Put Your Spending into Reverse Gear

Steve Says:

September 18th, 2007, 5:57 am

Thats really sad, you had to down shift to only $100 a pair jeans?

Such suffering.

[Edited for rudeness.]

Hannes Calitz Says:

September 18th, 2007, 6:36 am

Fantastic article. I absolutely love this theory of doing things, and I will definitely give it a go. Thank you for sharing. :)

brent Says:

September 18th, 2007, 6:42 am

Your version of frugality is to find an easy to still see yourself as a hyperconsumer, just somehow without the cost.

The goal of frugality is to be able to view your life in such a way that unwarranted spending is abhorrent to you.

You shouldn’t have said that you’d go to Target or Walmart if you had to.

Instead, you should have written something like “I decided not to buy any jeans at all this year. The jeans I already own still fit me just fine, and you know what? I LIKE them the way they are - me and those jeans have history together.”

Yeah, I agree with Steve. You still sound like a consumerist - like someone who Deserves to spend. You don’t sound like someone who’s trying to make fundamental changes to your life. You sound like making your own breakfast is somehow beneath you!

[Edited for rudeness.]

Leo Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:10 am

Guys … please be kind to my guest posters! I don’t understand the hostility here.

Everyone has different lifestyle standards … Anne’s may be different from yours, but the main point of her article applies to anyone: your spending habits tend to increase over time, especially as your income increases … and to fight this, gradually reduce your spending habits.

That’s good advice, whether you’re used to buying expensive jeans or expensive gadgets like iPods or computers or mobile devices or cameras.

Don’t let the details get in the way of the message. It’s a good message.

And please, don’t be so rude! Disagree, but be civil.

Malin Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:12 am

I liked this post, it seems like a good way to begin spending less. I wouldn’t have commented if Steve and Brent hadn’t been so venomous - I think they haven’t thought through what your article is actually about and I wanted to balance their input a little.

Lola Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:12 am

Please remember that she states, “But doing it the way I’m doing it, in gradual increments, means that I don’t jolt my expectations too much at once.”
I appreciate her honesty in showing us how she’s getting there one step at a time, and the use of “gradual increments” is similar to Leo’s advice in changing habits.

weiszguy Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:18 am

I’m speechless (well, almost).

I’ve been reading this blog for a long time, and I particularly like all the posts and comments related to frugality. But this post seems to fly in the face of all the others.

You know how famous actors occasionally do indie films? It makes them feel like they’re giving back to all those undiscovered actors who aren’t famous yet. It removes some of the guilt of being famous, but it certainly doesn’t put them back into the “undiscovered” category. Ratcheting down to the $100 jeans is kind of like that. She feels like she’s somehow doing good for her budget, and for humanity. It makes her feel good, but it certainly isn’t frugal.

And shifting down to 7-11 for her coffee really isn’t helping much either. Are we supposed to be impressed that she’s only spending $2.68 for breakfast, instead of her usual $4 at Starbucks? Please. Imagine how much better off her budget would be if she didn’t spend $2.68 every morning!

Color me unimpressed.

Leo Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:23 am

@weiszguy: again, I think you’re letting the details get in the way of the message. The main point of the article is valid for any lifestyle, frugal or not.

Martin Polley Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:39 am

Some of these poster are right though — the post concentrates on spending less money but still getting the same amount of stuff.

I prefer the idea of buying less stuff, period.

Leo Says:

September 18th, 2007, 7:51 am

@Martin: Good point, but I think the focus of the post is still valid: gradually reduce your expectations and spending.

If you start with spending less money, and gradually reduce from there, you will probably end up at the point where you buy less stuff. But you don’t necessarily get from A to Z without stopping at the points in between.

Justin Davey Says:

September 18th, 2007, 8:00 am

As you begin to spend less I think you will realize that material possessions never made you truly happy in the first place. They may have filled some kind of void, much like smoking or over-eating, but in the end they don’t really matter. As you downshift your spending, try being of service to someone in need. Downshift further and give some of your extra money to a good cause. You’ll find that by moving outside of yourself, your money, and your possessions that true happiness was never there in the first place.

disconnect Says:

September 18th, 2007, 8:11 am

I’m sorry, I can’t get past the near-$100 jeans. I already buy my jeans at Target, along with most casual clothes. When my business clothes are faded or stained, I go to the Van Heusen outlet, and only get enough to replace the ones I throw out. I make my own breakfast, lunch, and dinner, along with my family’s. I drove a Neon for 10 years, not because I needed to, but because I enjoyed it. Where am I supposed to go from here?

