|
My hot tip is: don't buy new things.
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
loki k zen posted:This may not be a popular one, but not drinking alcohol has saved me so much money. Eh, large bottles of decent bourbon are pretty cheap and can last you a loooong while.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
loki k zen posted:This may not be a popular one, but not drinking alcohol has saved me so much money. I haven't completely quit, but cut way back for health reasons (I need to lose a ton of weight), and a nice side-effect is that I'm saving about $200/mo. I knew how much I was spending, but I never really thought of how ridiculously large of an amount that is. My new regime is I pick up a box wine (that's actually pretty decent) for $18 and it lasts me 2-3 weeks when I limit myself to one glass per night. Now that I've broken the ritual of cracking open a bottle of nice wine with every dinner, or tossing back a six-pack on the weekends, I sometimes don't even have my one glass because it's really just not that important. I think the key here isn't that it has to be cheap poo poo, or that you have to be a teetotaler, but rather that it should be treated more like a special occasion thing than a hobby.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Yeah one of the things is to remember the line between frugality and deprivation. It will be different for everyone. I bought a 1,200 dollar camera a few years ago, but I have taken thousands of photos with it, managed to replace my expensive DSLR and multiple lenses, and have recorded some important memories. Whereas for many people that would not make sense. I happen to like being a bit high (and weed is way cheaper than booze per dose in Iceland) but sometimes a black russian is just what I want at dinner time. Even if you save perfectly, eschew everything but raw beans and rice, you could get hit by a bus tomorrow and all that great savings you were gonna "live it up on" in 10 years is worthless (to you).
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
It's been interesting for me since I've been undertaking lifestyle changes to lose the aforementioned weight, how similar the lifestyle changes for weight loss are to frugality and FI. You can go on spending freezes or crash diets to get yourself out of a really bad situation, but without major lifestyle changes, you'll probably go back to your old ways and get right back into the same kind of trouble. The solutions are pretty similar too: tracking spending and tracking calories. The greatest advice that I've found for both situations is to never do anything unless you're willing to do it every day for the rest of your life. If you try it and it's not something you can imagine doing long-term, it will eventually fail and you need to try a different approach. Generally what it comes down to is finding sustainable moderation in all things.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Yeah one of the things is to remember the line between frugality and deprivation. It will be different for everyone. I bought a 1,200 dollar camera a few years ago, but I have taken thousands of photos with it, managed to replace my expensive DSLR and multiple lenses, and have recorded some important memories. Whereas for many people that would not make sense. I happen to like being a bit high (and weed is way cheaper than booze per dose in Iceland) but sometimes a black russian is just what I want at dinner time.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
I brew my own beer. The only problem is that my diet keeps me from drinking that much anymore, so I can never drink it as fast as I want to make it. Unfortunately I haven't saved any money with it. I use my savings per batch to buy more equipment. So I guess my hobby is at least paying for itself. And I'm pretty much out of gizmos to buy. And ya, frugality, diet, and environmental stewardship are all about sustainable consumption. When someone asks about one of the frugal things I do and I don't want to get involved in a financial discussion, I tell them that I'm trying to consume less to be greener or eat less processed food. I usually get a dismissive glassy-eyed look and a change of subject. But when I say I do it to save money, they almost always have to respond with something that defends the alternative. I guess because people don't take those as personally.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
I hate being hungover, so quitting drinking is pretty easy for me. I can have one drink now and again with no issues. I wish my wife would join me, those $10 martinis when we eat out piss me off so bad.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Folly posted:I brew my own beer. The only problem is that my diet keeps me from drinking that much anymore, so I can never drink it as fast as I want to make it. Unfortunately I haven't saved any money with it. I use my savings per batch to buy more equipment. So I guess my hobby is at least paying for itself. And I'm pretty much out of gizmos to buy. A friend of mine (who from what I hear about his finances, could totally retire at 40-45 if he wants to) brews his own wine, way more than he can drink, and gives it to his friends or takes it to events (he's a field LARPer) to hand out. Works out about £2-3 a bottle and apparently tastes way better than the wine you could buy for £3.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
