Living below your means

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

I saw the most obnoxious article in this week’s WSJ.
It dealt with the mentality of people who don’t save money. And it’s most of us – something like 90% of us couldn’t come up with 2k in an emergency. This includes those of us who make decent money.

The author of the article quipped “people tend to fault the 1% for being greedy, but maybe we should be faulting the people who have failed to realize that living below your means is a requirement for happiness in life.”

That last part made my skin crawl. Wasn’t quite sure why. I think it’s this:

There comes a point where having certain things is more urgent than the saving. This should be obvious. Think of food. At some point you have to eat, so saving isn’t an option. That’s a silly example. But my point is, today, some creature “comforts” are emotionally almost like food. A clean apartment in a safe neighborhood. A way to watch tv and feel connected. Go out for dinner occasionally have decent clothes and possibly a car. Especially if your peers are doing this. To relinquish these things could almost feel like a sort of death. And so we live at or slightly above our means.

It’s easy for rich people to point to lack of discipline or responsibility. But they don’t know what it’s like to live without certain basics. Sure some people spend stupidly and clearly are fault. But I think most of us are spending what we make almost as self-medication. It’s not our fault. We are consumerist cogs in a system beyond our control. Our identity and mental health, and ability to be social, has a price. And what’s at stake is so vast, that it’s rational to spend everything we have to keep up.

That said, it’s a good idea to try to be frugal. But nothing irks me more than when I hear rich people chiding working class people over their spending habits.

Many rich people are fat. Simply point out that their figure should be solved as simply as reducing calories. Or better yet “burning more calories than you consume is a basic requirement for happiness in life.” Hopefully the lightbulb will go off when they realize it’s never so simple…and that they’re really no different.

Not sure what to say to the thin rich people.

2

The mantra of our age :

“I’m not responsible for myself”

:-"

3

there’s a kind of meta-hedonism behind all this you know. it is inherent to our nature to try and accumulate power… which can be in the form of wealth and social status/position. but it isn’t just these things that is pleasurable… the actual striving for it is pleasureable as well. what happens when so much wealth and power is acquired is there is less striving, which means less pleasure in the form of acquiring power.

it’s a bit of a contradiction that we should be like this. we don’t want to suffer, and yet we like it when we have to work to avoid it. now it gets complicated. the more you have, the less you have to strive, but you gradually become less satisfied with what you have… like a tolerance builds. it follows that if avoiding suffering comes easy to us we become bored… then to relieve that bordom we set out and become active to acquire more power somehow. meta-hedonistically there is that contradiction between wanting to avoid suffering and wanting to strive to do so. In both the wealthiest most powerful men and the buddhist monks there is that creeping malaise of bordom, and that is the evidence. what matters is that neither feel like they have to strive, see.

put it like this. we are surprised at the feeling of joy and power we have when we accomplish even the littlest things… and that feeling is something we want to have often. it makes no sense because who wants to work? and yet when we have finished something we have worked to make, a great feeling of satisfaction comes over us. this feeling is not exclusive to the magnitude of what is made, but the magnitude of the amount of effort put into making it.

those who do not have to work… and by work i mean a general productive activity of any sort from playing tennis to building space stations to working at taco bell… increase their chances of becoming bored in proportion to the degree to which living is made easier for them.

and anybody who tries to tell you you should be more frugal and modest is jealous. there is absolutely no logical reason why such things should be preferred to gluttony, or the complete opposite of chastity, so the person is expressing a personal distaste to you… not some objective analysis of the moral nature of your actions because there is no such thing.

4

So when the Stoics used to advocate preparing yourself in advanced for hardships through trials, and not indulging in unnecessary extremes of comfort and luxury, they we’re completely full of shit, on some Meta-Hedonist Denial?

