MMM Frugality vs. Guilt-Free Spending

[DoubleDown]

I have a question/proposition:

I think I understand (and agree with) the principles put forth by MMM. He has demonstrated how frugality and anti-consumerism can better our lives both financially and in appreciating and attaining life's simpler pleasures -- things that actually matter like time with our family.

Indisputably, though, the principles come with a built-in "continuum" for everyone's particular goals or lifestyle. For example, there's a continuum where frugality at some intangible point devolves into cheapness, or where efficiency turns into guilt for some people. Like most things in life, moderation is key, and what I consider "frugal" you might consider "cheap."

So in the continuum between MMM living and the so-called "guilt-free spending" camp, is there a happy medium? For example, if one was managing to save 65%, 75%, even 99% of their income, should they be feeling guilty for buying an occasional cup of starbuck's coffee, mowing their lawn with a gas mower, or heaven's forbid driving to the executive board meeting at work instead of biking through the snow?

I think that as long as one has a mindful goal for when they achieve FI, and save the appropriate percentage to reach it, then guilt-free spending should be okay, even if it's not the most efficient lifestyle possible. Because you can always be more efficient. So if someone puts aside 65% of their income because that gets them to their FI goal at the appointed time, then it doesn't particularly matter where the other 35% goes. They should be able to spend that 35% guilt free, even if it's not entirely MMM-approved spending. But I suspect that would be seen as punch-in-the-face-worthy, even heretical thinking, by MMM and many readers.

As an example, I thoroughly enjoyed his rant just now about the flyer in his mailbox, and certainly agree with his overall point about predatory advertising, but I am totally at peace with buying my daughters (and myself) one of those unhealthy 99 cent sundaes at McDonald's every once in a while that was featured in the flyer. It's within the budget, it's a thing and a moment we enjoy, it's infrequent, and I lift weights and run. Yes, I could have bought the ice cream at the store and eaten it at home, but then someone else would be thinking how unhealthy that is and damages the planet with all the packaging and transportation costs, so I better milk my own cows and grow my own cane sugar and use a hand-churning ice cream maker so I don't use any electricity... It never ends, and some people apparently end up feeling guilty in the end (I'm not one of them).

So what do you think? Shouldn't "guilt-free" spending be encouraged as long as it's within your overall savings and lifestyle goals?

[Jack]

There are some choices that are reasonable, and other choices that are so inefficient that they're just stupid and ridiculous. Using MMM's infographic as an example, "food" from Bizarro-Hardee's is okay as an occasional indulgence, but a 92" TV for $4800 (by the way, the infographic missed the fact that it's a lease!!!!) is completely insane unless you're renting it for a super bowl party with 50 of your closest friends and then returning it the next day (and even that might be crazy too, depending on how the terms at Aaron's work and whether your party is a potluck).

[gecko10x]

So what do you think? Shouldn't "guilt-free" spending be encouraged as long as it's within your overall savings and lifestyle goals?

Yes, I think so.

You may want to condemn someone for buying (or leasing) a 92" TV (which of course sounds insane!), but if the cost cost is insignificant to that person, they have a huge room to put it in, and frequently host game-day parties or movie showings, then who are we to judge?

[Matt K]

MMM's post was full of over the top writing, and yes, moderation is they key to life. But I don't think taking your kid to MickyD's for a 99 cent sundae is a good indulgence.

Your Reasoning
1 - You can afford to
2 - It's just a once and a while thing
3 - You lift weights and exercise, so that offsets the calories
4 - The 'alternatives' are buying ice-cream to eat at home (which defeats being "out and about") and going extreme and milking the cow yourself - pro tip: don't milk the bull ;)

Here's my problem with it, and it was mentioned in MMM's post:
1 - It's crap, crap you are putting in your body an your child's body, and you are teaching them that this crap is a perfectly good indulgence.
2 - You are supporting the makers of crap, giving them more money to produce more predatory advertising you say you aren't a fan of.

So, here's how you do it (also mentioned in the post): find a place that serves honest to goodness ice-cream (real cream and sugar have a lot of calories, but I'll take those over the transfats in many soft-serve-wanna-be-icecreams). Ideally a place that gets their ice-cream locally (may not be an option), or at least serves quality stuff, and pays its employees a good wage (in fairness, McD's in Canada is a pretty good employer, suprisingly).

There was a time when every little town had a family owned icecram parlour or two. They didn't go away because people stopped buying ice-cream. But many places have stepped up to fill the void: some fancy pants coffee shops, and many family resteraunts serve quality ice-cream.

Will it cost more than 99 cents? Certainly, but instead of spending $2 on two, you can split one for about the same price (and half the calories, but all the memories).

[Matt K]

Just so I don't come across as too high and mighty (since I'm probably the least Mustachian person on this forum, I really don't want to come across all preachy), I want to include a personal bit on food indulgences.

Unless I eat a honking huge breakfast, I get hungry mid way through the morning. Most days I'm smart and bring some almonds. Some days I don't and go down to the cafeteria and buy a muffin. Not much harm, only $1.50 each time, and since I'm starving again by lunch time, my body must want those calories pretty badly.

Except if I spend $3 on a bag of Quaker muffin mix and spend 20 minutes baking up a batch of those, I can have muffins all week. This is an improvement!

