6 ms·

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned this: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/22/getting-rich-from-zero-to-hero-in-one-blog-post/ http://www.mrmoneymusta

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned this: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/22/getting-rich-from-zero-to-hero-in-one-blog-post/ http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/22/getting-rich-from-...

Simon_says 9y ago
Good advice, but MMM is not even close to mainstream.
mattmanser 9y ago
Cause he's a very divisive figure who claims to be retired but in fact is a handyman and blogger?
- dejv 9y ago
  He did achieved financial independence years before he was blogging. This what I think is important and his advice note worthy. I don't really care what he did after this point. The fact that he multiplied his net worth many times thanks to blogging doesn't mean he is financial independent thanks to it.
  - tryingagainbro 9y ago
    >>He did achieved financial independence years before he was blogging. He is selling shovels and jeans to gold rush miners. "Financial independence" when supplemented by the $$ he makes while telling people how he got rich surely makes a huge difference.
    - throwaway0255 9y ago
      That isn't an argument for why his advice is bad or why he's a bad person, though. That's just an explanation of why people are jealous of him and an argument that people can't reliably repeat the success he's had with financial blogging. He's not saying people can, though. He's giving financial advice based on something he achieved following a plan when he was making $67k/year, years before he ever even had the blog. Also, shovels and jeans to gold rush miners?? Pretty sure people can still make $67k/year. Pretty sure people can also still make simple investments, live frugally, pay off their mortgage and retire early. It's simple math. Comparing that to taking advantage of gold rush miners is quite a stretch.
      - tryingagainbro 9y ago
        "I'm retired" while you're blogging /making a lot of money by saying you're retired, is profitable but fishy. Like getting rich by writing a book about how you got rich. Yeah, a Google /FB /x employee can sacrifice for 10 years and then retire, at least outside USA. Live like immigrants that send all their money back to their home country, do.
        pixelperfect 9y ago
        He does a breakdown of his household spending each year and it's around $30,000. His house had been paid for in full and he had ~$800,000 invested at the time of retirement. The math works out without income from blogging and handiwork.
    - discoursism 9y ago
      If his system would work without it, what does it matter whether he has $1 or $1M of supplemental income? I really don't understand this objection. It's like if Rich Hickey gave simple programming tips, and you said, "He's a genius, of course this works for him." Yes, and? If the advice works, what does it matter how the giver is positioned relative to you?
- throwaway0255 9y ago
  He gets the minimum standard hate that all financial gurus get. I wouldn't say that makes him divisive, at least not any more divisive than the others (Dave Ramsey, Suze Orman, Jim Cramer, etc). He's actually probably the least divisive, unless we're including people nobody's ever heard of. Also not sure what difference it makes whether he fits anybody's definition of "retired" or not. I don't think anybody actually cares if he's still saving money by doing his own yard work, or earning passive income from his blog. The point is that he attained the option of retiring at 30, which is true. Whether you consider how he chose to live his life after that point "retirement" is kind of subjective and irrelevant.
  - mattmanser 9y ago
    It's a long time since I've ever read any of his stuff, but I remember reading his early stuff and he said how he'd "retired" and then started doing handyman jobs and his wife did x, y and z to make some extra money. That's not retired. That's just changing your career. Of course it's relevant. He's still earning to make money to do more stuff, he just changed the way he does its. Now he makes money off blogging. That's, again, just changing your career.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      Retirement is financial independence. He has the luxury through financial independence to decide to do whatever activities he wants each day.
    - mwerd 9y ago
      It's laid out pretty clearly in his annual budget posts that he doesn't need to do any of that to live. He and his wife simply like doing those things. That's a big difference and I think you're being disingenuous not to give him that credit.
    - matwood 9y ago
      I've never seen the definition of retired meaning do nothing or not accept money for something done. Retirement means doing what you want to do. I know multiple people who are retired, but still do random jobs because they are bored or just like to have a bit more cash at the time. I still consider them retired because when they work, they are doing it on their own terms.
- branchless 9y ago
  He also owns several properties and derives rent from them. Are people in their 20s going to benefit from: 1. get a time machine 2. go back 20 years 3. exploit your peers He's full of it. I recall reading one time about him speaking about having a pound of oats in his hand and what a lot of raw energy that represented if used wisely. That at then income of two other families whilst they struggle.
  - matwood 9y ago
    If managing renters is someone's thing, there are plenty of opportunities to do that right now. If you're in your 20s you can live frugally, save some money, buy a (quad|dup)lex, and live in one and rent the others. It might not be doable in SF/NYC, but the US is a big country.
    - branchless 9y ago
      And if every millenial tries to exploit other millenials by appropriating wealth instead of creating it, what then? This is how we got to this total mess.
      - b4lancesh33t 9y ago
        If you believe owning rental units is "(mis?)appropriating" wealth, I dearly hope you are divested from the stock market and avoid keeping your money in banks. The former is exactly the same thing, and the latter is contributory to it.
        branchless 9y ago
        This is totally wrong. Stock markets invest in productive endeavor, not in creating a shortage then "servicing the need for accommodation". Secondly - and this shows you are living in a dream world - banks are not intermediaries of funds. When you borrow to buy a house credit is created not sourced.
      - skybrian 9y ago

