Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Being frugal is for the rich

theoutline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 305 posts

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#201

Post by incompatible »

autokad wrote: post #109
T2_t2 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they also had less. This is the ... I'm not sure of the right word, paradox? duality? ... anyway, the problem/benefit of globalisation, that it leads to cheaper stuff. We all have more today, even on less money. Thought experiment: ask yourself when it was better to be poor: 1950, or 2018. In 1950 you could... go to the library? In 2018, even the very poor likely have a mobile phone, the internet, a games cons…

when you account for taxes in everything (not just income taxes), I think taxes are pretty much everyone's biggest expense. then housing

Not in my case, I don't pay income taxes (my income isn't high enough) and most of my income goes on rent.

However, I suspect my living costs (in an apartment) are actually somewhat lower than the Frugalwoods in their country villa.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#202

Post by nunez »

mcguire wrote: post #195
nunez wrote: post #130

I was expecting the article to say how they've inherited a massive amount of money or how their parents paid for their education/first home/etc., which made them deciding to go frugal by achieving financial independence a hell of a lot easier. I didn't see any of that. Furthermore, the author doesn't fully explain how these two were "rich" before pursuing their journey to frugality aside from purchasing a home in Cam…

A dual-income tech salary may well qualify as rich. The median household income in MA is about $75,000 (much higher than the national median). That's also about what the median software developer is paid. ( https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Developer/... )

That's fair. I agree that a dual-tech-income is a lot of money compared to the national average.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#203

Post by [deleted] »

manigandham wrote: post #190
dijit wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I follow the logic, $350 on a passable phone that lasts 5~ years and affords me the ability to save time on banking (paying bills at least) and also connecting them to unimaginable numbers of people potentially while also granting access to the worlds information. Wifi hopping and pay as you go mobile plans mean that any cost outside of the cellphone itself is miniscule. Why I think the value proposition of…

I guess my comment is more confusing than intended, but a smartphone and modern living easily lets you be productive enough to afford a house. It's not difficult when half the planet lives on dollars per day.

[deleted]

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#204

Post by greedo »

MaybiusStrip wrote: post #147
dlp211 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wages have remained flat when inflation is taken into account, i.e. real wages are flat, nominal wages continue to increase. We also have seen upward movement in median household income recently, and we should expect that trend to continue. So the idea of flat wages may be coming to an end. What hasn't remained flat is the wages paid to the top N% which has greatly increased and accelerated the wealth gap. It is this…

I would qualify: people aren't just dissatisfied because of the "unfairness" of growing inequality. The growth of the wealth gap has some very real ramifications, ie: on the distribution of power in politics.

As if the poor ever had any power in politics. Huey Long might have been a lightning rod for poor people, but it's not as if their votes have been courted since I've been alive.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#205

Post by your-nanny »

manigandham wrote: post #192
s73v3r_ wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What resources or "connections" do you need?" Money, for one. Time for two.

We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.

Just so fantasies are soooooo appealing.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#206

Post by manigandham »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #198
manigandham wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.

Someone who's working two jobs would disagree with you.

Disagree with what? That there are 24 hours in a day?

They choose to spend that time working 2 jobs. I've done the same in the past. I've decided between buying dinner or getting gas to drive to work to earn enough to cover the commute in the first place. Eventually you make decisions to get you out of that life and into a better one. There's luck involved sure, but I absolutely reject any excuses as if it's completely out of your control.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#207

Post by manigandham »

your-nanny wrote: post #205
manigandham wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.

Just so fantasies are soooooo appealing.

If it's a fantasy then perhaps you're not spending your time wisely...

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#208

Post by mikeash »

nunez wrote: post #191
mikeash wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

State income tax is not generally the important part. From a quick search, the highest rate in the nation is 13.3% in California. The Federal income tax rate tops out at 37%, and there's also 7.65% Federal payroll tax.

Yes it is because that 13.3% is on top of your federal taxes (which don't change). A Californian making $150k is making $20,000 less than a Texan making $150k. That's sizeable! And Californians pay more in property taxes!

The 13.3% bracket starts at around a million dollars a year. Where do you get $20,000 from? A single person with no dependents with that income would pay about $11,000 in state income tax and $37,000 in federal income tax.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#209

Post by your-nanny »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #140
ahtu123 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really shows how some people in HN have never experienced poverty. If a households main income earner is making minimum wage they will not be making shopping trips to IKEA to furnish their whole apartment lol. IKEA is cheap but the $50 you have left over after bills won't get you much. Many months you will have a negative balance after you've paid for essentials.

>If a households main income earner is making minimum wage Maybe you shouldn't start a family when you are making minimum wage, in a city with a high cost of living.

It surely seems now that the biological imperative is just a luxury for the rich...

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#210

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #140
ahtu123 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really shows how some people in HN have never experienced poverty. If a households main income earner is making minimum wage they will not be making shopping trips to IKEA to furnish their whole apartment lol. IKEA is cheap but the $50 you have left over after bills won't get you much. Many months you will have a negative balance after you've paid for essentials.

>If a households main income earner is making minimum wage Maybe you shouldn't start a family when you are making minimum wage, in a city with a high cost of living.

Personally I agree that in modern society its a good idea to wait to have kids until you can provide for them....

But its a little weird that a Caveman's most basic prerogative (To procreate), is not something many people in modern society can afford to do.

It's also something that is fairly important to the continuation of our species, so hopefully we can figure out a way more people can responsibly afford to have children.

Post reply on HN