Live Cheap!

[RedScare]

Corporation Nation (Gerber ? I think)

Just looked it up. It is Charles Derber. He stole my idea....10 years ago!

Thanks for the heads up. I'll go get it soon. Not a big deal. My other book idea is the wealthy, for all of their griping about the tax money spent on the poor, are actually more expensive to placate themselves. But, I'll start another thread on that one someday.

Back to living cheap. I found that AT&T has a $15 DSL package that they do not advertise...naturally. Also, for those who almost always use a cell phone, but want a land line for 911 purposes, they have a service that charges per call. It's only about $10.

25 bucks for phone and internet. Now that's cheap!

[sevfiv]

Back to living cheap. I found that AT&T has a $15 DSL package that they do not advertise...naturally. Also, for those who almost always use a cell phone, but want a land line for 911 purposes, they have a service that charges per call. It's only about $10.

25 bucks for phone and internet. Now that's cheap!

i have the $15 DSL plan, and it is quite alright. the local phone is about $25 (unlimited calls).

at this moment, no cable TV.

one of my favorite past times, going to restaurants, is lessening. that saves an enormous amount.

other than that, trying to put as much as i can to paying off remaining interest-laden debt, and bracing myself for upcoming student loan repayments from this late round of school.

[MexAmerican_Moose]

the Wendy's Dollar Menu is a college students best friend

[Guest danax]

Quit worrying about other people and focus on your inner cheapness!

No offense but I think you're missing it. Cheapness implies being obsessive about not spending money, but what I'm talking about is the lessening of desires so that there's little left to spend on. I'm not frugal either. I can waste $8 on a burrito or pay my mechanic $800 and feel no anquish. I think the companion of few desires is also a lack of interest in money, and the accumulation of it, although it's obviously wise to do so, but it is then done for that reason, which is what money is really for; security and survival, not sense gratification.

So any spouting off about this idea, from me anyway, comes more from a feeling of discovery and enthusiam rather than an "I'm better than you people" feeling.

[TheNiche]

No offense but I think you're missing it. Cheapness implies being obsessive about not spending money, but what I'm talking about is the lessening of desires so that there's little left to spend on. I'm not frugal either. I can waste $8 on a burrito or pay my mechanic $800 and feel no anquish. I think the companion of few desires is also a lack of interest in money, and the accumulation of it, although it's obviously wise to do so, but it is then done for that reason, which is what money is really for; security and survival, not sense gratification.

So any spouting off about this idea, from me anyway, comes more from a feeling of discovery and enthusiam rather than an "I'm better than you people" feeling.

I think Coog has a good point that he's having difficulty articulating.

Desires are what they are. I desire a nice and architecturally-compelling home, good food, good health, plenty of sleep, leisure time, etc. And I desire a $300,000 Ferrari more than a used $5,000 Kia. Given the two options, I'll actually buy the Kia, but if I had lots of money to blow, I'd buy the Ferrari. ...not just because I can show it off, either. It's a better car. And you know, if I really really wanted it, I *could* work two jobs and save up for years and probably find a way to get one. I'm not going to. I value my leisure time too much. The tradeoff would be unacceptable to me. ...doesn't mean that I wouldn't still want the Ferrari over a used Kia.

Additionally, there is a point at which saving can become obsessive. What is the point of earning your money and having a high net worth if you don't plan on actually using it at some point? I know that Red has opted to cut his expenses, increase his leisure time, and thus optimize his own enjoyment of life, but does that mean that his way is the way? Yes, in the sense that he figured out what all his options were and reordered his life to his own priorities. No, in the sense that not everyone shares in those priorities.

While I think it true that there are a lot of households living beyond their present means, I don't see that as necessarily a problem insofar as they're able to increase their means over time. I also don't see it as a problem if they are cognizant of the path that they're taking, all their options, and all the risks. If householders are stupid, that is a problem. And I'd agree that the U.S. and the world have some big problems to deal with.

My conclusions are two-fold: 1) mind your own business, and 2) pressure all levels of government to provide a quality personal finance and economics education so that future generations are better able to make decisions to optimize their lifestyle and consumption.

[jm1fd]

Back to living cheap. I found that AT&T has a $15 DSL package that they do not advertise...naturally. Also, for those who almost always use a cell phone, but want a land line for 911 purposes, they have a service that charges per call. It's only about $10.

You're behind the times, man. You can get naked DSL for $10 now.

