The Money Mustache Community
General Discussion => Welcome and General Discussion => Topic started by: LightStache on July 21, 2022, 10:45:14 AM
-
As someone who typically flies in economy plus or first class, I thought of myself as "Mustachian Light." But the latest from MMM suggests his philosophy is evolving closer to mine:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
Buying premium airfare strikes me as inconsistent with his earlier philosophy suggesting that you should embrace riding your bike through the winter. What do you think?
-
If you were still in the position of trying to achieve financial independence, then sure. But he's already achieved that (several times over one would have to guess). So he can then look at the numbers, and if the cost of these things doesn't blow his budget under his safe returns, and he values them, then I don't see the issue.
-
I was a bit disappointed to read the ending of MMM's latest blog post. I can certainly understand for the $1,000 difference in cost, in his financial position, but I look to him to 'be better'. I wonder what the $/hr breakdown that $1,000 was worth--- would it have been an extra 5 hours for each of them, so $100/hour to be more comfortable? Perhaps spend that extra cash in private, rather than shout the message--- "The correct answer is “Shut up, Mustache! You should do whatever you think is most fun and least stressful, without thinking about the money.”
-
As someone who typically flies in economy plus or first class, I thought of myself as "Mustachian Light." But the latest from MMM suggests his philosophy is evolving closer to mine:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
Buying premium airfare strikes me as inconsistent with his earlier philosophy suggesting that you should embrace riding your bike through the winter. What do you think?
It seems he is following a path similar to Dave Ramsey's "live like no else so you can live like no one else." Biking in the winter so that later you can fly in economy plus may not be the trade off I would do, but to each his own.
-
I love it. Make money your b*tch. What else would you have him spend his money on? He earned it and he doesn't really work anymore so its not like he's chained to a job in order to pay for these little luxuries.
-
As someone who typically flies in economy plus or first class, I thought of myself as "Mustachian Light." But the latest from MMM suggests his philosophy is evolving closer to mine:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
Buying premium airfare strikes me as inconsistent with his earlier philosophy suggesting that you should embrace riding your bike through the winter. What do you think?
I don't know if premium airfare (aka Economy plus) is any less mustachian than choosing flights by time/ convenience/ days.
You know, red-eye vs daytime, early morning flight vs midday, Weds vs weekend days, long layover vs short, through Chicago vs. through NYC, direct vs 3 flights
Etc.
That's the kind of calculus we do whenever we fly - which is thankfully not often.
Is it ONLY mustachian to get only the very cheapest flights (including transp to + from the airport, parking, etc)?
Is it ONLY mustachian to only pack your own food and never eat airplane or airport food?
-
Some of your points in support of his epilogue decision echo the quotes of the "critics" he was trying to address in this article:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/ (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/)
This 2011 piece and the epilogue from yesterday seem at odds.
-
I don’t care how much his plane ticket costs, but I’d be impressed if he refused to fly.
-
I think I'm more interested in applying the principles I learned from MMM that work for me to my own life than in judging how he lives his own life.
Srsly, if you've benefited from what you've learned from him, what difference does it make? How is it anyone's business how he spends his $$?
-
Reading that article on worst case scenarios to lose all your money ignores the most likely worst case scenario: you decide to increase your spending to upper middle class levels on a lower middle class income. That will get you poor faster and easier than waiting for the government and stock market to collapse. Premium airfare, frequent hotels, restaurants and cruises are a good way to deplete a million dollars over a few years.
-
I'd do it too but I'm too cheap ;-)
-
I think I'm more interested in applying the principles I learned from MMM that work for me to my own life than in judging how he lives his own life.
Srsly, if you've benefited from what you've learned from him, what difference does it make? How is it anyone's business how he spends his $$?
MrMoneyMustache is an internet personality versus the real life Pete Adeney. I don't really care as much what Pete Adeney does with his money since it is relatively trivial, but when MMM succumbs to hedonic adaptation, as LightStache is pointing out, it doesn't bode well for the message that he had been trying to push for so many years.
-
First - on the topic of the two case studies he's decided to pull out - I think they're kind of tone-deaf at this point. The people who are seeking the blog aren't a 50-year old doctor with a grown child wondering if she can retire early. The people who (at least I imagine) are seeking the blog are 20-something's who are done with the cutthroat tech culture and 30-somethings with a house and kids who just want to stop having to schlep to the office anymore.
Moreover, his friend, with whom he has been renovating an investment house, lives in a desirable area to travel and as far as I can tell doesn't have a very demanding personal or professional life. His lifestyle is certainly valid and even desirable but it doesn't reflect the reality of the typical person wondering how they can escape a toxic work culture.
I think I'm more interested in applying the principles I learned from MMM that work for me to my own life than in judging how he lives his own life.
Srsly, if you've benefited from what you've learned from him, what difference does it make? How is it anyone's business how he spends his $$?
MrMoneyMustache is an internet personality versus the real life Pete Adeney. I don't really care as much what Pete Adeney does with his money since it is relatively trivial, but when MMM succumbs to hedonic adaptation, as LightStache is pointing out, it doesn't bode well for the message that he had been trying to push for so many years.
I very much agree. Sure he rented a Tesla, and we all know (from the blog) that the annual trips to Canada happen for him regardless of what people think of them, but it does seem to be quite a far cry from one particularly memorable post where he drove cross-country in his minivan with no A/C with all the luggage while his then-wife and son flew out. That, to me, was more emblematic of the Pete/MMM dichotomy. He paid plenty for the airfare then, but chose to document how it would be possible to travel without flying and being able to bring weeks' worth of luggage.
At this point, I think it might be time for him to retire the MMM persona and adopt a new moniker that reflects his (rightly earned) status as a well-funded early retiree.
-
Chemistk worded it quite well. Thanks
-
First - on the topic of the two case studies he's decided to pull out - I think they're kind of tone-deaf at this point. The people who are seeking the blog aren't a 50-year old doctor with a grown child wondering if she can retire early. The people who (at least I imagine) are seeking the blog are 20-something's who are done with the cutthroat tech culture and 30-somethings with a house and kids who just want to stop having to schlep to the office anymore.
Hammer, meets nail, smashes head.
I have a much bigger issue with the examples he tried to use to make his point than the fact that he's being a little wasteful. If you consider how much of an impact his message has made by likely influencing thousands or tens of thousands of people to reduce consumption and therefor make a positive impact on the planet, he gets a pass from me.
The guy is also a multi millionaire with a semipassive business that still earns him multiples of his current spending, you can't take it with you ;)
-
His vacation plans are definitely not classically Mustachian but using your expendable cash on fun "luxuries" for yourself and family are absolutely healthy and should be encouraged.
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
-
His premise is sound and has helped many people. I have no problem with him enjoying some of his money.
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
I concur. Along those lines even if he had bought the first class tickets, is the world a worse place? The private plane would mean more carbon emissions, but the first class seats change nothing.
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
I concur. Along those lines even if he had bought the first class tickets, is the world a worse place? The private plane would mean more carbon emissions, but the first class seats change nothing.
It doesn't matter because they were business expenses and not part of his personal spending, so probably stilling living way below $250k $25k per year. 😂🤣😂🤣
But seriously, I FIREd 3 years ago and still worry moderately about running out of money later, although I am not in the 2.5% wr or property owner that theoughs off 2x living expenses, so there that, and 3 school age kids rapidly approaching college. 🤔
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
I concur. Along those lines even if he had bought the first class tickets, is the world a worse place? The private plane would mean more carbon emissions, but the first class seats change nothing.
It doesn't matter because they were business expenses and not part of his personal spending, so probably stilling living way below $250k $25k per year. 😂🤣😂🤣
But seriously, I FIREd 3 years ago and still worry moderately about running out of money later, although I am not in the 2.5% wr or property owner that theoughs off 2x living expenses, so there that, and 3 school age kids rapidly approaching college. 🤔
Aren't all school age children rapidly approaching college? Oh, wait. They have to learn to drive first. Fun times ahead.
-
His vacation plans are definitely not classically Mustachian but using your expendable cash on fun "luxuries" for yourself and family are absolutely healthy and should be encouraged.
I'm not sure that this mantra from the blog itself:
Blah blah blah. The correct answer is “Shut up, Mustache! You should do whatever you think is most fun and least stressful, without thinking about the money.”
is remotely compatible with some of the initial premises he started the entire MMM blog with around hedonistic adaption, etc.
But that being said, for him, given his timeline for FIRE, income recently, etc? This decision is frankly trivial from a financial perspective.
-
I think his post is fantastic. It accurately reflects the true nature of aging. In our 20s it's easy to adopt a motto of austerity. Backpack across Europe staying in hostels, crash on a friend's couch for a week, drive across the country without A/C, etc. In our 30s we start to soften. Mental and physical discomfort become less tolerable and it is a fight to keep that rubberband stretched out. I feel this keenly now, about to turn 39, and trying to figure out how to keep my nomadic travel lifestyle alive while realizing there are certain things my wife and I just won't tolerate anymore. MMM is now in his mid-40s. Age is constantly going to be putting pressure on that tolerance rubberband to tighten up and he is succumbing to that just a little bit. And that's awesome, because he is modeling exactly what happens to everyone else. I understand a new reader might not realize that but he does point out that he's older.
If you become a multi-millionaire and at 45 you're still willing scrimp on some once yearly travel comforts to save $1,000 then you are truly a badass. You've kept your rubberband stretched more than basically anyone else. But I think it's good that his post shows that we will naturally soften in our older age, because it's the truth, and something worth thinking about for those considering FIRE while young.
-
I think his post is fantastic. It accurately reflects the true nature of aging. In our 20s it's easy to adopt a motto of austerity. Backpack across Europe staying in hostels, crash on a friend's couch for a week, drive across the country without A/C, etc. In our 30s we start to soften. Mental and physical discomfort become less tolerable and it is a fight to keep that rubberband stretched out. I feel this keenly now, about to turn 39, and trying to figure out how to keep my nomadic travel lifestyle alive while realizing there are certain things my wife and I just won't tolerate anymore. MMM is now in his mid-40s. Age is constantly going to be putting pressure on that tolerance rubberband to tighten up and he is succumbing to that just a little bit. And that's awesome, because he is modeling exactly what happens to everyone else. I understand a new reader might not realize that but he does point out that he's older.
If you become a multi-millionaire and at 45 you're still willing scrimp on some once yearly travel comforts to save $1,000 then you are truly a badass. You've kept your rubberband stretched more than basically anyone else. But I think it's good that his post shows that we will naturally soften in our older age, because it's the truth, and something worth thinking about for those considering FIRE while young.
This is just lifestyle inflation.
-
I bought a car with AC for the first time at age 37 and my last time in a tent was at 55. Then we bought a used motor home with a real bed. As you age you definitely want more creature comforts.
-
I think his post is fantastic. It accurately reflects the true nature of aging. In our 20s it's easy to adopt a motto of austerity. Backpack across Europe staying in hostels, crash on a friend's couch for a week, drive across the country without A/C, etc. In our 30s we start to soften. Mental and physical discomfort become less tolerable and it is a fight to keep that rubberband stretched out. I feel this keenly now, about to turn 39, and trying to figure out how to keep my nomadic travel lifestyle alive while realizing there are certain things my wife and I just won't tolerate anymore. MMM is now in his mid-40s. Age is constantly going to be putting pressure on that tolerance rubberband to tighten up and he is succumbing to that just a little bit. And that's awesome, because he is modeling exactly what happens to everyone else. I understand a new reader might not realize that but he does point out that he's older.
If you become a multi-millionaire and at 45 you're still willing scrimp on some once yearly travel comforts to save $1,000 then you are truly a badass. You've kept your rubberband stretched more than basically anyone else. But I think it's good that his post shows that we will naturally soften in our older age, because it's the truth, and something worth thinking about for those considering FIRE while young.
This is just modest lifestyle inflation.
FTFY
-
I think his post is fantastic. It accurately reflects the true nature of aging. In our 20s it's easy to adopt a motto of austerity. Backpack across Europe staying in hostels, crash on a friend's couch for a week, drive across the country without A/C, etc. In our 30s we start to soften. Mental and physical discomfort become less tolerable and it is a fight to keep that rubberband stretched out. I feel this keenly now, about to turn 39, and trying to figure out how to keep my nomadic travel lifestyle alive while realizing there are certain things my wife and I just won't tolerate anymore. MMM is now in his mid-40s. Age is constantly going to be putting pressure on that tolerance rubberband to tighten up and he is succumbing to that just a little bit. And that's awesome, because he is modeling exactly what happens to everyone else. I understand a new reader might not realize that but he does point out that he's older.
If you become a multi-millionaire and at 45 you're still willing scrimp on some once yearly travel comforts to save $1,000 then you are truly a badass. You've kept your rubberband stretched more than basically anyone else. But I think it's good that his post shows that we will naturally soften in our older age, because it's the truth, and something worth thinking about for those considering FIRE while young.
This is just lifestyle inflation.
Technically true, but my post is still accurate. I know of no one in their 40s, 50s, and 60s who live like they did in their 20s. Inflation or not, it's a part of life for basically everyone.
-
Thanks @Dicey ! ;)
Well damn, I just ran an excursion factoring in all the modest lifestyle inflation I want...looks like I'm going to need an extra 12 years of work and $4.8M. Womp womp.
-
I think his post is fantastic. It accurately reflects the true nature of aging. In our 20s it's easy to adopt a motto of austerity. Backpack across Europe staying in hostels, crash on a friend's couch for a week, drive across the country without A/C, etc. In our 30s we start to soften. Mental and physical discomfort become less tolerable and it is a fight to keep that rubberband stretched out. I feel this keenly now, about to turn 39, and trying to figure out how to keep my nomadic travel lifestyle alive while realizing there are certain things my wife and I just won't tolerate anymore. MMM is now in his mid-40s.
This is a little bit of a tangent, but one of the reasons that I'm not really aiming for an early retirement is that I'm not at all confident that my preferences will remain constant as I age.
