Live data from Hacker News

Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

nytimes.com

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#31

Please note that although we respect frugality over lavishness. Frugality among rich people is one of the primary reasons behind wealth inequality. Sitting on top of an perverse amount of wealth and not doing anything with it is bad for the economy. Wealth needs to be redeployed back into the economy and it must be done in following a method that doesn't grow the wealth in an unnatural compounding way.

The dynamics of capitalism put wealth into the control of its wisest custodians - frugality being defined as among the wise virtues in this context.

For those who argue that democratic government is the wisest custodian, e.g. there is estate taxation and government redistribution and investment.

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#32
post #15

The millionaires at $1m to $10m absolutely DO have to be "frugal" if we use define "frugal" to be about "smart spending" as opposed to fishing pennies out of public fountains. The word "million" is deceptive because it is an amount beyond what 99% have. It makes it seem like some mind boggling amount of money but mathematically, it really isn't that much. A person classified as "millionaire" could be tagged that beca…

I think it really depends on the kind of life you want whether one million is enough to live off. There is this guy, "Mr Money Mustache", that preaches a "frugal" lifestyle as a means of retiring very early with less than a million in the bank. On his blog he talks extensively about this.

In particular, he provides some evidence that it's safe to spend 3-4% of your assets every year, indefinitely, if you invest in index funds. That means that it's enough to safe about 30 times your annual expenses. For me, that would be around 650000 Euros. A million certainly would cover this, and have something left over for extreme crisis.

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#34
post #7

Sometimes I wonder if people do things like darn their own socks just to show off how frugal they are. I have a hard time believing that a multi millionaire values his time low enough to darn socks to save sock money.

Frugality is easiest to practice as a habit. E.g. rather than regard entertainment as an expense, frugal folks make simple errands and tasks into their entertainment.

Also frugality is not about showing off, except among frugal friends comparing notes.

Another factor its that not advertising one's wealth is an inexpensive form of household security.

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#35
post #15

The millionaires at $1m to $10m absolutely DO have to be "frugal" if we use define "frugal" to be about "smart spending" as opposed to fishing pennies out of public fountains. The word "million" is deceptive because it is an amount beyond what 99% have. It makes it seem like some mind boggling amount of money but mathematically, it really isn't that much. A person classified as "millionaire" could be tagged that beca…

Cannot read the article, however, we should be careful about the definition of "millionaires".

If we define "millionaires" as the individual with 1M of worth asset you are definitely right.

If we define "millionaires" as High-Net-Worth individual (HNWi), the people who have at least 1M in investable finance without counting the primary residence it start to get more interesting.

However, if we define "millionaires" as individual with a net profit of 1M in the last fiscal year, they DO NOT have to be frugal :)

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#36
post #27
post #15

The millionaires at $1m to $10m absolutely DO have to be "frugal" if we use define "frugal" to be about "smart spending" as opposed to fishing pennies out of public fountains. The word "million" is deceptive because it is an amount beyond what 99% have. It makes it seem like some mind boggling amount of money but mathematically, it really isn't that much. A person classified as "millionaire" could be tagged that beca…

It's laughable to suggest splurging on a 300k Ferrari is irresponsible at $10M < assets < $100M.

Agreed; lots of folks have enough passion for cars and driving that a Ferrari is not such a preposterous thing, weighed against its marginal utility; and, the race-inclined Ferraris have turned out to be pretty good investments.

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#37
post #27
post #15

The millionaires at $1m to $10m absolutely DO have to be "frugal" if we use define "frugal" to be about "smart spending" as opposed to fishing pennies out of public fountains. The word "million" is deceptive because it is an amount beyond what 99% have. It makes it seem like some mind boggling amount of money but mathematically, it really isn't that much. A person classified as "millionaire" could be tagged that beca…

It's laughable to suggest splurging on a 300k Ferrari is irresponsible at $10M < assets < $100M.

Everyone's appetite for risk is different.

If I had $10,000,001.00 in the bank, I personally would not feel secure enough to spend $300k on a car (and also pay all the expensive maintenance that it entails.) Since the car is 3% of my available funds, I'd be constantly hyper paranoid about a stray rock being kicked up by the truck in front of me.

If I had $100 million, the $300k car would feel a little more "disposable". If a runaway shopping cart dings it, I'd just shrug it off and buy another one and donate the imperfect one to my landscape gardener.

On the other hand, Elon Musk bought a $1 million Mclaren F1 after the 1999 zip2 sale netted him ~$20 million. Like I said, everybody's risk profile is different and most people including me do not think he's fiscally irresponsible.

