4 ms·

Well, I am happy that $4000 is so inconsequential to Mr. Money Mustache that he can just say 'fuck you' to it. Not everyone is so lucky. I am sure there are ple

Well, I am happy that $4000 is so inconsequential to Mr. Money Mustache that he can just say 'fuck you' to it. Not everyone is so lucky. I am sure there are plenty of families or individuals who would sacrificed their 'integrity' or 'freedom of speech' on their blog for that kind money to feed their families, pay for their home or get a medical procedure done. It doesn't sound like any of these issues are a concern to him as he can just whimsically reject that kind of money. Also, is this really an issue of freedom of speech? Seems a little melodramatic to me.

crikli 14y ago
"Also, is this really an issue of freedom of speech? Seems a little melodramatic to me." I had the same thought. It seemed to me like the author was trying to make his position far more noble than what it really is. The whole thing boils down to "Look at me, I just turned down $50K so that I could still say 'fuck'".
- ZanderEarth32 14y ago
  Exactly. The post could very easily have been titled, 'I just turned down $4k because I dont need it and like to say 4 letter words'
- Mz 14y ago
  I swear like a sailor. I try to keep it down to a dull roar online. If I could make $4k/month by removing a single swear word from my site, I would be a total sellout in a heart beat. Fuck "integrity" of that sort. Mz bookmarks article to try to figure out if she can sell her soul for $4k/month at some future date.
  - pixelbath 14y ago
    > If I could make $4k/month..., I would be a total sellout That's certainly a valid choice; some people prioritize "integrity of that sort" over money.
    - Mz 14y ago
      I am currently homeless and deeply in debt for valuing my integrity over money. I could have dumped my two adult sons on my ex. He would take them in, though he won't give me one thin dime to help feed them. And because they are legal adults, no shelter will take us as a family. My financial mess is due to the fact that I* have gotten well at my expense. As a former military wife with an incurable genetic disorder, I, instead, could be a lifelong legal drug addict at tax payer expense. But one swear word in the subheader? I would at least A/B test it. Perhaps cleaning up his foul mouth would grow his audience even bigger. * Really, all three of us have gotten well at my expense.
reitzensteinm 14y ago
The purpose of his site is documenting financial freedom by reducing expenses, so I don't understand your criticism at all. Just because he can forgo that money doesn't mean it's not substantial. Eg, his monthly income is reduced from $6000 to $2000, but he only spends $2000, it may be a reduction of 66% but he can still live with the decision. Compare that with someone that makes $20k a month and spends $20k a month - $4k a month is a small amount of money, but he can't give it up.
learc83 14y ago
He specifically addressed that >If this blog were the only thing between my family and a homeless shelter, I’d surely be a banner-changin’, credit-card-hustlin’ fool. Just as the indebted office worker faced with an abusive manager will bow down and do the shitty work, year-in and year-out. The whole point of his blog is financial freedom. How to make enough money that you don't have to live like that.
- grannyg00se 14y ago
  I'm not an expert on the site content, but I think it's about how to require little enough money that you don't have to live like that. The focus is on needing less, rather than making more.
  - sellsword 14y ago
    It takes both sides to succeed. But yes, in many ways it's easier just to lower personal demands or simply not raise them with rising income rather than be able to accumulate an arbitrarily large pile of money.
- ZanderEarth32 14y ago
  Fair enough, but isnt everyone financially free in that way at least partially? If I needed to work a second job to support my family, I would. But I don't, so I am financially free in that respect. The overall concept and goal of the site is great, financial freedom is an excellent thing. The tone I perceived from this singular post just wasn't as noble as others have received it as. More power to the guy for being able set standards for his content and not let financial incentives affect them.

crikli 14y ago

"Also, is this really an issue of freedom of speech? Seems a little melodramatic to me." I had the same thought. It seemed to me like the author was trying to make his position far more noble than what it really is. The whole thing boils down to "Look at me, I just turned down $50K so that I could still say 'fuck'".

ZanderEarth32 14y ago
Exactly. The post could very easily have been titled, 'I just turned down $4k because I dont need it and like to say 4 letter words'
Mz 14y ago
I swear like a sailor. I try to keep it down to a dull roar online. If I could make $4k/month by removing a single swear word from my site, I would be a total sellout in a heart beat. Fuck "integrity" of that sort. Mz bookmarks article to try to figure out if she can sell her soul for $4k/month at some future date.
- pixelbath 14y ago
  > If I could make $4k/month..., I would be a total sellout That's certainly a valid choice; some people prioritize "integrity of that sort" over money.
  - Mz 14y ago
    I am currently homeless and deeply in debt for valuing my integrity over money. I could have dumped my two adult sons on my ex. He would take them in, though he won't give me one thin dime to help feed them. And because they are legal adults, no shelter will take us as a family. My financial mess is due to the fact that I* have gotten well at my expense. As a former military wife with an incurable genetic disorder, I, instead, could be a lifelong legal drug addict at tax payer expense. But one swear word in the subheader? I would at least A/B test it. Perhaps cleaning up his foul mouth would grow his audience even bigger. * Really, all three of us have gotten well at my expense.

reitzensteinm 14y ago

The purpose of his site is documenting financial freedom by reducing expenses, so I don't understand your criticism at all. Just because he can forgo that money doesn't mean it's not substantial. Eg, his monthly income is reduced from $6000 to $2000, but he only spends $2000, it may be a reduction of 66% but he can still live with the decision. Compare that with someone that makes $20k a month and spends $20k a month - $4k a month is a small amount of money, but he can't give it up.

learc83 14y ago

He specifically addressed that >If this blog were the only thing between my family and a homeless shelter, I’d surely be a banner-changin’, credit-card-hustlin’ fool. Just as the indebted office worker faced with an abusive manager will bow down and do the shitty work, year-in and year-out. The whole point of his blog is financial freedom. How to make enough money that you don't have to live like that.

grannyg00se 14y ago
I'm not an expert on the site content, but I think it's about how to require little enough money that you don't have to live like that. The focus is on needing less, rather than making more.
- sellsword 14y ago
  It takes both sides to succeed. But yes, in many ways it's easier just to lower personal demands or simply not raise them with rising income rather than be able to accumulate an arbitrarily large pile of money.
ZanderEarth32 14y ago
Fair enough, but isnt everyone financially free in that way at least partially? If I needed to work a second job to support my family, I would. But I don't, so I am financially free in that respect. The overall concept and goal of the site is great, financial freedom is an excellent thing. The tone I perceived from this singular post just wasn't as noble as others have received it as. More power to the guy for being able set standards for his content and not let financial incentives affect them.