But recently I tried making my own muffins from scratch (it still only too 20 minutes). I used a recipe from 1945 to see if I could make 'healthy' muffins. 1 3/4 cups of flour (enough for a loaf of bread), 1/2 cup of sugar, butter and eggs... Putting all the ingredients into the bowl gives you a respect for just how many calories are actually in baked goods. Man these things must have a metric tonne of calories in them. And they don't rise much. They are piddly little things. But you know what, one of those piddly little dense things leaves me full for hours.

The problem with most modern food is that all the things we've done to make it cook easier, stay fresh longer, look nicer, all of it, makes for food that digests easier, quicker, and often doesn't signal to our body that we are actually full (how is it I can't drink a litre of water in one sitting, but I can finish off a 2L bottle of Coke?).

There's something to be said for churning your own ice-cream (or at least buying it from someone who does it with as few additives as possible).

[AJ]

So if someone puts aside 65% of their income because that gets them to their FI goal at the appointed time, then it doesn't particularly matter where the other 35% goes. They should be able to spend that 35% guilt free, even if it's not entirely MMM-approved spending.

Well, yes, of course everyone is free to spend their own money as they like. But why stop at 65%? What if you are only saving 50%, or 15%, or 5%? If your plan is to retire at 65 (or never), why not spend nearly all your money guilt-free? Is that really so bad, if that's really what a person wants?

As long as you know what you're giving up, and you're making an informed choice, by all means optimize your own happiness. The problem really comes when people don't think about the opportunity cost of their decisions. Sure, a starbucks coffee "only" costs a few dollars, but people don't consider how that adds up over time. Biking to a board meeting is inconvenient, but it saves money and emissions and makes you healthier. To say nothing of the option to reduce your own lifestyle in perpetuity in order to increase giving to others...

But, more to the point, why does anyone feel "guilty" about their spending in the first place? Do you need MMM's (or anyone's) permission to spend your money? And, if you do, what does that say?

[totoro]

Oh good grief.  The unsubstantiated crap argument.   Umm... McDonald's icecream is made of real milk, sugar, and contains zero trans fats.  I'm not saying it is good for you or the source ingredients are high quality necessarily, but I am saying it is not exactly as you are representing it to be and the good ol' mom and pop shop is likely selling something similar.

I use a slightly different set of boundaries to bounce these decisions off of.  The first is, can I afford it.  The next is, does the joy or other values (environment/health/educational/supporting local) outweigh the cost in money or other drawbacks.  You'd better enjoy your journey to early retirement because there are no guarantees that the bus won't stop before you get there.

So, I am perfectly happy to pay for snowboard lessons for my kids and all the attendant costs.  We can afford it and they get skill development and exercise and something to do over wintertime.  If money was the only measure, there are way cheaper ways to get exercise and skills.

Cable TV; however, is not worth it for me.  We can afford it but I dislike the advertising and don't think it a good form of entertainment as a steady thing.

I don't feel too much guilt about purchases.  I just bounce it off my criteria and make a decision.  Nice Christmas ornaments, totally love them and willing to buy them (at a discount of course) because of the family and personal enjoyment.  I burn candles all the time because I love the ambience.  New car, why would I?  Couldn't care less about the shiny factor.

Processed and heavily packaged/processed foods?  We eat some of it sometimes, but I do feel bad when we do because it seems like a poor excuse on my part for not managing time better, it is not as healthy as homemade and it produces more garbage.  Not worth the emotional cost for me unless we are on the road or crazy busy for some reason (like our recent move).

INFO:
McDonald's Icecream Ingredients:  Milk ingredients (milk, cream), sugar, glucose, soy mono and diglycerides, guar gum, dextrose, artificial vanilla flavour, carrageenan, cellulose gum. CONTAINS: MILK AND ZERO TRANS FATS

All icecream in the states has;
In the USA, ice cream may have the following composition:[25]
 greater than 10% milkfat and usually between 10% and as high as 16% fat in some premium ice creams
 9 to 12% milk solids-not-fat: this component, also known as the serum solids, contains the proteins (caseins and whey proteins) and carbohydrates (lactose) found in milk
 12 to 16% sweeteners: usually a combination of sucrose and glucose-based corn syrup sweeteners
 0.2 to 0.5% stabilisers and emulsifiers
 55% to 64% water, which comes from the milk or other ingredients.
 

[Mrs MM]

The MMM family indulges in plenty of things!  The main thing to keep in mind is that we always do them consciously. 

One day I walked to the library and on the way home the weather had changed and it was extremely cold.  I had skipped my morning homemade latte that morning and decided to get a coffee from the local coffee shop on the way home.  It was nice and warm and made my walk home more pleasant.

I occasionally buy books used books for my son.  They are always books that I know he will get a lot of use out of - like big scientific type books or question and answer books or books that we want to read but are not available at the library.

We drive to go on family hikes.  We take driving trips and often fly around the country.

We have dinner parties and supply all the food and spend money buying drinks for everyone to consume.  That's worth it to me.

These are all conscious choices that we make and when we do make them we're aware of our choice.

I think it's hard to get to this place though, if you're not used to it.  I think it's often WAY more fun to choose the other choice.  Going to the library, making morning coffee at home, biking places, doing things outdoors, is much more fulfilling to me that prepackaged conveniences. 

But, I didn't always feel that way.  I used to buy coffee every single work day.

