3 ms·
Its 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 vacatio
by SlipperySlope 11y ago
Its 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.