)

And I'll get a gang of $200,000 a year families that cry "oh wow is me, we are barely getting by" and "why does the AMT apply to us"?  Its all about who you surround yourself with that affects your perception.  I find it very reasonable that the people FW were surrounded by made about the same as them and considered themselves middle class.  All that really matters is what she thought they were, not what actually is.  She is definitely guilty of being misinformed, but to be guilty of lying or intentional misrepresentation she would have to know exactly what the average income of two full time adults is.

A separate point is that I think it makes people feel better to compare themselves to average household income.  But that number includes families with a stay at home spouse, or a spouse who works part time.  And again geographical differences are huge.  $200k in San francisco and you're practically on food stamps.  When I found out that my parents make about $150k between the two of them, I said "what the hell do you do with all your money?"  They thought they were barely making it by, and they saved almost nothing and never lived a flashy lifestyle.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 03:12:22 PM by Ryancanderson23 »

PoutineLover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 943
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2018, 03:14:23 PM »
$200k in San francisco and your practically on food stamps. 
This is pretty offensive. We all know people who blow their money, but there is a difference between being bad with money and actual poverty, and there is no possible world in which someone making 200k is considered poor, even in a very HCOL city. It's also pretty easy to find statistics on income, including individual vs family vs full time. There's no good excuse for representing a top 5% income as middle class, no matter how insulated from your surroundings you are.

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2018, 03:25:47 PM »
The median income for San Francisco county is $76K. Neighboring San Mateo and Marin counties are $88K and $91K respectively.

Here's the census explorer tool. Pretty fun:

https://www.census.gov/censusexplorer/censusexplorer.html

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2018, 03:27:48 PM »
$200k in San francisco and your practically on food stamps. 
This is pretty offensive. We all know people who blow their money, but there is a difference between being bad with money and actual poverty, and there is no possible world in which someone making 200k is considered poor, even in a very HCOL city. It's also pretty easy to find statistics on income, including individual vs family vs full time. There's no good excuse for representing a top 5% income as middle class, no matter how insulated from your surroundings you are.

This was obviously sarcasm.  I will write "sarcasm" in the future. (BTW- sarcasm)

mathlete

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2018, 03:30:04 PM »
This was obviously sarcasm.  I will write "sarcasm" in the future. (BTW- sarcasm)

I think you're making a good point here. That people can be fundamentally ignorant about how much money they make.

But (as you know) they're wrong. People who are wrong should habitually be called out for their wrongness.

wageslave23

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2018, 03:33:42 PM »
This was obviously sarcasm.  I will write "sarcasm" in the future. (BTW- sarcasm)

I think you're making a good point here. That people can be fundamentally ignorant about how much money they make.

But (as you know) they're wrong. People who are wrong should habitually be called out for their wrongness.

Yep, completely agree.  Call her out for being misinformed or inaccurate. 

For the record I'm no fan of FW.  I could care less how to make homemade apple cider.

nick663

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Location: midwest
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2018, 04:22:29 PM »
Perception is a pretty weak excuse for someone in the internet financial blogging space.  These statistics are available with a quick google search.

I haven't read the book but I saw a review that mentioned they stopped talking salary numbers as soon as they started to grow beyond the typical upper-middle class numbers.  I think it's likely that the FWs knew they were far from having normal salaries but kept the act up because no one wants to read about how someone retired early by living on "only" an amount equal to the median household income of the US.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7150
  • Location: United States
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #37 on: March 27, 2018, 04:30:34 PM »

I do tax returns for a living and if I were to guess what the average family's income was on the returns we prepare I would say $90k-200k.
I asked my Dad the average return he does (he works for a nonprofit) and he said $12k -$20k for a family of 4. (In Austin, TX, so not quite Cambridge)

CPAs have a pretty self selected group depending on what kind of work they do.

Cranky

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1373
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #38 on: March 27, 2018, 05:20:54 PM »
Truly, I was never under the impression that they were minimum wage earners. I find what people earn to be much less interesting than what they spend.

They literally wrote "we have normal jobs with standard salaries" in 2014, a year where they made $300,000k+. Liz has since purged her linkedin profile of job history, but not until many people had noticed her career as a highly compensated manager of fundraising at WGBH.

And I know plenty of people (alas, we are not among them) who make that kind of money and spend ever penny of it, and more. So again - don’t care what they make, but enjoy reading about how they have made their life.

I enjoy reading about how they became financially independent too. The problem is, they have intentionally misled, misdirected, and misinformed their audience about how they've attained financial freedom.

The difference is that I don’t care whether they are financially independent or not. (Similarly, I think MMM is many things, but “retired” is not among them.)

I read the FW blog as “Saved up, bought pretty house in the country, started a garden.”

Ben Hogan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 128
  • Location: Texas
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2018, 05:50:00 PM »
Who cares?

Captain Cactus

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 148
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #40 on: March 27, 2018, 06:40:59 PM »
2/3 say “guilty” at this point.

Interesting what the community perception is compared to what is is presented in the FI podcast/blogger community (aka “the media”).  “The Media” loves FW.  They’re all helping each other out in their PF clique.  Hookin their buddy up.  Maybe some day they’ll need Frugal Liz to help them sell THEIR book?