Your example of getting an ice cream at McD may sound like a fun thing to you... and maybe it is.  (My only issue with it is having to eat it in the restaurant).  But I find that those types of "experiences" often disappoint.  Biking to the grocery store and having my son pick out his favorite flavor and then going to the park and eating it right out of the carton with a spoon sounds much more fun to me.  Getting an ice cream from the stand at the beach sounds like fun too, since it would be hard to pack in a cooler.  :)

I think that a lot of our ideas of "treats" and "fun" are built into us by advertising.  And we don't even realize it!  It's a lot more fun to think out of the box and do something special with your family that you've never done before.  Something you wouldn't normally do.  That memory would probably last a lot longer.

So, I don't think it's a matter of whether you're allowed guilt-free spending or not... of course you are - it's your life and your choice.  But, I do think that MMM is challenging us to think differently about the things we do and whether they really make us happy or not (and maybe think a bit about the earth and your health while you're at it).

[Erica/NWEdible]

pro tip: don't milk the bull ;)

Just....fantastic. Thanks. My sister was, for some time, a bull semen salesperson (File under: "Jobs you don't see on Sesame Street") and this made me laugh out loud.

[sowantere]

in my family we each have budgeted blow money so that whatever we buy no matter how inefficient does not turn into an argument.  Its up to me  to find ways to save outside of the blow money.  Every ones entertainment fund as we call it is theirs to spend and is "their" money and not for me to haggle with.  As each family member has their own line where frugal becomes cheap this lets them be the one to cross it.  The only guilt arrives if they spend more then their share.  If they want to spend their whole monthly amount on a purse or a one hundred dollar ice cream cone,  it is their choice.  It helps that they are on board with the budget.  Just as an addendum I have not had fast food since September as I think it is crap.  There are actual studies that show eatting a lot of fast food can raise you liver enzyme labs.  I mean how bad is it that your bodies filter is struggling to keep up. 

[grantmeaname]

should they be feeling guilty for buying an occasional cup of starbuck's coffee, mowing their lawn with a gas mower, or heaven's forbid driving to the executive board meeting at work instead of biking through the snow

Yes, at least a little bit. Only half the story is saving money.

Your Starbucks latte has all sorts of food science in it that you probably don't want to put in your body... there's a reason you don't put seaweed, soy lecithin, and corn syrup in coffee when you make it at home. That push mower is free exercise built into your daily routine, and avoiding toxic exhaust spewing into the atmosphere (single stroke engines, incidentally, are way worse per unit of fuel than something like what you'd find in a car), and getting to know your lawn a little better and enjoy some peace and quiet. God knows we don't all choose biking over riding every time, but by biking through the snow you're a role model for all those motorists thinking there might be a better way, and all those idiot cyclists riding the wrong way up one way streets or on the sidewalk. Aren't all of those things worthwhile?

[grantmeaname]

Umm... McDonald's icecream is made of real milk, sugar, and contains zero trans fats....
McDonald's Icecream Ingredients:  Milk ingredients (milk, cream), sugar, glucose, soy mono and diglycerides, guar gum, dextrose, artificial vanilla flavour, carrageenan, cellulose gum.

Let's look at what real ice cream has in it, shall we? Aglamesis, my favorite local ice cream place, makes real ice cream with real ingredients. Other than flavoring, here's everything in it:

fresh cream, milk, sugar, evaporated milk, eggs, dextrose, honey, gelatin

There's a strange lack of soy mono- and diglycerides, guar gum, artificial anything flavor, carageenan, and cellulose gum in that Aglamesis ice cream, if McDonald's is normal and made from the exact same thing as real ice cream. Could be that cream, eggs, and honey are wholesome and McDonalds is a sick nasty agglomeration of the worst offenses of food science, but that's just my theory. I'm not saying it's toxic -- there are days when you just want a frosty or a blizzard -- but don't kid yourself, it's not the real thing. It's not even really food.

[arebelspy]

Finally some things grant and I disagree on.  :)

Back on topic, I think when your spending is aligned with your values, there is no such thing as guilty spending.

I may be wrong about that though, due to the different types of people though, I guess.  Just spoke with the wife and she goes though an "I don't need it" mental routine where she convinces herself it's okay to buy something.

I haven't ever felt guilty about any spending.  I spend my money on exactly what I want.  I buy whatever I want, whenever I want.

I just don't want very much.

[grantmeaname]

I think when your spending is aligned with your values, there is no such thing as guilty spending.

You said you were going to disagree with me.

Let me clarify: I don't think it's the spending you should feel guilty about. I think that you're missing a couple chances to be a badass and make the world a better place by your consumption activities. For me doing so isn't in line with my values, so I'd feel a little guilty. That's totally divorced from the "I save enough so I can do what I want with the rest" concept that's thrown about -- I'd tend to agree with that, and my argument is entirely nonfinancial. I'm not trying to guilt-trip anybody into biking today, but it's just like doing your own taxes to name a recent example: you can increase your independence while not spending money on a bedpan and catheter.

Or did you mean the bit about the soy diglycerides?

[totoro]

Well, I agree with you that the McDonalds icecream is not the best for you and certainly does not qualify as natural or pure or even wholesome.  I disagreed that it had trans fat and no real ingredients: it has both milk and sugar.  My local icecream shops have icecream with similar ingredients.  To get a less processed product I have to make it myself or buy it in the grocery store.  BTW since when is seaweed something you wouldn't want to ingest??  Seems like a fine ingredient to me.

I also agree with having other criteria than money to judge by.  Money is just one of the factors. 
   

