U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Frugal Living
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:31 PM
 
12,671 posts, read 20,489,997 times
Reputation: 2618

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Great post. Not to quibble....but since when is the food at Wendy's healthy??? But I do get your point. It's the people who wear "ordinary nice" clothes and drive "sensible" cars who tend to have the $$$.
You can get healthy stuff at all fast food joints.

 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:32 PM
 
12,671 posts, read 20,489,997 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
The point is that people that live well below their means may as well have a lower income and/or net worth. They also need to learn how to live life...


I don't see how enjoying your work has anything to do with the sort of stuff you want. I enjoy my work, yet I have no interest in driving around an old car and have numerous modern devices.
Will it effect your financial life if you drive a new car compare to the old one? Does it also meet your long term financial goals?
 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:33 PM
 
12,671 posts, read 20,489,997 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Maybe you're one of those rare people who doesn't have a hard time increasing his income, but that's not most of us. Once you reach a certain point, it's easier to save the $$$ than it is to make more.

Of course, I guess that's why the authors of "Millionaire..." emphasized small business ownership because successful small businesses tend to bring higher incomes to the owners as well as better tax advantages (e.g. you can save something like 49K in a retirement planif you're self employed but only 16K in a 401K if you work for someone else).
401K isn't the only retirement account available though. There is also the IRA's.
 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,969,159 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarkar View Post
World of Warcraft.. only $12-15/mo (plus your internet fees.)

Very time consuming computer game.

Plus reading books at the local library, going to the local park, taking side trips on the weekend when my company periodically sends me to a business trip in Asia..
Yes, I hear people get addicted to it all the time. But the game is in no sense cheap, you need a high speed internet connection, the monthly fees, the game itself (plus all the upgrade packages), a computer that is sufficient to play the game, etc.

Regardless, if you're happy playing the same computer game every day well...alright. That sounds horrible depressing to me though...
 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,969,159 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by maschuette View Post
If a person cant save with the money they have now, then they cant save when they get a raise.
Sorry, but this isn't true. The two are very different psychologically, people have trouble reducing their standard of living, not only that its often much more difficult. You may have to move, downgrade cars, etc. On the the other hand saving future increases of revenue (or even just part of them) is fairly easy, it requires no shift in their spending and there is no psychological hit.

Your version of savings is about suffering...little more. In the real world its not effective at all.
 
Old 12-28-2010, 04:59 PM
 
Location: Troy, Il
764 posts, read 1,386,379 times
Reputation: 527
Its funny that you think a person is suffering if they cut back on spending. i cut back on my spending drastically, all it involved was a written budget. Instead of eating out every other night we cook at home, brown bagging it to work, and not buying whatever i want when i go to walmart. Anyways, i think you are completely full of hot air. What this comes down to is that you would rather spend then save and thats why you are arguing against common sence principles. Thats why you dont like the book The millionaire next door, because you are a person who earns to spend. Well, many people are, but for some people being independently wealthy someday is more important then blowing money.
 
Old 12-28-2010, 05:37 PM
 
Location: DFW
6,717 posts, read 11,166,301 times
Reputation: 4972
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Yes, I hear people get addicted to it all the time. But the game is in no sense cheap, you need a high speed internet connection, the monthly fees, the game itself (plus all the upgrade packages), a computer that is sufficient to play the game, etc.

Regardless, if you're happy playing the same computer game every day well...alright. That sounds horrible depressing to me though...
A $500 laptop should be able to play the game.

$200 for the game plus all the upgrades

Monthly fees are pocket change, equivalent to eating out 2 times.

If you got no internet, try the local starbucks, library, or your workplace (after work.)

High speed internet is already included in my $650/mo rent so it's no issue.

Playing this game is less depressing than wasting lots of money on things everyone else is buying that I have no real need for anyways (i.e. new car, nice house/apt, furniture that's a pain in the ***** to move if moving to a new place, etc.)
 
Old 12-28-2010, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,969,159 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by maschuette View Post
Its funny that you think a person is suffering if they cut back on spending. i cut back on my spending drastically, all it involved was a written budget.
I'm not sure what is funny about it. Most average people don't have tons of fat that they can cut, spending cuts are going to involve real sacrifices.