froglet posted:A question about financial independence, I've only had a full time job for a few years, should I prioritise saving to buy a flat closer to my work over buying into ETF's or mutual funds? Here in Australia there's a scheme to encourage potential first home buyers to save by giving a 17% match on the first $6000 you put into the account. I started one last year, but I'm wondering if I should continue putting money into it or if I should have my assets more liquid since you can't take the money out once it's in. Just a bit of a different way of looking at this, I make the maximum contribution I can to both mine and my partner's first home saver accounts each year - even though I have no current intention of buying property - purely because it is 'free money' that is otherwise left on the table. With the co-contribution and the account interest it's a guaranteed >20% return every year on $12000. You won't beat that anywhere. If you don't end up using it, you can dump it into your super. I guess it depends on what other sort of investments you have. For me, it's the first thing I do each financial year to get it out of the way, but I consider it part of my 'old man money' rather than my FI funds. Chadzok fucked around with this message at 07:00 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
Hey! Guess what! Ignore me, because our loving government just scrapped the whole idea! On the bright side, they will be removing restrictions on accessing the money, so I just got quick access to a whole bunch of old man money. I guess that's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
Chadzok posted:Hey! I too follow Auspol! On the bright side it means I get the money early, but on the downside our government has gone to poo poo and a lot of things are going to be that much more expensive. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
Someone please explain maximum HSA contributions to me? If I'm on a self-only plan, but my wife and kids are on a family plan together, then is our total maximum $3330 + $6550 = $9850 each year? Or is there an overall cap at $6550? Edit: Fixed. Individual max is $3300 for 2014. It looks like I can get the larger number of $9850 based on this http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-12-26.pdf. It seems to be tied to the kind of coverage you have. Does Self+Kids count as family coverage? Folly fucked around with this message at 14:48 on May 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
I don't know anything about that but $6330 + $6550 does not equal $9850, sorry for not being actually helpful.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Folly posted:Someone please explain maximum HSA contributions to me? You're overthinking it. If you're on an individual HDHP you can contribute $3300 maximum to an HSA for 2014. If you're on a family HDHP you can contribute $6550 maximum to an HSA in 2014.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Guinness posted:You're overthinking it. If you're on an individual HDHP you can contribute $3300 maximum to an HSA for 2014. If you're on a family HDHP you can contribute $6550 maximum to an HSA in 2014. Yeah but he's on a different plan than his wife from what I can tell.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
Oh, derp, I can't read well. Then I would assume that you can contribute $3300 to your individual HSA and your wife can contribute $6550 to her family HSA, but I have no idea how qualified withdrawals would work in that situation. I wonder how it changes if you are married filing jointly vs married filing separately. Hmm... Yeah okay now I see why you're asking.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
IRS Notice 2008-59, Q&A #17 posted:Q-17. How do the maximum annual HSA contribution limits apply to a married Found it here. The figures are old, but pretty clear that you can't double-dip with respect to deposits. The more I learn about tax law, the more  I am about the number of instances where being married is a tax disadvantage.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
I found the same thing in different publication: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p969/ar02.html#en_US_2013_publink1000204045IRS posted:Rules for married people. If either spouse has family HDHP coverage, both spouses are treated as having family HDHP coverage. If each spouse has family coverage under a separate plan, the contribution limit for 2013 is $6,450. You must reduce the limit on contributions, before taking into account any additional contributions, by the amount contributed to both spouses' Archer MSAs. After that reduction, the contribution limit is split equally between the spouses unless you agree on a different division. Looks like the cap is $6550 for my wife and I combined.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Eyes Only posted:Found it here. The figures are old, but pretty clear that you can't double-dip with respect to deposits. The more I learn about tax law, the more It's all about the circumstances though. Generally the circumstances where it becomes a disadvantage, both people are well off(and thus *should* be very comfortable due to pooling resources). MY FIANCEE and I are at about 90kish AGI, but about 80k of that is from me. After we're married, I'll go from having the majority of my income taxed at 25% to having none of it taxed at 25%. Which is nice. If she finally gets a career off the ground at some point, her raises will disappear under a mountain of taxes though.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:It's all about the circumstances though. Generally the circumstances where it becomes a disadvantage, both people are well off(and thus *should* be very comfortable due to pooling resources). Yeah this was great when my wife was between jobs... Now her entire salary basically pays our taxes for the year. I know it is crappy to complain about it but it sucks that half of the year 15 min of every hour goes to federal taxes...
