Buy Yourself a Latte • Hacker News Board

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#141

Post by degrews » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:32 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #112

ineedasername wrote: post #46

If part of your audience consists of people living without much a safety net, that $5 a day adds up. Also, the author's point that saving that much isn't going to be $1 million, but "only" as much as $500,000 then that point rather falls flat. Sure, inflation may decrease the utility of that amount of money, but it will also increase the cost of that latte, so you'll be saving more than just the $5 over time. Finally…

that $5 a day adds up The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day. It's saying a. focus on larger issues and b. it's okay to do a little self care and a little self indulgence. I sometimes bought myself a fucking coffee of some sort at Starbuck's back when I was homeless. I needed the caffeine to help treat health issues. It let me plug in for an hour and get some electricity for my tablet, pl…

> The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day. It's saying a. focus on larger issues and b. it's okay to do a little self care and a little self indulgence.

I agree. But I don't think the people making the argument for spending less money on coffee are arguing against those two things.

They are not talking about never going to a Starbucks. As you point out, there are circumstances where buying a latte can provide a lot of value. But those situations don't account for most of the money being spent on $5+ lattes. In most cases, it's people in poor financial health, who are not saving enough, and who spend a significant amount on minor luxuries which don't actually contribute meaningfully to their lives. They do it just out of habit. It feels like a sacrifice to stop, but only because it requires giving up a habit. All habits are hard to give up.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#142

Post by fludlight » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #46

If part of your audience consists of people living without much a safety net, that $5 a day adds up. Also, the author's point that saving that much isn't going to be $1 million, but "only" as much as $500,000 then that point rather falls flat. Sure, inflation may decrease the utility of that amount of money, but it will also increase the cost of that latte, so you'll be saving more than just the $5 over time. Finally…

The author's point is that decades of wage stagnation combined with tremendous inflation in big ticket items (housing, healthcare, education) have made it impossible for the bottom 80% to save. That cohort will be perpetually broke because of housing, healthcare, and education. The other 20% won't notice the difference.

Rent? Enjoy annual increases that eclipse your wage growth.

Bought a home with rented money? You still have to pay the mortgage even if you get laid off. You still owe the same amount even if property values tank. If you deplete your savings you might face foreclosure, which, compounded with a down market could wipe out your equity. Most home"owners" don't understand these risks.

Major illness or emergency? Your insurance plan is tied to your job. A full time job in a competitive field at a generous company will get you decent, affordable coverage. A full time job at a company that's circling the drain or is focused on shareholder value will get you expensive coverage that doesn't cover much. A part-time job means you get to look for health insurance on your own, a process that confounds even healthcare economists, and the quality of your options varies greatly from state to state. This is where you'll eventually end up anyway, since you'll be too sick to work. Your company will find a way to fire you. Once you deplete your savings, you might qualify for aid, but not much.

Your parent/uncle/niece/unmarried SO needs money to treat a chronic illness? Government assistance won't cover everything. Neither will crowd-begging or their savings. Or yours.

Have young kids? Daycare costs $15k-30k per year. Kindergarten is only 4-5 hours a day, elementary school is 6-7 hours. One parent can only work part time--very, very close to home, or drops out of the workforce for 10+ years. This destroys their career and lifetime earnings.

Kids want to go to college? Financial aid is "need based". Live on the coast where your salary is high but so is the rent on your modest home? Too bad, need is not regionally adjusted. Are you poor and broke? OK, you have a need. Decades ago your child would receive grants, now they'll receive grants and loans. Hopefully you planned and parented well so they go to an in-state state school, otherwise they end up shackled to a mountain of debt.

Frugality won't save you. Don't be stupid and live way beyond your means, but a latte a day doesn't matter. The most important thing is to get in the top 20% on one salary and hope you stay there.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#143

Post by atomwaffel » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:42 PM UTC

failrate wrote: post #132

esotericn wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. $5 a day is a significant amount of money to a huge number of people. In the UK, if you're on minimum wage, a 3 quid coffee represents approximately 5% of your daily income. If such an individual (someone who earned minwage for a lifetime) were to end up with even "merely" 100K in today's money at age 60 that would actually be an enormous amount relative to their cohort.

If someone has that marginal an income, they will never even begin to start a savings plan, nor will that money survive to retirement. It will be gobbled up by the first medical or vehicular emergency that comes up.

Unless of course they live in a country that has tax-funded health care and useable public transport, of which there are quite a few.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#144

Post by mywittyname » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:43 PM UTC

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #111

kemitche wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think Social Security is?

An unsustainable ponzi scheme? :)

It's perfectly sustainable and returns are not guaranteed. You may get 1000x what you put in by living to 130, or you may get nothing by living to 60. But at least you're entitled to some safety net in your old age.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#145

Post by dsego » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #66

vonseel wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer a clever dripper to a french press. Much less cleanup... toss filter and grounds in the trash in one fell swoop, rinse once or twice under some water in the sink, done. On the other hand, I much prefer a latte to any pour-over or french press coffee, maybe it's the steamed milk, I'm not sure. I don't mess with latte's at home anymore. I've had two <$200 machines wear out on me and it's too much work for some…

Having used both, cleaning the french press is not a lot more work than a pourover device. Swirl some water, throw out on a patch of grass or flower bed, rinse, done. Of course, if you don't have a handy grounds disposal spot, there will be some additional issues.

