Frugality, Life Satisfaction, and Stress

[NW-Bound]

I believe what kcowan said is true, once one's wealth has reached a certain level. Of course, if one has to choose whether to run the AC to a bit lower temperature, or to save the money to make his car payment, one is not yet at that level. But once one's basic necessities have been met, the rewards from money reach the level of diminishing returns quickly. At least it would be for the LBYM type in this forum.

A couple of years ago, there was a book discussing how too many choices for the consumer bewilder him. Basically, he could never be sure that he would make the right choice to buy the optimal product. And that makes his purchasing activity less than a happy one.

I believe in that. So, I do not go shopping unless it is absolutely necessary. And all those iSomethings do not excite me at all. What am I missing?

 

[ziggy29]

OK, I do apologize for that uncontrollable burst of sarcasm....the idea of poor people being happier than rich ones has always had me rolling on the floor.

To be fair, I don't think the apt comparison is "rich versus poor." I think the comparison is more like "rich and obsessed with acquiring more wealth" versus "not wealthy but I have enough to be comfortable."

Stated that way, I can believe that the latter group can be happier.

 

[ejman]

Have you tried to buy any stateside honey lately?

Ha

Well, the only kind I get is the organic variety at the local Growers Market - expensive but it's worth it - very good. I'm sure the brown honey in SW Asia is also excellent but no first hand experience

 

[harley]

Finally, people are admitting that counting money can be more fun than spending it!

Many descendants and relatives of Scrooge McDuck here! We might be all related.

I'm sitting here in the AC watching The Cowboys (the Duke!). They just showed a State Farm commercial that started out with the comment "Saving money. It's our national pastime." I don't really know what the rest of the commercial was about because I was trying to clean up the diet coke that just shot out of my nose.

 

[Amethyst]

To be fair, I don't think the apt comparison is "rich versus poor." I think the comparison is more like "rich and obsessed with acquiring more wealth" versus "not wealthy but I have enough to be comfortable."

Stated that way, I can believe that the latter group can be happier.

I agree, Ziggy.

Sometimes, though, I get the sense that some people simply disapprove of the purchase of expensive, unneeded things - even if the purchaser pays all his bills on time, has enough saved to retire, and is responsible in every way. This perception could be wrong of course.

We, on the other hand, get a great deal of pleasure out of expensive, unneeded things, even if all we can do is look at them.

We don't buy them (even if we had the money) because our funds are committed to other goals. If we were truly wealthy, it would not bother us one bit if our purchases did not all fall along the efficient frontier. We would acquire whatever we admired, and the heck with optimization.

Amethyst

 

[rmark]

'Frugality gives people the financial resources to be able to stand up for oneself even if it means you get canned.'

Investing gives you that, frugality just stretches it out.

'I believe that if Henry David Thoreau were alive today, he'd be a member of our Forum,'

He suggested NOT saving money in the brick bank or laying up extra for bad times. (I like the book but note his time at Walden pond was more of a sabbatical, as it only lasted two years and he had professional training as a surveyor to go back to though he claimed to live as a day laborer, plus often ate out often while borrowing Emerson's land - exact truth the book is not)

Invest first, automatically living within your means while (hopefully) building future wealth.

 

[rmark]

So many money related stories are not much more than 'My spending good, yours bad'

I do have Gucci and Rolex watches though. I think my dad gave about 9 or 10 dollars each for them down in Mexico

 

[haha]

(I like the book but note his time at Walden pond was more of a sabbatical, as it only lasted two years and he had professional training as a surveyor to go back to though he claimed to live as a day laborer, plus often ate out often while borrowing Emerson's land - exact truth the book is not)

Oh heck! Another beautiful fantasy runs aground in the shoal of truth.

Ha

 

[NW-Bound]

Sometimes, though, I get the sense that some people simply disapprove of the purchase of expensive, unneeded things - even if the purchaser pays all his bills on time, has enough saved to retire, and is responsible in every way. This perception could be wrong of course.

We, on the other hand, get a great deal of pleasure out of expensive, unneeded things, even if all we can do is look at them.

We don't buy them (even if we had the money) because our funds are committed to other goals. If we were truly wealthy, it would not bother us one bit if our purchases did not all fall along the efficient frontier. We would acquire whatever we admired, and the heck with optimization.