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Are Multi-cookers a worthwhile thing? We use our slow cooker multiple times each week, but the ceramic lining on it is cracked. Currently, we don't own a pressure cooker. It's a safe bet we'll at least use it as a veggie steamer, rice cooker, and pressure cooker. I can replace my slow cooker for about $25. Is it worth another $50-$100 for these extra features?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
I've gotten way more flexibility out of our slow cooker by getting a sous vide controller and a big, cheap slow cooker than I think we ever would have if we spent the same amount on a fancier cooker. I don't vacuum pack any of my meat, I just put it in zip lock bags and close the bag as I immerse it in water. It's fun to come home to perfectly cooked steak that just needs a quick sear.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
If you don't already have a rice cooker, I would say it is worthwhile. Rice cookers by themselves are pretty fantastic to have if you make rice on any sort of regular basis. We got ourself a Tefal 4-in-1 three years ago for about £55 (~$80) when we were mainly interested in just cooking rice, but it has served us also very well for slow cooking and steaming. Just be aware that some models, like ours, might not have as much control over the slow cooking process (e.g. ours doesn't any way to set the slow cooking temperature, it just seems to cook it at "high").
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
I've always been happy with steamed veggies from the microwave.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
We usually steam them in the steamer pot. We also usually cook rice in a pot. I really wouldn't mind a little more fire-and-forget for both. I totally need a pressure cooker, though. I just realized that I didn't put the roast in this morning. Hope I can cook it in 4 hours. The Sous Vide thing is interesting, never tried cooking like that. But I've got like 75% of what it takes to make one in Arduino parts right now. I might as well put it on the project list. I only lack the relay and the screen.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
While we're talking about cooking, has anyone ever made their own beef jerky? I recently discovered that you can make it with plain old ground beef. Not only is it cheaper than a steak it saves me the hassle of slicing up a steak super thin. I love some beef jerky but drat is it expensive in the store.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
Saint Fu posted:While we're talking about cooking, has anyone ever made their own beef jerky? I recently discovered that you can make it with plain old ground beef. Not only is it cheaper than a steak it saves me the hassle of slicing up a steak super thin. I love some beef jerky but drat is it expensive in the store. It's definitely quite expensive. You lose about 75% of the water weight of the beef, so even buying $3/lb beef and drying it results in $12/lb of just dried meat. Add in a buck or so per pound of extra ingredients for flavoring, and you're coming pretty close to the standard ~$15/lb for store bought jerky. If you're eating pounds of the stuff weekly and not flavoring it much you could save a little. When I tried it, it was much more enjoyable to treat it as a luxury snack and use fun flavor combinations. Similar to steak, you can cook it for yourself cheaper at home, but it's still definitely something of a luxury, not very BFC to do regularly.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Unless you do what my co-worker does, make jerky and give out free samples until half the office is buying it from him at three bucks a tiny bag.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
It feels so good to be assigned to mentor people straight out of college, have them ask about a 401k plan, and tell them "You probably want to max that out, ours is really good. Also, have you heard of Mr. Money Mustache? Look at this, you could retire at 30!"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Big John's beef jerky is really good, and he gives Goon discounts. Check SA Mart.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Question: when people recommend maxing out 401k plans, do they typically mean up to the employer match or to the IRS annual contribution limit? I've been assuming the latter since it seems like up to employer match should be the minimum, but I know there are plenty of people who don't even do that.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