Camping at state parks is great in our (late) 30s, but will we want a vacation home when we're 60? Perhaps.
It seems very possible that it takes more money to have the same level of comfort as we age, which is pretty tough to really budget.
The 21st Century idea of FIRE hasn't really been put to the test yet because we haven't seen how people's behavior changes as they age over decades, and the market has so outperformed that people haven't been held to a 4% withdrawal rate. A decade of sideways market movement as early retirees start to feel the aches and pains of advancing years would be interesting to watch.
-
Thanks @Dicey ! ;)
Well damn, I just ran an excursion factoring in all the modest lifestyle inflation I want...looks like I'm going to need an extra 12 years of work and $4.8M. Womp womp.
That's a hell of an excursion! Where are you going?
-
I’m 52 years old and recently rode my bike and took a train solo to an all-day event, then came back in the dark alone navigating my way to the train through unfamiliar streets, waiting on the last train home with shady characters, getting off and riding like a demon home to avoid even more shady characters roaming my urban streets. And I had a perfectly good car parked at home that I could’ve used.
Oh and sometimes I like to sleep on the floor (it’s great for my back). I believe in keeping myself hedonically unadapted (though I do buy top quality tools for my side hustle).
-
Holy smokes after posting about myself (just throwing in a data point about a 50+-year-old person who is not hedonically adapting) I read the post and yeah people are being way harsh and missing the point of the post. I think it’s a point that bears repeating again and again which is that while some of us will not run out of money, we will all run out of time.
-
He’s FI and can as Dave Ramsey would say “live like no one else”. If he wants to spend a small portion of his overall net worth on these items, what is the problem?
-
I’m 52 years old and recently rode my bike and took a train solo to an all-day event, then came back in the dark alone navigating my way to the train through unfamiliar streets, waiting on the last train home with shady characters, getting off and riding like a demon home to avoid even more shady characters roaming my urban streets. And I had a perfectly good car parked at home that I could’ve used.
Oh and sometimes I like to sleep on the floor (it’s great for my back). I believe in keeping myself hedonically unadapted (though I do buy top quality tools for my side hustle).
There's something here about avoiding unnecessary risk, but I can't quite put my finger on it...
-
Yeah there's way too much angst about a middle aged person spending an extra $1,000 a year in "lifestyle inflation" because said person is no longer as hardcore as they were 15 years ago. It's quite hilarious! I expect everyone here to still be popping wheelies on their bike in the snow in their backyard when they're 80. Pics or it didn't happen!
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
This is where I stand, ultimately. Pete has earned his lifestyle, no doubt, but it's kind of antithetical to the principles that are espoused earlier in the blog. I think a lot of the issue for me comes from the fact that some of the core blog posts are about a decade old now and much has changed between then and now. What would he have written had he started the blog this year.
I'll be clear - I'm completely for him being able to do the things he is doing. I am happy that he's at this point in his life and that his dream was successfully accomplished. But his travel is done as Pete, traveling to see family, making the most of that experience as he gets older - not MMM, who's always on the lookout for ways to optimize his lifestyle to be environmentally conscious.
-
I don't see anything wrong with what he's recently done, and the choices are more in line with how I generally live and spend.
That said, I see a certain... tension with MMM2022 and MMM OG. His original schtick was so OTT judgmental, and didn't allow any room for differences in life. That guy would have mocked and facepunched this guy. To me, this speaks not to the current choices being wrong or bad, but the the old guy being myopic and small-minded.
Life changes. Finances change. Bodies and comfort change. His old attitude didn't allow space for that. Quite possibly that's just because moderation wouldn't have gotten as many clicks. And to address it now would mean eating some crow and admitting that maybe he didn't actually know as much as he thought he did. But it's hard for me to read today's MMM and not think about what OG MMM would have said to this new, fancy, hedonistic traveler.
And I guess that's the core of it for me--presumably he gives himself a lot of grace--grace that he never granted anyone else 10+ years ago.
-
I think part of the problem is that MMM doesn't post much any more. If he'd been posting once a week for the past 5 years we'd see a gradual evolution of his situation and life. In contrast, GoCurryCracker started out as two fancy free early retirees traveling the world on little money and paying no income tax. Now they're a family of four owning and living in a California house and living frugally. Jeremy posted often enough that you could see the logical changes in his lifestyle.
As others have said better than I can, the OG MMM was a badass caricature of an uber frugal dude with a family. Now we don't even think we know how he's living.
-
And yet he was always uber frugal while living an incredibly luxurious lifestyle. He said this repeatedly. Also it’s really interesting to see how many people felt like the whole face punching concept was a brutal critique. I never took it that way. I think he was appealing to exactly the kind of lifestyle I live therefore I didn’t feel attacked. If he had said no individual should own a single-family home or even one car, no one should reproduce, technology is bad, etc, then yes I would feel attacked.
All along he has been enjoying making careful quality purchases that aligned with his values, renovating homes, living in a Colorado suburb, admiring Teslas (which I think are stupid and wasteful 😂)… None of this is a surprise or a deviation from his personality.
-
It doesn't matter because they were business expenses and not part of his personal spending, so probably stilling living way below $250k $25k per year. 😂🤣😂🤣
Yes, his budget is basically that of a typical middle class American. The sum of his imputed rent, self insurance, the expenditures put under business, and $25k of discretionary is easily north of $50k/year. For one guy with half of a kiddo, that's not exactly living on rice and beans. His rhetoric has been rice and beans, but the numbers he's disclosed have been a pretty middle America lifestyle.
Quite possibly that's just because moderation wouldn't have gotten as many clicks.
Yeah, a schtick of tech dude comes out of college without debt during the go-go dot com days, learns to live like an ordinary person without a cocaine habit, and invests the leftover money with a strategy anyone can figure out in an afternoon right as assets go to the moon isn't exactly going to earn a big following.
Presenting ordinary thrift as radical self denial and minimizing the luck involved in his timing sells much better.
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
I concur. Along those lines even if he had bought the first class tickets, is the world a worse place? The private plane would mean more carbon emissions, but the first class seats change nothing.
It doesn't matter because they were business expenses and not part of his personal spending, so probably stilling living way below $250k $25k per year. 😂🤣😂🤣
But seriously, I FIREd 3 years ago and still worry moderately about running out of money later, although I am not in the 2.5% wr or property owner that theoughs off 2x living expenses, so there that, and 3 school age kids rapidly approaching college. 🤔
Aren't all school age children rapidly approaching college? Oh, wait. They have to learn to drive first. Fun times ahead.
It really is a blink of an eye how fast they grow up. Oldest is starting to drive so more worries, and the extra 1500-2000 per year for insurance. Fun times indeed.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Part of combatting lifestyle inflation is so that it does not interfere with your long term goals of FIRE. If someone happens to be so fortunate that they “FIRE” and then their passive income explodes due to side hustles they enjoy, is it that big of an issue to enjoy some ‘nicer’ things, when it has zero impact in the long run?
If someone is in the working stages and buys a $250 mountain bike to enjoy so they can continue to save, that’s great. If they are in FIRE and all of a sudden their $1MM nest egg turns to $4MM in side hustles, plus they have a passive income of $150k/yr, and they decide they really want to get into mountain biking and buy a $3k mountain bike, is that a big problem now?
I’d bet that MMM’s savings rate is higher now than it was at the peak of his working years, isn’t that what it’s largely about?
I understand that there’s the whole “badassity” aspect, the drive to minimize hedonic adaption, etc., but there are certainly some modern conveniences that certain income/net worth people may wish to take advantage of.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Sounds like he's still pretty badass at 45. He's just not as badass as he was at 30. Anyone expecting that is going to be disappointed because it's not reality for basically anyone.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Part of combatting lifestyle inflation is so that it does not interfere with your long term goals of FIRE. If someone happens to be so fortunate that they “FIRE” and then their passive income explodes due to side hustles they enjoy, is it that big of an issue to enjoy some ‘nicer’ things, when it has zero impact in the long run?
If someone is in the working stages and buys a $250 mountain bike to enjoy so they can continue to save, that’s great. If they are in FIRE and all of a sudden their $1MM nest egg turns to $4MM in side hustles, plus they have a passive income of $150k/yr, and they decide they really want to get into mountain biking and buy a $3k mountain bike, is that a big problem now?
I’d bet that MMM’s savings rate is higher now than it was at the peak of his working years, isn’t that what it’s largely about?
I understand that there’s the whole “badassity” aspect, the drive to minimize hedonic adaption, etc., but there are certainly some modern conveniences that certain income/net worth people may wish to take advantage of.
You're missing the point.
Do you think 2012 MMM would have said "go ahead and buy a 3k mountain bike instead of a used one" or "go ahead and buy a brand new SUV" to anyone, regardless of income level? If not, why?
That said, I see a certain... tension with MMM2022 and MMM OG. His original schtick was so OTT judgmental, and didn't allow any room for differences in life. That guy would have mocked and facepunched this guy. To me, this speaks not to the current choices being wrong or bad, but the the old guy being myopic and small-minded.
Life changes. Finances change. Bodies and comfort change. His old attitude didn't allow space for that. Quite possibly that's just because moderation wouldn't have gotten as many clicks. And to address it now would mean eating some crow and admitting that maybe he didn't actually know as much as he thought he did. But it's hard for me to read today's MMM and not think about what OG MMM would have said to this new, fancy, hedonistic traveler.
And I guess that's the core of it for me--presumably he gives himself a lot of grace--grace that he never granted anyone else 10+ years ago.
Yup. This is the only reason I even care on this, albeit still not much at all.
OG MMM would have smacked MMM2022 hard.
-
And yet he was always uber frugal while living an incredibly luxurious lifestyle. He said this repeatedly. Also it’s really interesting to see how many people felt like the whole face punching concept was a brutal critique. I never took it that way. I think he was appealing to exactly the kind of lifestyle I live therefore I didn’t feel attacked. If he had said no individual should own a single-family home or even one car, no one should reproduce, technology is bad, etc, then yes I would feel attacked.
All along he has been enjoying making careful quality purchases that aligned with his values, renovating homes, living in a Colorado suburb, admiring Teslas (which I think are stupid and wasteful 😂)… None of this is a surprise or a deviation from his personality.
I didn't feel at all attacked, and never did even when I was making choices that MMM at the time would have scoffed at. I'm pretty comfortable with my lifestyle and spending choices, which I'd peg as somewhere between 2010 MMM and 2022 MMM. But he was certainly judgmental and rigid in his thinking, so it's interesting to me to watch someone who was pretty sanctimonious about choices outside what he deemed as acceptable now make choices outside of what he deemed acceptable. He isn't subjecting himself to the same scrutiny as he subjected others too. And of course that's going to get, well... scrutiny. It seems a lot like "do as I say, not as I do", especially when he hasn't actually addressed the changes in his mindset and approach.
And I don't see how that's not a deviation from his personality. Are you telling me that 10 years ago, he wouldn't have shat upon premium travel as hedonism at it's worst and a terrible, face punch-worthy waste? That this somehow isn't a fairly significant shift in his supposed spending criteria and overall philosophy about finances and badassity and DIY and hedonistic adaptation?
And even that is fine. People change. They learn. They evolve. They experience different things. They have different, unexpected needs. But when you are repeatedly on record as being one way and judging that as basically the One True Way, and they you start living a different way, yeah, that's going to get some attention.
-
Ultimately it proves that luxuries are nice to have once you can afford them, despite all the years MMM proclaimed his 25k budget afforded a volcanic explosion of comfort…. It’s hypocritical when you blog that luxury leads to bedpans and flabassity, no other word for it.
-
First, the topic of the blog post is about how to feel secure in your FI and not worry about running out of money when it's abundantly clear you won't. If you read it in that spirit, I think it works.
Also, the whole topic of hedonic adaptation builds on the fact that if you do something nice all the time, you'll adapt to it. It would be different if he said that, since he'll never run out of money, he's going to fly first class everywhere and buy a giant SUV. A single splurge doesn't mean you're hedonically adapted, and it seems to me that his choices also didn't lead to increased carbon emissions (renting a Tesla instead of a Suburban, etc).
-
Ultimately it proves that luxuries are nice to have once you can afford them, despite all the years MMM proclaimed his 25k budget afforded a volcanic explosion of comfort…. It’s hypocritical when you blog that luxury leads to bedpans and flabassity, no other word for it.
First, the topic of the blog post is about how to feel secure in your FI and not worry about running out of money when it's abundantly clear you won't. If you read it in that spirit, I think it works.
Also, the whole topic of hedonic adaptation builds on the fact that if you do something nice all the time, you'll adapt to it. It would be different if he said that, since he'll never run out of money, he's going to fly first class everywhere and buy a giant SUV. A single splurge doesn't mean you're hedonically adapted, and it seems to me that his choices also didn't lead to increased carbon emissions (renting a Tesla instead of a Suburban, etc).
Just to be clear, are we actually defining an Economy plus seat and renting a Tesla that's about the same size as a Honda CRV as luxury? So...six inches?
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
-
It doesn't matter because they were business expenses and not part of his personal spending, so probably stilling living way below $250k $25k per year. 😂🤣😂🤣
Yes, his budget is basically that of a typical middle class American. The sum of his imputed rent, self insurance, the expenditures put under business, and $25k of discretionary is easily north of $50k/year. For one guy with half of a kiddo, that's not exactly living on rice and beans. His rhetoric has been rice and beans, but the numbers he's disclosed have been a pretty middle America lifestyle.
I appreciate you saying this, because his budget numbers have always smelled of hyperbole to me.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
-
I think there’s a significant difference between buying premium class (or business class) tickets when you’re living paycheck to paycheck vs. buying those things when you’ve got >$4MM net worth. The first makes it unlikely you’ll ever get to >$1MM net worth and the latter is likely to be unaffected by such expenditures, provided you’re spending within a reasonable withdrawal rate figure.
