Do you find this purchasing pattern wasteful/unusual?

[Ausmumof3]

It depends a bit. Sometimes the lunch and coffees out are a social obligation. I was pretty frugal at the same stage of life but if you are a journalist you probably need to be out and about, talking to and seeing people more often. And I guess at least she's keeping a barista in a job! I do think overall people could save more but often it comes with a social cost.

[Jean in Newcastle]

 

 

In my experience, eating in the work canteen is often part of the job. I have had various jobs where everyone eats there and you would definitely be the odd one out. I once had a colleague who did bring in food instead to save money and of course it is okay - but it also seems a bit "unfriendly". Most places I have worked at, people in an office/team stop working at say noon and go to eat together. Not going along would not necessarily be conducive to good working relationships (not necessarily horrible but just a bit strange). Often people also talk about work stuff there, it is a chance to get the manager better etc. It really is almost a necessitiy.

 

 

Is a work canteen the same as a cafeteria?  I always just brought my packed lunch into the cafeteria and ate with my coworkers - some who also packed lunches and some who bought it there.  You have to eat somewhere and they preferred that we do it in the cafeteria than at our desks. 

[katilac]

 and as she does still save money and does not spend more than she can afford it seems fine to me.

 

She saves about $134 a month, which barely counts as saving for routine emergencies in my book. 

 

I think she should spend her money however she likes, but she needs to own her decisions. Don't moan and groan about not being able to ever afford a house when you are spending money this way. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

She saves about $134 a month, which barely counts as saving for routine emergencies in my book. 

 

I think she should spend her money however she likes, but she needs to own her decisions. Don't moan and groan about not being able to ever afford a house when you are spending money this way. 

 

Exactly.  And while it might be true that she thought of the subject of this article on a whim, she did consult "Britain's most money saving expert".  So she asked someone to evaluate her spending habits.  And Laura is asking us to evaluate it as well, though of course, the author probably isn't so interested in what we think.

 

I personally think that financial habits that we get in when we are younger help us out a lot as we progress through life's stages.  I am very thankful that I am not in the financial situation that I was in when I was young.  But a lot of that is because I was so frugal back then.  And of course as you gain maturity and skills, hopefully your income (or your dh's in a single income home) goes up. 

[katilac]

Sometimes the lunch and coffees out are a social obligation. 

 

Sometimes they are, yes. And sometimes we convince ourselves that they are, because we want lunch and coffee out, lol. 

 

At most offices, yes, you need to eat out with coworkers on occasion to stay in the loop. That does not mean you need to eat out with coworkers every single day. If each person pays for their own part of the bill, you can also minimize the expense by ordering an appetizer or salad at the restaurant. Even easier at the coffee shop, because you generally line up individually to order and pay. So you get brewed coffee instead of a fancy espresso drink, or possibly get nothing if it's a nice big group - just go and socialize. You can still tip even if you don't eat/drink.

[maize]

The amount she spends on food and alcohol as a single person could frugally feed a family of four, even given higher costs.

[Crimson Wife]

This is going to sound totally un-P.C. but I disagree with the financial advisor's comment that finding a partner isn't a plan. If she's a journalist, she's never going to make a ton of money. Finding a husband who makes a good salary is absolutely a smart idea. My mom was a journalist but we lived on my dad's corporate finance salary. My sister-in-law is a journalist but my brother makes quite a bit more money than she does as a lawyer. My other brother's ex-GF was a journalist before she became a SAHM and lives on her husband's salary (he's got some sort of corporate job). It works the same way for male journalists as well like my cousin (who was a SAHD when his daughter was small and lived on his wife's college admin salary). I'm not saying to be a "gold digger" but the sooner she can get married, the better it will be for her financial situation.

 

Spending money on her appearance and the socializing she needs to do to find Mr. Right is not a waste IMHO.

[Laura Corin]

Sometimes they are, yes. And sometimes we convince ourselves that they are, because we want lunch and coffee out, lol. 

 

At most offices, yes, you need to eat out with coworkers on occasion to stay in the loop. That does not mean you need to eat out with coworkers every single day. If each person pays for their own part of the bill, you can also minimize the expense by ordering an appetizer or salad at the restaurant. Even easier at the coffee shop, because you generally line up individually to order and pay. So you get brewed coffee instead of a fancy espresso drink, or possibly get nothing if it's a nice big group - just go and socialize. You can still tip even if you don't eat/drink.

 

When I worked in the City of London, a lot of people went for a drink after work every day: no-one drove to work and there was a pub under the office block.  I went along a few times but it wasn't my idea of fun.  Most of the people going were non-managerial, so it was group bonding rather than upwardly networking.  I seemed to get on with people okay anyway, but maybe I was missing something (not unusual for me).

