Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did not post your entire post because ahem....it is already available in the thread.
Then why post ANY of it? After all, "it is already available in the thread." But I know why. You want to isolate bits and pieces, out of context, ignoring the answer I already gave you so that you can continue to argue irrationally. You're behaving like a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
I simply don't understand how it would "cost me more time", you are already out shopping there are undoubtedly places to get food right by the shops. Say, it takes 5 minutes to walk to one and then another 5 minutes to get your food, that is still a savings in time of at least 15 minutes or so.
5 minutes to walk/drive to one + 5 minutes to get my food + 5 minutes to walk/drive back from there = 15 minutes.
Make my own burger at home = 10 minutes.
What part of 10 minutes being less than 15 minutes don't you understand?
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
You see, I never suggested you never considered your time rather the way you calculated it in your example made little sense. You even left out one aspect entirely, namely the time it takes to purchase the food from the grocery store. Also, working for 20~30 minutes is not the same as having an enjoyable walk to a food place, etc.
No, you did suggest I never considered time, and you still do. I've told you already I consider "Costs" to include costs in time (and other things), not just money. Yet even in your most recent reponse you're stilll asking "Again, what costs exactly?" (see right below...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Again, what "costs" exactly? You mention some, but clearly there are others. I don't care about wasting paper, etc does that mean I'm not frugal? Are the costs relative to the person or absolute? If relative, then there is no meaningful way of discussing frugality as everyone is using a different measuring stick.
I listed several of the costs: Money, resources, time, health, pleasure/enjoyment... I've just given you these for a third time, but I expect you'll ask again "duh what costs exactly?"
That you don't care about wasting paper is a good indicator that you are most likely not frugal. It also indicates that your concept of "waste" is a narrow one.
Yes, costs are largely relative to the person. If bachelor Fred gets tampons for 80% off, it's still most likely a waste of money for him, and not a frugal move. If bachelorette Laura gets tampons for 80% off, it is most likely a frugal buy for her. You know why? Because Fred is a man and has no use for tampons (at least what they're intended to be used for) and probably would let the tampons go to waste, or at least give them away, which is just a way of cutting losses, since there is some benefit in giving them away, although not as much benefit as never buying them and spending his money on something else would have been. Lucy, being a woman who presumably has a need for the tampons, would have saved 80% on something she needed to buy at some point anyway.
How can you not understand that "cost" is relative to a person?
The problem is that people prefer to not think about things to hone in on what they truly want and instead just accept what they are TOLD is better for them. Some people take it a step further and lie to themselves and others by insisting that what they truly want is to not think about what they truly want and instead just do things the way they're told.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
You say you spent less time, but that claim again makes little sense to me. Perhaps, you have the ability to freeze time when you make your hamburger.
I broke it down practically minute by minute for you. What part of it did you not understand? I think you have reading comprehension problems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Also, its unclear in what sense a hamburger from home is better for you than a hamburger out.
Where I go to buy meat, I find a lean cut of good meat, I hand it to the butcher and ask him to trim the little fat that it has off and then grind it. While he does that, I get the other items on my list and then go pick up the ground meat. The meat I get is more than 90% lean. I can then cook it rare, the way I like it. It is not as fatty as the beef used by fast-food joints, or even most restaurants. I don't get little bits of bone in it like I have at fast-food places. I also don't salt it heavily as they do in fast food joints.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Its bread, beef, cheese, etc regardless of where its made.
I don't eat much at McDonalds, but I'd much rather eat out in the case you mentioned. I don't have that time freezer you have so it will take me more time to make the hamburger than eat out granted that I'm already out shopping. I don't find home made hamburgers magically more nutritious. But mostly, its simply more convenient and eating out is enjoyable. I'd also prefer to get fresh ice cream from a shop, making ice cream at home would take much longer.
It's odd to me that you take the attitude that "Its bread, beef, cheese, etc regardless of where its made," yet then you mention you don't like McDonald's... Why not? It's beef, no matter if it's from McDonald's or Morton's. You ought to love the Chicken McNuggets, after all, it's chicken, no matter if it's in a McNugget from McD's or from your favorite restaurant.
And in your case, a burger you would make is probably no more nutritious than a fast food burger. Your "beef is beef" attitude leads me to believe you buy the fattiest, crappiest beef because you don't see how there is any difference amongst different packages or units of beef.
As for ice cream, I agree, that's why I buy my ice cream instead of making it at home. I don't know where you got the idea that I make it at home or that I said it's easier or cheaper or better to make it at home.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Also, saving $360/year means rather little to me.