The saying of living like no one else so you can live like no one else later really is applicable.
-
I just booked comfort+ tickets for my next work flight.
I guess work is paying, and my boss suggested it, but.... am I gonna get kicked out of the forum?
-
If it's more than like an hour flight I always fly first class these days. It's miserable to be packed in with the heathen in the back of the plane. Not to mention downright painful on my joints as a taller, more athletic person.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
-
I just booked comfort+ tickets for my next work flight.
I guess work is paying, and my boss suggested it, but.... am I gonna get kicked out of the forum?
That was my point when I said I’m not retired, I make all sorts of un Mustachian choices when work is paying! Maybe that’s the case for MMM too
-
If it's more than like an hour flight I always fly first class these days. It's miserable to be packed in with the heathen in the back of the plane. Not to mention downright painful on my joints as a taller, more athletic person.
I know, almost 95% sure, that I will have to fly to Asia some time in the next year. I will do absolutely everything I can to not fly coach. It's an 11.5 hour flight. Slightly longer than the god-awful flight I took to Europe a few years ago.
It will be a work trip, and I'm 90% sure they won't pay for anything more than coach. I don't sleep on planes, I don't have any "status" because I don't like travel enough to travel hack.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
Hmmm, I used to rent cars for road trips. Since newer cars tended to have better gas mileage, they usually paid for themselves in fuel savings alone. I just can't believe the outrage over this. It's not like this is even a business class upgrade, he just paid for a little extra leg room on the flight and chose a vehicle that doesn't burn fossil fuel, which is a total yawner of a non-story, IMO.
Part of Pete's appeal is that what he's preaching is replicatable by virtually anyone. If what he was selling started with, "First you find a free cave to move into..." MMM wouldn't have become the "thing" that it is. Teaching people how to make choices that vastly improve their lives is a significant contribution to society. He is not a saint and he doesn't have to be perfect. If he turned into a Kardashian tomorrow, the world would still be a better place.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
Hmmm, I used to rent cars for road trips. Since newer cars tended to have better gas mileage, they usually paid for themselves in fuel savings alone. I just can't believe the outrage over this. It's not like this is even a business class upgrade, he just paid for a little extra leg room on the flight and chose a vehicle that doesn't burn fossil fuel, which is a total yawner of a non-story, IMO.
Part of Pete's appeal is that what he's preaching is replicatable by virtually anyone. If what he was selling started with, "First you find a free cave to move into..." MMM wouldn't have become the "thing" that it is. Teaching people how to make choices that vastly improve their lives is a significant contribution to society. He is not a saint and he doesn't have to be perfect. If he turned into a Kardashian tomorrow, the world would still be a better place.
I get what you are saying and hopefully my posts don't come across as though I'm outraged or anything, just a bit disappointed that this guy who has claimed for years to be impervious and even downright belligerent toward waste and luxury has finally capitulated. Here he is in his own words in 2012 -
The answer was of course that when it comes to buying additional treats for myself, the extra money is in fact no good at all. And that was a very liberating thing to figure out. I have completely lost the desire for any more of the things money can buy than I already have, which means I have completely lost any form of envy, any sense of deprivation, or any sense of missing out on anything – no matter how many rap videos I watch or over-the-top houses I visit.
Some people would question this assertion. “Sure, Mr. Money Mustache claims to be happy living on $2000 a month, but that’s just because he’s good at fooling himself. He doesn’t even go out to restaurants several times a week! If this guy could see my new Jeep Wrangler Unlimited and cruise the beach strip a few times, I could shake him out of it. I think it takes WAY MORE MONEY to be truly happy.”
But after punching that guy in the face, I’d question his questioning. As one form of proof, I’d offer the fact that I actually do have way more money than the amount required to sustain our lifestyle while never running out, and I’m still perfectly happy not spending it on myself. We actually want to find ways to need even less over time, just because it feels like the right thing to do, and the happier thing to do.
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, I recall a 'I wasted $1000 and hated it' experiment he posted about...
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
Hmmm, I used to rent cars for road trips. Since newer cars tended to have better gas mileage, they usually paid for themselves in fuel savings alone. I just can't believe the outrage over this. It's not like this is even a business class upgrade, he just paid for a little extra leg room on the flight and chose a vehicle that doesn't burn fossil fuel, which is a total yawner of a non-story, IMO.
Part of Pete's appeal is that what he's preaching is replicatable by virtually anyone. If what he was selling started with, "First you find a free cave to move into..." MMM wouldn't have become the "thing" that it is. Teaching people how to make choices that vastly improve their lives is a significant contribution to society. He is not a saint and he doesn't have to be perfect. If he turned into a Kardashian tomorrow, the world would still be a better place.
I get what you are saying and hopefully my posts don't come across as though I'm outraged or anything, just a bit disappointed that this guy who has claimed for years to be impervious and even downright belligerent toward waste and luxury has finally capitulated. Here he is in his own words in 2012 -
The answer was of course that when it comes to buying additional treats for myself, the extra money is in fact no good at all. And that was a very liberating thing to figure out. I have completely lost the desire for any more of the things money can buy than I already have, which means I have completely lost any form of envy, any sense of deprivation, or any sense of missing out on anything – no matter how many rap videos I watch or over-the-top houses I visit.
Some people would question this assertion. “Sure, Mr. Money Mustache claims to be happy living on $2000 a month, but that’s just because he’s good at fooling himself. He doesn’t even go out to restaurants several times a week! If this guy could see my new Jeep Wrangler Unlimited and cruise the beach strip a few times, I could shake him out of it. I think it takes WAY MORE MONEY to be truly happy.”
But after punching that guy in the face, I’d question his questioning. As one form of proof, I’d offer the fact that I actually do have way more money than the amount required to sustain our lifestyle while never running out, and I’m still perfectly happy not spending it on myself. We actually want to find ways to need even less over time, just because it feels like the right thing to do, and the happier thing to do.
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, I recall a 'I wasted $1000 and hated it' experiment he posted about...
I'm fairly certain of two things:
Mr. Money Mustache and Mr. Hyperbole are very good friends. Mr. H was an important partner in creating an interesting persona to convey the message in a compelling way.
When Pete Adeny invented Mr. Money Mustache, he never imagined how successful his efforts would be. He also wrote the words you cited a decade ago, when his life was very different than it is today. It is blatantly unfair to examine every thing he's ever written and expect him to blindly adhere to every single word of it forever. That's not how life works. Too many moving parts.
I see absolutely no reason to be disappointed. He's a human being, not an oracle. He had a fucking brilliant idea which improved thousands of lives and continues to help the planet. That's a damn fine legacy, one that few can hope to achieve. Lots of people are famous, few actually add so much value to so many people's lives. Also noteworthy is he never asked any of us for any money for the lessons he imparts.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
Hmmm, I used to rent cars for road trips. Since newer cars tended to have better gas mileage, they usually paid for themselves in fuel savings alone. I just can't believe the outrage over this. It's not like this is even a business class upgrade, he just paid for a little extra leg room on the flight and chose a vehicle that doesn't burn fossil fuel, which is a total yawner of a non-story, IMO.
Part of Pete's appeal is that what he's preaching is replicatable by virtually anyone. If what he was selling started with, "First you find a free cave to move into..." MMM wouldn't have become the "thing" that it is. Teaching people how to make choices that vastly improve their lives is a significant contribution to society. He is not a saint and he doesn't have to be perfect. If he turned into a Kardashian tomorrow, the world would still be a better place.
I get what you are saying and hopefully my posts don't come across as though I'm outraged or anything, just a bit disappointed that this guy who has claimed for years to be impervious and even downright belligerent toward waste and luxury has finally capitulated. Here he is in his own words in 2012 -
The answer was of course that when it comes to buying additional treats for myself, the extra money is in fact no good at all. And that was a very liberating thing to figure out. I have completely lost the desire for any more of the things money can buy than I already have, which means I have completely lost any form of envy, any sense of deprivation, or any sense of missing out on anything – no matter how many rap videos I watch or over-the-top houses I visit.
Some people would question this assertion. “Sure, Mr. Money Mustache claims to be happy living on $2000 a month, but that’s just because he’s good at fooling himself. He doesn’t even go out to restaurants several times a week! If this guy could see my new Jeep Wrangler Unlimited and cruise the beach strip a few times, I could shake him out of it. I think it takes WAY MORE MONEY to be truly happy.”
But after punching that guy in the face, I’d question his questioning. As one form of proof, I’d offer the fact that I actually do have way more money than the amount required to sustain our lifestyle while never running out, and I’m still perfectly happy not spending it on myself. We actually want to find ways to need even less over time, just because it feels like the right thing to do, and the happier thing to do.
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, I recall a 'I wasted $1000 and hated it' experiment he posted about...
I'm fairly certain of two things:
Mr. Money Mustache and Mr. Hyperbole are very good friends. Mr. H was an important partner in creating an interesting persona to convey the message in a compelling way.
When Pete Adeny invented Mr. Money Mustache, he never imagined how successful his efforts would be. He also wrote the words you cited a decade ago, when his life was very different than it is today. It is blatantly unfair to examine every thing he's ever written and expect him to blindly adhere to every single word of it forever. That's not how life works. Too many moving parts.
I see absolutely no reason to be disappointed. He's a human being, not an oracle. He had a fucking brilliant idea which improved thousands of lives and continues to help the planet. That's a damn fine legacy, one that few can hope to achieve. Lots of people are famous, few actually add so much value to so many people's lives. Also noteworthy is he never asked any of us for any money for the lessons he imparts.
Not about Pete, but more philosophically, you think that more money means more spending and results in more happiness then?
I still get satisfaction from optimization, whether I'm at 3% SWR or 1% SWR... so I am disappointed at the turn Pete has taken, whether you think I should be or not. I'm not sure if I'll capture my reason as to why I feel this way, but if even the most hardcore of us blogs about spending money on luxuries 'just because', the environment ultimately suffers the negative externalities. That is the real cost. I can only vote with my own money I spend, but it sucks when someone like Pete who seems to feel the same way about luxuries posts that they have had a hard discussion with themselves and decided to 'let themselves go'. But like I said, I still fly coach and carpool when I can (and I do believe he could carpool during his family visit, rather than drive himself around in a Tesla).
That last bit I bolded just sounds defensive. Is he really helping the planet if the message is, "get rich then spend more because luxuries do, in fact, increase happiness"? Just because he never asked for money I should be OK with him capitulating on his own message?
The hyperbole point I get, but I still felt that, under the hyperbole, was a bedrock message that luxuries were for consumer suckers, full stop.
-
The hyperbole point I get, but I still felt that, under the hyperbole, was a bedrock message that luxuries were for consumer suckers, full stop.
But are all luxuries bad for the environment? Is a Tesla worse than a non-electric car?
What about spending more buying "luxury" locally grown produce or free range meat or dairy or eggs? Or are those not luxuries?
"Optimization" doesn't necessarily mean "least amount of money possible", does it? Also, even flying coach is bad for the environment.
-
I just flew regular economy and am carpooling and I don’t feel deprived, so yeah a bit luxurious and wasteful for someone who espoused stoicism. I’m not even retired like he is!
Hmmm, wonder how your net worths compare?
Probably not too different, I’m in the ‘and beyond’ net worth group…. But thanks for letting me gloat a bit. I just don’t like to waste money.
Hmmm, I used to rent cars for road trips. Since newer cars tended to have better gas mileage, they usually paid for themselves in fuel savings alone. I just can't believe the outrage over this. It's not like this is even a business class upgrade, he just paid for a little extra leg room on the flight and chose a vehicle that doesn't burn fossil fuel, which is a total yawner of a non-story, IMO.
Part of Pete's appeal is that what he's preaching is replicatable by virtually anyone. If what he was selling started with, "First you find a free cave to move into..." MMM wouldn't have become the "thing" that it is. Teaching people how to make choices that vastly improve their lives is a significant contribution to society. He is not a saint and he doesn't have to be perfect. If he turned into a Kardashian tomorrow, the world would still be a better place.
I get what you are saying and hopefully my posts don't come across as though I'm outraged or anything, just a bit disappointed that this guy who has claimed for years to be impervious and even downright belligerent toward waste and luxury has finally capitulated. Here he is in his own words in 2012 -
The answer was of course that when it comes to buying additional treats for myself, the extra money is in fact no good at all. And that was a very liberating thing to figure out. I have completely lost the desire for any more of the things money can buy than I already have, which means I have completely lost any form of envy, any sense of deprivation, or any sense of missing out on anything – no matter how many rap videos I watch or over-the-top houses I visit.
Some people would question this assertion. “Sure, Mr. Money Mustache claims to be happy living on $2000 a month, but that’s just because he’s good at fooling himself. He doesn’t even go out to restaurants several times a week! If this guy could see my new Jeep Wrangler Unlimited and cruise the beach strip a few times, I could shake him out of it. I think it takes WAY MORE MONEY to be truly happy.”
But after punching that guy in the face, I’d question his questioning. As one form of proof, I’d offer the fact that I actually do have way more money than the amount required to sustain our lifestyle while never running out, and I’m still perfectly happy not spending it on myself. We actually want to find ways to need even less over time, just because it feels like the right thing to do, and the happier thing to do.
I'm sure there are plenty of other examples, I recall a 'I wasted $1000 and hated it' experiment he posted about...
I'm fairly certain of two things:
Mr. Money Mustache and Mr. Hyperbole are very good friends. Mr. H was an important partner in creating an interesting persona to convey the message in a compelling way.
When Pete Adeny invented Mr. Money Mustache, he never imagined how successful his efforts would be. He also wrote the words you cited a decade ago, when his life was very different than it is today. It is blatantly unfair to examine every thing he's ever written and expect him to blindly adhere to every single word of it forever. That's not how life works. Too many moving parts.
I see absolutely no reason to be disappointed. He's a human being, not an oracle. He had a fucking brilliant idea which improved thousands of lives and continues to help the planet. That's a damn fine legacy, one that few can hope to achieve. Lots of people are famous, few actually add so much value to so many people's lives. Also noteworthy is he never asked any of us for any money for the lessons he imparts.