Bad times occur often in the ancient world, even our own. There is a base necessity, then +. But most luxury gets absurd after a while, and it’s unnecessary. A example… a $50,000 Hermes handbag, handsew by a Frenchman using premium leather, or a $10 bag from Thailand, bootleg, handsewn in a similar fashion, same design and functionality, likewise leather of a slightly different quality that’s usually just based on aesthetics and not functionality or durability.

Some of the Mega rich collect hundreds of these bags from around the planet… hitting store after store for that special edition. I can buy a equal number of bootlegs off a single paycheck from Burger King.

Same with cars, homes, food… yeah, the rich can have “more”, but they can’t use more. Still stuck to sleeping in one bed at a time, one phone, one car in use. Its really hard for the rich to achieve wealth beyond what the poor, if clever, can parallel. Bring rich can certainly have advantages, but increasingly less.

Furthermore, let’s take your viewpoint to a infantry squad leader… shocked to find that instead of packing rations such as MREs, he packs cheesecake and M&Ms for a week long mission, and his canteens are filled with soda and vodka, and half his rucksack has somehow stuffed a inflatable bed inside…

I’m sure he is going to take your arguments well. That boy is gonna get all his shit thrown out, bare essentials, and made to lowcraw through mud and water, carrying double ammo and water more than everyone else. Its okay a little luxury… like a snack, maybe a tiny airplane pillow or a playboy, but not half your stinking room, including a laptop in the woods when your going tactical.

The whole point is to remain flexible, adaptible, and learn to trust your equipment, the bare essentials, as all you need, and to be able to dig down deeper and do more without luxuries. Life and death depends on this. If the military doesn’t get it, then everyone has to learn this lesson when society starts falling apart.

I remember my first night back from Iraq… I was in a Alaskan Hotel, uncomfortable with everything around me. I was staring out at the winter landscape past the city, into the frozen sea. Everything looked very different, extremes of wealth everywhere. In the morning, I crawled to the window, looked outside amazed. I was having trouble walking (knee injury, atrophy). Made my way down to the lobby, wanted the pool, but it was closed… too much chlorine. I told them I just returned back from Iraq and wasn’t scared of the chlorine, and really, really just wanted to float in some damn water already. So they let me… and I floated. Just floated… forever, looking up at the crenellation in the ceiling. I couldn’t help but feel it was pointless wasted wealth. All the expensive cars outside. Clothes in the stores. I never got over this awareness, when you get used to seeing people ride around in donkey carts, or live in plyboard houses stuck together on the fly, where the main piece of furniture was a carpet they would kneel on and chat drinking tea.

So yeah, I mock Stoics who never went first through the Cynic stage of living homeless, when they say they are finally really getting into philosophy, roughing it by sleeping in futons, or carpet with blankets under them… preparing for the worst, etc. Its bullshit, get back into your bed. In my case, the bed was killing me, no matter how many boards I put under it, so I’ve resumed sleeping on the floor. Its hardly a bad living, I’m warm, electric, don’t get rained on.

But when I look at guys hoarding guns, impulsively buying a new one every month, or having multiple cars, or even multiple houses, I roll my eyes. Its rather pointless in most cases. Going to the opposite extreme is too… thing is, eventually, either all of us, or our distant descendants, will be put in a crisis, be it homeless, refugee, or in war. Do you really want to deprive them of a skill set to inherent from you, in living adaptably and frugily? Or will you be of the opinion they can fend for themselves, or read a book, socialism or something, someone will save them?

Its good generally not embracing a extreme luxury. You can be the richest man in the world, and still live normally (Bill Gates sorta does this). Going overboard doesn’t do you any good at a certain point… but I’m talking personal luxuries. I think it’s fine to build a ever larger business, be it larger agriculture estate, or more shops from you shipping company Keep your company solvent and productive… but know we more or less capped the categories and types of wealth available out there.

Some idiots run about, buying a $300 pair of socks, one pair per day, throwing them out after one use. Why? I make it just fine on $5 socks, and to be fucking honest, my sock is of a much better quality than that hand sewened French crap.