Prove it. Send me $360. Or if you don't want to enrich me (out of spite, no doubt) then donate $360 to a legitimate charity of your choice tomorrow and post the receipt for all of us to see it. And don't give an excuse that you already give to charity (if you do); we're talking about $360 above and beyond what you may already be giving to charity. Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is. Put up or shut up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Yeah, I just don't believe this. It takes a good 10~15 minutes just to cook the patty. You also left out a number of things, like again purchasing the food, putting the dishes up, etc.
10-15 minutes? Even to cook a burger well takes no more than 4 minutes per side. So, 10 minutes MAYBE, if you overcook it. 15 minutes? If you like grey burgers, I guess...
And I did account for purchasing the food, washing the dishes, etc. in my previous post. I'm not going to repost it; you can go back and read my post since, ahem....it is already available in the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
This is a clear cut case of saving money by spending time. This time you can't claim that the reused bag is better some how, and you're clearly spending more time reusing them than otherwise. Even if you were washing 100 bags at a time, it would still be little savings for the time you're spending. My grandma does this though, I always thought it was funny.
Of course this is a clear cut case of saving money by spending time. But it's a savings of decent amount of money for very little of my time. It also helps keep garbage out of the landfills. If more people did this we would reduce costs for everyone for garbage hauling and we'd reduce pollution. Conversely, if I and everyone else who does these little things were to stop doing them we would all be living in a much more polluted planet and we'd all face higher garbage costs. It's too bad your grandma's sensibility hasn't affected you for the better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
You are doing this because you want to produce less physical waste and be more "green", a different issue entirely. As an individual you'll receive no benefit from doing this, unless you absolutely don't have the money to purchase new bags.
Wrong. As an individual I do benefit from those things from which our society collectively benefits. If garbage costs go up, then it will hit me in the form of a higher tax so my town can pay for higher garbage hauling costs.
I'm a bit this way too, but I try to avoid it. But....there some things that I still have not gotten rid of, like a RC helicopter that I have not used in years.
Then why post ANY of it? After all, "it is already available in the thread." But I know why.
No, apparently you don't. I use a piece of it to let you know what I'm responding to, while anybody interested can look at your original post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
What part of 10 minutes being less than 15 minutes don't you understand?
As I said, I don't believe you can make a hamburger when all things are considered in 10 minutes. I certainly can't do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
That you don't care about wasting paper is a good indicator that you are most likely not frugal. It also indicates that your concept of "waste" is a narrow one.
Saving paper does not benefit me personally, so why would I do it? The cost of the paper is next to nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Yes, costs are largely relative to the person......
How can you not understand that "cost" is relative to a person?
Then there is not much to discuss, really. If costs are relative, then frugality is relative. Also, I asked you a question, I was not suggesting it was relative or otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Where I go to buy meat, I find a lean cut of good meat, I hand it to the butcher and ask him to trim the little fat that it has off and then grind it.
Interesting, because you did not mention this in your as time spent to make your burger. This would obviously result in additional time spent, you have to select the meat, wait in line, talk to the butcher, etc.
Personally, if I wanted to eat something more lean I'd use Turkey or a chicken patty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
It's odd to me that you take the attitude that "Its bread, beef, cheese, etc regardless of where its made," yet then you mention you don't like McDonald's... Why not? It's beef, no matter if it's from McDonald's or Morton's.
I don't mind McDonalds, I just don't eat there often. Why? Because there are better options. I will go to McDonalds here and there and get a Big Mac combo though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
As for ice cream, I agree, that's why I buy my ice cream instead of making it at home.
You did not get what I was getting out. You talk about quality, yet you are eating cheap preservative packed pseudo-ice cream out of a paper tub. This stuff does not compare at all to fresh ice cream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Prove it. Send me $360. Or if you don't want to enrich me (out of spite, no doubt) then donate $360 to a legitimate charity of your choice tomorrow and post the receipt for all of us to see it.
Because I don't find saving $360 to be significant, I should give away $360?
You're not talking about saving $360 with no change in my standard of living, you're talking about saving $360 by significantly changing my standard of living.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Of course this is a clear cut case of saving money by spending time. But it's a savings of decent amount of money for very little of my time.
Decent amount of money? A sandwich sized ziplock bag costs around 2 cents (if you buy generics, or in bulk). I just tried it, putting a bag inside out takes around 5 seconds. So that is around 8~9 minutes just to put the bags inside out, say it takes 10 minutes or so to wash them. $2 for 20 minutes of my time? No thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny
Wrong. As an individual I do benefit from those things from which our society collectively benefits.
Your actions have no noticeable effect on these things, its the collective action that does. As a result, you don't benefit personally from them.
This is why issue regarding pollution are so tricky, our personal constribution is so tiny in either direction.
Last edited by user_id; 09-13-2009 at 10:31 PM..
Reason: too long, removed some things.