Thank you, Dicey. Brilliantly said.
-
The hyperbole point I get, but I still felt that, under the hyperbole, was a bedrock message that luxuries were for consumer suckers, full stop.
I don't think they were-- he drank beer and smoked weed, right? Luxuries were fine, unless you owed somebody money (especially if you owed MMM money)-- then you shouldn't be drinking any beer!
I think feeling that you needed the luxuries and absolutely could not do without them was more his schtick. If you felt you HAD to have a big clown car and were sacrificing your future financial security to pay for it, then you were a consumer sucker.
I always assumed that was why he didn't normally publish his year-to-year budget (apart from when it was an exceptionally low $24,000)- because he was probably buying whatever he felt like by the time he started writing the blog.
Another example would be, when the former Mrs. MMM was spending on ingredients to make soap. He never mentioned how much she spent in the hobby phase-- only that it eventually became a profitable business. Presumably, they also had spending on leisure hobbies that didn't happen to turn into profitable businesses.
I don't personally care how he spends or doesn't spend his money. Obviously, I'm here because I found some useful things in his blog, but I don't personally think the hyperbole really is very helpful; in fact, I think it's counterproductive and usually read it while rolling my eyes-- the idea that "anyone can do this" ignores the fact that he achieved what he did before having a child, had no major health issues, was able to divorce amicably, never experienced job loss, and took on substantial financial risk by not having health insurance that happened to pan out in his case, but could easily be disastrous for anyone less favored by nature or circumstance. I mean, one good car accident and the $400,000 he retired on could be in the wind. Anyone who works in an advisory capacity knows this is the nature of advice; it's rarely universally applicable.
-
Life is always a balance between competing goals and priorities and even philosophies.
On the one hand, I very clearly recall his discussion of Stoicism, because it is something I internalized and think about. I remember his example of being on an airplane without food and debating whether to overpay for airport food or suck it up, and he chose to suck it up not just because of the money, but as an intentional choice to remind himself that he didn't actually need crappy airport food. Stoicism involves intentionally choosing discomfort, because surviving that discomfort makes you stronger and healthier. It can mean going without, like MMM did in his example, or actively choosing something that is very uncomfortable, like going to the gym and pushing yourself, or forcing yourself to take a risk and learn something new and hard. I think we all need to push ourselves to the discomfort level sometimes, because that's the only way to learn and grow; if we don't, it's easy to become stagnant and flaccid and mentally rigid.
And yet none of us actually wants to do full-bore Stoicism all the time. We all have our luxuries we like (like, you know, indoor plumbing and electricity). We need enough hardship and challenge to continue to grow and strengthen our minds, but we also sometimes just need to flop in the recliner and read a book (or is that just me projecting?). The question is just how far you push the lever. For most of our modern society, we default to all-luxury, all the time; indeed, commercialism and hedonic adaptation often make us feel that we are behind in our luxury-seeking, and that this is a flaw that we must rectify immediately by throwing money at it. We need a push towards intentional discomfort. And the MMM character was designed to do that, often with a degree of hyperbole or showmanship to make the point.
But the flip side of the MMM personality is that when we do seek to satisfy that "luxury" part of the brain, we should do it in a way that is both effective and efficient. The first part of that is being aware of how much luxury we already have. And then when we do spend money, we need to do it right. Throwing it away on fancy "stuff" isn't effective once you've reached a basic level of security and comfort, because that "happiness" wears off after a while, and we need another hit of name-brand crack to keep the high going. And when we do find something that we want to buy or do, we can often reach the same result for less money if we focus on the need we're trying to satisfy instead of the brand-name bragging and keeping-up-with-Joneses.
For me, the "smoother/more comfortable travel experience" upgrade is a worthwhile luxury. At this point, I have more money than time, and I am a massive bitch when I don't get sleep (I once ruined half of a European vacation because I lost the ability to sleep on a plane and was a total bitch for the first three days while my body caught up). So for me, if I have a week planned in Europe, and I'm already devoting my valuable money and even-more-valuable time to that week, then I'm going to choose to spend more on business-class seats so that I can actually enjoy all of the time I have once I land. [And yes, it is getting worse as I get older; both my inability to sleep in an economy-class seat and my inability to recover from the lack of sleep worsened dramatically around 50. Luckily, my finances had also improved dramatically by that time.]
Now, I'm not Pete; I've never claimed to be a Mustachian purist, so I doubt anyone would call me a hypocrite for making that choice (lazy and entitled, yes, and you'll get no argument from me). But does paying for extra legroom make Pete a hypocrite? Well, remember, it's all in the balancing between the stoicism and the luxury. I think Pete has the stoicism side of things fairly well under control; he leads a disciplined life and pushes himself regularly. So adding a bit more temporary luxury into the mix doesn't necessary swing the meter too far to the "you're getting soft" side. But is he doing luxury "right" -- is it effective and efficient? Well, he's not throwing money at name brands, where the happy will fade almost instantly, and I imagine he'll enjoy the rest of the travel more if he's not cramped and uncomfortable on the flight. So it's probably effective. And it's a pretty cost-efficient way to achieve that goal, as extra legroom and direct flights cost a hell of a lot less than first class, and the $1K is a minuscule portion of his 'stache.
IOW, it doesn't fit with the cartoon MMM stoicism lessons, no. But that's because MMM isn't all about stoicism -- it's about finding the right mix of stoicism + "good" luxury that makes for a happy life.
-
I reject the notion of following MMM as though he is a Deity-like figure, where one must follow his 14 points or risk eternal damnation. This is a guy who is sharing a system that worked for him, and encouraging people to find a way towards financial freedom. And he is sharing his first-hand journey - good and bad, with the world online. It is very brave to be that personal where you are sharing your net worth, the details of your marriage, and other things to that affect.
If he wants a nice plane ticket, especially in this market, let him buy it. Maybe you would make the same choice, maybe you should make another choice.
I personally have no issue with the premium air travel, other than perhaps the climate impact. But, I have spent many a time in a premium cabin, and generally have found it to be well worth it. But sometimes it isn’t worth it, or sometimes my desire to be frugal carries the day.
Our world is becoming too binary. It worries me.
-
I'm not going to push it any further, but after reading more comments, I guess I end up with what I have heard on this forum in one form or another lately-
1. I miss the old MMM. The one from a decade ago. He had me questioning my defaults and ridiculing the status quo. I miss that. He's just not the same guy anymore in his relatively few posts. I wish he'd have just preserved his legacy, but it's his blog and he can post whatever he likes.
2. We are getting more spendy on this site in general, compared to how it was a decade ago. I'm as guilty as anyone. People could pick me to pieces on not walking my talk on environmentalism if they wanted to read my journal and take me to task, but I'm also not blogging or trying to influence others (other than when it comes to alcohol, I'm very opinionated when it comes to that).
Thanks for considering my posts and it has been interesting reading the different replies! I especially liked what Laura33 had to say, and haven't heard from her in a while so that was a nice treat!
-
[Snip]
I especially liked what Laura33 had to say, and haven't heard from her in a while so that was a nice treat!
Hear, hear!
-
If it's more than like an hour flight I always fly first class these days. It's miserable to be packed in with the heathen in the back of the plane. Not to mention downright painful on my joints as a taller, more athletic person.
I know, almost 95% sure, that I will have to fly to Asia some time in the next year. I will do absolutely everything I can to not fly coach. It's an 11.5 hour flight. Slightly longer than the god-awful flight I took to Europe a few years ago.
It will be a work trip, and I'm 90% sure they won't pay for anything more than coach. I don't sleep on planes, I don't have any "status" because I don't like travel enough to travel hack.
My wife and also companies I work for know if they want me to go anywhere they're paying for at least business class. Non-negotiable. If it's a puddle jump a state or two over then ok, but otherwise I want reclining seats. And I don't want to have to stress whether there'll be room for my carry on by the time they call my boarding group.
-
The hyperbole point I get, but I still felt that, under the hyperbole, was a bedrock message that luxuries were for consumer suckers, full stop.
I don't think they were-- he drank beer and smoked weed, right? Luxuries were fine, unless you owed somebody money (especially if you owed MMM money)-- then you shouldn't be drinking any beer!
I think feeling that you needed the luxuries and absolutely could not do without them was more his schtick. If you felt you HAD to have a big clown car and were sacrificing your future financial security to pay for it, then you were a consumer sucker.
I always assumed that was why he didn't normally publish his year-to-year budget (apart from when it was an exceptionally low $24,000)- because he was probably buying whatever he felt like by the time he started writing the blog.
Another example would be, when the former Mrs. MMM was spending on ingredients to make soap. He never mentioned how much she spent in the hobby phase-- only that it eventually became a profitable business. Presumably, they also had spending on leisure hobbies that didn't happen to turn into profitable businesses.
I don't personally care how he spends or doesn't spend his money. Obviously, I'm here because I found some useful things in his blog, but I don't personally think the hyperbole really is very helpful; in fact, I think it's counterproductive and usually read it while rolling my eyes-- the idea that "anyone can do this" ignores the fact that he achieved what he did before having a child, had no major health issues, was able to divorce amicably, never experienced job loss, and took on substantial financial risk by not having health insurance that happened to pan out in his case, but could easily be disastrous for anyone less favored by nature or circumstance. I mean, one good car accident and the $400,000 he retired on could be in the wind. Anyone who works in an advisory capacity knows this is the nature of advice; it's rarely universally applicable.
Frankly the health care thing really led me.to view MMM as a pompous not-very-smart person. I give him credit for dropping the scales from my eyes that it was possible to retire early though I sort of discovered that on my own several years early. I don't hate the guy or anything but there's not much in my life I'd want to model after him anymore.
-
Frankly the health care thing really led me.to view MMM as a pompous not-very-smart person. I give him credit for dropping the scales from my eyes that it was possible to retire early though I sort of discovered that on my own several years early. I don't hate the guy or anything but there's not much in my life I'd want to model after him anymore.
Well, even very smart people sometimes make dumb moves. I'm sure all of us have our areas of hubris. The nature of having a personal blog is that a lot of people will be responding to what you do, for good or ill.
Being a bit bombastic when you're trying to counteract a strong cultural narrative (like unchecked status consumerism) is probably a psychological necessity to some degree. There's a lot of strong messaging floating around that people who don't drive brand-new Teslas and buy giant McMansions are worse people; I like to think part of the whole superiority-complex thing that the MMM persona was using was designed to push back on that.
But, all told, personally, I like the more nuanced MMM.
-
It's not like he chartered a plane or is flying first class, or even business class. Some of these comments are crazy harsh.
If you read his consumer sukka article and compare it to this I don’t find any contradiction. He’s demonstrating that even as a wealthy person he still is making these calculations constantly and must evaluate them internally. It’s hilarious that anybody commenting in this thread pretends they would regularly spend several hours getting to the airport with their teenage son on the way to an international flight *if they had an affordable alternative.*
However if you want an extreme environmentally focused forum you should go to Early Retirement Extreme. What you’ll find there is a bias towards people who tend to live off grid/well outside norms. As a result, the influence is smaller.
-
For me, the "smoother/more comfortable travel experience" upgrade is a worthwhile luxury. At this point, I have more money than time, and I am a massive bitch when I don't get sleep (I once ruined half of a European vacation because I lost the ability to sleep on a plane and was a total bitch for the first three days while my body caught up). So for me, if I have a week planned in Europe, and I'm already devoting my valuable money and even-more-valuable time to that week, then I'm going to choose to spend more on business-class seats so that I can actually enjoy all of the time I have once I land. [And yes, it is getting worse as I get older; both my inability to sleep in an economy-class seat and my inability to recover from the lack of sleep worsened dramatically around 50. Luckily, my finances had also improved dramatically by that time.]
Laura's whole post was awesome, but this right here.
I do not sleep on planes. I made the mistake of taking a red-eye this summer and: nope. Same with the trip to Europe several years ago.
For this reason, the 50th birthday trip to Hawaii (that was canceled due to COVID) - I specifically refused a red-eye. I'll pay more for a non red-eye.
Thus, as I think about what "fun" vacations I'd like to take over Christmas - I'm considering Amtrak, and will 100% pay extra for sleeper cars for everyone.
-
Im around 20 years older the you @Mr. Green and some of us "old folks" actually enjoy harder more challenging things and a rougher lifestyle with more difficult adventures then we did when younger.
Love this! I think when you have your kids it’s so exhausting that yes you find yourself grasping for comforts. I’m 52 and I can easily sleep on the floor or a tent without throwing my back out. Yet 20 years ago I regularly threw my back out when I tried to camp and I struggled to find the right cushy air mattress.
I went through various sports injuries over the years and age had nothing to do with it, they were injuries that taught me lessons about how my body works and often took years to recover from. But currently I have mobility/strength/endurance/equanimity that exceeds most people much younger than me.
The only thing different about me at 30 or 40 compared to me now is that my face looked so freaking young back then lol! Oh well!
-
Thus, as I think about what "fun" vacations I'd like to take over Christmas - I'm considering Amtrak, and will 100% pay extra for sleeper cars for everyone.
I so want to do this!!! I got to start watching the Amtrak deals.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Sounds like he's still pretty badass at 45. He's just not as badass as he was at 30. Anyone expecting that is going to be disappointed because it's not reality for basically anyone.
Of course it's a reality for some people - again me and numerous other forum members here. If people do experience lifestyle creep. or a desire for more comfort and time, how much of that is due to having a spouse and kids? Or just middle age lifestyle demands including jobs? There are compromises and changes that usually have to be made to accommodate those things that us single childless FIREd people don't need to make. Much of those "luxuries" are done to make life easier for everyone and doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of badassity or need for greater comfort or luxury as you age. If you were single and childless and FIREd without having to make choices based on spouse's, kids, job, pets, etc.., then it's pretty easy to continue to live the same in your 40s, 50s and beyond as it is in your 20s and 30s. So again, not "everyone".