Leo, the details make the message. Anne, you need to write for your audience, and this audience (generally) doesn’t buy 7 for all Mankind (?) jeans, drive Hummers, shop at Tiffany’s, or think about how much better their stuff is than their neighbor’s.

Everybody else, reread the post and mentally cut out anything that pisses you off. The message may have value for you.

Anne Z. Says:

September 18th, 2007, 8:23 am

Have you all never spent too much on something? Or gotten into a lifestyle that turned out to be not what you wanted? Perhaps I could have framed it in a less shocking way than to mention my expensive jeans. :)

I sprinkled some examples from my own personal life throughout to make it more real and to illustrate how you might approach cutting down your spending if your lifestyle had kept creeping up in tandem with your income. If the particular examples don’t resonate, that doesn’t mean it might not be a helpful way to look at your own spending and happiness.

The point is that most people do indeed start buying things they don’t need just because they can. Then, if circumstances change for some reason, or if they just want to spend less (because wouldn’t that be great for all of us) they need a way to get it under control.

Anyway, I love those 7 jeans! Even if they did cost way too much.

Suzanne Says:

September 18th, 2007, 8:33 am

Anne, if you love your 7 jeans, they didn’t cost too much. And if you don’t really love your Banana jeans, then they cost too much even if they were half the price. To me, the point is to spend money consciously and thoughtfully, getting value equal to what you spend, not always to buy the cheapest. One pair of expensive jeans may be better than many pairs of cheap ones.

Anne Z. Says:

September 18th, 2007, 8:49 am

@Suzanne: one pair of expensive jeans I love is fine. The problem arises when it turns into an overall pattern of spending, and that’s what I was trying to draw out in discussing the hedonic treadmill. I should have chosen some other examples, since people are fascinated that I’d spend so much on a pair of jeans.

I did want to point out one more thing — I never said that buying stuff is the way to happiness. In fact, what I pointed out was that over time, you don’t get any more satisfied by buying more and better stuff. But reversing that trend isn’t going to happen all at one time — and you do need to buy stuff.

Also, I didn’t mean to imply that substituting one purchase for another is the only thing to do. You can also cut spending out entirely and you will adjust to that too.

I’m still thinking out the implications of the reverse hedonic treadmill. Instead of focusing on my spending habits — I’d like to hear if you all have any experiences of your own to share in this regard. Have you seen your lifestyle creep up in tandem with your income? Have you done anything that puts your spending into reverse gear?

Spike Says:

September 18th, 2007, 9:03 am

I call this sort of thing lifestyle inflation. It’s a lot easier to adopt to an improved and more expensive way of life, than it is to go down a level which is where gradually decreasing your expenses makes sense. My friend told me how now he has his own house with a garden, he could never live in a flat again. Likewise a relative has a Mercedes and he says he cannot imagine ever buying another type of car again.

SpiKe
Organize IT

Jose Says:

September 18th, 2007, 9:11 am

Well, there are all different types of people in the world at different levels on the “caring consumer” scale. I think it’s great that Anne has started thinking about saving money and I’m sure many people (I’m thinking of my sisters) can relate to her post.

William Mize Says:

September 18th, 2007, 9:12 am

Obligatory Materialism-Ikea-Fight Club comment here.

Marigoldie Says:

September 18th, 2007, 9:14 am

I can’t relate to this lifestyle level either, but I guess those changes represent a good start. I’ll do you one better than Target jeans, which I now avoid after reading up on unfair labor practices in the garment industry (seems like most of the Target clothes were made in Vietnam or Indonesia). I’ve recently started buying everything second hand, and it’s a great way to go. Less waste, the money goes to charity and I can get well outfitted in interesting, well-made designer pieces for very little money. I feel like my next step is to not care about fashion at all–I am a little ashamed that I even bother with this–and reduce my wardrobe to just a few pieces, but I’m not there yet.

I just discovered this blog. Great stuff.

Justin Davey Says:

September 18th, 2007, 9:14 am

I find valid evidence that our society is obsessed with material possessions when all I see in the comments is a focus on blue jeans. This is a serious topic and one that would do all of us a lot of good to examine in more depth. My only suggestion Anne would be to elaborate on some ideas that would go beyond the issue of money altogether. Namely concepts such as relationships, service and giving. Then you will start to see the true meaning of happiness.

