Being Frugal Makes You A Loser

I think I may already practice everything this blog post tells me to, but I still feel insulted, both on my behalf and on behalf of people I know. The author comes off as a real dick. I can't point to any recommendation in the post I specifically disagree with, but I'm pretty confident if he met me he'd find some reason to think I'm a loser. And my whole family. And most of my friends.

Maybe it's because I don't take the same snotty attitude toward the "mediocrity" of consumer purchases. Maybe it's because I recognize that the "draining" and "grating" experience of using "piece of shit" stuff is, in many cases, entirely relative. My car is less a draining piece of shit than a $15,000 car and more a draining piece of shit than a $30,000 car. My television is less a piece of shit than a $1000 television and more a piece of shit than a $2000 television.

There's no magical way to get beyond "piece of shit" when there's always a better, more expensive item available. The shirts I buy are not as nice as the $200 shirts I'd buy if I were not paying careful attention to my spending. I tried to buy a sport coat a few months ago. I'm not really comfortable buying fancy clothes, so I just wandered around randomly for a week before giving up, but what do you know, the perfect jacket I found (not in my size, but perfect fabric) at Armani Exchange cost $2000 marked way down. Apparently I will not be buying a sport coat that makes me feel "quality" and "worth it." My favorite restaurants in town easily run into triple digits for two people or even for one -- I go occasionally and watch what I spend, and on rare occasions I have whatever I want. I don't feel like I'm eating shit and reinforcing the mentality that I'm a cheap piece of crap when I spend $15 on a meal, even if I usually would prefer the $50 meal.

There's no way I can escape those compromises. There's a hell of a lot of better stuff I would buy if I made twice the money I make now. There's no way I can escape consciousness of that better stuff, and there's no way I can escape the fact that there are plenty of people in town who don't have to make the same compromises I do. There's no way I can escape the fact that the fabrics I wear do not feel as nice as the fabrics they wear. There's no escaping the fact that I chose my apartment as a trade-off between niceness and location. I have a crappy apartment in a perfect location; most of my coworkers have beautiful, new houses in distant, desolate suburbs; and a few blocks away from me there are beautiful high-rise condos that are nicer than my coworkers' houses and more centrally located than my crappy apartment. I could afford one of those condos if I stopped contributing to my 401k and stopped saving for a down payment on a house.

Does my choice of apartment make me frugal? I pay more for a central location, which is what I want, so maybe I am following his advice. On the other hand, I pay less by accepting a crappier apartment, so maybe I am not following his advice. Actually, now that I think about it, I cannot be following his advice, because my apartment does not fill me with gratification and self-esteem. Even when I make the right decisions for myself, I never think "Damn, this is great, I am so totally worth this." Instead, I think, "This isn't the best or the worst, but it's the best trade-off for me. Some people who make the same money as me will spend more and have something better, and others will spend less and have something not as good."

I really don't feel bad about it until I run into people like this who ram it down my throat that not having the stuff I really want is supposed to make me feel cheap and unworthy compared to the people who can afford it.

And finally, not that anybody gives a shit anymore, it's just morally wrong to equate possession of higher quality stuff with a higher level of worthiness. If you indulge in the gratifying thought that your nice stuff reflects your superior worthiness, that generalizes to the perception that people with higher quality stuff are higher quality people. It's an inescapable mentality, you can't not think that way, but shouldn't we be working to moderate that prejudice instead of intentionally aggravating it?

Yes.

There are people who take consumption too far, and there are people who take frugality to the point of miserliness. I don't think it's fair to peg the definition of frugality to either of these extremes.

Furthermore, I take issue with the author's (or anyone's) attempts to stake out objective ground on what does or does not constitute "the right place" to spend money. Everyone lives differently. "The right places" are subjective. If I derive a ton of personal utility and happiness from splurging on something someone else considers worthless, while saving on something someone else considers vital, then that's my prerogative. So long as my overall strategy is sound, and I'm living within or under my means, I'm fine with my choices.

But your time has a cost. How much time do you spend cutting coupons, seeking discounts, finding, and then pursuing rebates, cash back offers, etc? Could you spend it doing something else? Would that time expenditure make more money than $3k/yr? The last calculations I saw, you were almost always better off picking up a part-time job or a hobby that makes stuff you can sell.

This. The peace of mind that comes with owning disposable or easily replaceable stuff is priceless. Every item I have to spend time and effort maintaining and worry about losing or damaging it is another golden ball and chain around my carefreeness.

Yes, but when the original author said it he was rude and condescending. Rude because there is simply no polite way to call someone a loser. Condescending because he assumed that ignorance was the only reason someone would buy something of low quality and that everyone reading the article would have money to buy high quality things.

Almost everyone in the U.S. has access to an internet connection. If not in their home, in their local library. The median household income in the U.S. is around $50k. Many people earn much less than that, and they still manage to get access to the internet. If you are used to living with above-median income, you should be humble when saying what people earning much less than median can and can't afford.

And that's just considering the U.S., which is easily in the top 10 of median income.

By contrast, yason did not assume anything about the readers ability to afford things and he or she did not put anyone down, except maybe people who buy the best of absolutely everything and still claim to be frugal, and even then, yason only addressed their behavior, not them as people.

There is a right and a wrong way to say things. The original author went with the wrong way.