I am single without kids and selfemployed so I rarely need to accomodate anyone. I take the bus to the airport in the morning but if I come back with a late flight that would result in me having to wait for a bus for an hour I rather pay for a taxi home. I probably would have waited for the bus in my 20is. I also take the fast airportrain that cost three times the bus ticket when I get to the capital. I would probably not have done that in my 20ies.
I backpacked 6 months in Asia before the pandemic. I bought 1 st class tickets on most of the trains. I I stayed some nights in hostels with crappy beds. I laughed internally when I listened to 20 something kids that thought the hostel was great because they had free drinks. I upgraded myself next night to a Nice bed and breakfast because I had enough of crappy places. Some meals I ate for a dollar and others for 30 dollars. After a string of crappy hostels and a Airbnb, I spent a couple nights in a five star resort because I got cranky. I didn’t take the dollar ride with the guy on the motorcycel but instead the Uber for 2 dollars. I would have been miserable if I would have made the trip as when I was in my 20ies. I kept my budget and found a balance between cost and comfort.
Oh, and I bought a car, even though it would have been cheaper to get rides from others, taking the bus and train as well as renting, because I found it easier to own a car then to be dependent on others and deal with the logistics. During the pandemic I rented a car and drove across the country to my parents. The cost for rental, hotels and gas was probably 1600 USD instead of 50 USD for flying with bonuspoints. Talks about overpaying for the discomfort of 4 days of driving instead of a 4 hour flight and pickup at the airport but I could do it because I wanted to minimize the risk of getting covid.
I don’t follow mmm as a rule book but I rather choose to take the parts that works for me and adapt. I spend on what is important for me and minimise the expenses that are not. I pay ridiculous prices for local food because I want to support local production but I am not going to spend more the necessary on my internetconnection.
-
@spartana you are likely the exception not the rule, which is awesome. Sure someone out there is more hardcore in their 40s and 50s than their 20s. I'm sure trying to do it. If you have no physical ailments at 50 that prevent you from going harder than in your 20s that is great! I still think its foolish for people to expect the the same tone from someone who is 15 years older. Of every single person I've ever known, I can think of three who were more badass in their 40s and beyond than their 20s. I would say that fits my definition of basically anyone.
-
I know people who have done an amazing amount of stuff in their 70s and 80s, be it creative, adventure, business (still working part time!). Recently I was helping some old folks out with hard labor on their rural property for a few days and realized just how much they do every day as compared to our household. Even socially, they have so many more commitments — I marvel at how easily they build community wherever they go.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Sounds like he's still pretty badass at 45. He's just not as badass as he was at 30. Anyone expecting that is going to be disappointed because it's not reality for basically anyone.
Of course it's a reality for some people - again me and numerous other forum members here. If people do experience lifestyle creep. or a desire for more comfort and time, how much of that is due to having a spouse and kids? Or just middle age lifestyle demands including jobs? There are compromises and changes that usually have to be made to accommodate those things that us single childless FIREd people don't need to make. Much of those "luxuries" are done to make life easier for everyone and doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of badassity or need for greater comfort or luxury as you age. If you were single and childless and FIREd without having to make choices based on spouse's, kids, job, pets, etc.., then it's pretty easy to continue to live the same in your 40s, 50s and beyond as it is in your 20s and 30s. So again, not "everyone".
I am single without kids and selfemployed so I rarely need to accomodate anyone. I take the bus to the airport in the morning but if I come back with a late flight that would result in me having to wait for a bus for an hour I rather pay for a taxi home. I probably would have waited for the bus in my 20is. I also take the fast airportrain that cost three times the bus ticket when I get to the capital. I would probably not have done that in my 20ies.
I backpacked 6 months in Asia before the pandemic. I bought 1 st class tickets on most of the trains. I I stayed some nights in hostels with crappy beds. I laughed internally when I listened to 20 something kids that thought the hostel was great because they had free drinks. I upgraded myself next night to a Nice bed and breakfast because I had enough of crappy places. Some meals I ate for a dollar and others for 30 dollars. After a string of crappy hostels and a Airbnb, I spent a couple nights in a five star resort because I got cranky. I didn’t take the dollar ride with the guy on the motorcycel but instead the Uber for 2 dollars. I would have been miserable if I would have made the trip as when I was in my 20ies. I kept my budget and found a balance between cost and comfort.
Oh, and I bought a car, even though it would have been cheaper to get rides from others, taking the bus and train as well as renting, because I found it easier to own a car then to be dependent on others and deal with the logistics. During the pandemic I rented a car and drove across the country to my parents. The cost for rental, hotels and gas was probably 1600 USD instead of 50 USD for flying with bonuspoints. Talks about overpaying for the discomfort of 4 days of driving instead of a 4 hour flight and pickup at the airport but I could do it because I wanted to minimize the risk of getting covid.
I don’t follow mmm as a rule book but I rather choose to take the parts that works for me and adapt. I spend on what is important for me and minimise the expenses that are not. I pay ridiculous prices for local food because I want to support local production but I am not going to spend more the necessary on my internetconnection.
Sure lots of people DO upgrade their lifestyle to a greater comfort levels once they have money - which also coincides with getting older usually. I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case.
However I very strongly disagree with @Mr. Green saying "everyone" does that. In my personal experience that's not the case. I know tons of people who haven't really upgraded their lifestyle because of age or increased income as they are already living the lifestyle they want. Lots of journals on just this forum (some by people in their 40s, 50s and 60s @Mr. Green has met or will meet soon) who continue to do the same things they did in their 20s and 30s despite the discomforts (or who relish in the discomforts) and do even more because they are FIREed and have the time to do the 100 mile solo backpack. Or the 500 mile one. Who would rather stay at a hostel or travel via local bus rather the a fancy hotel and rental car to experience a greater range of diversity, cultures, and challenges. Sure they might be bit creaky but that doesn't mean they want a softer life. So again, not everyone.
I now plan to FIRE in my early 40s and spend at least a decade on physically challenging adventures while my body's capable.
But I've always had doubts whether I'd be happy FIREing on a middle income. It used to be a core tenet of MMM that you forgo luxuries because the happiness they create is fleeting. And while I practice some frugality and get the stoic philosophy, I've never been really satisfied doing it.
This also comes at a particularly bad time because a classic car that I've been lusting after for over 20 years came to auction a month ago and I'm still mourning its loss.
So this thread makes me doubt whether a middle income FIRE spend is sustainable for me long term. While I think I'll keep my nose to the grindstone for now (I actually can't dip below a 33% savings rate because I setup a pension that requires annual funding for a few more years), it looks like my planned FIRE date might have to become a coastFIRE date.
Ironically, for a blog post that's discouraging OMY, it's causing me to do the opposite. Eventually I'll still be a "new Mustachian," which I guess is just a VHNWI who doesn't work and cares about the environment. It's just a bummer to have my RE date continue to slip right because I really don't like corporate life.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Sounds like he's still pretty badass at 45. He's just not as badass as he was at 30. Anyone expecting that is going to be disappointed because it's not reality for basically anyone.
Of course it's a reality for some people - again me and numerous other forum members here. If people do experience lifestyle creep. or a desire for more comfort and time, how much of that is due to having a spouse and kids? Or just middle age lifestyle demands including jobs? There are compromises and changes that usually have to be made to accommodate those things that us single childless FIREd people don't need to make. Much of those "luxuries" are done to make life easier for everyone and doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of badassity or need for greater comfort or luxury as you age. If you were single and childless and FIREd without having to make choices based on spouse's, kids, job, pets, etc.., then it's pretty easy to continue to live the same in your 40s, 50s and beyond as it is in your 20s and 30s. So again, not "everyone".
I am single without kids and selfemployed so I rarely need to accomodate anyone. I take the bus to the airport in the morning but if I come back with a late flight that would result in me having to wait for a bus for an hour I rather pay for a taxi home. I probably would have waited for the bus in my 20is. I also take the fast airportrain that cost three times the bus ticket when I get to the capital. I would probably not have done that in my 20ies.
I backpacked 6 months in Asia before the pandemic. I bought 1 st class tickets on most of the trains. I I stayed some nights in hostels with crappy beds. I laughed internally when I listened to 20 something kids that thought the hostel was great because they had free drinks. I upgraded myself next night to a Nice bed and breakfast because I had enough of crappy places. Some meals I ate for a dollar and others for 30 dollars. After a string of crappy hostels and a Airbnb, I spent a couple nights in a five star resort because I got cranky. I didn’t take the dollar ride with the guy on the motorcycel but instead the Uber for 2 dollars. I would have been miserable if I would have made the trip as when I was in my 20ies. I kept my budget and found a balance between cost and comfort.
Oh, and I bought a car, even though it would have been cheaper to get rides from others, taking the bus and train as well as renting, because I found it easier to own a car then to be dependent on others and deal with the logistics. During the pandemic I rented a car and drove across the country to my parents. The cost for rental, hotels and gas was probably 1600 USD instead of 50 USD for flying with bonuspoints. Talks about overpaying for the discomfort of 4 days of driving instead of a 4 hour flight and pickup at the airport but I could do it because I wanted to minimize the risk of getting covid.
I don’t follow mmm as a rule book but I rather choose to take the parts that works for me and adapt. I spend on what is important for me and minimise the expenses that are not. I pay ridiculous prices for local food because I want to support local production but I am not going to spend more the necessary on my internetconnection.
Sure lots of people DO upgrade their lifestyle to a greater comfort levels once they have money - which also coincides with getting older usually. I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case.
However I very strongly disagree with @Mr. Green saying "everyone" does that. In my personal experience that's not the case. I know tons of people who haven't really upgraded their lifestyle because of age or increased income as they are already living the lifestyle they want. Lots of journals on just this forum (some by people in their 40s, 50s and 60s @Mr. Green has met or will meet soon) who continue to do the same things they did in their 20s and 30s despite the discomforts (or who relish in the discomforts) and do even more because they are FIREed and have the time to do the 100 mile solo backpack. Or the 500 mile one. Who would rather stay at a hostel or travel via local bus rather the a fancy hotel and rental car to experience a greater range of diversity, cultures, and challenges. Sure they might be bit creaky but that doesn't mean they want a softer life. So again, not everyone.
I think the difference is in what we see as a lifestyle upgrade. If you like hiking, why would you stop doing it when you are older if you don’t need to due to health reasons?. Most of the people I know might upgrade their equipment in that case. I do triathlons were the sky is the limits for costs. Most of the people that continue doing long distance triathlons are not looking for a softer lifestyle. Those that don’t have the mental stamina leave it.
Personally, I don’t see rental cars as an upgrade when touristing. It is much easier with public transport at least outside of US but I prefer decent hotels in central locations.
-
I read the article. He has a point. I see many people on FI forums who have way over what they could possibly spend, and they flat out ignore Social Security. They end up wasting years of life on OMYs for no reason at all. I read about people who "need" $150K in retirement spending which to me is absolutely an absurd amount of money. That could easily be cut WAY down without much effort. I get it, planning for worst case, but planning that way has a cost, your most precious commodity, time.
He is using the extravagant spending to illustrate the point that you are probably really safe .
-
We are impatient and can park for free three miles from the airport. We hoof it. It all started on a busy evening when it was going to be an hour wait and $80 to take a Lyft, but we decided it isn't so bad and now we walk as a matter of course.
But the money we spend on the other end has certainly gone up!
-
What I meant and how it's being interpreted are not matching up. I'm not the clearest writer at times. I think there is a difference between things people "upgrade" because they've become older and their bodies are not as resilient as they once were, and true lifestyle inflation. Could I have made my 65 year old mother fly coach across the country with me for my (probably once in a lifetime) hip surgery? Sure! Would it have been very uncomfortable for her? Significantly more so than for me, who is almost 30 years younger. So we flew first class.
I wasn't thinking of things that people choose to upgrade so much as they feel compelled to because the alternative just isn't tolerable anymore. Could be as simple as a thicker shirt on that long-distance hike or more leg room on a cross country flight. I suppose frequency comes into play as well.
Perhaps I was more unassuming than others while reading his post. He could be flying first class for the hell of it and it's pure lifestyle inflation. I just thought of the aging aspect and think it's a real consideration people should have, one that isn't lifestyle inflation the way we think of it, and that's where my mind went.
There are clearly some folks here this has not been an issue for, but I still believe this will be something the vast majority of MMM readers encounter. So his post came across to me as more of a natural aging of a persona, vs. the perpetually popping wheelies on his bike in the snow, early-30s MMM I tend to think of. And I think that's a good thing overall.
-
^^^ I totally agree that the aging aspect, as well as the lifestyle aspects, should be a factor when deciding when to FIRE and on how much. Even if you are still popping wheelies in the snow at 60 you might want a fancier bike ;-). Choosing to work longer because you may want more luxuries or more comforts, or deciding to quit earlier and forego those things (currently and in the future) in lieu of greater freedom while younger, is going to be a very individual thing for each person. And I think it's important that you brought that up as a lot of people probably don't think about that.
My beef is the "everyone" comment. I just don't believe that. I don't even believe it's the majority. I've known so many older people who just don't fit into that so I never assume that, barring disability, injury or illness, the average healthy 50 or 60 or older persons going to have issues. I LOLed at your example of you believing your mom would be uncomfortable flying coach class as my mom was flying long distance solo in her late 70s to travel for a few months a year to places like China, Russia, New Zealand, the Middle East, South America, etc.. Long long flights, as well as long distance overland travel, walking etc. with no more discomfort then the average person would have. So I think maybe your mom would have been fine. I can go on with a long list of old people I know or are related to who are doing even more extreme things.
