Buy Yourself a Latte • Hacker News Board

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#331

Post by scarejunba » Sat, Apr 06, 2019, 10:29 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #314

sisu2019 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Impoverished people aren't poor because they occasionally buy coffee Impoverished people might be poor because they take everything literally and can't see the big picture though. Yes, frivolous spending absolutely has something to do with poverty. It's so clear and obvious and when I look at every example of a person that I know that could be called poor vs someone that is rich there is the same pattern: The poor…

"Rich people I know LOVE to work. They would work for free." Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired? The rich people you know don't have to deal with the crap poor fo…

> Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired?

Not to speak for Americans but this is the classic immigrant story in America. I, personally, know many people who've done this.

It isn't about "this type of work" or "people taking it out on me". The world is a place. It is a certain way. I have an objective. To have my family better off. So if someone is going to yell, they're going to yell. It's just the constraint. I'm going to adapt to it.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#332

Post by im3w1l » Sat, Apr 06, 2019, 10:37 PM UTC

yellowstuff wrote: post #44

CompelTechnic wrote: post #14

To give this conversation a more concrete example, here is (linked below) a calculation of saving $5 a day over 40 years, in real (inflation adjusted) dollars, assuming returns on invested assets are 7% per year. This is a realistic number based on >100 years of U.S. real (inflation adjusted) stock performance. You end up with $377k after 40 years. In my opinion, a lot of Americans and people around the first world l…

7% real return is a relatively high assumption. In the article Ritholtz assumes 8% nominal returns and 2-3% inflation, so 5-6% real returns. Even assuming 5% real returns is somewhat optimistic. Developed countries in the last 100 years or so have achieved that, but most places in most time periods have not.

I'd argue that you can beat the market. And poor people especially.

What? Heresy? No I don't mean by stock picking. I mean by investing in yourself. Imagine if you save up enough money that you avoid having to take out a payday loan. Or imagine if you have sufficient money that you aren't in chronic stress mode, and can think about your long term future instead of worrying about the next meal. Or being able the upfront cost of bulk buying. Or maybe you can buy high quality tools and gear that allow you to do your job more efficiently.

If you can start a virtuous cycle in your personal finances that can create huge excess returns.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#333

Post by lazyasciiart » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

sisu2019 wrote: post #330

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Rich people I know LOVE to work. They would work for free." Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired? The rich people you know don't have to deal with the crap poor fo…

> Would they work fast food for as many hours? You don't fully understand how these "next door millionaire" types operate. They don't look at something and say "that's fast food work". They work at what is necessary for however long it takes. My girlfriend is building her two businesses, she spends nights in the basement sewing piece after piece by the dozens and the days churning out t-shirt design after t-shirt des…

This woman seems to have magically exhibited every moral failing and self inflicted difficulty that the American right wing ever made up. You should probably step back and realize that it sounds totally unbelievable - for instance, you can’t cause an entire years developmental delay in an otherwise healthy three year old simply by not playing with them enough.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#334

Post by cerberusss » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 6:39 AM UTC

munk-a wrote: post #251

jimbokun wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day." That is EXACTLY what the article is advocating, very explicitly. Your case sounds very different than the "$5 latte a day habit", which is probably just someone standing in line in the morning, grabbing their coffee and absent-mindedly sipping it as they walk to the office. You got an hour of shelter and a comfortable place to sit in a nice enviro…

This article is terribly misleading and, honestly, makes me wonder if it's just some BS starbucks guerilla marketing. I agree that having an occasional treat is great - the latte a day habit is an addiction it stops being a treat. The article fails because it uses terminology to positively frame it as a treat while using terminology to include the negative framing when describing what you can do... it is terribly wri…

I estimate the chance infinitesimal that it's marketing, Barry is a well-known financial planner/wealth manager and doesn't need a small cheque from Starbucks.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#335

Post by sisu2019 » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 7:44 AM UTC

lazyasciiart wrote: post #333

sisu2019 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would they work fast food for as many hours? You don't fully understand how these "next door millionaire" types operate. They don't look at something and say "that's fast food work". They work at what is necessary for however long it takes. My girlfriend is building her two businesses, she spends nights in the basement sewing piece after piece by the dozens and the days churning out t-shirt design after t-shirt des…

This woman seems to have magically exhibited every moral failing and self inflicted difficulty that the American right wing ever made up. You should probably step back and realize that it sounds totally unbelievable - for instance, you can’t cause an entire years developmental delay in an otherwise healthy three year old simply by not playing with them enough.