[arebelspy]

The rest of my post was separate from the first comment I made.

I don't think one needs to be badass all the time, nor feel guilty when they aren't.

For me, guilt plays no role whatsoever in my life.  If I were going to do something I'd feel guilty about, I don't do that thing.  But it doesn't cross my mind to not do it because I'd feel guilty, but rather I wouldn't do anything that would make me feel guilty.

And yes, I think the "it's not even really food" comment was quite the hyperbole.  I'm sure there's some fallacy associated with it.  ;)

[c]

Reading the MMM site I always thought that "MMM Frugality" was about guilt-free spending, about not wasting money and being more self-sufficient so that you can spend your time and money on things that are important to you.

I only feel guilty spending money when it's on something wasteful, like when I let food spoil or I take a taxi when I could have walked/subway. The other day I bought fresh flowers for my apartment. It certainly wasn't frugal, but I didn't feel guilty. I actually felt happy that I had some spare cash to do this without having to worry, because I've cut out other crap.

[sisca]

Even though I dont think anyone is ultimately totally hardcore frugal all the time, I get that MMM sort of give a pretty badass impression. Most readers will think that "ok, it is possible, but I will take it down to 90 % badassity, good enough".

If MMM were only 90 % badass to begin with, a lot of the readers will drop it another point down.

This whole early FI, retirement, frugality thingy is more about mindset than anything else, so MMM and the entire blog is in my impression the authors view of what is possible, what is important and why it is.

A blog that advocates saving 5 %, and retiring at 58 just isnt all that inspiring.

[DocCyane]

Having been a member of various frugality, save the planet, anti-consumption groups, I have seen some folks get sanctimonious about other's choices. It can easily become a depravation contest.

What I like about MMM is that members can respectfully disagree on the particulars without judging or getting all butt hurt. Do your own thing. If an ice cream cone is your special treat, it's all good.

[okits]

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/09/18/is-it-convenient-would-i-enjoy-it-wrong-question/

This beautiful post blew my mind when I read it in September.

I was always a little bit of a "surface Mustachian": don't spend money!  You're not rich!  Save, save, save!

I'm a long ways away, but now I try more to focus on deeper Mustachianism: being rich because I already have the things I want (food, shelter, love, contentedness, gratitude.)  This is a LOT harder, I find, but I think it's an easier path to the nebulous place of "enough".

You can save 99% of your income and still spend a ton of money on wasteful crap (granted, you'd probably have to have very high income.) You can save almost nothing but have frugal, sustainable, self-sufficient habits and thoughtful spending. I don't think there is a numerical savings rate where you no longer have to feel guilty about spending money.  I think you have to know what you want to achieve, what you need to do to get there, and how much of that you are willing to do.

I spend money on all sorts of things that are strictly not essential, but they're things I've determined are important to me, the life I want, and that fit into the FI goals and plans I have.  If you've gotten those things well in order, I wouldn't feel guilty about spending that's consistent with those guideposts.

[spider1204]

You can probably not feel guilty when your spending aligns with you goals.  I think the reasons restaurants get such a bad rap is because it loses on just about all dimensions.  When you cook food at home it is generally healthier, cheaper, faster, better for the environment, tastier, and more convenient.  As a result it's hard for eating out to really by aligned with your goals.

[Gerard]

Lotsa wisdom in this thread. Thanks, people, especially Mrs MM and arebelspy.

I think a lot of it's about being mindful, not about having a better hair shirt than the next person.

Eating at a restaurant because you don't even consider the alternatives, or you forgot to buy groceries, or because you "deserve" it, is a whole nother thing than choosing a place because the chef has the techniques or suppliers to make things you can't, or a wider range (I can make dim sum, but I'm not likely to make the 15 different kinds we share at Dragon City), or to avoid buying ingredients you'd never use up, and so on.

Or to blow your mind by getting out of your rut. I paid thirteen bucks for five small slices of ham at a restaurant a while back. That was ridiculous. But it was by far the best ham I've ever eaten (I think... keeping in mind that my brain was probably trying to convince my taste buds that I wasn't stupid for spending $13 on ham).

[TomTX]

I'm puzzled here that people apparently think "gelatin" is somehow more natural than "carrageenan"

Gelatin: Hoof/skin extract
Carrageenan: Seaweed extract

They're both goopy stuff extracted from a natural material.

[grantmeaname]

I'm puzzled here that people apparently think "gelatin" is somehow more natural than "carrageenan"

Gelatin: Hoof/skin extract
Carrageenan: Seaweed extract

They're both goopy stuff extracted from a natural material.

Which people would those be? And could it be that you're missing the forest for the trees? You forgot to comment on how some people seem to think that honey is apparently more natural than soy diglycerides, too.

[igthebold]

pro tip: don't milk the bull ;)

Just....fantastic. Thanks. My sister was, for some time, a bull semen salesperson (File under: "Jobs you don't see on Sesame Street") and this made me laugh out loud.

"So, what do you do?"

"… I work in cattle futures."

[DoubleDown]

Having been a member of various frugality, save the planet, anti-consumption groups, I have seen some folks get sanctimonious about other's choices. It can easily become a depravation contest.

What I like about MMM is that members can respectfully disagree on the particulars without judging or getting all butt hurt. Do your own thing. If an ice cream cone is your special treat, it's all good.