Let's take Rolex watches as an example. I do not have a fancy watch. I know that they are beautiful, but I still do not covet them. One may say that because I cannot afford a $100K watch, I will say that I do not care about them, as they are out of reach anyway. Perhaps it's true.

So, I imagine that I would be as rich as Bill Gates, when a $500K watch to me would be just a small change, and I could buy a dozen. Would I then be happy wearing these watches that I could afford? I don't think so. I would buy them, but they would not make me happy. I just don't care about them enough!

It is difficult to argue that the possession of some objects would or should bring someone happiness. Of course, I mean luxurious objects of desire and not day-to-day necessities.

We are all different. If a certain thing can bring one's happiness, and it is affordable, then why not get it? Life's short and we cannot take it with us.

 

[harley]

He suggested NOT saving money in the brick bank or laying up extra for bad times. (I like the book but note his time at Walden pond was more of a sabbatical, as it only lasted two years and he had professional training as a surveyor to go back to though he claimed to live as a day laborer, plus often ate out often while borrowing Emerson's land - exact truth the book is not)

Not to mention he took his laundry home for his mother to do, and his sister would come clean his house for him.

Oh heck! Another beautiful fantasy runs aground in the shoal of truth.

Ha

It's like the Bible, an incredible book but not to be taken literally.

 

[rmark]

The question in life is 'at what point does more of something stop being a help and instead becomes a hinderance'. And that's a personal decision.

 

[haha]

More stuff can quickly become a problem. But more money?

How?

Ha

 

[BunsGettingFirm]

Well, the only kind I get is the organic variety at the local Growers Market - expensive but it's worth it - very good. I'm sure the brown honey in SW Asia is also excellent but no first hand experience

It is sad for me, but I can't attest with first hand experience either. However, I figure honey, whatever the color, is better than all stress, all BS, and no honey.

 

[Amethyst]

That's different from the sense I was picking up from some quarters--that somehow, just liking expensive things is to be frowned upon.

I like nice things. (Not Rolexes, though - I think they are clunky-looking). Fortunately, much of what I really like is in museums and showrooms, where I can look at it for free

A.

We are all different. If a certain thing can bring one's happiness, and it is affordable, then why not get it? Life's short and we cannot take it with us.

 

[ziggy29]

That's different from the sense I was picking up from some quarters--that somehow, just liking expensive things is to be frowned upon.

I guess I read it a little differently. I read it more as proclaiming that it's okay to be content with not having "expensive things." I think that points to a non-consumerist mindset that can be beneficial from a mental health and stress standpoint. It's easier to roll with the punches of life that way, I think.

Having said that, if you have the means to enjoy "expensive things," there's nothing wrong with that either. It's just that too many people in this position wind up becoming obsessed with the ongoing acquisition of wealth and "stuff," and these are the people who are more likely to see their wealth become a form of self-destruction. Not only do they need to keep w*rking to make it happen in many cases (whereas a more LBYM person with "simple" tastes may have been long since able to retire), but they may keep one eye on the road and one eye on the Joneses along the way.

If one could build wealth and enjoy some of the "finer" things without it becoming an unhealthy obsession, so be it! My personal litmus test for "expensive" discretionary items (roughly defined as several hundred dollars or more) is to consider the pleasure/happiness I'll derive from it compared to the long-term "cost" of it in terms of reduced financial security down the road as a result of its purchase. Sometimes that ends up justifying the purchase and sometimes it doesn't.

 

[kcowan]

To be fair, I don't think the apt comparison is "rich versus poor." I think the comparison is more like "rich and obsessed with acquiring more wealth" versus "not wealthy but I have enough to be comfortable."

Stated that way, I can believe that the latter group can be happier.

Yes it was that book. Being rich vs poor, I'll pick rich. But the notion was more "How much is enough?" and the idea is that you get pleasure out of anticipation of acquiring the next essential. Working, saving et al are good things and the reward is buying something you really feel you need. You get a sense of satisfaction that Lindsay Lohan will never know.

 

[rmark]

More money I can deal with. But after this thread I want to set up a beehive in the backyard.

 

[CuppaJoe]

.... the idea is that you get pleasure out of anticipation of acquiring the next essential.....

Sometimes a cool item can serve as an essential at the same price as a dull one. My 44 cent comic book stamps should be in the mail tomorrow. Wheee! (copywrite W2R). SO has already claimed half of them. Two of us anticipating the same joy.

