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

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

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 152 posts

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

#81

Post by reagency »

walshemj wrote: post #63
grmarcil wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious - what industry are you in? I've never heard of a company providing perks for car and house purchasing.

depends for Western companies those sent overseas can have some very nice perks. I remember looking at this in Malaysia and one of the thing that put me off was the "servant" issue - the idea of having a servant was just creepy to me.

A servant is a better job than working in a sweatshop to make all the things you have in your "servantless" western home.

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

#82

Post by reagency »

walshemj wrote: post #63
grmarcil wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious - what industry are you in? I've never heard of a company providing perks for car and house purchasing.

depends for Western companies those sent overseas can have some very nice perks. I remember looking at this in Malaysia and one of the thing that put me off was the "servant" issue - the idea of having a servant was just creepy to me.

A servant is a better job than working in a sweatshop to make all the things you have in your "servantless" western home.

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

#83

Post by aptwebapps »

reagency wrote: post #79
aptwebapps wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe your first option is the conventional one so while the others might be interesting they aren't what the article is talking about.

And what does "convention" say about inflation adjustments?

Something along the lines of "Being a millionaire ain't what it used to be" I guess. Are you suggesting that we should peg it to some point in the past?

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

#84

Post by crpatino »

allendoerfer wrote: post #44
jasode wrote: 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…

As long as your income is greater than your expenses (which include healthcare and retirement saving) you can absolutely buy a sports car if it makes you happy and it is not your life-goal to retire early. I think it is nice if you can provide your children some security, but I do not think that your savings have to be at the highest level when you die. I come from a country where college education is free and health…

Without commenting on the goodness/badness of deriving happiness out of a sport car...

If you can buy the thing in cash, out of pocket, without depleting more than half of your liquid savings... sure, why not. If on the other hand you buy on credit, you are making a commitment against future earnings, that are in no way guaranteed to match or surpass current earnings.

More over, if you make and habit of indulging in anything you happen to fancy, you have no guarantee that other frivolous expenses won't come before you actually finish paying this one. However its other (many) flaws that's one point that Kiyosaki's "Rich dad, poor dad" gets absolutely right: A large income is irrelevant if you inflate your lifestyle even more.

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

#85

Post by reagency »

beachstartup wrote: post #12

the people in this article have multiple or large houses, take expensive vacations, buy luxury goods... they don't sound overly frugal to me. wtf? am i taking crazy pills? my parents (in their 60s) have 2 lifetimes worth of savings and investments yet still do their own laundry, have a vegetable garden, mend their clothes.... but they drive nice cars, take expensive vacations, and buy tons of gadgets. they have a mas…

You can spend your money on high marginal value things like lifting people out of poverty, or on paying someone to create pollution and junk.

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

#86

Post by [deleted] »

mmrasheed wrote: post #72

When I read this article few minutes ago I found the following phrases and quotes defining the characters of these people and justifying their acts- ...“It’s (money) an important tool. They don’t neglect it, but they also don’t worship it.”... ...“Part of this pressure to keep going is less about greed and more about insecurity that might be self-imposed,” ... ...“It’s about paying attention to what makes you happy a…

[deleted]

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

#87

Post by mark_l_watson »

drpgq wrote: post #2

The Millionaire Next Door is a good read related to this although it is getting a bid dated.

That book had a large effect on my views of money, not being ostentatious, etc. Some people need to be flashy with their money, but probably not a good idea. I have a friend who usually drives a fairly new model Porsche while I think I have more wealth than he does and I have a 1998 Toyota Corolla. That said, it would be a more boring world if we were all the same!

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

#88

Post by reagency »

crimsonalucard wrote: post #45
DanAndersen wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cases like those in the article, these savings aren't stowed away in gold bars under rich people's mattresses, they're mainly in investments that continue to yield dividends. Those investments are going to various companies that are actually doing something with that money, so it's still circulating through the economy. Is there something I'm missing? I admit I'm not as well-versed in economics as I'd like to be.

Unless it's an ipo an "investment" or exchange of stocks for money on a stock market is simply just a trade among shareholders that generates zero GDP. It does go back into the economy and thus circulates. Dividends is wealth generated by laborers and taken by shareholder owners. Sitting on stocks and eating up dividends while contributing no work of your own does not cause money to circulate through the economy in a…

Repeat after me:

Money is not wealth.

Money is not wealth.

What you spend your money on is wealth.

Sitting on a number in a computer file does not cause inequality.

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

#89

Post by reagency »

crimsonalucard wrote: post #41
fsloth wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you exactly saying? Isn't 'redeploying money back to economy' basically investing? I think what you first would want is an increase to minimum pay if you want to increase the flow of money in the areas where I think you want.

You can invest, or you can spend in a way that generates GDP. If you "invest" or put your money into the stock market, you are not deploying your money in a way that generates GDP. Unless the stock is an IPO, you are essentially trading paper when you buy a stock. No GDP is generated on that transaction. In a sense you could be redeploying if the seller of the stock takes the money from the trade and redeploys it in…

And what if a nonnrich person needs access to capital in order to pay workers?

Who would buy an IPO if they knew everyone else took your advice and would never let the IPO buyer exit? Trading stock is dealing in liquidity. Liquidity is where all the wealth in the market is made available to humans.

Post reply on HN