+1

Yes, and we see frequent comments from folks that hint at guilt (or even outright scream it). Things like "I was driving to work the other day -- I know, I know, I'm working on biking more often..." Or, "I was at the gym -- yes, I realize paying for a gym is not very MMM, but..."

No one should be making excuses for the choices they've made, as long as they're mindful choices. I wouldn't pay to go to a gym, but if that's your choice and it aligns with your goals, good for you! Would I tell Bill Gates he's wasting his money going to a gym if he's giving away to charity and saving 99.99999% of his income?

Otherwise it can become a never-ending struggle to become more and more frugal or, as you said, a "deprivation contest." If someone is saving 30, 40, 50%+ of their income towards their goal, and MINDFUL of their consumption, they ought to let go of guilt. Yes, there are other factors besides financial -- impact on the planet, health, gaining knowledge by doing things yourself. All of those things should be mindful considerations, and incompatible with guilt.

I don't pay to go to a gym, but on the other hand I usually take kids to school and drive to work instead of biking. I don't feel guilty about that, it's within my consumption and savings goals.

[StashinIt]

Yes, and we see frequent comments from folks that hint at guilt (or even outright scream it). Things like "I was driving to work the other day -- I know, I know, I'm working on biking more often..." Or, "I was at the gym -- yes, I realize paying for a gym is not very MMM, but..."

I don't really think it's guilt so much as a desire for self improvement. We all know what we "should" do and what we would "like" to do but perfect is not perfect. So I acknowledge my shortcoming, set goals, and do my best to achieve them. No guilt involved. Maybe there is some confirmation bias but that's what I see other people doing around here when they say phrases as above.

[Vahla]

pro tip: don't milk the bull ;)

Just....fantastic. Thanks. My sister was, for some time, a bull semen salesperson (File under: "Jobs you don't see on Sesame Street") and this made me laugh out loud.

"So, what do you do?"

"… I work in cattle futures."

Haha, well played.

[dragoncar]

I've noticed something on this board that I will term "Judgypants" -- it seems that some people will express outright disgust at various choices that reasonable people can differ on.  McDonalds ice cream?  Sure, it's got a place.  Black Friday sales?  I've been deferring some purchases for years, you're going to imply there's something wrong with me for purchasing at the best price?

I think the typical Judgypants is a relatively new convert, who has made drastic changes and experienced a total consciousness shift.  Like a credit-card junkie quitting cold turkey, they can't always accept that others can get along fine with judicious use of credit.  The guilt seems related to the judgment.

Edit for better analogy

[NWstubble]

..."Judgypants" -- it seems that some people will express outright disgust at various choices that reasonable people can differ on.  McDonalds ice cream?  Sure, it's got a place.  Black Friday sales?  I've been deferring some purchases for years, you're going to imply there's something wrong with me for purchasing at the best price?

Ditto.

Having been a member of various frugality, save the planet, anti-consumption groups, I have seen some folks get sanctimonious about other's choices. It can easily become a depravation contest.

What I like about MMM is that members can respectfully disagree on the particulars without judging or getting all butt hurt. Do your own thing. If an ice cream cone is your special treat, it's all good.

Sometimes comments on here can have the "holier than thou" air to them. But overall I would agree that the tone and discussion here is respectful and welcoming. But hater's gotta hate, just look at some of the feedback MMM has received over choosing to pay for a gym membership (oh the horror!).

[arebelspy]

..."Judgypants" -- it seems that some people will express outright disgust at various choices that reasonable people can differ on.  McDonalds ice cream?  Sure, it's got a place.  Black Friday sales?  I've been deferring some purchases for years, you're going to imply there's something wrong with me for purchasing at the best price?

Ditto.

Having been a member of various frugality, save the planet, anti-consumption groups, I have seen some folks get sanctimonious about other's choices. It can easily become a depravation contest.

What I like about MMM is that members can respectfully disagree on the particulars without judging or getting all butt hurt. Do your own thing. If an ice cream cone is your special treat, it's all good.

Sometimes comments on here can have the "holier than thou" air to them. But overall I would agree that the tone and discussion here is respectful and welcoming. But hater's gotta hate, just look at some of the feedback MMM has received over choosing to pay for a gym membership (oh the horror!).

It's a fine line between giving a punch in the face to someone making excuses and seeming to judge someone because of (albeit conscious) unfrugal decisions.

I think it's the receiver of the comment's attitude that determines its use.  If one whines and says "don't judge me," the comment was useless.  If one says "thanks for the punch in the face" (or even "appreciate the thought, it's a good thing to be wary of, but I did do this consciously) then we have thought and progress.

Personally I'd rather the forum participants err on the side of face punches rather than err on the side of being "politically correct" and worrying about judging people for their spending.  It's not judging, it's tough love, and I hope the forum sticks with it, as I haven't seen much negative judging or insulting at all.

IMO, you may see it differently.  If so, let me offer you a punch in the face to change your perspective.  ;)

[NWstubble]

It's a fine line between giving a punch in the face to someone making excuses and seeming to judge someone because of (albeit conscious) unfrugal decisions.

I think it's the receiver of the comment's attitude that determines its use.  If one whines and says "don't judge me," the comment was useless.  If one says "thanks for the punch in the face" (or even "appreciate the thought, it's a good thing to be wary of, but I did do this consciously) then we have thought and progress.