So it's not always the case that you need to work longer and save more to buy greater comfort in your old age. If MMM hadn't had his blog income and just lived off his original FIRE stash I'm pretty sure he would be happily flying coach (and popping wheelies ;-)) well into his old age with little discomforts. I'm sort of living the life original recipe OG MMM would likely have if he wasn't a rich blogger. Just a middle aged (old???) person living on a modest amount of stash doing the same stuff they did when first FIREd and no desire or need to change anything. Especially not go back to work longer so I can afford to buy avocado toast in the future ;-). Noooooo...
Spatana, this is [mostly] a great post! May I please point out that he is still flying coach? All he did was pay for little extra legroom, which is in the front of the COACH section. Geez, it's not even business class! For that matter, what he chose to pay extra for is merely the legroom that all coach passengers used to enjoy before the airlines squeezed in more seats.
-
-snip-
For that matter, what he chose to pay extra for is merely the legroom that all coach passengers used to enjoy before the airlines squeezed in more seats.
Hopping up on my high horse real quick... Like shrinkflation, consumers should not reward companies by paying the same to get less!! Or, in this case, pay more just to get what you used to get... I vote with my wallet.
-
-snip-
For that matter, what he chose to pay extra for is merely the legroom that all coach passengers used to enjoy before the airlines squeezed in more seats.
Hopping up on my high horse real quick... Like shrinkflation, consumers should not reward companies by paying the same to get less!! Or, in this case, pay more just to get what you used to get... I vote with my wallet.
Yeah, I'm voting with my wallet, too. Pretty sure no one's listening, lol.
-
-snip-
For that matter, what he chose to pay extra for is merely the legroom that all coach passengers used to enjoy before the airlines squeezed in more seats.
Hopping up on my high horse real quick... Like shrinkflation, consumers should not reward companies by paying the same to get less!! Or, in this case, pay more just to get what you used to get... I vote with my wallet.
Yeah, I'm voting with my wallet, too. Pretty sure no one's listening, lol.
We can but hope, if enough consumers do Mustachian things like buying high mpg (or high mpg equivalent) cars, biking, skipping drive throughs, etc... I just have to believe that contributing to the solution is better than the alternative! Even better that it gets you to FI sooner and makes you more badass in your old age so you can enjoy that FI longer!
-
On some level, consumers are starting to fight back, by buying less.
The problem is, sometimes, like today, you find out you need a new A/C coil, and you are stuck. You really do “need” it where I live. The fact that prices have gone way up, that’s what you have to do.
-
Some of your points in support of his epilogue decision echo the quotes of the "critics" he was trying to address in this article:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/ (https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/22/what-is-hedonic-adaptation-and-how-can-it-turn-you-into-a-sukka/)
This 2011 piece and the epilogue from yesterday seem at odds.
Not really. One is meant for people who are pre-FIRE. If you buy the expensive vacation, it means you need to spend more time in the desk at the job you don't like.
The other post is for those on the other side. After someone quits and no longer has to go back to their desk job that they don't like, the cost doesn't matter unless the cost is so expensive that it might make you go back to your desk job. Both preach freedom, but from different angles.
-
No one cares (much) if the average person experiences lifestyle inflation.
But when someone who made a blog with a central theme of being badass and not having lifestyle inflation does, it's a bit more hypocritical.
Sounds like he's still pretty badass at 45. He's just not as badass as he was at 30. Anyone expecting that is going to be disappointed because it's not reality for basically anyone.
Of course it's a reality for some people - again me and numerous other forum members here. If people do experience lifestyle creep. or a desire for more comfort and time, how much of that is due to having a spouse and kids? Or just middle age lifestyle demands including jobs? There are compromises and changes that usually have to be made to accommodate those things that us single childless FIREd people don't need to make. Much of those "luxuries" are done to make life easier for everyone and doesn't necessarily reflect a lack of badassity or need for greater comfort or luxury as you age. If you were single and childless and FIREd without having to make choices based on spouse's, kids, job, pets, etc.., then it's pretty easy to continue to live the same in your 40s, 50s and beyond as it is in your 20s and 30s. So again, not "everyone".
I am single without kids and selfemployed so I rarely need to accomodate anyone. I take the bus to the airport in the morning but if I come back with a late flight that would result in me having to wait for a bus for an hour I rather pay for a taxi home. I probably would have waited for the bus in my 20is. I also take the fast airportrain that cost three times the bus ticket when I get to the capital. I would probably not have done that in my 20ies.
I backpacked 6 months in Asia before the pandemic. I bought 1 st class tickets on most of the trains. I I stayed some nights in hostels with crappy beds. I laughed internally when I listened to 20 something kids that thought the hostel was great because they had free drinks. I upgraded myself next night to a Nice bed and breakfast because I had enough of crappy places. Some meals I ate for a dollar and others for 30 dollars. After a string of crappy hostels and a Airbnb, I spent a couple nights in a five star resort because I got cranky. I didn’t take the dollar ride with the guy on the motorcycel but instead the Uber for 2 dollars. I would have been miserable if I would have made the trip as when I was in my 20ies. I kept my budget and found a balance between cost and comfort.
Oh, and I bought a car, even though it would have been cheaper to get rides from others, taking the bus and train as well as renting, because I found it easier to own a car then to be dependent on others and deal with the logistics. During the pandemic I rented a car and drove across the country to my parents. The cost for rental, hotels and gas was probably 1600 USD instead of 50 USD for flying with bonuspoints. Talks about overpaying for the discomfort of 4 days of driving instead of a 4 hour flight and pickup at the airport but I could do it because I wanted to minimize the risk of getting covid.
I don’t follow mmm as a rule book but I rather choose to take the parts that works for me and adapt. I spend on what is important for me and minimise the expenses that are not. I pay ridiculous prices for local food because I want to support local production but I am not going to spend more the necessary on my internetconnection.
Sure lots of people DO upgrade their lifestyle to a greater comfort levels once they have money - which also coincides with getting older usually. I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case.
However I very strongly disagree with @Mr. Green saying "everyone" does that. In my personal experience that's not the case. I know tons of people who haven't really upgraded their lifestyle because of age or increased income as they are already living the lifestyle they want. Lots of journals on just this forum (some by people in their 40s, 50s and 60s @Mr. Green has met or will meet soon) who continue to do the same things they did in their 20s and 30s despite the discomforts (or who relish in the discomforts) and do even more because they are FIREed and have the time to do the 100 mile solo backpack. Or the 500 mile one. Who would rather stay at a hostel or travel via local bus rather the a fancy hotel and rental car to experience a greater range of diversity, cultures, and challenges. Sure they might be bit creaky but that doesn't mean they want a softer life. So again, not everyone.
I think the difference is in what we see as a lifestyle upgrade. If you like hiking, why would you stop doing it when you are older if you don’t need to due to health reasons?. Most of the people I know might upgrade their equipment in that case. I do triathlons were the sky is the limits for costs. Most of the people that continue doing long distance triathlons are not looking for a softer lifestyle. Those that don’t have the mental stamina leave it.
Personally, I don’t see rental cars as an upgrade when touristing. It is much easier with public transport at least outside of US but I prefer decent hotels in central locations.
I agree. But how many people in their 20s and 30s would upgrade their lifestyle if they had the money to do it? Lots of big consumer debt in the younger (non-mustachian) crowd to have certain luxury things and a more upscale lifestyle. So more likely a function of having money rather then seeking greater comfort due to aging. Although I'm sure for many people they ARE upgrading for comfort reasons. Just, you know, not "everyone" ;-).
I DO upgrade some things myself - I mean I'm not exactly living in a cave - but they aren't really any different then what I did when I was younger. Some, like staying at motels, eating in restaurants, fancier vacations, fancy clothes, cars, bigger house, etc, I really don't do at all now because I just don't like them. Although I do like short term monthly apt or airbnb as an alternative when travelling and camping isn't an option. And I do get monthly car rentals often for long road trips because I have a dog and it makes it easier on her then riding on my bike or backpack (she's not a mustashian at all ;-)). I think there are lots of people here like me that choose to downgrade rather then upgrade. Or when they do upgrade, like MMM, its generally to make things less of a hassle (like paying extra for a non-stop flight - something most people would likely do if they have the money) and not huge lifestyle changes.
I did upgrade after university but after some years I downgraded again in certain non important areas. I still buy quality clothes that last. There is nothing as annoying to needing to replace things after a short period but I buy less. I realised today that my goretex jacket that have reached end of life have to more then 10 years old so my spendypants years was not totally wasted. Cost per use is pretty low after all these years even if it was expensive to buy. I have never been a big fan of takeout so I eat in restaurants when I travel or with friends. I also rather pay for good food instead of crappy fast food. I think americans have a different mindset when it comes to houses then in the nordics. You don’t buy starter homes and then upgrade. You rather buy an apartments when you are younger and if you want to have a house you by it more for life then for a couple of years.
-
^^^The concept of a starter home has always been weird to me. It does seem like it's an american concept and my parents (German Mom and first generation Swedish-American Dad) just bought one small house and never upgraded. I've downgraded myself going smaller once I didn't have pets - or not as many pets - and was FIREd and not working. But I can see that for many people having a bunch of kids or wanting a better location would mean they'd upgrade from a smaller house. American move a lot and fairly long distance just within their own country too so that may factor in to the constant upgrading.
Another part is the Pre 1997 tax laws that only allowed for paying no capital gains on a home so long as you bought a more expensive home. I still had to explain that to my Mom in 2017 when I was buying my last house. The last home they bought was in 1982. She thought I was giving the government tax money by buying a cheaper and smaller home. (I was under the 250k gain so nope).
-
^^^The concept of a starter home has always been weird to me. It does seem like it's an american concept and my parents (German Mom and first generation Swedish-American Dad) just bought one small house and never upgraded. I've downgraded myself going smaller once I didn't have pets - or not as many pets - and was FIREd and not working. But I can see that for many people having a bunch of kids or wanting a better location would mean they'd upgrade from a smaller house. American move a lot and fairly long distance just within their own country too so that may factor in to the constant upgrading.
Bottom line is that most people (even simple living minimalists like me) like a few nice things and creature comforts and are willing to pay for them. Even harder core MMM. Personally I'd never pay an extra thousand buck to gain a few hours of comfort on a plane but I'd happily pay a few hundred bucks for a month-long car rental upgrade for something more comfortable.
I know people who upgrade when they move from bigger cities to smaller ones with cheaper housing. A house here cost the same as a two room apartment in the last city where I lived. It is like a house or apartment sale. So in a year or two I will probably upgrade to a small house or larger one with some rental apartments to pay my bills. I want a yard.
-
So yes he has the money to spend and he should enjoy it and spend it, but I hate the non-equivalent comparison.
When it comes to other people spending vs saving money, he takes into account the opportunity cost of not investing that money and compounding (at 8%):
dropped her annual expenses by over $500 per month, or six thousand dollars per year. And she will of course invest these savings, which will then compound to about to about $86,000 every ten years.
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2019/08/22/1000-per-hour/
But when its himself, spending an extra $1k/yr over 50 years just $50k instead of $571,475.08! if he assumed the same investment and compounding at 8%:
Why? Because the difference between the cheapest and most stressful trip, and the most expensive one in this case, is only about one thousand dollars.
Even if I did this every single year for the rest of my life, I’d blow $50,000 on luxurious trips to visit my family (and I could drive my Mom to her 125th birthday in style!)
And based on my own worst-case spreadsheet, I am never going to wake up and think,
“Damn, if I just had one thousand more dollars, or even fifty thousand dollars more in this net worth column, I’d be a happier person”
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
-
Definitely don't enjoy the softening in message, even if it is a natural progression as we age and completely financially responsible.
The special spark that made this blog worthwhile to me was frugal badassity. There's a thousand other blogs where you can get a Live Below Your Means message and feel justified in small luxury expenditures.
I want someone to challenge my assumptions and suggest I do crazy shit like spraying myself with water to avoid AC usage.
-
Our bodies do become less resilient as we age (I'm talking 60s, 70s, 80s here). But that doesn't mean we can't still be "badass" in other ways. What I have still happening my life as a result of MMM is really examining what I need/want versus what is a passing whim. Examining what matters a lot to me versus what doesn't matter much at all. In other words, the real result of MMM is learning to examine our own priorities instead of letting society (really advertisers) determine our priorities.
Which is why I now own a baby SUV (Mazda CX3) - my creaky knees really appreciate getting in and out of a higher seat. Which means I am no longer dreaming of owning a Mazda Miata, sigh. ;-) I aged out of that dream.
Similarly, I laughed when DD told me I was still living like a University student - because I didn't bother with luxuries I could technically afford but didn't really care about. But I'm not living like a University student - back then (especially as a grad student) I really had a super tight budget, now I just can't be bothered with a bunch of things becasue I know for me they are just a waste of money. I have trained myself well. ;-)
-
So yes he has the money to spend and he should enjoy it and spend it, but I hate the non-equivalent comparison.
When it comes to other people spending vs saving money, he takes into account the opportunity cost of not investing that money and compounding (at 8%):
dropped her annual expenses by over $500 per month, or six thousand dollars per year. And she will of course invest these savings, which will then compound to about to about $86,000 every ten years.
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2019/08/22/1000-per-hour/
But when its himself, spending an extra $1k/yr over 50 years just $50k instead of $571,475.08! if he assumed the same investment and compounding at 8%:
Why? Because the difference between the cheapest and most stressful trip, and the most expensive one in this case, is only about one thousand dollars.
Even if I did this every single year for the rest of my life, I’d blow $50,000 on luxurious trips to visit my family (and I could drive my Mom to her 125th birthday in style!)
And based on my own worst-case spreadsheet, I am never going to wake up and think,
“Damn, if I just had one thousand more dollars, or even fifty thousand dollars more in this net worth column, I’d be a happier person”
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
1. Person #1 asked for his help. I know no other details than that, like their NW or income or age.
2. Do you think MMM is gonna live 50 more years? Possibly, but the numbers aren't with him (biking and lifting aside).
- Also, $571k is what percentage of his current/ future net worth?
I mean, I don't know his NW, but let's say it's $4M, what do you get after 50 years at 8%?