[RedScare]

Tell me how!

[crunchtastic]

pressure all levels of government to provide a quality personal finance and economics education so that future generations are better able to make decisions to optimize their lifestyle and consumption.

Absolutely!

I tend to be far more pessimistic about the future ability of middle america to increase their means, and I fear there's a lot of willfull ignorance out there getting passed on to a new generation. Financial education is terribly important. I can only hope that we see school systems embrace it, and that the curriculum is not underwritten by Citigroup.

Hey this is cool timing-- just opened my apres' lunch fortune cookie and it says: we never know the worth of the water until the well is dry.

[RedScare]

My conclusions are two-fold: 1) mind your own business, and 2) pressure all levels of government to provide a quality personal finance and economics education so that future generations are better able to make decisions to optimize their lifestyle and consumption.

You left out 3) Demand that the government implement and adhere to a sustainable economic policy that returns the military to its historical role as defense, and outlaws its use for economic expansion.

[TheNiche]

You left out 3) Demand that the government implement and adhere to a sustainable economic policy that returns the military to its historical role as defense, and outlaws its use for economic expansion.

That's not one of my conclusions. Truthfully, I don't know what the purpose of the war is. There are a lot of implausible reasons given for it, and economic imperialism is among them.

If handled competently under very specific circumstances, I believe that war or the threat of war can be justified for the purpose of ensuring economic growth or abating economic risk. I'm not talking about the willy-nilly use of force, though. Nor am I infering that production from defense contractors contributes directly in any way to the nation's well-being.

[RedScare]

I can think of no circumstance whatsoever to justify sending the military in to invade another country so that McDonalds can open new restaurants. Likewise, if we need another country's oil, we need to learn diplomacy, or learn to adapt our economy to a less oil dependent state. If the US is going to demand respect for its borders, it must respect others' borders. We do not have a god-given right to consume the world's resources. We only have the right to negotiate and pay for them. It is this belief by Americans that we can use military force to take what we want that infuriates me.

[MidtownCoog]

It is this belief by Americans that we can use military force to take what we want that infuriates me.

Oh man. Why must you hate America ;-)

[TheNiche]

I can think of no circumstance whatsoever to justify sending the military in to invade another country so that McDonalds can open new restaurants.

Well what was the greatest impetus of the American revolution? Who backed it with the greatest fervor? Business interests. I see nothing wrong with that. I also don't have any problem with occasional use of the military in small rapidly resolved conflicts so as to signal other nations that "yes, we'll kick your ass too if you try something underhanded." It won't make us popular, but I have no desire to be liked.

Likewise, if we need another country's oil, we need to learn diplomacy, or learn to adapt our economy to a less oil dependent state. If the US is going to demand respect for its borders, it must respect others' borders. We do not have a god-given right to consume the world's resources. We only have the right to negotiate and pay for them. It is this belief by Americans that we can use military force to take what we want that infuriates me.

I disagree that we must respect others' borders or that I expect for them to respect ours. Real politik.

As for the goal of securing oil for ourselves, it is an implausible goal. Iraq was producing and exporting oil before we went in...and only well after we'd committed billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of soldiers and contractors to go in, then disrupted supply, and created additional political/war risk sufficient to cause a prolonged spike in oil prices worldwide, did Iraq continue to export oil at its previous pace. Oil is a global commodity, so it doesn't matter that we weren't importing it from Iraq before because we'd only get it from some other supplier who otherwise would've supplied it to a nation that didn't care about the embargo. If the goal was to secure more oil for ourselves, thereby keeping prices low, the opposite is what happened. And anybody could've predicted it. That's why I bought Exxon stock before the war. If a first-year college student studying from an introductory microeconomics textbook written by the President's economic advisor could figure it out, then the President's economic advisor probably could, too.

[RedScare]

Oh man. Why must you hate America ;-)

I admit it. I laughed.

Niche, I wasn't around in the 1770s. Who did WE invade?

As for the rest of your post....umm....No. Still no wars for Exxon. And, I still own their stock. Exxon knows the risks. They walked away from Venezuela.

[Guest danax]

Great discussion on war but Way Off Topic..................

[TheNiche]

Niche, I wasn't around in the 1770s. Who did WE invade?

As for the rest of your post....umm....No. Still no wars for Exxon. And, I still own their stock. Exxon knows the risks. They walked away from Venezuela.

British territory.