Simon_says 9y ago

Good advice, but MMM is not even close to mainstream.

mattmanser 9y ago

Cause he's a very divisive figure who claims to be retired but in fact is a handyman and blogger?

dejv 9y ago
He did achieved financial independence years before he was blogging. This what I think is important and his advice note worthy. I don't really care what he did after this point. The fact that he multiplied his net worth many times thanks to blogging doesn't mean he is financial independent thanks to it.
- tryingagainbro 9y ago
  >>He did achieved financial independence years before he was blogging. He is selling shovels and jeans to gold rush miners. "Financial independence" when supplemented by the $$ he makes while telling people how he got rich surely makes a huge difference.
  - throwaway0255 9y ago
    That isn't an argument for why his advice is bad or why he's a bad person, though. That's just an explanation of why people are jealous of him and an argument that people can't reliably repeat the success he's had with financial blogging. He's not saying people can, though. He's giving financial advice based on something he achieved following a plan when he was making $67k/year, years before he ever even had the blog. Also, shovels and jeans to gold rush miners?? Pretty sure people can still make $67k/year. Pretty sure people can also still make simple investments, live frugally, pay off their mortgage and retire early. It's simple math. Comparing that to taking advantage of gold rush miners is quite a stretch.
    - tryingagainbro 9y ago
      "I'm retired" while you're blogging /making a lot of money by saying you're retired, is profitable but fishy. Like getting rich by writing a book about how you got rich. Yeah, a Google /FB /x employee can sacrifice for 10 years and then retire, at least outside USA. Live like immigrants that send all their money back to their home country, do.
      - pixelperfect 9y ago
        He does a breakdown of his household spending each year and it's around $30,000. His house had been paid for in full and he had ~$800,000 invested at the time of retirement. The math works out without income from blogging and handiwork.
  - discoursism 9y ago
    If his system would work without it, what does it matter whether he has $1 or $1M of supplemental income? I really don't understand this objection. It's like if Rich Hickey gave simple programming tips, and you said, "He's a genius, of course this works for him." Yes, and? If the advice works, what does it matter how the giver is positioned relative to you?
throwaway0255 9y ago
He gets the minimum standard hate that all financial gurus get. I wouldn't say that makes him divisive, at least not any more divisive than the others (Dave Ramsey, Suze Orman, Jim Cramer, etc). He's actually probably the least divisive, unless we're including people nobody's ever heard of. Also not sure what difference it makes whether he fits anybody's definition of "retired" or not. I don't think anybody actually cares if he's still saving money by doing his own yard work, or earning passive income from his blog. The point is that he attained the option of retiring at 30, which is true. Whether you consider how he chose to live his life after that point "retirement" is kind of subjective and irrelevant.
- mattmanser 9y ago
  It's a long time since I've ever read any of his stuff, but I remember reading his early stuff and he said how he'd "retired" and then started doing handyman jobs and his wife did x, y and z to make some extra money. That's not retired. That's just changing your career. Of course it's relevant. He's still earning to make money to do more stuff, he just changed the way he does its. Now he makes money off blogging. That's, again, just changing your career.
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    Retirement is financial independence. He has the luxury through financial independence to decide to do whatever activities he wants each day.
  - mwerd 9y ago
    It's laid out pretty clearly in his annual budget posts that he doesn't need to do any of that to live. He and his wife simply like doing those things. That's a big difference and I think you're being disingenuous not to give him that credit.
  - matwood 9y ago
    I've never seen the definition of retired meaning do nothing or not accept money for something done. Retirement means doing what you want to do. I know multiple people who are retired, but still do random jobs because they are bored or just like to have a bit more cash at the time. I still consider them retired because when they work, they are doing it on their own terms.
branchless 9y ago
He also owns several properties and derives rent from them. Are people in their 20s going to benefit from: 1. get a time machine 2. go back 20 years 3. exploit your peers He's full of it. I recall reading one time about him speaking about having a pound of oats in his hand and what a lot of raw energy that represented if used wisely. That at then income of two other families whilst they struggle.
- matwood 9y ago
  If managing renters is someone's thing, there are plenty of opportunities to do that right now. If you're in your 20s you can live frugally, save some money, buy a (quad|dup)lex, and live in one and rent the others. It might not be doable in SF/NYC, but the US is a big country.
  - branchless 9y ago
    And if every millenial tries to exploit other millenials by appropriating wealth instead of creating it, what then? This is how we got to this total mess.
    - b4lancesh33t 9y ago
      If you believe owning rental units is "(mis?)appropriating" wealth, I dearly hope you are divested from the stock market and avoid keeping your money in banks. The former is exactly the same thing, and the latter is contributory to it.
      - branchless 9y ago
        This is totally wrong. Stock markets invest in productive endeavor, not in creating a shortage then "servicing the need for accommodation". Secondly - and this shows you are living in a dream world - banks are not intermediaries of funds. When you borrow to buy a house credit is created not sourced.
    - skybrian 9y ago