Personally I'd rather the forum participants err on the side of face punches rather than err on the side of being "politically correct" and worrying about judging people for their spending.  It's not judging, it's tough love, and I hope the forum sticks with it, as I haven't seen much negative judging or insulting at all.

IMO, you may see it differently.  If so, let me offer you a punch in the face to change your perspective.  ;)

I certainly agree that it is a fine line. Perhaps I don't understand what a punch in the face is..? I thought the act of face punching was to help others realize that their spending habits were jeopardizing their future. But if someone has already applied MMM ways to their life, is meeting their personal goals and is happy, why must some punch them in the face for making a conscious decision to spend a little on a 'luxury/treat' that doesn't affect their financial progress?

Let me be clear though, if I felt that the MMM boards were really that bad I wouldn't be here. Certainly the majority offer meaningful feedback and commentary and let's be honest, if you are posting on a forum you are asking for feedback and commentary, regardless of if you agree with it or not. While I can agree that erring on the side of face punches is better than political correctness/sugar coating, I think some just like to throw punches.

Back to DoubleDOwn's original point, where does it end?

Do you eat an all natural organic free range diet; no? Face punch.
Are you a consumer of natural gas; yes? Face punch for supporting fracking.
Do you live off the grid; no? Face punch for not being self sufficient.
Do you see where this is going; no? Face punch.

[arebelspy]

I certainly agree that it is a fine line. Perhaps I don't understand what a punch in the face is..? I thought the act of face punching was to help others realize that their spending habits were jeopardizing their future. But if someone has already applied MMM ways to their life, is meeting their personal goals and is happy, why must some punch them in the face for making a conscious decision to spend a little on a 'luxury/treat' that doesn't affect their financial progress?

Let me be clear though, if I felt that the MMM boards were really that bad I wouldn't be here. Certainly the majority offer meaningful feedback and commentary and let's be honest, if you are posting on a forum you are asking for feedback and commentary, regardless of if you agree with it or not. While I can agree that erring on the side of face punches is better than political correctness/sugar coating, I think some just like to throw punches.

Back to DoubleDOwn's original point, where does it end?

Do you eat an all natural organic free range diet; no? Face punch.
Are you a consumer of natural gas; yes? Face punch for supporting fracking.
Do you live off the grid; no? Face punch for not being self sufficient.
Do you see where this is going; no? Face punch.

We agree on what a face punch is.  I disagree it occurs as you say.  Often it comes from lack of information.

You say: "But if someone has already applied MMM ways to their life, is meeting their personal goals and is happy, why must some punch them in the face for making a conscious decision to spend a little on a 'luxury/treat' that doesn't affect their financial progress?"

They shouldn't. But I don't think that occurs.  And when it does, it's because we don't have the information that they are living a conscious life, so we err on the side of face punch in case it can help.

It's then up to the attitude of the receiver to get hurt or accept it, whether warranted or not.

I guess I just disagree that people here face punch just to judge, rather than to try and help/open eyes.  I haven't seen much of that at all.  Though if one had a different attitude, they might see that everywhere.  Apparently you see it more than I do, but I may be too willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt that they're giving tough love in case the original poster needs a face punch, while you may be too willing to give the original poster the benefit of the doubt that they don't need it, and thus the person behind the punch is being judgmental.  Perhaps it lies somewhere in between, and we apparently disagree, but I just don't see this happening the way or nearly as much as you describe.

/shrug

[DoubleDown]

I'm not so much troubled by the face punching on the board. As NWStubble aptly said, if you post on a board you should be inviting feedback both positive and negative. I think it's more the self-imposed face punching that could be problematic. Since the amount of frugality one could exercise is limitless, I could beat myself up all day over some of my choices. Oh no, I used a power saw instead of a hand saw to cut that wood!!! Self-improvement: Great. Unbridled, Self-Imposed Guilt: Not so great.

That's why I think there's a definite place for the "guilt free spending" approach within the context of MMM. Yes, we can always strive to improve. But there's positivity in being able to say to oneself, "I'm saving 80% (or whatever) of my income, which takes me to my goals. The other 20%, I'm not going to worry one bit about how I spend it, even if it's on gas driving to work or some other not-completely-frugal outlay, because that's my choice." I think if you're within the larger MMM goals of greatly increasing spending and decreasing consumption, then we shouldn't fret about every purchase.

[chucklesmcgee]

For me, it's not so much saving or spending as it is just maximizing your personal utility. I think everyone has their own level of what really matters and what's comfortable to them, but the whole point of frugality for me is asking a few questions:

1.What am I buying?
2. Why am I buying this, really?  What do I hope to get out of it?
3. What am I really paying for this relative to how much I'm using this? (per month, per use)
4.What alternatives could get me what I want? What would they cost? How would they be different or less fulfilling?
5. Could I think of something better to spend the money I'd save that would be more enjoyable?
6. Do I still want to buy this, go with the alternative or forego it altogether?
7. If I do want to buy this and think I'll be buying it often enough, is there a cheaper way of getting it (taking into account time costs)?

It's not a "oh-poo-poo your lifestyle is awful live in a shack in the woods" type of a deal. I just think if people stopped more often to consider why they spend what they do, they'd figure out it's more often due to norms or consumerism than any really rational desire. If you go through this calculus and decide it's really the best way to spend your money, there shouldn't be any reason to feel guilty about it.

Example: Do I ditch cable TV?

