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

Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

ajkesslerblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 211 posts

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#61

Post by jasonkester »

yason wrote: post #24

I don't think that being frugal has ever been about going cheap. Frugality is not about consuming but investing in your life: that often contradicts with cheap. Frugality is about not buying things you don't need but buying things you can't live without. A frugal person will typically invest in quality because he knows he'll be using the item for years and doesn't want to replace it every few. I wouldn't consider mys…

Indeed, and I think that's what the author was saying too.

One example: Craftsman Hand Tools. They have a lifetime guarantee, so provided you don't lose them, you're done buying screwdrivers and wrenches for life.

True story. I walked into Sears with a broken socket wrench.

Sears guy: "Wow. What happened to that?"

Me: "Well, I had a bolt that really didn't want to come loose, so I had a six foot cheater bar and I was bouncing my whole weight on it when suddenly it exploded."

Sears guy: "Yeah, that would do it. Let me see what I can do..."

[check in the back]

"Well, we don't have that model in stock, so here's a new one from our Pro line. It's a bit more expensive, but it's probably a bit stronger too. Good luck with that bolt."

I've had that same conversation on 3 different occasions, each with ludicrously mis-used tools broken entirely through my foolishness. All replaced for free with a smile.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#62

Post by yread »

ajkessler wrote: post #13
nicpottier wrote: post #3

On one hand I kind of agree with this, there certainly is something to be said for buying nice stuff now and then, especially when it is stuff you love doing. For play, I use a ratio I call the Fun Factor. Essentially, that's the $/hr of fun I get out of something. So if you go see a movie and it is $10, and it is the rare money that is actually fun to watch, then the fun factor is roughly $5. So then you apply it to…

I use the Fun Factor rationalization too, but I find it can be problematic in many cases. Mainly with bigger purchases. When you amortize that $2000 bike out per use, the difference between it and the $1500 bike can seem rather insignificant. "$1.5 v. $2 per use? Hell, I might as well get the better one." But, it's still $500. That's real money that could be used to earn more money somewhere else. Ratchet that up if…

> But, it's still $500. That's real money that could be used to earn more money somewhere else.

On the other hand the 2000$ bike is perhaps so much nicer that you ride it more often and have more fun doing it. It might last longer as well lowering the fun factor even more.

> With things like digital cameras (or any consumer electronics), it's silly to expect anything to last more than 10 years, on the very long end.

I think that's an unreasonable assumption. I had a Kyocera camera (designed in 1999) but even though I would call myself frugal (some people would call me cheap) and I didn't have much money I basically had to replace it around 2006 because of technology progress and lack of batteries, replacement parts.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#63

Post by westicle »

jerrya wrote: post #25

I tend to buy in two strategies. Either so cheap but functional I don't mind throwing it out later (as eco bad as that might be), or buying good quality wares. I believe that if you can afford good quality wares, that that will both make you happier and leave you with something of substantial resale value. So it may be a better financial strategy. Compare cheap Target cabinet with "Handmade Amish Furniture." That sai…

This is something I've never understood.

Considering that a new car loses a huge chunk of its "value" the second you drive it out of the car dealer's, if you're buying new the only sensible strategy is to drive it nearly into the ground. If you have to pay a wrecker to take it away, I agree, you may have taken it too far. But unless there are obscure tax reasons, I can't see any benefit to flipping cars regularly.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#64

Post by wyclif »

danssig wrote: post #53
yason wrote: post #24

I don't think that being frugal has ever been about going cheap. Frugality is not about consuming but investing in your life: that often contradicts with cheap. Frugality is about not buying things you don't need but buying things you can't live without. A frugal person will typically invest in quality because he knows he'll be using the item for years and doesn't want to replace it every few. I wouldn't consider mys…

I think the disconnect here is your use of the term frugal. In the US (at least the south) every time I've ever heard anyone say they were frugal they meant they were cheap. They would buy the cheapest possible thing and use it well past the point it was presentable. I've even heard such people claim the cheaper thing must be better quality because it's cheaper. Sadly, I'm not even exaggerating.