I think the nuance that's getting lost in translation is my idea of "affording" to buy an exotic car. Yes in mathematical terms, $10 million subtracting $300k leaves plenty left over so one can buy without requiring a loan and still be "wealthy."

However, my idea of "afford" also includes the state-of-mind after one pays for it. I'd like the luxury of not giving the super car no more thought than a Toyota Camry. If I'm paranoid about the car, I can't "afford" it no matter what my bank account says. The car is ruling over me instead of the other way around. The cost of ownership is too high (this includes "mental costs"). The threshold isn't "how much money I need to buy the car without a bank loan" but "how much money so that the car feels disposable."

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#38

Its important to have a spouse who has a similar desire for sensible frugality. The level of income is less important than simply living below your means for your whole life. With prudent financial planning, compound interest and the passage of time achieves the level of wealth described in the article. Indeed car purchases are a good indicator. An omission of the article is that often frugal persons are generous to…

Compound interest? Where? The interest rates are such that inflation would destroy whatever gain you have. Nearly all savings accounts are paying an annual yield of less than 1%! That means WITH compounding, you're looking at a 1% or lower gain. Inflation is typically between 1-4%, with 2% being the benchmark in terms of financial planning, though admittedly in April, we had slightly negative inflation, but that trend won't continue.

Investing is the only way to build wealth. It's impossible to save your way to financial freedom. If you make an average of $100K per year from age 30-60, that's $3 million in income. Assuming about 35% in state, local and federal taxes, that leaves you with $65K per year. Now, you're saving 10% of that per year, that's $6,500 saved per year. With a 1% rate, at the end of 30 years, you have about $229K. Assuming you live to be 80, that's $229K that needs to earn enough to pay your bills. Even if you saved 20%, you'd still not even have $500K at the end of 30 years.

With the same 20% savings rate and some reasonably smart investing (12% returns,) then you'd end up with over $3.5 million over the same period. If that investing is in real estate, you could potentially earn that gain tax free (or tax reduced) because building depreciation percentages can generally exceed the "profit" from real estate cashflow. On top of that, a 1031 exchange means you can keep selling and trading up to larger and larger real estate without paying a capital gains tax, which means you build even more net worth that can then be leveraged to buy more properties. Most millionaires get there because of property, very, very rarely because they save their way to it. A typical middle-class wage doesn't lend itself well to saving your way to millions. The math just doesn't work, the tax code also doesn't support it.

Frugality isn't the key to success. The $30 you save by washing your own car is peanuts compared to the value of that time doing something more productive (like sourcing real estate or researching investments.) Frugality can actually cost you more money because of the time-value of money. But admittedly many of us have inherited our parents/grandparents' Depression Era, middle-class ethos. It's a classic example of Rich Dad Poor Dad.

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#39

Please note that although we respect frugality over lavishness. Frugality among rich people is one of the primary reasons behind wealth inequality. Sitting on top of an perverse amount of wealth and not doing anything with it is bad for the economy. Wealth needs to be redeployed back into the economy and it must be done in following a method that doesn't grow the wealth in an unnatural compounding way.

Unless they've sacked their money away under their mattress, it has been deployed back into the economy. It is either invested or in a bank where the majority of it has grown the pie of total dollars through loans (this is often not well understood). If I have ten dollars that I place in a bank, they will only hold the required reserve. Assuming this is 30%, then seven will get distributed in loans. The effective siz…

[deleted]

Re: Millionaires Who Are Frugal When They Don't Have to Be

#40

"And while they own three homes — condominiums in Naples and Boca Raton, Fla., and a house in Lebanon, Pa., where they grew up, none of them are huge. One splurge is an annual trip to Italy." Frugal? Is this a joke?

I think "frugal" in this context means "spending within their abilities".

In contrast, many lottery winners are bankrupt within 5 years. Why? They're "rich"! They can spend money like it's water! And they do... Then they run out.

As other commenters point out, a million dollars is money, but you still have to be careful. You probably still have to work.

You can go out for dinner three times a week at a reasonable restaurant and not worry about it. You can buy a decent car without it impacting your budget too much.

They're not penny-pinching. They're not part of the 47% of americans who'd have trouble raising $400 for an emergency expense.

But care-free? Nope.

One trip a year to Italy is probably $5K for two people. In comparison, that's like $50 for someone with $10K to their name. It's money, you likely have to plan for it, but it's do-able.

Post reply on HN