I’m not saving ninety percent of my income for myself

Is that really the worst part of US poverty? I didn't see anything about drug addiction, abuse, prostitution, or prison.

Chinese poverty, I suspect, gets far worse than that.

Just seems like straightforward frugality, and she probably did far better than her ancestors going back a thousand years (or ever). Chinese premodern poverty was always worse than European.

It might be a dream if the feeling of security, of having assets, money in the bank, is the thing that's missing in your life. That'll be the case to the degree that you were insecure and poor as a child, I'd expect.

I grew up poor, but not as poor as the lady in the article. And it was in Ireland, so there was a social security net, my college degree was paid for, etc. So I feel comfy enough once I have a year's take-home income in the bank. Past that point I feel good spending money on things my partner and I enjoy, things we may not have time for if we have kids or might not be able to do at all when we get old. Working hard is only good if the work in itself is rewarding, or the money buys you things that are rewarding. Money in itself doesn't really have that allure. A six or seven figure bank account wouldn't excite me - I've spent the best part of a million pounds since I started my career, and certainly don't regret not saving it.

I, too, am building up financial resources for the point where I have to take care of my parents. They did not plan for their financial future, and now that they have split up, they are in an even more precarious situation.

Although my mother was an excellent saver (to a fault?), she was not interested in learning how to amass/raise capital, nor in any type of investing, other than older, traditional CDs, etc. that are not financially viable in this age of debt and funny money in the US.

My father is a spendthrift, so there is always a hole in his pocket.

I see in them the reluctance (or refusal?) to shift from the "American Dream" (go to school, get a good job, save for retirement, your employer/the government will take care of you) to what it more realistically takes to grow any sort of wealth in the current US financial climate.

Consumption was the biggest negative factor, I think, as well as the inability to sacrifice some of the present for the future. It seemed necessary as a kid growing up, if we were going to keep up with the Jones'. I remember being envious of having an "Ocean Pacific" jacket as a kid, and the only pair of "Britannia" jeans I had came from a second hand store. I was very caught up in the whole name-brand thing... That was the 80's, for me.

Now I save up and invest in Real Estate, effectively short the US dollar, as that seems to be the vehicle I am most comfortable with. My wife and I are accelerating the process as much as possible, without scrimping too much, as her mother, likewise, has little to live on. And being at the mercy of governmental healthcare is the pits, as I watch both sets of our parents attempting to navigate those hoops.

So I understand the author's motivation from my own point of view, and I think she has adopted practices that will serve her well, as long as she also has enough consideration for taking care of herself, her husband, and any kids they may choose to have, as well as her parents.

It is definitely possible, although I find I have to ignore all of the "consume this now" messaging I perceive blasting at me from all angles in media.

Side benefit: Ignoring that media helps on the political front, though, as well. I used to become (still sometimes become?) the raving lunatic when I pay attention to what higher politicians (non-local) and larger government employees get up to, technically on my behalf.

I feel much more calm ignoring that and focusing only on what I have a chance of affecting: My home, family, friends, and immediate neighborhood. I have even served in local government, and although I did not enjoy it (the waste! the pettiness!) it helped me make more social contacts locally that have positively affected my life and immediate living environment.

I now volunteer more often, as well, as there is much need in the community, and few obvious answers (to others' points of view).

It seems to be working for me... YMMV.

I think about this a lot, as another frugal but high-earning household that earns way more than we spend, even after maxing out 401(k) contributions. Most people in our position save more than they need partly as a means of hedging personal risk (higher-than-typical retirement and medical expenses, children who grow up unable to financially self-suffice), and partly (IMHO) just because they gain some satisfaction from seeing numbers climb and because hoarding wealth is not seen as having any downside. However, at least the first of these reasons could be much more efficiently managed by having social (rather than individual) safety nets, for the same reason that insurance works. Some people also save with the thought of giving away a ton of money at death, but this again holds money out of useful purposes until decades away. With these thoughts in mind, and with the example of religious folks with much less disposable income than us who tithe, we annually give away whatever money we don't have use for after sensible but not excessively conservative allocations for immediate and future needs. To be clear, I'm not certain this is the right thing to do; ask me how I feel about it in a few decades!

> America, and indeed many countries in the world, do not have the social safety nets to take care of its own people when they can't work anymore.

I don't see any good alternatives to having children take care of their parents. Abuse is common at even the most expensive nursing homes. You can't always blame the caretakers either because being constantly surrounded by grumpy, dying people has a huge psychological toll.