People just get stupid when they get too much wealth. They often can’t tell quality objects of high wealth from cheap crap… I remember one store I guarded, had $1000 vases, but the store also hired a florist who would bring cheap as shit Chinatown vases in for her flowers… she would put it on a $50,000 table, the real vases on the wall… people would ask me how much, and I’d try my damnest to repress my smile, and said I was just the security, and would get a sales associate to help them… walk up to the assistant manager and tell him… the gay guy would freak the fuck out, palms in face. I told him I sell the vase to them, split it 50-50 and not tell anyone, and he just moan. Peace of fucking worthless glass… but it was a functional vase, fit the decorum. Same with the table… IKEA came out with a bootleg version in the 90s, I recognized it… the US vice president got flustered and upset and I told him. They owned the rights to it since the 1920s.

Most things of true quality disparity are dissapearing. People who go overboard are merely indulging in elitist fantasies, or worst, have a serious psychological disorder going on. I’ve seen a lot of that. In my case, I dealt with millionaires and even billionaires daily, some very famous people, and then went and slept in the woods at night as a hobo, none the wiser.

In the end, I can say it was all silly fucking nothing. Rich aren’t any different, fuck, half of them are as fucked up on drugs as here, in my poor neighborhood. Slot of smart people, a lot of ignorant people. A lot of attractive people, a lot of buttugly. They often wanted me to follow ugly people like they we’re goingbto steal, but they tended to buy the most. Stupid fucking steotypes. One guy was a miles dace fatass wearing stained tee shirts, bought stuff for his mistresses. We would tell one another dirty jokes… whenever they got a new employee, they would sneak up to me and ask me to follow him. Id laugh, said I introduce them to him and get them a sales commission. Another fun gut, was one of the iPhone designers… that fucker lead me in mazes, didn’t look like nobody, but all the really famous big named tech guys knew him. After a while, I got tired of staring at him off of the corner of my eyes… new people would tell me to watch it, I do say what kind of phone they had (usually a iPhone) and told them he fucking helped design it. If he stole, I knew where to bill him, let him take whatever, we had cameras all over, but it’s better for you missy if you try to make the sale, cause he could buy everything in the store if he wanted to. Those guts never spent much, just little random stupid shit you would never identify as a luxury item for themselves… but they would get women some nice stuff. In Chinatown, I could buy a damn close equivalent of everything, just a few blocks down.

5

That guy with the article is absolutely right. One should always try to live just below his earnings, unless he is not in extraordinary circumstances like starving.

If one is living in 5000 bucks for a month, he can certainly manage within 4900 bucks too, just with a little bit of self decipline. No big deal.

Remember, it is not earning that makes one future secure, but savings only. If one cannot save, he can never be financially stable, no matter how much he earns. Though, it seems bit old fashioned in modern era of consumerism.

Ideally, one should save 10% of his earning. If one starts following this from the very beginning of his earnings, he would have a secure future according to his standard of living/earnings within two decades, irrespective of what he earns.

With love,
Sanjay

6

You totally missed the point Sanjay. It’s easy to agree with that article because it’s a facile point he’s making. The statement is so obvious a child knows it: live below your means. When things become so obvious as to prevent thought, they become dangerous.

