5 ms·
the people in this article have multiple or large houses, take expensive vacations, buy luxury goods... they don't sound overly frugal to me. wtf? am i taki
by beachstartup 11y ago
the people in this article have multiple or large houses, take expensive vacations, buy luxury goods... they don't sound overly frugal to me. wtf? am i taking crazy pills?
my parents (in their 60s) have 2 lifetimes worth of savings and investments yet still do their own laundry, have a vegetable garden, mend their clothes.... but they drive nice cars, take expensive vacations, and buy tons of gadgets. they have a massive OLED TV that they watch stereotypical old-person shows on, yet still re-use their ziploc bags. this is not an either/or proposition. people are complex creatures, especially when it comes to money.
in other words they're just normal people, not overly or underly frugal. this entire article is confused. older people with $millions today have a huge diversity of backgrounds, philosophies, and lifestyles. it's impossible to capture some kind of over-arching rule. spending habits are usually a mix of contemporary attitudes and early life values.
if nobody spent any of their money our economy wouldn't work. the important thing is to be careful with your savings and investments - the goal isn't to be a complete cheapskate and die with every penny you ever earned. i can't think of a worse way to live.
- SlipperySlope 11y agoIts clear to me that the article's family are still living well below their means. Multiple homes make sense for those who are frugal enough to restrict vacations mostly to the second home, which if well-located can appreciate in value faster than inflation. Frugal families often have such assets that appreciate, rather than expenses or possessions that depreciate.
- beachstartup 11y ago> Frugal families often have such assets that appreciate, rather than expenses or possessions that depreciate. i'll repeat myself. the people in this article have both, like most successful people in general. it's not a mutually exclusive choice. this article is basically not making any kind of point whatsoever. what's the thesis of the article? that most successful people don't blow all their money on bullshit like some poor people do? wow, what a revelation. these people drive cars and take vacations and buy cartier watches. truly 'frugal' people usually don't do any of this stuff. for example, you don't have to look far on HN to find cheapskates that make professional salaries yet shun cars, live in tiny apartments, shop at garage sales, don't vacation, and live on dry foodstuffs. in fact i was poking fun at them in a comment i made just yesterday. i called it the 'cheapskate olympics'. i think that kind of lifestyle is absurd if you can afford to live a bit better than that.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- SlipperySlope 11y agoThe thesis of this article is that a frugal lifestyle may lead to relative wealth that permits occasional splurges. I regard the article as inspiring to someone who wants to become successful later in life due to their wealth, despite a modest job history.
- reagency 11y agoYou can spend your money on high marginal value things like lifting people out of poverty, or on paying someone to create pollution and junk.
- beachstartup 11y agoyou have this exactly backwards, because you're ignorant of how poor people actually live in this world and rely on your dogmatic beliefs to guide your interpretation of reality. people being lifted out of poverty do not make high marginal value goods. they make things that create pollution and junk. i invite you to take a look at a factory in the developing world (the people who are being lifted out of poverty) and see what they produce. i assure you it's not "high marginal value" goods like swiss watches, fixed gear bicycles, and midcentury modern furniture.