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

Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 297 posts

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#101

Post by djrogers »

CodeCube wrote: post #79
branchless wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has several rentals and lives off other families. We can't all do that. It's not a real, scalable solution. It's not genuine.

Personally, I find rent-seeking landlords to be an unethical pursuit. I know that's not a mainstream thought, and is the underpinning of many people's income strategy ... but I can't support the idea of letting a family live in a property for decades, and then something happening, and they're on the street with nothing to show for the tens of thousands of dollars they have given in rent.

What exactly should be the relationship between the person who owns a home and the person that lives in it then? One of charity? Or do you think private home ownership is in and of itself wrong?

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#102

Post by reverend_gonzo »

CodeCube wrote: post #79
branchless wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has several rentals and lives off other families. We can't all do that. It's not a real, scalable solution. It's not genuine.

Personally, I find rent-seeking landlords to be an unethical pursuit. I know that's not a mainstream thought, and is the underpinning of many people's income strategy ... but I can't support the idea of letting a family live in a property for decades, and then something happening, and they're on the street with nothing to show for the tens of thousands of dollars they have given in rent.

The reason to rent is for the ability to move on demand.

If a family is renting in the same place for decades, that is their problem. The moment you realize you are going to stay in one place for an extended period of time, there is no reason to continue renting. Sure, not everybody can purchase their dream home. But they can purchase something small, build equity, and upgrade in the future. The government also has programs to help first time buyers, especially those with less income.

Again, the primary reason to rent is so you can relocate. If you are not planning on relocating in the 5-10 years, you should own, or be working on owning.

Furthermore, the landlord is taking on risk (risk of the market moving against him, risk of the tenant not paying him or the place remaining unoccupied after a tenant leaves), is paying property taxes, insurance, is responsible for broken appliances, and is also often taking on a loan with higher interest rates.

Should all of this be provided for free?

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#103

Post by [deleted] »

astura wrote: post #44
joeax wrote: post #19

I've been reading his blog for a few years, and he does some have some insightful advice on shedding unnecessary expenses and living on a frugal spending diet. I've been able to get down to one car that is almost paid off, and double my savings and investment portfolio. My favorite article from him is living close enough to work to bike (although working from home is most ideal). However, his blog comes with a bit of…

MMM is too smug and pushy for a good portion of the general public. His writing can awfully hostile, it could be toned down a bit and his message would get further - some of his advice is very sensible. The problem with frugal blogs (in general) is they do one or more of the following; push penny pinching 24/7, "if you aren't eating lentils everyday and living in a cardboard box you're fucking up," they are too conde…

[deleted]

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#104

Post by craigcannon »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #25

Does anyone else think it's a bit funny to see an MMM interview on YC? Through their investments, YC seems quite pro-consumerism. Consumerism is the antithesis of being mustachian. It's always kind of bothered me that HN (and YC) seems to encourage conspicuous consumption.

Yeah, I think on the surface it could seem contradictory. MMM does advocate frugality but he also advocates spending money on things that increase happiness and don't hurt the environment. I'd say many (though obviously not all) YC companies actually do check that box.

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#105

Post by troupe »

joeax wrote: post #19

I've been reading his blog for a few years, and he does some have some insightful advice on shedding unnecessary expenses and living on a frugal spending diet. I've been able to get down to one car that is almost paid off, and double my savings and investment portfolio. My favorite article from him is living close enough to work to bike (although working from home is most ideal). However, his blog comes with a bit of…

I would assume that an important part of trying to retire early is to choose a career path that doesn't max out at $50k per year.

From what I've seen he suggests two things are necessary to retire early: 1. Save lots of money (which requires making money that you can save). 2. Don't spend lots of money. He seems to be pretty transparent in how he does both. If you want to save lots of money, but choose a career that leads to a $50k a year job, it is necessarily going to take you longer to retire than someone who chooses a career that leads to a $150,000 per year job. I'm not sure that makes it a pipe dream--just that if your time horizon is going to be different based on the decisions you make.

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#107

Post by dxbydt »

man, what a weird pov. Start at the beginning - "nobody should do the 40 mile pleasanton to sf commute". I guess he means pleasanton to mv, because if you were to go to sf you'd just take the bart door to door. So do you know how many engineers drive from pleasanton, or in general east bay, to mv ? I'd wager its upwards of 100k, considering the backed up traffic on 680 between 8 am to noon. now are all of these engineers fools ? the majority of them have a nice tech gig in mv at the biggest tech firms - the sexiest startups and boring profitable enterprises, a solid 150k+ paycheck, stocks, 401k etc and are paying off their mortgage in the east bay on a large 3k sq ft house in an incredible school district. the tech companies themselves encourage this behavior by plying free wifi-buses on 680 so you've done your git commits en route. so which part of this is objectionable and why ? even if facebook builds a company town in san mateo or wherever, engineers are ultimately humans who have reasonable human desires to buy a house & get hitched & start a family & send the kids to school, so all of that isn't going to happen within the confines of a company town designed for the 20 year old median programmer crowd. in all likelihood, this 40 mile commute, whether to east bay or south bay or wherever will be the norm, because the alternative is what ? all of us moving to colorado and riding our bicycles to work?! i mean i envy your frugal no-waste healthy bicycle lifestyle, but i just don't see all these engineers with giant beer bellies either. they do the 40 mile commute because there really isn't much of a choice, and most companies do offer some form of on-site fitness regimen, so the majority does keep in shape. financially the outcome is positive as well - appreciating equity in a spacious sunny california home, 7 figure retirement accounts, kids in good schools. if the only downside is a 40 mile commute, i'll take that any day of the week.

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#108

Post by falcolas »

jacquesm wrote: post #33
the_gastropod wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but good luck trying to retire as a welder or car mechanic making $50k Retiring at 30 while earning $50k would be difficult. But retiring at 40 or even 50 is still relatively easy on such a salary.

That depends greatly on where you are living and on whether or not you have kids or student debt. In plenty of places a 40 or 50K salary would be burned up every month even if you never did anything crazy.

This is more important than a lot of people realize. "Just move somewhere cheaper!" is the battle cry which ignores "It's cheaper because there's no real jobs there."

Few industries are as flexible about working from home as the software development industry.

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#109

Post by davis_m »

the_gastropod wrote: post #56
jrochkind1 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? In the U.S.? Case study? Without kids and if you don't really spend any money on recreation or vacations (before or after retirement), maybe. Or if you somehow have a job that will give you a pension (with health insurance?) at 50, sure!

I suggest just reading MMM. It's all about savings rate. As an example, I live in Brooklyn, NY (one of the most expensive places to live in the U.S.) In 2016, I spent $32k ($24k was rent!) Assuming a $50k income, that'd be a ~36% savings rate, which requires a 23 year career. Assume someone making $50k lives in not NYC, I imagine this scenario could be a lot better. For a more extreme version of MMM, read http://earl…

You are forgetting taxes (FICA, state and federal income taxes, etc), which would eat up a significant portion of those savings.

Re: Interview with Mr. Money Mustache

#110

Post by abfan1127 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #27
joeax wrote: post #19

I've been reading his blog for a few years, and he does some have some insightful advice on shedding unnecessary expenses and living on a frugal spending diet. I've been able to get down to one car that is almost paid off, and double my savings and investment portfolio. My favorite article from him is living close enough to work to bike (although working from home is most ideal). However, his blog comes with a bit of…

Sadly, these days good luck trying to retire EVER making $50K.

its about living within your means... you can't afford new cards, $1000 cell phones, AND retire on 50k, but you can pare that back... Life is about choices.
Post reply on HN