more friedman units posted:Question: when people recommend maxing out 401k plans, do they typically mean up to the employer match or to the IRS annual contribution limit? I've been assuming the latter since it seems like up to employer match should be the minimum, but I know there are plenty of people who don't even do that. Anyone who doesn't contribute up to employer match is either financially retarded, or has a *illegally* bad 401k that they should really report to the DOL. Max out 401k to contribution limit, max out Roth IRA - that's the bare minimum to do if you want to be financially independent at a relatively early age. The people retiring at 30 are saving $70-100k a year in today's environment.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Anyone who doesn't contribute up to employer match is either financially retarded, or has a *illegally* bad 401k that they should really report to the DOL. Max out 401k to contribution limit, max out Roth IRA - that's the bare minimum to do if you want to be financially independent at a relatively early age. The people retiring at 30 are saving* $70-100k a year in today's environment. *Or spending 35k/year forever. Edit: and yeah, I've made beef jerky a few times. It only saves money because it's cheaper than the stuff from the store. The real money is in not eating meat, or only eating meat twice a week. tuyop fucked around with this message at 05:42 on May 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Depending on where you live deer hunting could be feasible if you don't go overboard with hunting gear. A $200 Mosin or SKS will kill a deer just as dead as a tacticool sport rifle, and you don't need a set of duck commander branded poo poo to do it with neither.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 07:25
|
|
|
Has anybody read the Four Hour Workweek? I'm halfway through and can't tell if I want to finish it or toss it in a furnace. His approach to FI appears to be "Hire India to live for you and sell workout supplements online"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Has anybody read the Four Hour Workweek? I'm halfway through and can't tell if I want to finish it or toss it in a furnace. His approach to FI appears to be "Hire India to live for you and sell workout supplements online"
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Has anybody read the Four Hour Workweek? I'm halfway through and can't tell if I want to finish it or toss it in a furnace. His approach to FI appears to be "Hire India to live for you and sell workout supplements online" Also his definition of work is hosed up. And yeah, the book was loving insufferable in many places.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Has anybody read the Four Hour Workweek? I'm halfway through and can't tell if I want to finish it or toss it in a furnace. His approach to FI appears to be "Hire India to live for you and sell workout supplements online" There were parts I found enormously liberating and hilarious, like the way that he has the four-step plan to being able to say you gave talks at Harvard University and Fortune 500 companies - and he's right. It puts you into the mindset of the ultimate cynic businessperson, able to adeptly navigate institutions while necessarily stripping them of whatever value they might have had in your mind. The book makes you much less eager to impress, and directs your efforts towards the factors that actually matter. It makes you choose what you're actually looking to maximize in your life, a question that most people don't have to answer. It's almost an instruction manual on killing your idols - the fancy car, credentials, money, international competitions - but it does leave you in the existential dilemma of not knowing what's next. I had to turn to hardcore philosophy to make sense of things after getting the FI mindset. Also, if you think you can follow anyone's else's path and make free easy money forever, you're an idiot. They're tools, not instructions manuals. No Wave fucked around with this message at 16:41 on May 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
It's practically useless unless you have a very specific skillset and ideals. If you're a knowledge worker who needs to help people face-to-face (think social workers, teachers, any medical professional) in order to feel worthwhile - which is most people in my experience - then outsourcing your life in order to satisfy your hedonistic desires will really not make you happy. A better strategy is YMOYL's, which is like, "love your job as much as possible, but it behooves you to efficiently satisfy your wants and bank the rest so that when or if the day comes that you no longer love your work you can leave and do stuff you do love."
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 17:08
|
|