[Sherry in OH]

In her defense, the (Guardian article) author does have a roommate.  She is paying her bills and saving a small amount.  She cannot be considered frugal, but I don’t think her spending pattern is unusual for a single 20-something city dweller.

 

If a house or flat is something the author really wants, she is going to have to make sacrifices.  Either she earns more or cuts spending.  Her disproportionate spending on meals out and alcohol are obvious places to cut back.  I realize that city apartments are often small and that all socializing may occur in public spaces.  But, small changes here could have a big impact over time.   

 

Fewer takeout coffees are a good start.  Bringing a snack to eat on the way home would help curb impulse purchases at the end of the workday.  Many workplaces provide refrigerators and microwaves for employee use.  Work lunches don’t have to be all or nothing.  She could start by bringing lunch one or two days a week.  She may find that many other employees do the same.  Having one or two drinks with friends instead of drinking to intoxication would not only be kinder to her wallet but also to her health.

 

Realistically, the author may never be able to afford a home in the trendiest neighborhood.  That doesn’t mean she won’t be able to afford a house or flat somewhere else.  She may decide she’d rather rent. There is nothing wrong with that.  Instead of saving for a down payment, she could build a nest egg for other purposes.

[Arcadia]

Is a work canteen the same as a cafeteria? I always just brought my packed lunch into the cafeteria and ate with my coworkers - some who also packed lunches and some who bought it there. You have to eat somewhere and they preferred that we do it in the cafeteria than at our desks.

When I was working in HP, the staff canteen at my location does not allow outside food. We could eat at our desk or at various departments staff pantry area (big enough for only two or three people to eat their packed lunch at one time) for that location. The staff canteen only had a Panda Express style store. The price was lower though than nearby food courts as entry was by beeping the employee pass at the entrance so everyone eating there was an employee or an escorted guest.

 

My husband’s current company’s work canteen and previous company’s work canteen does not allow outside food either. It’s run the same style as a Le Boulanger cafe. If it is one person with outside food per table, they aren’t going to kick a fuss. It is because rents are high with most customers being employees, and it’s managed by a food catering company.

[Twolittleboys]

Is a work canteen the same as a cafeteria?  I always just brought my packed lunch into the cafeteria and ate with my coworkers - some who also packed lunches and some who bought it there.  You have to eat somewhere and they preferred that we do it in the cafeteria than at our desks. 

 

I would assume so. And I think it depends - I have eaten at various cafeterias (I used to be an auditor so ate at various clients' cafeterias) and I don't recall ever seeing someone do that. You probably could and if you are really hard up for cash you might have to. But it doesn't sound like she is having problems making ends meet, just saving enough for a house. Most places I have been it would be a bit strange.

 

She saves about $134 a month, which barely counts as saving for routine emergencies in my book. 

 

I think she should spend her money however she likes, but she needs to own her decisions. Don't moan and groan about not being able to ever afford a house when you are spending money this way. 

 

I didn't really read it as her complaining. I think being able to buy a decent apartment as a single person in London would be difficult. Sure, you can do it but personally I don't think it would be worth the sacrifices. I would not want to spend years not going out with co-workers etc. just so that I could maybe one day afford something.

 

Sometimes they are, yes. And sometimes we convince ourselves that they are, because we want lunch and coffee out, lol. 

 

At most offices, yes, you need to eat out with coworkers on occasion to stay in the loop. That does not mean you need to eat out with coworkers every single day. If each person pays for their own part of the bill, you can also minimize the expense by ordering an appetizer or salad at the restaurant. Even easier at the coffee shop, because you generally line up individually to order and pay. So you get brewed coffee instead of a fancy espresso drink, or possibly get nothing if it's a nice big group - just go and socialize. You can still tip even if you don't eat/drink.

 

Yes, you could probably save by buying cheaper food etc. but depending on the job it may be necessary to eat most meals together. Most places I have worked at (obviously this may be quite different in other industries/businesses) you are expected to share lunch at least. And there would be a social cost if you don't. I once was out on a job with someone who did not come along and if I had to choose someone to go to the same client the next year I probably would not have chosen her. Wwell, I would have if she had been outstanding otherwise but all else being equal I would have prefered someone to eat lunch/dinner with (and if it is customary it does give the impression the person just doesn't like you).

 

I guess I can see the going out for dinner part as being a bit excessive but lunch in the cafeteria? I give my kids about that amount (4.50) if they have afternoon classes so they can eat in the cafeteria/get take-out etc.