Thomas Enever Says:

September 18th, 2007, 10:28 am

Consumerism is remarkable. It really is the consumption of things we don’t need, and this post is an interesting example of how pervasive a lifestyle it is. I totally understand the authors examples, for my entire twenties I consumed this way, I spent all I earned (and more) and never appreciated the happiness and freedom that three months of income in the bank gives you. That, vs breakfast at Starbucks or 7-11 and $200 or $100 jeans, is no contest.

The step after downgrading your designer labels while still consuming at the same level, is to consume just what you need and save the money to free yourself from the chains of work, insurance, debt etc - that way money will impact your happiness significantly.

Lottie Says:

September 18th, 2007, 10:35 am

I agree with Jose. Cutting back on luxuries is relative.

What’s important is how we feel when we realize that happiness and satisfaction is really unrelated to “stuff.” The next step for me was when I realized that real happiness and satisfaction comes from trying to treat others well, practice kindness and compassion.

Not to say that I don’t enjoy my stuff or that I’m always kind and fair — it’s in the effort, I think

Anne Z. Says:

September 18th, 2007, 10:51 am

Left this comment earlier, but it’s in moderation because of links, so this may turn out to be a duplicate.

@Justin: I recently wrote about using what I call positive flooding to keep relationships in good shape and a few weeks ago about how happiness is not about buying stuff on my personal blog. This is a huge topic that can’t be addressed in one short guest post, and I’m sorry if I seemed to imply that happiness is all about buying stuff. That’s certainly not how I feel.

@Marigoldie: my sister’s husband was telling me recently about unfair labor practices in Asia and made me more aware of this problem. Haven’t yet gotten to the point in my own life to do something different — but secondhand clothes are a good idea, thanks for bringing it up.

@Spike: “lifestyle inflation” — that’s a good way to put it.

Daiko Says:

September 18th, 2007, 10:52 am

Thank you, Anne, for the idea of the hedonistic treadmill and shifting it into reverse. This is a useful way of thinking about what often seems like jumping from a cliff.

And yes: I have seen an increase in expenses in my household as my income level rose, though much of it has had more to do with children getting older (braces and dance lessons weren’t wanted or needed when they were babies).

Balfour Says:

September 18th, 2007, 11:03 am

Anne Z, I got your point and thought it was a great article.

Some of the posters seem to want this article to be some kind of encyclopedia - give it a rest, it’s not a treatise! It it was, you’d be complaining about how long it is. It’s very focused on a particular topic.

Also, the notion that everyone that comes to this site is a certain type at this particular point in time is ridiculous. You don’t know who’s reading this blog. Sheesh.

LisaS Says:

September 18th, 2007, 11:07 am

A few thoughts:

1. Anne’s main point is a good one: any 30+ working adult has seen their income grow, and we start to feel a sort of entitlement to better things. Scaling back is hard, and finding the budget lines where you can do that and not feel “deprived” (even if you’re still fairly fortunate in the scale of society) is key to success.
2. You should love the things you have. If that means you have one pair of 7 jeans instead of 2 pairs from Banana Republic, great–you’ve bought less stuff even if it is more expensive stuff. Personally, I would go to the local coffee shop fewer times each week rather than drink 7-11 coffee, I’d still spend less and enjoy the same quality and companionship among the regulars.
3. Spending and consumerism are a form of addiction. Some people have the stomach to go cold turkey–and some people by circumstance have to–but an incremental approach, if followed, will eventually have the same result.
4. Finally, so far as Anne’s success in targeting her audience–frankly, not everyone who reads this blog is among the “saved,” who think that consumerism is de facto evil. If Anne’s column opens the door to one of those people, all the better.

Anne Z. Says:

September 18th, 2007, 11:24 am

Thanks Daiko, Balfour, and LisaS. And thanks to the other commenters who give me lots of things to think about, though I think some of you are reading a lot about my financial situation into a couple of examples. I have no debt, I drive a crummy old minivan, and I only buy coffee and danishes on special occasions. The Tiffany, Hummer, and Louis Vuitton examples were chosen because of their first letters not because of personal experience. ;)

@LisaS: I actually prefer 7-11 coffee because I like the flavored stuff (argg, first I admit I have $200 jeans and now I own up to drinking vanilla nut coffee… what next will the Internet learn about me!)

@Daiko: I have three kids and I’ve seen that creeping up of expenses with them too. You’re right, that makes budgeting hard. I haven’t tried to dial back my spending on them, just on my frivolities.

Trost Osler Says:

September 18th, 2007, 11:27 am

Um, I’ve already shifted down to wearing pants until they wear out … and then re-sewing the cuffs and wearing them until the rest wears out … and then cutting the legs off and using them as shorts …

$2 clearance flipflops from Old Navy for everyday wear. I go through about 2 pairs a year.