It's not made up. You misunderstood about the developmental delays: she gave birth to her son, refused to nurse him, refused to even have him close to her. She did not go outside with him or interact with him in any way beyond what's necessary to sustain life. She was living in a 11 squaremeter apartment with him and did not let him explore, did not take him to the play ground, did not take him to child groups. For a young child this situation basically amounts to sensory deprivation and it's absolutely enough to stunt growth and development.

Oh it's real, I haven't even told you half of her insanity.

Like the time my girlfriend who is her friend tried to help her quit by listening to Alen Carr which had helped us a lot in quitting smoking. Quote verbatim: 'this is brain washing'.

Like the time my step son who would rather bite his arm of then confront someone told her straight up that smoking while pregnant is a shitty thing to do to the baby. She just shrugges, smiles and say I know I know.

Like when she told her baby father to move 700km so he can take their son on the weekends (she was always trying to pawn him off to someone) and then half a year later moved up 500km the same direction to her new boyfriend and now has the state pay for her legal bills from the resulting custody dispute.

It's all real. You can, of course think, that it's all invented by the american right wing to make poor people look bad but if you listen you will hear the same kind of stories from social workers and welfare officials from all over. You might not want to believe this because it points to a fundamental problem of welfare: bad attitudes, tendencies and habits get worse with more resources and not better.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#336

Post by Broken_Hippo » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 8:19 AM UTC

scarejunba wrote: post #331

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Rich people I know LOVE to work. They would work for free." Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired? The rich people you know don't have to deal with the crap poor fo…

> Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired? Not to speak for Americans but this is the classic immigrant story in America. I, personally, know many people who've done t…

I'm not saying there aren't situations where these aren't viable options. I'm personally an immigrant and would be happy with about any sort of job. I'd be fooling myself thinking said job makes me rich, and I don't have to work two of these jobs to make it. I also don't have to support a family. Luckily, I don't really have to work either, it merely affords us a different lifestyle. Lots of folks are motivated to work such jobs, and make the best of them. However, none of them are rich nor do they have the options and luxuries of the rich.

I'm saying no one would do these jobs for "love of working" if they are rich enough to avoid such labour. For example: You might open a restaurant, but you'd not likely be a cashier at McDonalds with no health insurance, vacation, nor agency over one's life. You might own a hobby farm, but it is highly unlikely you'd be a migrant farm worker if you are already rich. And so on.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#337

Post by scarejunba » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 9:17 AM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #336

scarejunba wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would they work fast food for as many hours? How about in a call center where half the customers are angry and taking it out on you? How about if they couldn't afford the basics in life from the job? How about if they couldn't afford health care or food, so when working they are always tired? Not to speak for Americans but this is the classic immigrant story in America. I, personally, know many people who've done t…

I'm not saying there aren't situations where these aren't viable options. I'm personally an immigrant and would be happy with about any sort of job. I'd be fooling myself thinking said job makes me rich, and I don't have to work two of these jobs to make it. I also don't have to support a family. Luckily, I don't really have to work either, it merely affords us a different lifestyle. Lots of folks are motivated to wo…

Not going to argue that point. It's about moving up in the leverage thing and menial labour is very low leverage.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#338

Post by ineedasername » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 2:28 PM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #87

ineedasername wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people by 2, or 3. Then think of streaming services and other subscription services, gold-plated cable TV packages, etc. That meal box kit that costs you $240/month. It's pretty easy to get non-essential luxury spending up in to a few hundreds of dollars a month. Not to say you ditch it all, but judicious pruning of it down to the essentials/most used/biggest time savers etc isn't impractical. Obviously if…