[Laura Corin]

 

Realistically, the author may never be able to afford a home in the trendiest neighborhood.  That doesn’t mean she won’t be able to afford a house or flat somewhere else.  She may decide she’d rather rent. There is nothing wrong with that.  Instead of saving for a down payment, she could build a nest egg for other purposes.

 

With a place like London, it's no longer a case of the trendiest neighbourhood.  Either it's incredibly expensive close in or it's cheaper further out but you pay lots for transport.  When I lived in London in the Nineties, a lot of the East End was cheap and edgy.  Now these are the prices.  The lowest-priced one-bedroom flat in Hackney (not a studio - those are a bad investment) is £260,000

 

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E87508&maxBedrooms=1&sortType=1

[Reefgazer]

I'm another one who is floored by the alcohol/eating out/expensive coffee purchases.  But her spending habits are much like a poor person - have fun with the little affordable things because no way will you be able to buy big ticket items like a house or vacation.  I'd bet my last nickel she grew up poor or lower middle class.

[katilac]

 <snip?

 

I didn't really read it as her complaining. I think being able to buy a decent apartment as a single person in London would be difficult. Sure, you can do it but personally I don't think it would be worth the sacrifices. I would not want to spend years not going out with co-workers etc. just so that I could maybe one day afford something.

 

 

Yes, you could probably save by buying cheaper food etc. but depending on the job it may be necessary to eat most meals together. Most places I have worked at (obviously this may be quite different in other industries/businesses) you are expected to share lunch at least. And there would be a social cost if you don't. I once was out on a job with someone who did not come along and if I had to choose someone to go to the same client the next year I probably would not have chosen her. Wwell, I would have if she had been outstanding otherwise but all else being equal I would have prefered someone to eat lunch/dinner with (and if it is customary it does give the impression the person just doesn't like you).

 

I guess I can see the going out for dinner part as being a bit excessive but lunch in the cafeteria? I give my kids about that amount (4.50) if they have afternoon classes so they can eat in the cafeteria/get take-out etc.

 

"Justifying" would probably have been a better word for me to use, rather than complaining. She's using the fact that she could never save a down payment to justify her various expenses, when actually she could save a down payment. If you don't want to, that's fine, but don't say you aren't doing it because it's impossible. Also, even if that were impossible, she needs to up her savings game. It's not an all or nothing choice. 

 

What types of jobs do you think require eating most meals out? My husband eats many lunches out, and he really does have to: he's an outside salesperson and you are expected to take clients out to lunch. In that job, it either goes on your expense account, or it's a legitimate business expense if you are an owner or contractor (can't do the job without it, and can be written off). Lawyers often eat out, but they also make lots of money and either bill it or write it off. 

 

I majored in communications and worked part-time for my metro newspaper for ten years. No one is expecting the journalist to buy their food or drink, lol. Unless they are hella better paid in Europe than they are here. The joke is that the way to get guaranteed coverage for your event is to provide free food - every reporter and photographer in the vicinity will show up. 

[LucyStoner]

Unusual? No.

 

Wasteful? Yes but not the the point of being reckless.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I'm another one who is floored by the alcohol/eating out/expensive coffee purchases.  But her spending habits are much like a poor person - have fun with the little affordable things because no way will you be able to buy big ticket items like a house or vacation.  I'd bet my last nickel she grew up poor or lower middle class.

 

That's a good point.

[Twolittleboys]

"Justifying" would probably have been a better word for me to use, rather than complaining. She's using the fact that she could never save a down payment to justify her various expenses, when actually she could save a down payment. If you don't want to, that's fine, but don't say you aren't doing it because it's impossible. Also, even if that were impossible, she needs to up her savings game. It's not an all or nothing choice. 

 

What types of jobs do you think require eating most meals out? My husband eats many lunches out, and he really does have to: he's an outside salesperson and you are expected to take clients out to lunch. In that job, it either goes on your expense account, or it's a legitimate business expense if you are an owner or contractor (can't do the job without it, and can be written off). Lawyers often eat out, but they also make lots of money and either bill it or write it off. 

 

I majored in communications and worked part-time for my metro newspaper for ten years. No one is expecting the journalist to buy their food or drink, lol. Unless they are hella better paid in Europe than they are here. The joke is that the way to get guaranteed coverage for your event is to provide free food - every reporter and photographer in the vicinity will show up. 

 

 

I am not sure if my point is coming across - I do think she could save money. But I don't think she is unusual or necessarily wasteful. She is having fun and living within her means. Obviously, a bit more savings would be good.