And I didn't say that we ought to fight wars for Exxon. Just that Exxon was a beneficiary of an inexplicable war, but that wars beneficial to our economy (and this one wasn't/isn't) are OK with me.

But danax is right, we're off-topic.

[MidtownCoog]

Well I've blown being frugal this week. Three days in a row of tunnel food lunches.

And what exactly has happend to the price of beer?

Dang Bush!

[Subdude]

I know that Red has opted to cut his expenses, increase his leisure time, and thus optimize his own enjoyment of life, but does that mean that his way is the way? Yes, in the sense that he figured out what all his options were and reordered his life to his own priorities.

MY priority is to be able to retire some day without having to eat cat food. Hence I try to live relatively frugally and squirrel away what cash I can. That said, I'm not a maniac about it. I think it is only human for people to want to show off nice possessions.

[sevfiv]

it's all about balancing financial smarts and personal preferences. in my case, i have my things i like to splurge on, but i also must use discretion in spending and saving because of debts and future major purchases (a home).

that being said, i find modesty extremely attractive

[sifuwong]

Also, cut your own yard. That can save you over $500 a year. Or, you can hire someone to do the yard work on a call basis.

[memebag]

ComCrap's most recent rate increase pissed me off, so I canceled my cable TV. I'm going to just download everything I want to watch from the interwebs....

That's the key to real frugality: Stealing! No amount of scrimping and saving can ever compare to just taking what you want without paying.

[memebag]

Also, cut your own yard. That can save you over $500 a year. Or, you can hire someone to do the yard work on a call basis.

I get my yard cut for $20 a week. I get paid $52 an hour. I would have to cut the entire lawn in 23 minutes just to break even on the labor, and I'd have to buy and maintain a lawn mower and edger. I guess if I took a pay cut it might work...

[jm1fd]

That's the key to real frugality: Stealing! No amount of scrimping and saving can ever compare to just taking what you want without paying.

So...I'm stealing if I download the show into my computer via the internet, but it is NOT stealing if I download the show into my TiVo for free through an OTA antenna? How does that work, again? Refresh me on that one....

[musicman]

I get my yard cut for $20 a week. I get paid $52 an hour. I would have to cut the entire lawn in 23 minutes just to break even on the labor, and I'd have to buy and maintain a lawn mower and edger. I guess if I took a pay cut it might work...

if one gets paid 52/hr for every hr they are awake I could understand.

[RedScare]

I mow my yard for 3 reasons. One, it saves me $600 a year. The $450 I paid for a mower, edger and weedeater were paid for the first summer. Secondly, I do it for exercise. Even though I have a motor propelled mower, I never use it. The 45 minutes or so that I spend mowing and edging is good exercise, which save me money on health club membership fees with the accompanying bad indoor air and other peoples sweat and germs. The health club savings bought my road bike as well as my mountain bike. Thirdly, I enjoy working on my yard more than I do going to work to pay for a yard man.

I also installed my own patio pavers, and built a retaining wall, rather than pay to watch someone else do it. I also built my own deck. The money saved is nice. Seeing the finished product and knowing I did it myself is nicer.

[memebag]

So...I'm stealing if I download the show into my computer via the internet, but it is NOT stealing if I download the show into my TiVo for free through an OTA antenna? How does that work, again? Refresh me on that one....

No, Tivo is stealing, too, if you don't watch the commercials. I'm not saying stealing is wrong, just that it's the pinnacle of frugality.

[lockmat]

No, Tivo is stealing, too, if you don't watch the commercials. I'm not saying stealing is wrong, just that it's the pinnacle of frugality.

If you don't watch the commercials? LOL

I would hate to have that conscience.

[houstonmacbro]

If you don't watch the commercials? LOL

I would hate to have that conscience.

I have DVR now and I do not feel it is stealing to speed past commercials. Heck, I'm paying $80/month for cable and high speed access. I am DEFINITELY paying for it.

[memebag]

I have DVR now and I do not feel it is stealing to speed past commercials. Heck, I'm paying $80/month for cable and high speed access. I am DEFINITELY paying for it.

Nope. Your non-premium cable fees don't cover the cost of content, and in the case of broadcast TV, are only paid to stations that negotiate "retransmission consent" deals.

[houstonmacbro]

Nope. Your non-premium cable fees don't cover the cost of content, and in the case of broadcast TV, are only paid to stations that negotiate "retransmission consent" deals.

Well ... in my mind if I pay for something, they turn it on, and I watch it ... I paid for it.