Your example seems fine at first but it’s not. People have a hard time living below their means because sometimes doing so literally tears your life apart, can cause you to move to another city, or grow apart from your support base of friends. It can cause you to do without things that society prizes as self medicating activities. It’s easy to sit there and make it a simple equation. But wealthy people simply don’t know how it FEELS to go without certain things. We are not test tubes. The modern soul can’t easily depart from the norm of its surroundings. So what happens is we stretch, desperately, so that today we can be among the living, and we hope tomorrow our income will catch up. It’s life and death. It’s the mating game. It’s so much more complex than: people should leave below their means. The article is right on only one very facile obvious mathematical level, but to say it is “absolutely right” is to force the topic into a sadly prosaic and flat place. We don’t make a decision to spend 4,900 instead of 5,000. What happens is we make $5,000 but need $8,000 just to have normalcy. Cut down $3k? Maybe. But I don’t see why the rich get to sit their and talk about how easy that is. And btw I’m not one of those who lives above his means. But it makes me sick when people judge those who do, with babyish simple-minded cliches. There’s some deep stuff here and it should be addressed, not dulled down to a fools slogan. Rich people have this attitude like, oh if people would just wake up and do this very simple thing and be clear headed and wake up to very obvious and simple truths, they wouldn’t be in their position. Well, unless you’re in that situation you shouldn’t sit around and take guesses at how simple these things are. Unless you know how the trauma of being poor affects your mood, health, mind, everything, you shouldn’t judge. It’s extraordinarily hard to pull oneself out of it. And to make it sound “easy” is the ultimate injustice. The ultimate stupidity, and it’s why many rich are hated.

And the responsible poor and middle class, those who save, also have no right to judge. A lot of your ability to save is tied to circumstances that fell in your lap. Either you can go without something without any dire consequences, or your emotionally dispassionate about having certain things that cost money. Again, value of a spend is personal and subjective. It’s like saying to someone who is suicidal, cheer up, look how good you have it! It’s different, but the same basic flaw. It’s this idea of judging someone’s decisions without regard to the emotional transactions underlying their reality.

7

But we live in the era of hedonists and manchildren. The latest tech and must be purchased at all times. 2000 dollars must be spent on furniture and 10 grand on videos. The more money you have the more you throw it in the air. After all, money is not real, it is an illusion, so wasting it has no meaning?

8

Emmm… actually …

9

James we are not a repeatable formula that operates the same way in every situation, in organized fashion. There is no valid control and variable. We are all mixed up, and our decisions can’t be reduced to food and shelter. There are subjective e value judgements that follow a different calculus from one man to another. Different experiments. A person doesn’t find a reason to live simply because caloric needs are met.

10

Wasting money does have meaning. But the word manchildren. Not so much.

The word is human. Humans are a certain way. By calling some of them manchildren you are not only being demeaning, you are cravenly ignoring what common behaviors reveal about human nature.

So you think needing the latest technology is what, stupid? You’re demonstrating what I just complained about. Who decides what’s stupid? You? Yes people need to have things. People DIE for less. That’s not man children. That’s man. It always has been.

11

The equation of the manimal is simple to see. Whatever is “cool” and popular he must buy or have.
When he buys a house or gets rich, his tastes suddenly become exponential…the old house he has must avoid for it revolts him he must buy the biggest house he can muster…the risk in throwing money away floods her small penis with exiting chemicals.
The manimal is a girl.
The exact opposite is the rich cougar. The rich cougar is a tomboy, who pees in a bucket, or “doesn’t buy paper towel to save the environment” even though she is a millionaire.

Both are senile manimals.
Neither can be reasoned with.

12

People do what they think they need to do. Who among us is not doin something stupid, less than Godly, without knowing it? Who among us is without vanity, insecurity, some measure of conformity? Who among us is not susceptible to temptation. Judge not, lest ye be judged. This is basic fucking stuff.

The problem with money will be solved with compassion and understanding, rooting out corruption, education and equal opportunity. Not demeaning people and making it seem like the poor are idiot flies stuck in bottles; not to blame or Jibe or jest at another’s problem without lifting a finger to help. Not to spew about the key to a happy meaningful life when that key has always been in reach for you, and nowhere in realistic sight for many others.

All that said there are of course limits to where the conversation becomes, well, yeah, that was a stupid, selfish, self destructive spend. It becomes about culpability. But that article jumped way ahead to that scenario. To lump together the deadbeat dad who buys fancy clothes and cocaine, with the good father who over spends to help his kid join the soccer team. It’s that latter group that gets arse poked every time some boob releases an article about getting back to basics about fiscal responsibility; the curling of the forelock bravado of “saying it like it is,” reverting to the dummy analysis because it’s oh so much easier to swallow; sorry, Sanjay, nothing basic about it. Never was, never will be.