 

[kcowan]

The question in life is 'at what point does more of something stop being a help and instead becomes a hinderance'. And that's a personal decision.

We have done home swaps and the people are burdened by their stuff. They all admire our "light" lifestyle (even though we could afford to acquire more stuff) and say that their heirs will have to deal with all their stuff.

More stuff can quickly become a problem. But more money?
How?

Ha

Well it will change your asset allocation or one thing. And there will be many more decisions to be made if you keep it in a bank (splitting among institutions, for example). If you are comfortable investing $10k in a stock, how about investing $200k in a single stock (same allocation of a bigger portfolio). It gets more complicated.

I guess I read it a little differently. I read it more as proclaiming that it's okay to be content with not having "expensive things." I think that points to a non-consumerist mindset that can be beneficial from a mental health and stress standpoint. It's easier to roll with the punches of life that way, I think.

Having said that, if you have the means to enjoy "expensive things," there's nothing wrong with that either. It's just that too many people in this position wind up becoming obsessed with the ongoing acquisition of wealth and "stuff," and these are the people who are more likely to see their wealth become a form of self-destruction. Not only do they need to keep w*rking to make it happen in many cases (whereas a more LBYM person with "simple" tastes may have been long since able to retire), but they may keep one eye on the road and one eye on the Joneses along the way...

Friends of ours lived a blue collar life until his business was bought out. Now he has condos in Vancouver and Mexico, a Class A motor home, a 58 foot yacht, and a Harley. These are just the big things. Managing all this stuff is a big job. Enjoying it also is a major undertaking.

This guy is very smart and very capable but he is also struggling with his choices. You can argue that you would like to have the chance to experience that problem and I would not blame you. But I would not change places with him. I know how much is enough for us.

 

[Walt34]

And as for houses - - it all depends on housing prices where you live, but I'd jump off a cliff if I had to own one of the $400K+ homes in my area. That is just too much home for me to have to deal with, and I only really use about half the square footage that I already have for less than half that price.

This reminds me of a quote from the Dr. Phil show: "Never buy a house with more bathrooms than you want to clean."

As I said to DW some years ago when she expressed contentment with our life: "We have everything we need and most of what we want."

And to be honest about it, all of those "wants" are just that. Sure, a 6,000 sf house, 60-inch plasma TV, super sound system, Lamborghini, yacht, etc. would be nice baubles, but would we be substantially happier with them? I seriously doubt it. Even if we won the lottery I doubt that we'd end up with any of that stuff. Well, maybe I'd spring for the TV.

 

[haha]

My son offered to trade me a mint condition Audi S-4 for my Subaru Impreza wagon. I was very tempted, but it has cost him muh more to keep that car up than mine has cost, and I can carry at least some bulky items in mine, so I passed with some regret but I think I would be even more concerned if I had done the trade. However, if I had a $100,000 annual budget I would have taken the S-4.

Ha

 

[Khan]

This reminds me of a quote from the Dr. Phil show: "Never buy a house with more bathrooms than you want to clean."

As I said to DW some years ago when she expressed contentment with our life: "We have everything we need and most of what we want."

And to be honest about it, all of those "wants" are just that. Sure, a 6,000 sf house, 60-inch plasma TV, super sound system, Lamborghini, yacht, etc. would be nice baubles, but would we be substantially happier with them? I seriously doubt it. Even if we won the lottery I doubt that we'd end up with any of that stuff. Well, maybe I'd spring for the TV.

As I get older I want less.

My spending is less than my small pension.

I started 'harvesting' my CD ladder and have been giving away most of it.

For my 60th birthday present I'm going to start taking money from my retirement accounts.

I'll probably give away most of that.

 

[Dawg52]

As I get older I want less.

My spending is less than my small pension.

I started 'harvesting' my CD ladder and have been giving away most of it.

For my 60th birthday present I'm going to start taking money from my retirement accounts.

I'll probably give away most of that.

What does it take to get on your give away list?

 

[REWahoo]

What does it take to get on your give away list?

Sorry Dawg, only teetotalers need apply...

 

[RonBoyd]

Sorry Dawg, only teetotalers need apply...

Is that negotiable? I might have off-setting attributes... like only before 5:00.