$10 clearance shoes from Bobs for when it’s cold or wet.

$15 used prana pants off eBay, because they last forever and are super comfortable.

$2 t-shirts off cheapestees.com.

Buy my own flour / salt / yeast to bake bread in the microwave at the office.

Drink water, not juice, refill from the (filtered) tap at home.

Some things I have to spend money on: GASOLINE, a decent camera (I am an amateur photographer), VITAMINS!

Ebay and clearance sales are the dogz ballz as far as I’m concerned.

Balfour Says:

September 18th, 2007, 11:55 am

Trot: flipflops will ruin your feet and you’ll incur podiatrist bills later on and be hobbling around forever. this is not a curse–welcome to reality (unless you plan to die young, which could be a good budget option.)

Rob Says:

September 18th, 2007, 12:10 pm

Interesting post. Judging by the comments some folks seem to be where you are headed. For folks who find themselves having unreflectively getting to a point where they’re spending too much on *stuff* it provides some food for thought.

The problem my wife and I faced was similar to what I’ve described — every raise we’d get we’d just find ourselves spending because we weren’t thinking about our actions (and following the so-called “First Law of Economics”: that we will spend up to the limits of our income.

One trick we’ve tried is putting having 90% of any raise direct-deposited into a money market account. Since it’s not easily accessible (no easy transfers and only 6 transactions a month allowed) our savings has built up, we’re buying less and we only dig into it when we make a deliberate decision to do so. The 10% we keep basically covers inflation.

Thanks for your thoughts on this!

Trost Osler Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:05 pm

RE: flip-flops ruining feet ….

I should have mentioned that I would only recommend flip-flops if you love your feet, and enjoy the beauty of walking through the morning dew barefoot.

I run barefoot everywhere, on pavement, grass, and woods. I also backpack, kayak, weightlift, and dance barefoot or with flipflops.

The first African to win an Olympic race won running the cobblestones of Rome, barefoot.

We ran for thousands (millions) of years barefoot, although many cultures developed simple protective pads to protect against thorns and other uncomfortably sharp things. Ergo, flip-flops.

Our feet and legs are designed to run barefoot. The knee problems that many runners face are directly caused by shod heel impacts. Barefoot runners do not encounter those injuries.

Unfortunately, for social and health reasons, I cannot go everywhere barefoot. I need flip-flops for shopping, and they are also necessary for walking in heavily polluted areas.

(I also own good trail running shoes, dress shoes, and dance shoes. All have lasted a ridiculously long time, and should last much longer because I only use them when necessary.)

JenPDX Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:13 pm

Reading the comments, I find it ironic that some folks who are on the “frugality-wagon” seem to be all about one-ups-man-ship (I spend less than YOU do on those jeans/shoes/coffee) which is basically the same “keeping up with the joneses” mentality that tends to drive consumerism.

When it comes to cutting back on luxuries…I find it more useful to ask myself “Why do I feel that the $250 item is more desirable than the $100 item?” You can analyze that in terms of objective benefits and features of the item and analyze it in terms of the subjective emotions that come with owning a status object or going with a less expensive alternative. It’s not as simple as saying that the less expensive item is always the *best* choice.

Ultimately, *ZEN HABITS* isn’t about how much/little you spend, how much/little you own… To me its more about figuring out what your priorities are (at a superficial level and at a deeper level), and then reconciling the contradictions in your own life through actions (or inaction) and then hope that you find yourself on a path that is sustainable at all levels of experience.

delmara Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:13 pm

Hey. folks - if you’re reading this, chances are near 100% that you’re among the tiniest fraction of richest people on the planet. From that perspective, thinking that there’s any substantive difference between a $30 pair of jeans and a $200 pair is delusional.

Anne Z. Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:30 pm

The examples I gave didn’t fully capture the idea of putting your hedonic treadmill into reverse gear — the point is not just to spend less money (duh!) but to realize that your expectations run in tandem or slightly behind your experience and to start dragging the expectations, not just the spending, inexorably downwards rather than inevitably up. If you’re always buying more and better stuff, you’ll get used to that as the status quo.

On the other hand, if you can find ways of decreasing your spending and your expectations over time, as many of you seem to have done, you can get used to a standard of living that doesn’t require so much money. You can put more money in the bank, have more money for important things like education or charitable contributions, and so forth.