These things matter.
-
So yes he has the money to spend and he should enjoy it and spend it, but I hate the non-equivalent comparison.
When it comes to other people spending vs saving money, he takes into account the opportunity cost of not investing that money and compounding (at 8%):
dropped her annual expenses by over $500 per month, or six thousand dollars per year. And she will of course invest these savings, which will then compound to about to about $86,000 every ten years.
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2019/08/22/1000-per-hour/
But when its himself, spending an extra $1k/yr over 50 years just $50k instead of $571,475.08! if he assumed the same investment and compounding at 8%:
Why? Because the difference between the cheapest and most stressful trip, and the most expensive one in this case, is only about one thousand dollars.
Even if I did this every single year for the rest of my life, I’d blow $50,000 on luxurious trips to visit my family (and I could drive my Mom to her 125th birthday in style!)
And based on my own worst-case spreadsheet, I am never going to wake up and think,
“Damn, if I just had one thousand more dollars, or even fifty thousand dollars more in this net worth column, I’d be a happier person”
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2022/07/18/never-run-out-of-money/
1. Person #1 asked for his help. I know no other details than that, like their NW or income or age.
2. Do you think MMM is gonna live 50 more years? Possibly, but the numbers aren't with him (biking and lifting aside).
- Also, $571k is what percentage of his current/ future net worth?
I mean, I don't know his NW, but let's say it's $4M, what do you get after 50 years at 8%?
These things matter.
And isn't this really part of knowing what is "enough"? We talk about this all the time with respect to commercial goods, and we talk about it with folks dealing with OMY syndrome. But it applies just as strongly here. When you are already happily FIRE'd with more money than you would ever need, an extra half-million bucks in 50 years is freaking meaningless -- it improves your life not one teensy diddly squat. So what is the value in accumulation for accumulation's sake?
I strongly agree that you need a different analysis pre-FIRE and post-FIRE. Pre-FIRE, an extra $500/yr savings can literally buy your freedom months or even years earlier. But post-FIRE, you've already achieved that freedom. So the only remaining questions are (a) are you living the life you want, consistent with your values and interests, and (b) is that life still within your means? It's about getting the most value out of what you have. And sometimes a small* indulgence brings more value than more money for Future You ever could.**
*No, objectively, $1K itself is not "small." But relative to Pete's NW it's entirely irrelevant.
**Yeah, I'm probably over-sensitized on this one, but I am older and facing the prospect that some of my future plans may be physically beyond me if I leave them too much in the future. Nothing bad, but the aches and pains and longer recovery times are making me feel likely future constraints in a very real way. I just got back from an international trip, and I am hurting from the travel -- and that was with business class (Condor airlines, so price was normal-airlines economy, but still). I have saved my whole life, always placed the future ahead of the now, and that has put me at a place where I need to carpe me some diem while my body can still manage it. So, yeah, I totally feel the value in nonstop flights and more legroom, because I know up close and personal how not having those things puts a major crimp in my ability to enjoy a trip.
-
^^I read this with the screen blown up so I couldn't see the author.^^
I was nodding along, so I shrunk the screen to find out who was stringing these pearls of wisdom. Of course it was you, @Laura33! Lol at "carpe me some diem." Totally stealing that.
Random thought, not directed at L33: how long after the event that triggered this thread is over will it still be dissected here? Let it go...
-
I wonder if the Mr Money Mustache that appears in Netflix's 'Get Smart With Money' is the facepunch the clown car owner MMM or the pinkie in the air premium air travel and Tesla renting MMM?
-
I wonder if the Mr Money Mustache that appears in Netflix's 'Get Smart With Money' is the facepunch the clown car owner MMM or the pinkie in the air premium air travel and Tesla renting MMM?
Buying a few inches of legroom in Coach is still fucking Coach. It's paying extra for what used to be standard.
So many stone throwers on this thread. Yawn.
-
I wonder if the Mr Money Mustache that appears in Netflix's 'Get Smart With Money' is the facepunch the clown car owner MMM or the pinkie in the air premium air travel and Tesla renting MMM?
Buying a few inches of legroom in Coach is still fucking Coach. It's paying extra for what used to be standard.
So many stone throwers on this thread. Yawn.
I just couldn't help myself when you said you wanted to let it go... sorry
-
^^I read this with the screen blown up so I couldn't see the author.^^
I was nodding along, so I shrunk the screen to find out who was stringing these pearls of wisdom. Of course it was you, @Laura33! Lol at "carpe me some diem." Totally stealing that.
Random thought, not directed at L33: how long after the event that triggered this thread is over will it still be dissected here? Let it go...
Yup
**Yeah, I'm probably over-sensitized on this one, but I am older and facing the prospect that some of my future plans may be physically beyond me if I leave them too much in the future. Nothing bad, but the aches and pains and longer recovery times are making me feel likely future constraints in a very real way. I just got back from an international trip, and I am hurting from the travel -- and that was with business class (Condor airlines, so price was normal-airlines economy, but still). I have saved my whole life, always placed the future ahead of the now, and that has put me at a place where I need to carpe me some diem while my body can still manage it. So, yeah, I totally feel the value in nonstop flights and more legroom, because I know up close and personal how not having those things puts a major crimp in my ability to enjoy a trip.
I am also overly sensitive to this. I am ALREADY thinking and planning on how to manage a business trip to Asia. I *know* my company won't pay for business class. I have to really consider/ figure out if DH has enough airline miles to upgrade me to business class for the 11-12 hour flight because I DO NOT SLEEP ON PLANES. At least, I do not sleep upright, or slightly reclined, with very little legroom, as someone who is barely 5'3". So, how will I function and manage a foreign country, riding on two different trains, while not reading/ speaking the language, if I've been awake 24-36 hours? Um, I'm 52. Not well.
(This leaves my choices as: 1. make sure I'm traveling with someone else at work, and take the same flight. At least if it's overnight and I don't sleep, they can make sure I don't get lost. 2. Figure out how to upgrade to business, even if it means paying a couple to 5 thousand dollars. 3. Insist on flying during the daytime. 4. Flyi a day or two ahead of time so that I can at least adjust somewhat to the time zone before having to function.)
-
I am 68 and went to Europe in June. I have back/neck problems from being rear ended a few times. I am also fairly tall. Riding in coach was definitely uncomfortable. Coming home I was offered a chance to sit in premium economy for 145 which included both flights. It was a extra 12” of leg room and what a difference that made. In the future when I fly if it doesn’t cost a fortune I will do that again. Mr MM’s philosophy is really just how most people lived both in my parents generation and mine especially when younger.
-
I don't fly often but I'm going to have to start looking at whatever the next step up is to get more room for, at least, international flights. I'm 6-1, so not all that tall. A few years ago, I did a round trip from Chicago to Cairo (Egypt, not Illinois) in coach and it was pretty unpleasant. My knees were jammed into the seat in front of me and I could barely move anything in my lower body. I was fighting cramping and joint pain (I have a bad back) for most of the flights so there was no sleep. Obviously, I survived but it wasn't a great way to book-end a vacation.
I don't consider myself a "true Mustachian" so I'm not concerned with being labeled a spendthrift if I try to seek out travel that doesn't have me in pain for long periods. I just need some space to be able to move my legs around a little bit. Even the lack of sleep wasn't that big of a deal. I don't need champagne, hot towels, or a 7-course meal, just a bit of space. For my next trip, I need to see where the class boundary is that gets me some leg room.
As a side note, maybe I'm just a pleb, but I was impressed with the food and service in coach on the trans-Atlantic legs of that trip. The way over was British Airways and Air France on the way back - Air France was a little better (not shocked). If business or first-class is markedly better it would probably be lost on me.
-
Here's my take: tl;dr: the audience for this post is different from several years ago. Different life situation, different goals, so different advice.
longer version:
In days of yore, MMM's posts were directed at people who were sacrificing years of their lives to spend money on things that didn't make them happy. Sticking with a bad job because they didn't have FU money. On the smartphone upgrade treadmill because that's what the marketing told them to do. Leasing a car because that's what their peers were doing. Eating out three times per week because it was convenient. And then complaining that "I'll never retire" or "I'm living paycheck to paycheck."
The recent article is speaking to a different audience. This audience has already achieved their financial goals. They've accumulated enough that their savings can not only support a joyful lifestyle, but also provide some money for splurging.
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
-
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
But while I don't disagree, this is contrary to the entire initial premise that MMM had.
-
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
But while I don't disagree, this is contrary to the entire initial premise that MMM had.
You may be right. But the initial premise, at least the way I understand it, did not target "retirees who have money to burn."
-
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
But while I don't disagree, this is contrary to the entire initial premise that MMM had.
You may be right. But the initial premise, at least the way I understand it, did not target "retirees who have money to burn."
But there are us retirees who are still in the prioritizing mind-frame who look at surviving travel with a body that is not as resilient as it used to be as definitely high priority, so that may mean that spending priorities shift. So we may not have money to burn, but we have enough money to allocate to comfortable travel and will just spend less elsewhere. In other words, when you are older and creakier (whatever level of older and creakier) then making travel comfortable becomes higher priority. No point travelling if you pay a high physical price to do so.
-
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
But while I don't disagree, this is contrary to the entire initial premise that MMM had.
You may be right. But the initial premise, at least the way I understand it, did not target "retirees who have money to burn."
But there are us retirees who are still in the prioritizing mind-frame who look at surviving travel with a body that is not as resilient as it used to be as definitely high priority, so that may mean that spending priorities shift. So we may not have money to burn, but we have enough money to allocate to comfortable travel and will just spend less elsewhere. In other words, when you are older and creakier (whatever level of older and creakier) then making travel comfortable becomes higher priority. No point travelling if you pay a high physical price to do so.
Are we saying that MMM has become old and creaky? Poor fella was sliding down fireman’s poles to get to hot tub emergencies just a few posts ago…
-
The message is this: If you're FI and never spend that extra money, it can never do you any good. Spending it won't hurt your financial future (otherwise, you're NOT FI), and might make you a bit happier.
The person earning $30k/year can't afford an extra $1k. The retiree spending $40k/year from a $2M portfolio can.
But while I don't disagree, this is contrary to the entire initial premise that MMM had.
You may be right. But the initial premise, at least the way I understand it, did not target "retirees who have money to burn."
But there are us retirees who are still in the prioritizing mind-frame who look at surviving travel with a body that is not as resilient as it used to be as definitely high priority, so that may mean that spending priorities shift. So we may not have money to burn, but we have enough money to allocate to comfortable travel and will just spend less elsewhere. In other words, when you are older and creakier (whatever level of older and creakier) then making travel comfortable becomes higher priority. No point travelling if you pay a high physical price to do so.
Are we saying that MMM has become old and creaky? Poor fella was sliding down fireman’s poles to get to hot tub emergencies just a few posts ago…
Nah I was saying I am old and creaky. But most of the wear and tear issues I am dealing with now were started in my 40s, if not before. So be kind to your bodies.
-
But there are us retirees who are still in the prioritizing mind-frame who look at surviving travel with a body that is not as resilient as it used to be as definitely high priority, so that may mean that spending priorities shift. So we may not have money to burn, but we have enough money to allocate to comfortable travel and will just spend less elsewhere. In other words, when you are older and creakier (whatever level of older and creakier) then making travel comfortable becomes higher priority. No point travelling if you pay a high physical price to do so.
Perhaps I was being a bit hyperbolic. By "money to burn" I meant "after meeting other requirements, there is discretionary income that can be (judiciously) spent, without worrying that such expenditures will negatively affect one's financial security." The latter is specific, but wordy. The former may be a bit indelicate, but it gets the point across.
Are we saying that MMM has become old and creaky? Poor fella was sliding down fireman’s poles to get to hot tub emergencies just a few posts ago…
It's all a matter of degrees. I noticed that creaks and aches started an upward trend at age 35...
-
I don't fly often but I'm going to have to start looking at whatever the next step up is to get more room for, at least, international flights. I'm 6-1, so not all that tall. A few years ago, I did a round trip from Chicago to Cairo (Egypt, not Illinois) in coach and it was pretty unpleasant. My knees were jammed into the seat in front of me and I could barely move anything in my lower body. I was fighting cramping and joint pain (I have a bad back) for most of the flights so there was no sleep. Obviously, I survived but it wasn't a great way to book-end a vacation.
I don't consider myself a "true Mustachian" so I'm not concerned with being labeled a spendthrift if I try to seek out travel that doesn't have me in pain for long periods. I just need some space to be able to move my legs around a little bit. Even the lack of sleep wasn't that big of a deal. I don't need champagne, hot towels, or a 7-course meal, just a bit of space. For my next trip, I need to see where the class boundary is that gets me some leg room.
As a side note, maybe I'm just a pleb, but I was impressed with the food and service in coach on the trans-Atlantic legs of that trip. The way over was British Airways and Air France on the way back - Air France was a little better (not shocked). If business or first-class is markedly better it would probably be lost on me.
It's definitely harder to tolerate economy flights as one gets older. I've nearly(*) solved the problem by flying in business class for about the same price as coach. How? By playing the credit card points game very well. Basically, by opening a few credit cards with large points bonuses and always maximizing points earned on purchases, and transferring these points to airlines to purchase tickets, I've managed to fly my family of 3 on overseas vacations in business class every few years. There is a cost to the credit card points earned this way, in the form of annual card fees, extra fees for using a credit card vs cash (e.g., more expensive per-gallon cost of gas), etc. But it works out to no more than roughly the cost of a coach ticket per person to get the miles needed for business class. First or business class trips in the last 15 years include India, Cambodia, Thailand, Greece, and two trips to western Europe; a few transcontinental flights; and we have New Zealand tickets booked for next year. And we've banked enough points to think of a trip in 2024.
There are plenty of online resources on how to do this. Here's a good place to start: https://onemileatatime.com/guides/redeeming-airline-miles/
(*I say I "nearly" solved the problem because I still have to take other trips for work or family reasons that I don't have the points for, so I continue to be very familiar with coach. And when coach airfares are very cheap it usually makes sense just to pay for a coach ticket.)