You can’t merely reason with humans. Reason alone is not a human thing. That is a Vulcan thing. Ask yourself why the fuck it’s so important to be a Vulcan and a know it all prick and how you’ve pushed away everyone in your life because of it. (Not you Sanjay, that was a general statement to anyone who chides fellow humans for not being able to be “reasoned” with. Not surprising, many of the rich are these very Vulcans. In that light, the vitriol begins to make sense.)

And for those of you prick face Vulcans reading this thinking, “hm, I’m a Dick knowitall and everyone hates me, and yet I’m still not rich! What gives Gamer!?”

My answer to that is don’t worry, you’ll be rich soon enough. Dick

13

i shall not judge.

i shall not judge justine bieber or nikka minaj.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys7-6_t7OEQ[/youtube]

Who am i to judge?

We all have our struggles.

We are all Human, and have our flaws.

We are helpless to behave in a rational or conscious manner, we cannot fight the invisible money magnet making us throw money away at every opportunity, down the drain… it makes us so wet doesnt it …so helpless like little things.

14

We have to use these simple truths as building blocks for complex truths.

15

there are a million different kinds of weakness, pain, struggle. Some might be weak little girls blaming money magnets. The problem is when we decide EVERYONE is being that. It’s just an effrontery to reality, which is more complex and nuanced. Brain chemistry. Some people have major depression and kill themselves. Are they being little girls? You don’t think spending might be linked with self medicating? Should they just “suck it up” like men? That’s your answer. Fucking dummy. You actually think you know things. Hahahhahahahahah

16

I’m sure if given the talent, the “white mice” would say the same thing.

Profess justness and truth all you want. But try not to ignore the reality of your situation.

The Presidency (I believe Obama, but perhaps Bush)) approved experimenting on the USA population as long as it was deemed of “national interest”.

17

Sorry, can’t hear you. Have a stupid cat talking to me while stupid pop music is autoplaying while this stupid idiot above me (you) is making gutteral noises. its too much stupid at once to respond to.

18

Why cant Mr. S and his gang do me a solid and help me out here. Alls they do is send me to the dungeon. When I am holding down ravenous manimals for them doing them a solid why cant they step in and finish it/do the honors?

19

That’s a meaningless statement. We are not talking about men talking about injustice. We are talking about men spending more than they have out of a subjective feeling of desperation to meet a level they emotionally require.

There are philosophical men who discuss such things. That’s us. To make the mistake of expecting all men to be philosophical is just stupid. That’s you answer? All men should be geniuses and freethinkers who can break free of all mental prisons? So naive.

This is always the same debate. One moron generalizes. A wise man points out an array of coexisting levels, to move away from the hideous limitation of the generalization. Then when the wise man furnishes examples, he is accused of replacing one generalization with another. There is room for weak idiots, and strong victims, and a lot more as well. The broad brush is the enemy. Those who come here to wield the broad brush miss the whole point of this place.

I assure you, I am smart you are dumb. I am funny you are not. Humble yourself before my greatness and if you can’t, fine, I’ll continue debating in three months. I actually have a life.

20

i shall not judge jabba the hutt. i shall devote serious philosophical thought as to why jabba the hutt and his subspecies, manimals, exist.

it has nothing to do with their genetic code…they are victims of a oppressive society, that is why we must make them millionares and be their slaves until they are billionares and spend it all on luxurious harems…while we get paid in slop, so that one day, they can finally find the error of their ways, we can have a carthartic recompense, they can convert to a common religion and publish self help books and donate to a small charity. There must be some sort of deep rooted philosophical explanation behind their behavoir…perhaps their daddy never bought them the mansion by the lake as a child, or perhaps it was the rap music.