Pretty much ever single personal finance podcast I listen to was lined up to promote FW and their new book a few weeks ago.  My entire week’s listening was shot because my (previously) favorite podcasters chose to sell me a book instead of deliver some food content.  It wouldn’t be so bad if it were spread out a bit...literally had multiple podcasts with the same “frugal Liz” guest that week. 

I get it, it was a media blitz, it was done for marketing/advertising purposes.  That being said, it really opened my eyes as to what I really am to the media, even in the FI/PF community:  we as the listeners are actually the product the podcasters/bloggers sell to their advertisers.  Sigh.

McStache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 144
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #41 on: March 27, 2018, 07:02:36 PM »
For more context on contextual averages/norms, the average annual wage earned in Cambridge, MA is $107K.

citation: http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/factsandmaps/demographicfaq (5th faq from the bottom)

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #42 on: March 27, 2018, 07:38:01 PM »
I voted 'not guilty', but full disclosure I'm probably not the most informed voter.  First off, we had MMM lead the charge on this FIRE thing, and I think he's pretty good at mis-representing (ref. lotsa my history posting about his abuse of calling himself retired and having a 25k/yr lifestyle).  The Frugalwoods never seemed to be about balance sheet disclosure, they just talked about how much the spent and what a great life it afforded them.

I guess I also have a bias know how conflicting it is to blog about LBYM.  I started off making 42k/yr in 1996 and saved over 50%.  Returns on investment were addictive as the tech bubble inflated which kept me going strong for a while (that, and gas was under $1/gal, the internet was cheap and slow, and downloading music was a full-time past-time.  In fact, I got paid for surfing the web, but I digress....).  But I was never going to get rich quick, especially when that bubble popped early 2000.  I became despondent that I hadn't done something with the gains like an advanced degree or diversification into real estate.  So I applaud FW for achieving their goal and maybe spending a little of their excess.  I guess I'd assumed, after the whole MMM thing, that there was excess and I appreciated the disclosure about the spending side. 

On MMM you really get don't get anywhere near full disclosure on what the Pete household's actual income or spending are.   
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 07:43:26 PM by EscapeVelocity2020 »

middo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
  • Location: Country Western Australia
  • Learning.
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #43 on: March 27, 2018, 07:39:02 PM »
i find this a little amusing.  I have recently started reading through the FW blog, and I don't see any attempts to really hide their income.  E.G. Their July 2015 spending is $3350, including their mortgage.  They say they save 70%+ of their income.  They must have income AFTER TAXES AND 401K (or whatever it is called over there) of at least $11166 per month, or take home $134,000 a year.  Minimum. 

They also clearly say they don't talk about their income or their stash.  But their incomes are higher than average, and they acknowledge it.

I wonder how much of the "Guilty" issue is jealousy?

terran

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1541
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #44 on: March 27, 2018, 09:16:55 PM »
Seriously? Isn't the other thread enough to beat this dead horse?

clarkfan1979

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1756
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Kauai & Denver
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #45 on: March 27, 2018, 09:26:49 PM »
Everyone is the average of the five people you spend the most time with.

Tuskalusa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 262
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #46 on: March 27, 2018, 09:29:41 PM »
I really don’t get all this Frugalwoods animosity. They started out with a plan and executed through extreme frugality. I would expect their income to take off now, given their ability to execute.

terran

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1541
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #47 on: March 27, 2018, 10:53:53 PM »
Seriously? Isn't the other thread enough to beat this dead horse?
Maybe we can merge the 2. Add in the gun thread and The Beatles thread and watch the forums implode ;-).

As I said in the other thread (or maybe it was here...who can remember) I personally really like the FW blog even though I'm not interested in.country life. I like Mrs FW a lot, enjoy her writing style and enjoyed her posts here in the past. She seems like a genuine and nice person. I hope they continue to live the dream life. I don't care how much they earned before or now. I don't really care if they chose not to disclose their income. But I do think it lessens their message but that's just me. Now I'm done with both threads.

lol. It would then become a frugal black hole. Any money that slips past the event horizon will never escape.

Mr Mark

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1150
  • Location: Planet Earth
  • Achieved Financial Independence summer 2014. RE'18
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #48 on: March 27, 2018, 11:33:42 PM »
As a fellow ridiculously high earner I say good luck to them. They seem nice.

I'd like to think the FIRE journey is allowed to have a business class section.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7150
  • Location: United States
Re: Frugalwoods - Guilty or Not?
« Reply #49 on: March 27, 2018, 11:45:48 PM »
For more context on contextual averages/norms, the average annual wage earned in Cambridge, MA is $107K.

citation: http://www.cambridgema.gov/CDD/factsandmaps/demographicfaq (5th faq from the bottom)
So then, they are above average quite a bit. At least he is.

The median (which is typically used for income data, not a mean, which I assume the above is) FAMILY income (same page) was lower.
"The U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development estimates that the 2017 Metropolitan Boston area median income for a family of four is $103,400 per year."

Both these numbers are for 2017. I wonder what it was in 2014, the year we have his income for.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2018, 11:52:21 PM by iowajes »