Well, 2. I want something that will entertain me. I want something that will amuse me and let me see my favorite shows and sports.
3. It's about $1000/year for am HD package that covers the channels I like after fees and taxes come into play. There are about 4 half-hour shows I regularly follow, total programming time without commercials is about 5.5 hours a month.  Huh, that's like $15 an hour of programming. Wow.
4.Well hell, for $15 an hour, I could see a new movie in theaters for a third of that! Oh and hey, 2 of those shows are already available streaming, online, with near zero commercials, whenever I want them...for free.  The other 2 have all but the most recent episodes on Netflix streaming. Hmm and Netflix would let me watch thousands of movies instantly for $8 a month.
5. Uhm, yes, I can think of more awesome things to do with $900. I could get a home theater system, a netbook, pay for a gym membership, get dance lessons, etc etc.
6. Well I do want SOMETHING with on demand entertainment, but not cable, so yeah Netflix should be nice.
7. Oh I can start Netflix with a free trial and put it on a 2% back credit card. Nice.

Since it's based on your values, I think it's one that really should never leave you guilty, only that your values aren't what you thought they were.  Ok so you want a new $60,000 Lexus? Is it $55,000 (lost interest, tax, title, delivery fee, insurance) BETTER for you to have a new Lexus than one than a 10 year old Lexus from a private party? Is there really no other way you could think of spending that money that would make you happier? Exotic vacations, meals prepared by private chefs, your whole house cleaned weekly, flowers delivered to your significant other, a personal trainer, groceries delivered, the fanciest suits money could buy, spa treatments, a virtual secretary to handle all your errands and enough money left over to buy another used Lexus when this one bites the dust? All of those things combined are really worth less to you for something slightly shinier and faster?

It doesn't have to be some unbounded conclusion that makes me renounce all worldly possessions. Do I sell my 12 year old Lexus and bike everywhere? No. Why? I want to be able to drive places, go out of state on a whim. I want to transport other people places and move groceries, packages and other purchases easily between stores and my home. I don't want to be cold driving in the winter, or really be bothered by the rain. I want the convenience and freedom of being able to get up and go whenever I feel like it and move myself a few hundred miles in an afternoon. I don't want to have to carry around a bike lock or a helmet. I don't want to ride on a road or narrow bike lane with enormous, several thousand pound hunks of metal hurdling dangerously close to my vulnerable self. I don't want to have to worry about what type of clothing I'm wearing at night or have to get some silly reflector jacket. These are luxuries that are worth it to me. 

[Hamster]

in my family we each have budgeted blow money...

I don't think that cocaine is very mustachian, even if you do have the money pre-budgeted. There are much cheaper ways to get a high.

[Matte]

Agreed that everybody has there line, I know I could be much more mustachian in many ways but I am conscious and happy with my choices.  I think what's mostly important that you look At the full effect of money spent and make an educated descusion if it is worth it.  when I make purchases I look at factors like how long will it last me, should I put it off or not buy at all.  It seems like it'd the ability to take a step back and get out of the mainstream consumer madness and make descisions.  It really reminds me of how my grandparents and their generation were, worked hate, paid things off, saved like crazy, made/grew there own fOod.  They managed to have stay at home moms, savings accounts, fi, all these things that most younger folks don't even know exist.  If you spend it you gotta make the most of it and know that it will bring happiness or serve a purpose for a long time.  Example my grandpas truck that he bought new in 1976 is still on the road today, he sold it a few years ago, 300k miles, original engine, tranny, ran propane to save fuel costs, was worth 5k the day he sold it.  Today keeping a vehicle for that long is unheard of. 

[Jamesqf]

Unheard of? Ask me again in about 10 years, since my '88 Toyota pickup is still running strong.  (OK, I did have to fix the starter a couple of weeks ago, but that took an afternoon's work and a few cents worth of solder.)

[eyePod]

I know it's a key buzzword but I think mindfulness is the key.  For example, I make a conscious decision that I am going to enjoy this movie in a theater as opposed to waiting for it to come out on Netflix.  I'm able to do this because I know that I'm not wasting in 800 other areas and am still saving for the long run.

[StarswirlTheMustached]

The ingredient you missed when arguing over weather you'd rather processed seaweed or hooves&horns in your icecream was dextrose. Bad sign, if you're looking for a natural product. "Dextrose" is one of the many names for corn syrup.

in my family we each have budgeted blow money...

I don't think that cocaine is very mustachian, even if you do have the money pre-budgeted. There are much cheaper ways to get a high.

Now, now, don't be a judgypants. It's budgeted and fits with their values.

[dragoncar]

The ingredient you missed when arguing over weather you'd rather processed seaweed or hooves&horns in your icecream was dextrose. Bad sign, if you're looking for a natural product. "Dextrose" is one of the many names for corn syrup.

Are you be trolling?  Dextrose is glucose, a ubiquitous and natural energy source in biology.  If you don't like glucose, you are in trouble, because even if you avoid eating all carbs, your liver will make it from fat or protein in order to keep you from dying (a process called gluconeogenesis).

[StarswirlTheMustached]

The ingredient you missed when arguing over weather you'd rather processed seaweed or hooves&horns in your icecream was dextrose. Bad sign, if you're looking for a natural product. "Dextrose" is one of the many names for corn syrup.

Are you be trolling?  Dextrose is glucose, a ubiquitous and natural energy source in biology.  If you don't like glucose, you are in trouble, because even if you avoid eating all carbs, your liver will make it from fat or protein in order to keep you from dying (a process called gluconeogenesis).