The fact that I enjoy the expensive jeans so much is part of the hedonic treadmill. Yes, they are more enjoyable to me than the cheaper ones. Not all expensive goods are like that but some are. But the important thing is, I adjust to having them as a default… and in the long run I’m no happier having established a habit of spending that much on jeans.

So looking at individual purchases and saying, “did you get a lot of enjoyment out of them or not?” isn’t what I’m saying. I’m saying there’s benefit to resetting your expectations lower and getting into the habit of doing that over time, even if your income is increasing (or especially if it’s not.)

I’m also saying, look at the dynamic not just a static calculation of how much enjoyment you get out of your purchases. Each purchase you make can drag your expectations downwards or upwards or leave it the same. Not making a purchase at all is ideal when you can do that, because how better to reset your expectations than to get used to going without.

Kudos to Leo for such a passionate and thoughtful bunch of readers. Wow! Now I’ll get back to my shopping… ;)

gerryc Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:46 pm

shopping in poorer areas can, not always, be cheaper.
i just spent $75.00 on my grandaughter in spanish harlem in nyc that would cost me 4x as much in my neighborhood 15 blocks away. some of the quality is less but how long does something need to last for a 2 yr old? i also spent 125.00 on ebay for my grandaughter again, i love the idea of recycling and not having to go into a store. most of the time i am a frugal shopper. i live from paycheck to paycheck no matter how much i make. i have gotten a tremendous amount better in not increasing debt.

Julia Says:

September 18th, 2007, 13:50 pm

I think you’ve got a good point there, but I agree with what the others here have pointed out too: the good feeling shouldn’t come from knowing you could afford more, but from knowing you don’t need more! What do you need a flash car for? Realizing that the stuff you think you need is actually expendable is a very important step! Saving money is not all of it! Imagine that when you spend less money, you also have to work less and can spend more time on the important things in life.

katecontinued Says:

September 18th, 2007, 14:05 pm

Leo, I would offer a suggestion for future guest posts. (Yes, hindsight is so much easier.) I think that when you have someone who is just beginning to take this step towards a more conscious life of consumption reduction, it would be good to have you as a part of the format. By that I mean an interview or a back and forth exchange. You know the audience.

I think that your voice alongside Anne’s new realizations would help us all remember those first tentative steps we all took. As you did in the comments, you could keep the focus on what Anne has discovered rather than the details she hasn’t realized yet.

Sadly, sanctimony and self-righteousness is an embarrassing (if not hostile) side effect of working hard to live more consciously.

michelle Says:

September 18th, 2007, 14:13 pm

the typically-positive tone of ‘zenhabits’ seems to be missing from many of the comments. frugality is relative, and it seems all improvements are worth encouraging. i appreciate the post and anne’s tips because i can relate to it a lot more than some of the frugality posts that - though i support their measures in their own lives - seem extreme to me (e.g. not travelling to save money, etc.).

Truthteller Says:

September 18th, 2007, 16:08 pm

great article for stirring up debate! And that is what good writing should do.
My contribution to this debate is in this short article I wrote a few months ago about…daily decreasing. (a term I borrowed from Dr Dyer)
I believe it covers very well the arguements of some of the comments made. I hope you take a moment to read it. You can find it here…….
http://www.reddeerblog.com/2007/08/clean-up-your-life.html

Eduardo

Leo Says:

September 18th, 2007, 16:16 pm

Thanks for all the thoughtful comments, everyone.

And especially thanks to Anne, who wrote this thought-provoking post and for adding to it in these comments.

Good discussion!

George Bush Says:

September 18th, 2007, 16:38 pm

I don’t care how much you saved going to 7-11. Think about the health costs in the long run of catching infectious diseases.

Monica Says:

September 18th, 2007, 16:52 pm

How exactly are you baking bread in the microwave, and what kind of bread? I didn’t realize that was possible.

Toast Says:

September 18th, 2007, 16:55 pm

Why not replace consumption with practices and acts that make you happy while learning to value what you posses for the aesthetic and use value it no doubt still has? In many spiritual paths renunciation is a prerequisite to experiencing the innate bliss of being. This is because stuff actually gets in the way of your natural state of freedom and happiness. We do not need much to live and feel joy. Get out of the consumption trance altogether and you will _want_ to free yourself from all of your junk and embrace your natural state of simple joy.

Snit Says:

September 18th, 2007, 17:51 pm

I too would like to have the instructions for microwave bread!