-
^^I agree with this^^, but want to remind everyone that Pete didn't do this. He just paid a a bit extra for a little more legroom IN FREAKING COACH!
I find it humorous that this thread persists long past MMM's actual trip.
-
I totally agree at @spartana and you inspire me! It really does take seeing options because humans are imitative group creatures so when somebody else says why take a taxi when I can walk 3 or 5 miles to the train station or as a woman I can go solo backpacking or bike packing (neither of which I’ve done, trying to work up courage) that’s the kind of thing that helps us break out of the box of having to do things a certain way.
You also said something really important which is that you don’t see hedonic adaptation being tied to age. I think that’s so important to avoid the causality excuse when it’s unproven.
-
I totally agree at @spartana and you inspire me! It really does take seeing options because humans are imitative group creatures so when somebody else says why take a taxi when I can walk 3 or 5 miles to the train station or as a woman I can go solo backpacking or bike packing (neither of which I’ve done, trying to work up courage) that’s the kind of thing that helps us break out of the box of having to do things a certain way.
You also said something really important which is that you don’t see hedonic adaptation being tied to age. I think that’s so important to avoid the causality excuse when it’s unproven.
Some of it is age (believe me, I'm there) and some of it is just hedonic adaption independent of age. The trick is to keep examining options to see when is really acknowledging an older creakier body and when it is just being indulgent.
-
^^I agree with this^^, but want to remind everyone that Pete didn't do this. He just paid a a bit extra for a little more legroom IN FREAKING COACH!
I find it humorous that this thread persists long past MMM's actual trip.
I think it's morphed from "Pete did this" to just a general hedonistic adaptation discussion now. Which is always a good topic IMHO. Because I'm a long term forum member I remember the early days when the idea of throwing a bunch of money towards a couple of hours of comfort instead of bucking up would have been super face punch worthy. Even if already FIRE. I miss those days ;-).
I miss those days, too, even though my lifestyle has always been pretty punch-inducing by those standards. I felt like it pushed me to really evaluate my choices. Before I'd say I was 75% on the spectrum of crazy frugal---->consumer sucker, relative to the posters here. Now, with almost nothing about my and my choices changing, I'd say I'm at 25%.
-
Thanks although I LIKE being uncomfortable ;-). Are you a stoic if you like it and it makes you feel good, happy, and is more challenging and makes you feel more powerful? Probably not since you are enjoying it!
I do agree with most people who say aging does facter into seeking greater comforts and willingness to pay for them. Not everyone of course and challenging yourself be be a bit uncomfortable or do something hard can be pretty rewarding regardless of your age or ability. But I do think there are a lot of young healthy fit people (MMM) who find it easy to throw some extra money at something hard and more challenging to make it softer and easier.
Nothing is absolute. It's possible to really enjoy hard physical labor despite the muscle aches and pains, yet absolutely hate the discomfort of sitting upright in a chair in a confined space surrounded by other people. At some level, even an extreme Mustachian has to say "you can't take it with you" and spend some money for comfort now. It really just comes down to where you draw the line.
Here's a thought experiment. Let's say the dentist charges $20 extra for anesthesia. Would the ideal Mustachian forego anesthesia and endure an hour of pain that's 20 on a scale of 1 to 10? The ideal, as I understand it, is to push yourself to tolerate what you think you can't, and when you decide whether you need to pay extra to avoid what you think you can't tolerate, factor in all the future costs of deciding to spend the money and all the opportunity cost of not investing the money you'd otherwise save. Most of us, even the most Mustachian, are going to pay the $20 even after carefully considering the costs and benefits. But maybe someone with only $100 in the bank would not. Similarly, someone with $20M in the bank is likely to pay a few hundred or even thousand extra for comfortable airline seats, which most of us with smaller piles of cash wouldn't even consider. My point is that the equation is not just the cost of current pleasure/comfort/benefit vs the return you could get if you forego that pleasure -- it also includes the size of your cash pile in relation to the cost of the pleasure. MMM has historically discounted this factor. Now that he's wealthy, not too surprisingly, he isn't discounting it as much.
-
This is what is concerning about this 'lifestyle drift' from MMM himself. Mustachianism was never meant to be Early Retirement Extreme, but it also wasn't supposed to cater to FatFIRE. It was that happy spot in the middle where you acknowledge the ridiculous luxury already present in everyday life, that we all have an exploding firehose of income to meet our current needs, and a challenge to the status quo of taking everyday luxury for granted - like defaulting to accepting long commutes, the lunacy of using drive throughs, that biking is only for the Tour de France and kids, etc. That core of Mustachianism, in Pete's latest posts and on the forum, is drifting more toward 'well, if you have the money, efficiency for its own ends isn't all that important'. Pete might be getting soft... but that also doesn't mean 'true Mustachianism' is ERE either. I hope we haven't lost the plot here.
-
This is what is concerning about this 'lifestyle drift' from MMM himself. Mustachianism was never meant to be Early Retirement Extreme, but it also wasn't supposed to cater to FatFIRE. It was that happy spot in the middle where you acknowledge the ridiculous luxury already present in everyday life, that we all have an exploding firehose of income to meet our current needs, and a challenge to the status quo of taking everyday luxury for granted - like defaulting to accepting long commutes, the lunacy of using drive throughs, that biking is only for the Tour de France and kids, etc. That core of Mustachianism, in Pete's latest posts and on the forum, is drifting more toward 'well, if you have the money, efficiency for its own ends isn't all that important'. Pete might be getting soft... but that also doesn't mean 'true Mustachianism' is ERE either. I hope we haven't lost the plot here.
I like how you put this, this blog is a sort of goldilocks between FatFire and LeanFire. I believe that is what kept me coming back to it. I appreciate that MMM is environmental and as a woman it is refreshing to read his writing about becoming financially independence without the toxic-masculinity (looking at you FATfire). But I don't think the concept of hedonistic adaptations will be sullied because Pete bought a little leg room. The MMM philosophy (if I may can call it that) challenges our abilities and tolerances (as has been mentioned). While I haven't been on these forums for long, I've been reading the blog since (almost?) the beginning. So I am not coming at this as a noob. I think MMM has done his job. Anyone who wasn't around in those early days to read the blog could start today from the first post and still get a lot out of the content he has provided the world for free. His blog is very generous to those who give it the time it deserves. I'm sure you all remember when he didn't use his name, Pete strikes me as a guy who doesn't really enjoy the spotlight (just a guess) but ended up under one because he has good ideas and is inspirational. Perhaps he slipped a little by buying a little more legroom on a flight, I really don't care though because I think he has done the work to earn it. The question about whether he should have mentioned it on his blog is fair criticism. However, I have no problem accepting the blog as the aspirational MMM persona.
Personally, I appreciate where the conversation in this thread has been going and have enjoyed reading the different perspectives about the post.
-
he has the money so he can do what he wants. It does delute his message of badassity and toughing it out can be rewarding and even fun just for its own sake and that hedonism is not as awesome as we've been told.
That core of Mustachianism, in Pete's latest posts and on the forum, is drifting more toward 'well, if you have the money, efficiency for its own ends isn't all that important'. Pete might be getting soft... but that also doesn't mean 'true Mustachianism' is ERE either. I hope we haven't lost the plot here.
I'm not so sure it dilutes the message, at least if you think about it mathematically. One way of looking at it is simply that Mustachianism encourages you to change the definition of "what you can afford." If you make $100k per year, you can afford to spend $100k pre-conversion to Mustachianism, but after conversion, you can only afford to spend $40k. The answer to the question, "HOW can I possibly do without $60k worth of crap?" is "figure out how to enjoy what $40k buys you, and look, here is this blog and forum to tell you all the ways." The current message is the same, just shift the decimals to the right a few notches if you happen to have the cash to do it. And if you can't because you don't have enough zeros, keep the decimals where they are. Based on that logic, I'd argue that someone with MMM's wealth is being Mustachian simply by not buying first class tickets and going for premium economy instead.
I guess it boils down to: if it's Mustachian to make $100k/year and live off $40k, why isn't it also Mustachian to make $1M/year and live off $400k?
-
I guess it boils down to: if it's Mustachian to make $100k/year and live off $40k, why isn't it also Mustachian to make $1M/year and live off $400k?
I suspect Pete of 5-10+ years ago would say that spending $40k is what makes someone Mustachian. So would facepunch the second person.
-
I guess it boils down to: if it's Mustachian to make $100k/year and live off $40k, why isn't it also Mustachian to make $1M/year and live off $400k?
I suspect Pete of 5-10+ years ago would say that spending $40k is what makes someone Mustachian. So would facepunch the second person.
This^. Also if you make $400k/year but choose to live on $40k/year (which can be pretty nice for many here) then you only need to work a short while to FI.
To be fair the $40k (including imputed rent) he spent back when the blog started is equivalent to $53k today. So give yourself a raise!
But really a few bucks for a bit more comfort...who cares, buti get it can be a slippery slope.
On one hand MMM has always spent more than was characterized but on the other he always spent well below his means, and since the blog took off way below and way below what would be frugal for anyone else with that income.
There's also the distinct possibility that when resources were less, at the beginning, it was a forced level of spending and not desired level and then as income and assets grew his spending migrated more to a desired level of spending, which is still way less than typical though.
I personally always liked the message but always thought there was a dose of hypocrisy with it, but that's ok and quite common for most blogs. I mean fictional books are fake stories, but I still enjoy them.
-
To be fair the $40k (including imputed rent) he spent back when the blog started is equivalent to $53k today. So give yourself a raise!
But really a few bucks for a bit more comfort...who cares, buti get it can be a slippery slope.
On one hand MMM has always spent more than was characterized but on the other he always spent well below his means, and since the blog took off way below and way below what would be frugal for anyone else with that income.
There's also the distinct possibility that when resources were less, at the beginning, it was a forced level of spending and not desired level and then as income and assets grew his spending migrated more to a desired level of spending, which is still way less than typical though.
I personally always liked the message but always thought there was a dose of hypocrisy with it, but that's ok and quite common for most blogs. I mean fictional books are fake stories, but I still enjoy them.
If I remember right, MMM once wrote that when the blog took off and he got rich off it almost by accident, he decided not to touch that money and live as if it didn't exist. That would make a lot of sense from the perspective of someone writing a blog on how anyone can become frugal and FIRE: his advice wouldn't be very credible if he used the "accidental" blog earnings to do it.
So I guess I don't sense a lot of hypocrisy. As to whether he's become more hypocritical by now starting to spend a few pennies more on creature comforts - well, I don't see that as hypocritical either because even if he earned his blog money in a way that most of the people he's addressing in his blog cannot (i.e., by blogging), his financial future would be pretty secure even if he dramatically increased his spending. I mean, when we laugh at clown car drivers and clown house owners, it's because they've spent extravagantly to have these foolish things now instead of being more sensible in order to ensure a stable financial future. Do we laugh at the Bill Gateses of the world for their clown houses? Their future is stable no matter what they do, so if the antics of the rich entertain us, it's not because we think they're making poor financial decisions. (Well... not always, anyway.) And compared to your average wealthy person, MMM is still pretty frugal relative to his wealth.
-
OK, I know it's beating a dead horse, but boy we're nitpicking stuff that most of us do every day. Look at what he actually did:
-- Drive + park at airport: $150 vs. $50 + 3 hrs for round trip bus fare
-- $80 for better seat on plane.
-- Rent a Tesla for the travel -- Ca $870.
So really, the $1K "lifestyle" upgrade was a total of $230. The major chunk was renting a car. And for that, the splurge isn't actually $870 -- it's how much more he paid above what the cheapest option would have been (and even those are going to be significant). Even if he could have gotten a low-end rental for half that, with gas $7/gal. and 800 miles to travel, he's still going to be out something like $600 total. Or depending on where he was going, he could also have presumably taken buses or trains. I'm assuming those would be less (unlike where I live**). But those also have additional costs (e.g., Ubers to train station), and when you're visiting several places and traveling 800 miles total, juggling the bus and train schedules can cost you a huge chunk of time over what you'd spend just hopping in the car whenever you want. So overall, we're talking maybe, what, another $200 in extra costs associated with renting a Tesla instead of taking the cheapest option -- not even counting the hours saved? For a guy with both an environmentalist bent and a total fascination with electric vehicles in general and Tesla in particular, that seems like a reasonable splurge.
Seems to me that most of what he spent money on wasn't for personal comfort, it was buying his time back -- 3 hrs for the airport run, however many hours for his travel within Canada. The exception is the airplane seat, and those tickets were still under $300 total. If he were in debt, or trying to get to FIRE, sure, I'd jump on him for blowing $150 on parking when he could have sucked it up and spent $50 for the bus. But once you're FIRE, you are at a place where, almost by definition, your time is more valuable than money. So as long as your budget can handle the approx. $30/hr it costs for the privilege of driving and parking, it's a reasonable choice to decide that it's worth the upcharge to get 3 hrs of your life back.
Really, isn't FIRE all about valuing your time over money? We all work and save and suck it up for years because we value -- prize, really -- the freedom to spend our days however we want once we are financially free. And most of us give up more than $30/hr when we retire; if you make $100K, that's $50/hr for a "normal" work year. So how is it Mustachian to walk away from $50/hr or $100/hr or however much you're paid at your job, but it's the poster child for hedonism when you have way more money than you need and use a teensy bit of it to buy 3 hrs of your time back at $33/hr?
*Even if you get 40 mpg, which is unlikely with any city driving, that's still 20 gallons of gas and $140.
**I don't know Canadian train pricing, but every time we've wanted to take a weekend trip to NY, it always works out that its cheaper to drive, even counting the NJ Turnpike tolls and NY parking prices, because 4 train tickets get ridiculously pricy. I'd hope Canada has a more functional system, but you still have to factor in that he'd need 2 train tix, not just 1.