Drastic spending cuts involve a lot more than writing a budget, again you are speaking as if someone has a large amount of fat in their existing budget. Families have a lot of expenses that can't be easily cut that is especially true if you have kids.


Quote:
Originally Posted by maschuette View Post
Anyways, i think you are completely full of hot air. What this comes down to is that you would rather spend then save and thats why you are arguing against common sence principles .
I think you're not paying attention to what is being said, never did I suggest that savings was bad, rather I suggested that cutting spending is the worst way to try and save. I save more than the vast majority of people, yet I've never cut spending to save money. Instead, I've done exactly what I've suggested here. My general "rule" is that I save around 50% of increased revenue and will let the other 50% augment my standard of living.

Reducing your standard of living is not going to make you "independently wealthy", again focusing on revenue makes far more sense here. Create one good sized business and sale it and you'll have millions, penny-pinch all your life and save it and you just may have a million when you're a senior citizen.

This reminds of two families, one family (my relatives) were penny-pinchers and by the time they were in the 60's they had a net-worth of around $500k. Now another family that lived on the same blocked started just the same, but they did something different. After they got a bit secure financially, they took out loan to purchase the home across the street as a rental. They did this many times, for the first 10 maybe even 20 years my relatives probably had a higher net worth and more "in the bank", but then the other family started to quickly out pace them. Anyhow, the husband of this family just died and his net worth was around $12 million. He never had to reduce spending, he never bothered pinching pennies, instead he focused on making $$.

Last edited by user_id; 12-28-2010 at 07:12 PM..
 
Old 12-28-2010, 07:00 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 16,969,159 times
Reputation: 4304
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarkar View Post
Playing this game is less depressing than wasting lots of money on things everyone else is buying that I have no real need for anyways (i.e. new car, nice house/apt, furniture that's a pain in the ***** to move if moving to a new place, etc.)
Look, if you prefer to play a game all day rather than go on vacation, live in a nice area, have decent furniture, eat good foods, etc then that's your choice. Personally, I just can't imagine someone willingly making that choice unless they had a major addiction though.
 
Old 12-28-2010, 07:35 PM
 
Location: Troy, Il
764 posts, read 1,386,379 times
Reputation: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
I'm not sure what is funny about it. Most average people don't have tons of fat that they can cut, spending cuts are going to involve real sacrifices.

Drastic spending cuts involve a lot more than writing a budget, again you are speaking as if someone has a large amount of fat in their existing budget. Families have a lot of expenses that can't be easily cut that is especially true if you have kids.



I think you're not paying attention to what is being said, never did I suggest that savings was bad, rather I suggested that cutting spending is the worst way to try and save. I save more than the vast majority of people, yet I've never cut spending to save money. Instead, I've done exactly what I've suggested here. My general "rule" is that I save around 50% of increased revenue and will let the other 50% augment my standard of living.

Reducing your standard of living is not going to make you "independently wealthy", again focusing on revenue makes far more sense here. Create one good sized business and sale it and you'll have millions, penny-pinch all your life and save it and you just may have a million when you're a senior citizen.

This reminds of two families, one family (my relatives) were penny-pinchers and by the time they were in the 60's they had a net-worth of around $500k. Now another family that lived on the same blocked started just the same, but they did something different. After they got a bit secure financially, they took out loan to purchase the home across the street as a rental. They did this many times, for the first 10 maybe even 20 years my relatives probably had a higher net worth and more "in the bank", but then the other family started to quickly out pace them. Anyhow, the husband of this family just died and his net worth was around $12 million. He never had to reduce spending, he never bothered pinching pennies, instead he focused on making $$.

I dont dissaggree with you when it comes to investing. If someone wants to have substantial wealth then it is a neccessity. But most middle incomes and higher have fat that can be cut. It is hard to find until they actually do a budget and see what they are spending on. Also, most people are too lazy to start their own business. They would much rather work 40 hours a week, do their job, and go home without any of the responsibilties or worries. It is hard to accumulate wealth, thats why most people dont. Most people, on the other hand, dont have the will to save either. Really it is just a matter of personal preference of how people want to live their lives. Everyone wants to be rich, but it takes real sacrifice to accomplish it one way or another.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Frugal Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top