I liked Anne’s article and all the posts following — they really got me thinking of how I define materialism. At risk of sounding cliche, it really is a relative matter, depending upon national, financial, and so many other particulars. It is also a matter of gender: I do know what “7″ jeans are and have always wanted a pair. I’ve not splurged — my “extra” dollars go to my toddler’s needs and my student loan — but being a youngish female, I find it is very hard not to get sucked onto the pretty pink treadmill designed esp. for women. It is easier for me to drive my 12 year old car, cook from staples, give a little to those less fortunate than say no to gourmet mascara.

Andy Says:

September 18th, 2007, 18:24 pm

The only problem with buying cheaper clothing is that you’re often passing the buck of financial hardship by investing in sweatshop labor. Banana Republic is owned by the Gap, and if you’re curious about their labor policies and practices, go here:

http://www.coopamerica.org/programs/rs/profile.cfm?id=229&MajorSub=1&CompanyName=Banana%20Republic

Buying cheap isn’t always buying smart.

But I think your post generally is on the right track. It’s just that Americans too often only think as far as their own wallets.

Georgio Says:

September 18th, 2007, 19:04 pm

Frugality Tip - if you live in a house with a hot water cylinder, turn the thermostat down to the lowest level such that when you have a shower, shave, or do dishes, you must turn the hot water mixer to maximum. Any extra in the mixer is just water you’re heating for no reason in the how water cylinder. But for the Frugality Extremists just take cold showers!

George Bush Says:

September 18th, 2007, 22:25 pm

Another thing to think about is why do you have to buy your breakfest out? Why not make coffee at home? You could drink good coffee for the price of 7/11. Furthermore, you could spend a little more, purchase fair trade coffee and do a friggin service to humanity. After all, isn’t that what frugality is all about? It’s not about saving as much as you can so you can afford that all-inclusive to Cuba. Save money where you can, but in other areas make that extra payment, give the finger to corporate America, and live a life beyond yourself and the almighty dollar.

Scott Says:

September 18th, 2007, 22:45 pm

@ Anne Z:

After reading some of the less civil comments, I felt I should post a comment showing my support — your article is exactly what I am currently practicing in my life.

I too was hit by this “lifestyle inflation” after graduating college and immediately landing a very comfortable job as a scientist at NASA. I went from a student budget to that of an engineer and I went a little overboard. I’m not talking about going into debt (thankfully), but suddenly morning stops at Starbucks were the norm and brown-bagging my lunch was only considered when I had a meeting exactly at 1:00 PM. I had replaced my fading Target clothes with department store counterparts.

I have been a long-time reader of the blog and others like, and have been working on a budget so I could feel confident financially with money set aside for emergencies, retirement etc so I needed to save more than “whatever was left” at the end of the month.

It appears some commenters have forgotten what life was like before they baked their own bread in microwaves at work, grew their own vegetables, and mended/repurposed outlet clothes. While others spout condescending comments about your designer jeans and your willingness to “settle” or “downgrade” to $100 BR jeans, they overlook the fact that you just cut your jeans budget by 50%. The same goes for your 7-11 breakfast stop instead of going to Starbucks — 50%.

The point is that everyone has a different idea of what an acceptable quality of life is and success is meeting your savings/spending goals while still maintaining a quality of life that is acceptable for you and you alone. As has been discussed on other websites[1], there comes a point of diminishing returns where any further frugality decreases from your quality of life and if that’s the case — what’s the point?

Rock on with your reversed spending habits, Anne! You are most definitely not alone.

.
[1] http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2007/09/14/ask-the-readers-am-i-saving-too-much/

Helen Says:

September 19th, 2007, 3:06 am

I thought this was a good article, and I loved the idea of downsizing in increments. I used to be very frugal, having been a student then art graduate with a very low income, then part of a single income family. When my own income went up, I got into some very bad spending habits.

But I also enjoy good quality products - I’d rather spend $100 on a pair of boots that will last me for years than a shoddy pair that will fall apart in months.

Complete detatchment from ’stuff’ is a lofty ideal but there’s nothing wrong with a reasonable enjoyment of things, too, within reason.

For me, because I work from home, having an occasional coffee at a cafe is a nice way to get out of the home - a small luxury. It might be cheaper to make instant at home, but this is a luxury I choose. I am thrifty in many areas, and spend more in others - such as trying to buy local, and from independant local retailers rather than big chain stores.

Don’t listen to the ranters, Anne.

brent Says:

September 19th, 2007, 6:57 am

I’m sorry for being rude.

I just didn’t know that there was any such THING as not making your own breakfast…

Bowl. Milk. Cereal. That’s breakfast. What else is there?