I not be trolling, mon.
The pure chemical dextrose is glucose, yes. But we're not talking about pure materials in the lab, we're talking about food ingredients. Ask yourself: why are glucose and dextrose considered different on ingredient lists? Here, if you don't believe me.
 
If you don't have a problem with King Corn, then you needn't worry yourself. If you are concerned about its ubiquity (100% of the carbon atoms in American coca-cola are from corn, according to an analysis reported in "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan) or toxins that can pruportedly make it through processing, you may want to avoid it. (Or if, like me, you're allergic to maize. Now you'll want to tell me pure glucose can't trigger an allergy no matter what the source-- no shit, but they don't purify this stuff to lab grade.)

My point was, if you want to brag about being "all natural", you can't bloody well put corn syrup as an ingredient, even if you hide it under another name.

[dragoncar]

The pure chemical dextrose is glucose, yes. But we're not talking about pure materials in the lab, we're talking about food ingredients. Ask yourself: why are glucose and dextrose considered different on ingredient lists? Here, if you don't believe me.
 
If you don't have a problem with King Corn, then you needn't worry yourself. If you are concerned about its ubiquity (100% of the carbon atoms in American coca-cola are from corn, according to an analysis reported in "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan) or toxins that can pruportedly make it through processing, you may want to avoid it. (Or if, like me, you're allergic to maize. Now you'll want to tell me pure glucose can't trigger an allergy no matter what the source-- no shit, but they don't purify this stuff to lab grade.)

My point was, if you want to brag about being "all natural", you can't bloody well put corn syrup as an ingredient, even if you hide it under another name.

I did wonder why it was listed separately, and concluded that it's probably because it's been processed differently (such as from corn as you suggest).  But I don't really have a problem with adding an innocuous ingredient just because it's derived from corn.  If they added water extracted from corn, that would be perfectly fine with me too.  I assume that the cows making the milk in your favorite ice cream were not grassfed.  Plus, there's nothing to suggest that the dextrose in any particular ice cream was actually derived from corn instead of any of the many other sources.

Fun fact:  100% of carbon atoms in everything are made from stars, which would kill you instantly if you touched one.  Pretty scary stuff.

[StarswirlTheMustached]

Plus, there's nothing to suggest that the dextrose in any particular ice cream was actually derived from corn instead of any of the many other sources.

Well, simple probability. There's more of it in this country than any other. Every source I've read that discusses the provenance here says it's corn. Those of us who are sensitive have learned to avoid it. Note, though, I did say labels in North America; European and Aussie dextrose may be from another source.

Fun fact:  100% of carbon atoms in everything are made from stars, which would kill you instantly if you touched one.  Pretty scary stuff.

Made in stars, you mean. :P

But the stars have already done their work, and the corn must do its every year. The last time a nation became so utterly dependent on one crop it ended in the potato famine. Never mind what the market-distorting corn subsidies due to land use patterns, etc. Like I said, if you don't have a problem with King Corn, then don't worry yourself. Not everyone is as comfortable with him, though.

[grantmeaname]

The last time a nation became so utterly dependent on one crop it ended in the potato famine.

That had more to do with England than blight.

[Hamster]

Is HFCS any worse than table sugar??? They are equally bad

High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) in food is 42-55% fructose, and 45-58% glucose (aka dextrose). It was designed to mimic table sugar (sucrose) which is exactly 50% glucose and 50% fructose--basically the same as HFCS. In the intestine, table sugar is broken down into fructose and glucose (same as HFCS), and the individual components are absorbed into the blood stream where glucose and fructose are treated quite differently by the body.

The emphasis on the ill health effects of HFCS is a bit misguided in the sense that many people believe that replacing it with sugar, or "evaporated cane juice" (just a euphemism for sugar) is somehow better. Both are equally bad for you from a health perspective. I have seen people buy lollipops made with "evaporated cane juice" to avoid sugar or HFCS... same thing... same health risks... More money

If you are interested in a 90 minute lecture about why significant quantities of fructose specifically (and sugar generally) is so bad for you, check out: Robert Lustig, Sugar the Bitter Truth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

I can't speak to whether monocropping of corn [edited typo] is worse than sugar cane monocropping (and import) or beet monocropping for sugar production. At any rate, both table sugar and HFCS are equally bad when consumed.

[Jamesqf]

The last time a nation became so utterly dependent on one crop it ended in the potato famine.

I seriously doubt that a failure of the corn crop would create a famine.  Most of the corn by-products are additives used in junk foods.  If they were left out, the remaining actual food would still provide enough calories (and vitamins &c) for survival.  Indeed, I expect a lot of people would argue that we'd be better off if they were left out, and the food would taste better, too.

[dragoncar]

The breakdown of sucrose into fructose and glucose slows digestion slightly.  See the following glycemic indices:

Table Sugar 80
High Fructose Corn Syrup 87

(http://www.naturalnews.com/032281_HFCS_sugar.html#ixzz2EFL5vnmW)

This is the first time I looked it up, and honestly I'm surprised how close they are.  Based only on the GI, it seems that if you're going to eat something sugary, it probably doesn't make too much of a difference whether it has table sugar vs. HFCS.

Sugary foods are not a daily affair.  I eat it maybe once every month.  For that level of moderation, I don't think it matters much what the source of the sugar is.