None of those things get you even close to $50/day. The "meal box kit"s are hundreds of dollars a month, yeah, but they also come with hundreds of dollars worth of food. Blue Apron comes out to about $10 per meal and they're considered the expensive choice. TV packages get you up to $60 per month, or $2 per day. Wow, so wasteful, almost the price of a one-way commute and all you get in return is broad and unlimited 2…

Meal boxes are more than twice as much/meal than buying your own ingredients. I calculate the average cost per serving when I duplicated Hello Fresh recipes at roughly $3/serving. Add in a few hundred dollars a month for eating out as well, the occasional dinner, lots of lunches, all a luxury compared to cooking/preparing your own.

I have no idea where you're getting $60 for cable, that may be the promotional cost but where I am, it's $75 for the cable, $11 for the cable box, and about $25 in other non-optional fees too, bringing it to $110 for the base package, and using that price is still a straw man: My comment specifically referenced the high-end even more expensive packages that can top $200 per month. Add in internet to that cable bill with upgraded data speeds and that can easily be another $100/month. Then Add in another $30 per month for a few streaming services, maybe another $30 for content rentals/purchases, $20 to see a movie in theaters once a month

Then there are costs the significantly pad essential things like housing and auto costs:

Plenty of people lease a new car every 3 years instead of buying one and keeping for a long time, and at the same time spend more than necessary, getting a top model when a base model for $10k less will work just as well.

Plenty of people buy much larger houses/apartments than necessary, opting for more rooms or more square footage than is needed, fancy appliances, counter tops, etc.

It's possible to do all of the above in single-person household. Now consider a married couple, or a couple with kids.

None of the above is all that abnormal. It's also a straw man to say people can't afford this: You attribute to me an argument I never made. I never claimed every person could or did spend this much money or luxuries. Nor was I referring just to luxury items. I was referring to non-essential expenses in general, with some reference to luxury. And it is absolutely true that lots of people spend $18,000/year in non-essential expenses, while at the same time they have little savings, retirement, etc.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#339

Post by TheCoelacanth » Sun, Apr 07, 2019, 3:29 PM UTC

nugget wrote: post #189

DoreenMichele wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to buy $5 lattes unless they have already socked away 15% of their income into a retirement account, have at least 6 months of salary in a savings safety fund, and generally live about 10% below their means or can manage to articulately justify it to internet strangers as somehow having gotten a lot out of it while homeless.” ― Anatole France's great, gr…

>It is not how most rich people got rich by any stretch of the imagination. Have you read the Millionaire Next Door? I suppose it depends how you define "rich" these days, but the data in that book seems to indicate that most US dollar millionaire households are dual middle income workers who live below their means for decades and actively save and invest the difference.

Having two middle incomes in a household is a luxury that many households don't have. By definition, half of people have incomes below the median. Assuming random pairing of couples, 25% would have both people making below median incomes, but in reality people tend to pair up with people with similar incomes, so in practice it is even higher than that.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#340

Post by lazyasciiart » Mon, Apr 08, 2019, 12:50 AM UTC

sisu2019 wrote: post #335

lazyasciiart wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This woman seems to have magically exhibited every moral failing and self inflicted difficulty that the American right wing ever made up. You should probably step back and realize that it sounds totally unbelievable - for instance, you can’t cause an entire years developmental delay in an otherwise healthy three year old simply by not playing with them enough.

It's not made up. You misunderstood about the developmental delays: she gave birth to her son, refused to nurse him, refused to even have him close to her. She did not go outside with him or interact with him in any way beyond what's necessary to sustain life. She was living in a 11 squaremeter apartment with him and did not let him explore, did not take him to the play ground, did not take him to child groups. For a…

No, they don't. And social workers and welfare officials that I know do tell stories like this - about the parents of children now in state care. Infants don't get left with mothers who refuse to nurse or hold them. Children who are found to be suffering from such severe neglect that they are developmentally delayed don't get left with those parents. I have no doubt you believe what you're saying, and I have no doubt that you are misinformed.