I guess I was upset because the gist of your post appears to be “It’s ok. You can remain a rabid consumer while reducing the load on your budget.” It just really didn’t sit very well with the rest of Leo’s philosophy of “Want less.”

Joy Says:

September 19th, 2007, 7:50 am

I didn’t much like this article and it wasn’t the suggestion that I might spend more money on less things as I got older. It was the author’s position of authority on the basis of her experience of still buying expensive luxury items, though not as expensive as before. Those comments removed any sense of reality, frugality, compassion or sensitivity. It was like, “oh, poor me, look at these ghastly cheap jeans I’m reduced to buying, but don’t worry, I’m holding up well, at least until I have to, gasp, go and buy at yech puke plebian Target.”

I’m seriously thinking I’m not part of this blog’s target market. For a start I neither earn nor spend enough.

Kim Says:

September 19th, 2007, 9:46 am

I don’t know if others would find this helpful or not, but recently, whenever I get the strong urge to buy a “nonessential” item, I transfer that amount to my ING direct account and watch my savings grow ! I just started doing this - I’ll see how much I can accrue in 3, 6, 12 mths !

Phoenix Says:

September 19th, 2007, 11:16 am

I was surprised at some of the comments on this article. In particular at some of the superior attitudes of some of the commentators.
One that struck me in particular was

“are we supposed to be impressed”.

I think that if someone reads the articles on this blog looking to be ‘impressed’ that it implies one of two things, or possibly both. That the commentator either views themselves as superior to all the mindless-sheep-consumers and is looking to really be amazed by people doing things like getting along with 10 items in their lives, possible but difficult for most people, or that they’re reading the blog simply to say to themselves “wow, that’s incredible!” and then to go about the rest of their day.

And how did the author’s statement of “I could go even cheaper…I could buy my jeans from Target or Wal-mart” imply that either was somehow beneath her? Fixing breakfast at home something she’s “lowering herself to”? I didn’t read that into the article, and I’m kind of surprised that others did.

Here are a couple of other possible explanations for that section. Ones that I think are a lot more likely.
1) The comment regarding Target/Wal-mart was to say something along the lines of “and I’m not really frugal yet, I still spend a lot, but I’m happy where I am”
2) A great deal of people don’t make their own breakfast, at least in the United States. There are a lot of people who live their lives in a rush (whether this is good or not is another discussion entirely, but I digress) and buying breakfast from someplace isn’t a matter of some ‘plebian’ fixing breakfast for you but a matter of a chance to eat something in the morning.
Starting to ‘make time’ in one’s daily life as it’s so often put is a lot harder to start than people make it out to be and if you’ve been able to find the time to make your own breakfast in the morning, then that’s wonderful, it’s most likely healthier and it is definitely cheaper. If someone isn’t able to, or hasn’t made the time to do so however, you are completely out of line to chastise them for it.

That’s the other main thing that struck me in a lot of the comments. The sense of it not being ‘ok’ for someone to live their lives in a way that the poster doesn’t find palatable. It’s not a matter of if you find the way someone is living to be ‘ok’. It’s none of your business.

The ethics of consumerism can definitely come into play in a blog like this one, but I thought the big idea to get from reading was how to make your life simpler and therefore happier and more fulfilling, not to make your life simpler and therefore show the other kids on the block how cool you are, to ‘impress’ people.

Acerbic commentators, isn’t it lonely up there on the pedestal?

Phoenix Says:

September 19th, 2007, 11:18 am

@Kim
That is a great idea! I think I may start doing that with my savings account. Wonderful way to redirect cravings.

(wishing the comment function had an ‘edit’ option…ironic, I’m a forum moderator and here I am, double posting!)

Jasi Says:

September 19th, 2007, 13:24 pm

Thumbs down.

Buy less shit.

Kim Says:

September 19th, 2007, 14:10 pm

HI Phoenix-
Thanks! I use an Excel sheet with a large colum to describe precisely what I wanted to buy eg Barbie DVD for $15…that way I can remember precisely what my urge/temptation was….

Kim Says:

September 19th, 2007, 14:11 pm

And of course a SUM formula to see my savings GROW !

Helen Says:

September 19th, 2007, 18:16 pm

I think that voluntary simplicity / frugality does look very different when you are scraping by on minimum wage. I know as a student the notion of ‘buying less’ was laughable. When nursing my babies, I wrapped a blanket around myself as I didn’t own a dressing-gown and couldn’t afford the extra $30 to buy one from Target. Been there, done that.