I'm from the NE, and the word "frugal" does not mean the same thing here as it does in the South. As someone above said about New England, frugal is an art form here. Frugal is spending more on Calphalon cookware because you don't waste a ton of money eating out 3x a week, and want cooking gear that lasts a lifetime so you don't have to spend more money re-buying cheap stuff later.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#65

Post by jbm »

danssig wrote: post #56
wickedchicken wrote: post #30

The privilege of spending extra on "nice things" is almost purely in the realm of the well-to-do. This is the rationale Rich White People™ use when buying L.L. Bean backpacks (LIFETIME WARRANTY GUYS) that end up piled in attics and covered in dust from neglect. Also, a downside of 'nice stuff' is you have to lug it everywhere. If you lead even a moderately itinerant lifestyle, this totally blows . Don't listen to som…

Sounds like you're a "frugal" person who got offended at this (correct) message. >Also, a downside of 'nice stuff' is you have to lug it everywhere. What on earth are you talking about? If you buy a cheap generic $200 17" laptop you'll have to lug it around just as much as a nice MBP. The difference is; you'll have to replace the cheapy about 10 times in the lifetime of my MBP.

I think you are reading too much into the comment.

I can throw out or resell a 400$ laptop with some ease; not so easy with a more expensive model. (My current laptop is a MBP that I got from work)

I can't invest too much on a bed as I can't lug it around with my bedouin lifestyle. I can imagine that is the case for quite a few people.

It's great that you have stability of location but that isn't true for us all.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#66

Post by dhs »

chc wrote: post #17
paganel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The strange hate for people who are "cheap" is one of the more bizarre about Americans. I also find strange the stigma attached to being a "loser".

Isn't it at least a little bit bad by definition?

I think this depends on the definition. If you define it as "Given any competition with n competitors, where n>1, then n-1 of the competitors are losers", and you find 0 persons who have won all the competitions they participated in (which I think is a likely result), then everybody is a loser. Why should I think this is "bad"?

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#67

Post by roel_v »

comice wrote: post #50

"I get as much pleasure watching my bank account grow as I do from buying things or taking trips" Pleasure from amassing wealth or things is misplaced. It's a dangerous addiction to nothing. Work on that before you lecture the frugal about being cheap.

"Pleasure from amassing wealth or things is misplaced."

Says you. A holier than thou attitude about how awful all this 'materialism' and 'attachment to the physical world' is, is also misplaced.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#68

Post by yread »

dprice1 wrote: post #51

I'm in a state of disbelief that this is the top article on HN right now. Reading this article made me feel like I was shopping in the discount aisle of the pop-psych megalo-mart. This article is cheap shoes. It is poorly written, contains numerous abuses of the English language, and aims low at an obvious insight; the comments have been an order of magnitude more insightful. The author utterly misunderstands the mea…

You're absolutely correct. It's a pity I can't upvote only the comment thread without upvoting the article. I find the discussion here so good it reminds me of the "old HN" days :)

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#69

Post by danssig »

wyclif wrote: post #64
danssig wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the disconnect here is your use of the term frugal. In the US (at least the south) every time I've ever heard anyone say they were frugal they meant they were cheap. They would buy the cheapest possible thing and use it well past the point it was presentable. I've even heard such people claim the cheaper thing must be better quality because it's cheaper. Sadly, I'm not even exaggerating.

I'm from the NE, and the word "frugal" does not mean the same thing here as it does in the South. As someone above said about New England, frugal is an art form here. Frugal is spending more on Calphalon cookware because you don't waste a ton of money eating out 3x a week, and want cooking gear that lasts a lifetime so you don't have to spend more money re-buying cheap stuff later.

Fair enough. Where I'm from people say "frugal" because they don't want to say "cheap" even though that would be the truth.

Re: Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

#70

Post by danssig »

westicle wrote: post #63
jerrya wrote: post #25

I tend to buy in two strategies. Either so cheap but functional I don't mind throwing it out later (as eco bad as that might be), or buying good quality wares. I believe that if you can afford good quality wares, that that will both make you happier and leave you with something of substantial resale value. So it may be a better financial strategy. Compare cheap Target cabinet with "Handmade Amish Furniture." That sai…

This is something I've never understood. Considering that a new car loses a huge chunk of its "value" the second you drive it out of the car dealer's, if you're buying new the only sensible strategy is to drive it nearly into the ground. If you have to pay a wrecker to take it away, I agree, you may have taken it too far. But unless there are obscure tax reasons, I can't see any benefit to flipping cars regularly.

The warranty. Every time I've tried to follow your intuitive logic here I've ended up spending more per month to keep the car usable. Personally I view cars as a tax that I just have to pay, so I get the (long term) cheapest I can that uses as little gas as possible.
Post reply on HN