If you are paying 50% in taxes, please hire a good accountant. Heck if you're paying even 35% in taxes (and you're making less than like 200k a year), hire one too. Not hiring an accountant because it's "too expensive" is a good example of being penny wise pound foolish. I think you'd be pretty surprised how low of a tax rate I personally pay relative to my income. If a good accountant saved you 10 grand on taxes and cost 2 grand, that's a pretty good example of an expense that makes sense. Sometimes spending money makes sense.
Paying at or above the 50% marginal income tax rate (for all taxes combined: FITW, SS, medicare & state) is not as rare as you make it out to be. Depends on where you live, but it's possible and at gross incomes less than 200K, too. IOW, somebody who's paying far less than a total of 50% tax on their income may indeed be paying 50% or more of each additional (marginal) dollar of income in taxes. Just ask your accountant. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drshang
And BTW, I don't think you fit the definition of frugal, I think you fit user_id's definition of skinflint. Not that there's anything wrong with that but don't mistake yourself with someone whose being frugal. You are simply not spending money. There is a difference which is what we're trying to get across in this thread.
No, I spend money, but sparingly. I conserve by cutting back on needless consumption...i.e. not making two trips to the store when one will do and planning days out to minimize back-and-forth driving, taking good care of clothing and many other things to make it last, fixing things rather than discarding them, xeriscaping my yard to minimize water usage, replacing all my incandescent light bulbs with CFLs, keeping a well-insulated house and wearing a few layers of comfortable clothes instead of turning the thermostat way up, etc. None of those things takes great effort or sacrifice, yet the accumulated fruits of years of that sort of behavior are sitting right there in my portfolio where I can see 'em.
I also don't spend money on extravagances like luxury cars, jewelry, club memberships, first class air fare, and private school tuition. The idea of working several more years to keep people employed in the BMW factory in Munich or to help fund genocidal wars in Africa just to adorn DW with shiny baubles never made sense to me. Call that "skinflint" if you want, but I know people that have never made a six figure income in their entire working lives that spent enough just on luxury cars to fund ten or more years of my retirement living expenses. If keeping a Lexus in the garage is worth literally years out of your life, go for it. I elected to be free from work while I'm young enough to enjoy it.
Paying at or above the 50% marginal income tax rate (for all taxes combined: FITW, SS, medicare & state) is not as rare as you make it out to be. Depends on where you live, but it's possible and at gross incomes less than 200K, too. IOW, somebody who's paying far less than a total of 50% tax on their income may indeed be paying 50% or more of each additional (marginal) dollar of income in taxes. Just ask your accountant. ;-)
You both forgot sales taxes in your argument, and the numbers from those are even more troublesome than they appear because the sales tax is paid for with money that you've already been taxed on. By the time you're done paying taxes on both ends, you can be well over 50%.
If keeping a Lexus in the garage is worth literally years out of your life, go for it. I elected to be free from work while I'm young enough to enjoy it.
Oh c'mon a Lexus is not that expensive, they start at around $30k.
$30K every 4 years for 40 years of working life comes out to $300K in today's dollars, as opposed to a median house at under $200K.
When people are having a hard time paying for a roof over their head, it's silly to pay three times that much to keep a couple Lexi sitting in the garage.
Paying at or above the 50% marginal income tax rate (for all taxes combined: FITW, SS, medicare & state) is not as rare as you make it out to be. Depends on where you live, but it's possible and at gross incomes less than 200K, too. IOW, somebody who's paying far less than a total of 50% tax on their income may indeed be paying 50% or more of each additional (marginal) dollar of income in taxes. Just ask your accountant. ;-)
The marginal number is a silly way of calculating it, since every dollar earned will have a certain percentage in deductions, if you do tax planning properly. My point is simply that if you're paying that much in taxes, then you must "invest" in a good accountant who will give you ideas and options for tax shields or tax deductions. No one making 200k or less should ever be paying 50% marginal tax rate, even at dollar 199,999, they should be taking advantage of deductions and tax shields to reduce their tax bill.
You both forgot sales taxes in your argument, and the numbers from those are even more troublesome than they appear because the sales tax is paid for with money that you've already been taxed on. By the time you're done paying taxes on both ends, you can be well over 50%.
Only a small percentage of total expenses will be subject to sales tax so it's not a significant burden on one's total tax rate. Plus depending on your situation you may be able deduct sales tax on your tax return.
In at least one place where I lived, the tax break down was:
28% federal, 7.5% state, 2.0% local in town of employment, 1% local in resident town and 7.5% FICA. That is getting close to a marginal of 50%.
And that is why I accepted a job in another state.
This is nonsense. State taxes and local taxes are deductible on your federal return so your effective tax rate is really not that high. Plus you ignore ANY kind of deductions or tax shields. Unless you just didn't deduct anything in which case you paid way more to the government than you should have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