But it is arrogant to think that everyone is at the same place in life, and the people who’ve moved up on the consumerist treadmill are probably the most important targets of this message. For various reasons, including Imported materials bought at the expense of foreign cheap labor and environmental degradation. Often the people with luxury lifestyles are up to their necks in debt. The spending habits of those further along the chain affect all of us.

Scott Says:

September 19th, 2007, 21:15 pm

@Phoenix

Very well said.

Portia Says:

September 19th, 2007, 23:27 pm

Good job, Anne. I like the idea of racheting down. I am sending this post along to some folks I know.

Adrian Koh (www.couplehood.net) Says:

September 20th, 2007, 14:42 pm

I’m not sure if this has ever been commented on - but how frugal can we get until we are entirely cheapskate? I’ve heard of cases of people pilfering MacDonald’s for sauces and napkins - that’s extreme.

But I’m thinking the threshold is broken if you cross these lines:

- Saving money to the point it’s affecting someone else’s convenience
- Your arguments with people are usually about safe-guarding your money
- Cheating/lying to save money
- Attitude of “getting things free” instead of “getting things cheap”
- Only wear hand-me-downs (I actually know someone like that)

Jasi Says:

September 20th, 2007, 22:11 pm

@adrian: I agree. Frugality is cool, stealing ketchup is tacky. But I don’t see anything wrong with people wearing only hand-me-downs if that’s what they dig. I have a few friends who love the “new to me” freecycle wardrobe they rock. As long as it’s clean and neat, what’s the harm?

My idealism agrees with that thinking, but my germaphobia keeps me in new threads. Oh well.

Adrian Koh (www.couplehood.net) Says:

September 21st, 2007, 5:32 am

@Jasi: Hmmm, I guess clean & neat’s okay for hand-me-downs. I totally agree on that germophobia thing :)

Jasi Says:

September 21st, 2007, 13:15 pm

O!
Fantastic!

Phoenix Says:

September 21st, 2007, 13:41 pm

@Adrian,
I agree with you that those are some big warning signs when “frugal” turns into “scrooge”. I think it brings up another way that minimalism in terms of “stuff” can bring happiness (and hey, money is still stuff in a certain sense), and that is in being attached to little.
Although the post written is helpful from a financial point of view, when someone starts doing the things you described (especially the lying/cheating to save money…that’s just sad) then they’re not a slave to their possessions anymore, they’re a slave to their money.

snit Says:

September 22nd, 2007, 14:33 pm

It is good to be attached to little. But it is a negative to think you are holier than thou in being so. In thinking you are better than the rest of us, you are still a slave to your ego, albiet expressing this differently than buying stuff. Is judgement of others very zen?

FirstTimePost Says:

October 1st, 2007, 17:21 pm

Wow, this is the first post I’ve read and I loved it but based on the comments I feel like I shouldn’t bother with the main page. Some of you seem angry that she spent the $200 on a pair of jeans, resentful, maybe jealous. How sad. Personally I’ve started to down size myself much like this poster, but it was from buying flats that were $400-500 to a $120 pair that was very cute. So there. You know nothing about my salary or what a small percentage of it that it or of my total overall savings, but go ahead flame away.

mia Says:

November 1st, 2007, 10:21 am

You know, as a South African I can understand why some people would have a bad reaction to points of the article. As someone who literally drives past at least, AT LEAST 10 to 15 beggars a day to and from work, who has 5 homeless people sitting on my office doorstep and street hawkers on every corner, the dichotomy of peoples experiences is ever present in my mind.

Would many people, especially non Americans, find the examples illustrated in the article somewhat condescending? Maybe. But is the posters heart in the right place? Yes, I would say so. Even asking yourself the smallest question can lead you onto an entirely different path. I applaud anyone who lives in a hyper consumer society and steps slightly off that path. I’m not sure that I would ask the questions that I do of myself every single day if I were not confronted with how inherently fortunate I am.

Frugality has less to do with how much money you spend and more to do with how appreciative you are of the things you have.

Being able to appreciate the things you have always had is hard enough; acknowledging how much more appreciative you could be is amazing.

Trost Osler Says:

November 1st, 2007, 11:02 am

That is beautiful insight.

Lily Says:

January 17th, 2008, 18:11 pm

I agree with FirstTimePost and Mia and the not-hostile posters… It’s easy to be noble, wise and frugal when you have to, but what if someone who can actually spend money decides to be less consumeristic? Should we throw stones at a person who is acquiring conscience?