Doesn't work in an apartment, have to either scoop out the solids into a trash can or fill with some water and pour out into the toilet bowl and flush. It can get messy.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#146

Post by degrews » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:46 PM UTC

biesnecker wrote: post #80

ineedasername wrote: post #46

If part of your audience consists of people living without much a safety net, that $5 a day adds up. Also, the author's point that saving that much isn't going to be $1 million, but "only" as much as $500,000 then that point rather falls flat. Sure, inflation may decrease the utility of that amount of money, but it will also increase the cost of that latte, so you'll be saving more than just the $5 over time. Finally…

I read this very differently -- if $5/day makes up a significant portion of your safety net spending, then you have much larger problems than the $5 delta your latte is causing. It's not that $5/day doesn't matter to anyone, it's that the people for whom it matters are facing much larger systemic issues that we're ignoring while shaming people for the smallest of luxuries. edit: missing word

Okay, I can appreciate that observation. But I don't think that the advice to individuals to stop worrying about luxury daily coffee spending follows from that.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#147

Post by setquk » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:49 PM UTC

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #140

ineedasername wrote: post #46

If part of your audience consists of people living without much a safety net, that $5 a day adds up. Also, the author's point that saving that much isn't going to be $1 million, but "only" as much as $500,000 then that point rather falls flat. Sure, inflation may decrease the utility of that amount of money, but it will also increase the cost of that latte, so you'll be saving more than just the $5 over time. Finally…

$5 a day. $1800 a year. In ten years a family of two has $36000. This is downpayment for a house.

In UK that's downpayment for a shed.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#148

Post by DoreenMichele » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:49 PM UTC

degrews wrote: post #141

DoreenMichele wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that $5 a day adds up The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day. It's saying a. focus on larger issues and b. it's okay to do a little self care and a little self indulgence. I sometimes bought myself a fucking coffee of some sort at Starbuck's back when I was homeless. I needed the caffeine to help treat health issues. It let me plug in for an hour and get some electricity for my tablet, pl…

> The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day. It's saying a. focus on larger issues and b. it's okay to do a little self care and a little self indulgence. I agree. But I don't think the people making the argument for spending less money on coffee are arguing against those two things. They are not talking about never going to a Starbucks. As you point out, there are circumstances where buying…

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to buy $5 lattes unless they have already socked away 15% of their income into a retirement account, have at least 6 months of salary in a savings safety fund, and generally live about 10% below their means or can manage to articulately justify it to internet strangers as somehow having gotten a lot out of it while homeless.”

― Anatole France's great, great, great grandchild

I've seen pieces that indicate that poor people spend on average like $90 per month on lottery tickets and other forms of gambling. If they invested that instead, they would have a meaningful nest egg. I think that's a brilliant thing to point out.

So, certainly, it can be reasonable to suggest that sometimes poor people can make better choices than they are currently making and it can, in fact, meaningfully improve their lives. But most such arguments really boil down to "The beatings shall continue until morale improves." because we simply don't approve of poor people having any bright spots in their dreadful, miserable lives.

It's generally disingenuous to act like if poor people just give up a few small luxuries, they, too, can invest their way to being millionaires. This is generally not true.

I see it as malicious behavior to act like poor people can save and invest their way to wealth with a little self discipline, like giving up their coffee. Doing so is the rare exception. It is not how most rich people got rich by any stretch of the imagination.

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#149

Post by thaumaturgy » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:52 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #112

ineedasername wrote: post #46

If part of your audience consists of people living without much a safety net, that $5 a day adds up. Also, the author's point that saving that much isn't going to be $1 million, but "only" as much as $500,000 then that point rather falls flat. Sure, inflation may decrease the utility of that amount of money, but it will also increase the cost of that latte, so you'll be saving more than just the $5 over time. Finally…

that $5 a day adds up The article isn't advocating that you buy a coffee every single day. It's saying a. focus on larger issues and b. it's okay to do a little self care and a little self indulgence. I sometimes bought myself a fucking coffee of some sort at Starbuck's back when I was homeless. I needed the caffeine to help treat health issues. It let me plug in for an hour and get some electricity for my tablet, pl…

There was an illustrative article on this topic a few years ago [1]:

"It’s not like the sacrifice will result in improved circumstances; the thing holding me back isn’t that I blow five bucks at Wendy’s. It’s that now that I have proven that I am a Poor Person that is all that I am or ever will be. It is not worth it to me to live a bleak life devoid of small pleasures so that one day I can make a single large purchase. I will never have large pleasures to hold on to."

(I really recommend reading the whole thing, for those that have never lived that situation long-term.)

There's additionally a more recent study on the cognitive effects of long-term poverty [2], which essentially finds that poverty skews prioritization in financial decision-making and produces long-term decision-making stress which amounts to a massive ongoing cognitive load.

Attitudes like ~ineedasername's are just fucking infuriating, especially when posted in response to an article in which the entire point was that saving money on coffee is not a habit which in isolation will make a huge difference in anyone's financial future.

It's only about one step removed from victim blaming. Impoverished people aren't poor because they occasionally buy coffee. They're poor because there's an economic system currently in place which is slurping as much wealth away from as many people as possible to feed it to just a few.

[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/your-br...

[2]: http://review.chicagobooth.edu/behavioral-science/2018/artic...

Re: Buy Yourself a Latte

#150

Post by mywittyname » Fri, Apr 05, 2019, 6:56 PM UTC

ChrisRR wrote: post #3

I think this article misses the point. The daily coffee isn't the only problem with people's spending, but is representative of all the small daily spends that add up without people realising. It's the petrol in your car when you could've walked, it's the extra bar of chocolate that you add to your lunch, it's the daily newspaper you buy. Everything adds up very quickly and the coffee is just one example

That's literally the point of the article -- the prices on the things we want are going down, while the prices of the things we need keep climbing. That $5 coffee will still be $5 in 10 years, but housing, healthcare, insurance, etc will all have gone up dramatically.

All of these latte and avocado toast articles are a failure to acknowledge this fact and blame the economic victims.