 

When I was talking about eating most meals out I was mostly thinking of lunch in the cafeteria. I have worked in various offices both of large companies and government agencies and teams just go to lunch together. Of course you don't always have to go but if you do not have a good reason it would seem strange. After all, everyone has to eat and it is generally cheaper than most alternatives (if you don't want to bring something along). At the last job I worked I actually never went along as I only worked part-time and left around 1 (and would have had to stay longer if I took a lunch break). So I did have a good reason that people understood - still I think it hurt a bit as it makes you the odd one out.

 

When I worked as an auditor we generally ate lunch together (either in a client's cafeteria or a restaurant). If at a restaurant, the manager often picked up the bill. If not, people went to cheaper places. But not going along would have been weird - especially if out of town. It is just part of the culture. 

[Entropymama]

The crazy part to me is the student loan bit. She owes 8,000 pounds, but spends 900 per month on eating out and other frivolities. At that rate she could be out of debt in (probably, depending on what her student loan payment is) 8 or 9 months. That would reduce her expenses and allow her to save more, plus she could qualify for a higher mortgage loan. So, go really frugal (write about it!) for a little while and put yourself in a better financial position. She could potentially even write an ebook about how she got out of debt on a low end salary and make a little money. 

 

I don't know. When dh and I were in our early 20's, we were poor, like on government assistance poor. And we had a couple little kids. I can't imagine spending like this, but that's more because of my personal experience/family culture than anything. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

The crazy part to me is the student loan bit. She owes 8,000 pounds, but spends 900 per month on eating out and other frivolities. At that rate she could be out of debt in (probably, depending on what her student loan payment is) 8 or 9 months. That would reduce her expenses and allow her to save more, plus she could qualify for a higher mortgage loan. So, go really frugal (write about it!) for a little while and put yourself in a better financial position. She could potentially even write an ebook about how she got out of debt on a low end salary and make a little money. 

 

I don't know. When dh and I were in our early 20's, we were poor, like on government assistance poor. And we had a couple little kids. I can't imagine spending like this, but that's more because of my personal experience/family culture than anything. 

 

I don't know all the rules for their loans, but they don't work like our student loans work. Your repayment is based on your earnings.  Not sure if you can save by repaying early though. 

[MaeFlowers]

Given that she says in the very beginning of the article that she doesn't want to rent forever, I am thinking she's not 100% happy with the choices she is making. Besides the article is specifically discussing whether or not she could save to buy a home by cutting out the little luxuries, so yes, in that context it does matter. It matters because if she didn't spend so much on random instant gratification, she would be able to later purchase the bigger things she says she wants.

Like I said, I didn't read the article. She does spend quite a bit on food but she doesnt seem to spend a ton of money on hobbies, clothes, or anything else. If she really wants to save, she always has the option of cutting back. However, life can be pretty miserable when you are frugal about everything all of the time.

 

ETA: I get savings are important. I also get that being frugal has its upside. But, at some point you have to enjoy life. That's my point. It's about balance.

Edited January 29, 2018 by MaeFlowers

[gardenmom5]

I do know people who spend like this - not all of them are young.  

 

I listened to a young woman whine about how she couldn't afford to save for a house/etc. because they didn't make enough, she stayed home, and her dh worked.  (I knew how much her dh made, exact same job/employer as a nephew/hired same time/yes- I took into account he made less than nephew - still plenty.). . . . she spend A LOT on baby toys and they were renting a larger house, not a smaller apartment, which is cheaper by far and would enable them to save for a downpayment.

 

I (sadly) wouldn't consider it unusual - I would consider it stupid and  one that undermines financial goals.  she's not saving, she's not building equity - she's living paycheck to paycheck and one day it's going to bite her.

[Bluegoat]

Why do people keep saying that she won't be able to buy a house?

 

The expert said if she saved more she very likely could in 4 to 8 years, that would put her in her mid-30s.

 

That doesn't seem all that bad to me.

 

I don't think she has to if she doesn't want to, though she should probably save a bit more - it's nice to have something available if an opportunity arises and she has the disposable income.  

 

But it isn't that she'd be saving for no reason if a house were what she really wanted.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I think the concept of financial allocation whether it is a strict budget or a looser one, is a good one.  And the idea that goes along with that is conscious spending (and saving).  The specifics of how you spend your money and for what categories and what percentage you save is individual and depends on a lot of factors.  I don't think that this is emphasized in a lot of homes or schools any more.  (I remember it being taught in Home Ec back in the day.)  I think that it is easy to just spend money unconsciously for all sorts of "sundries" and then all of a sudden find out that you've spent your paycheck already. 

[eternalsummer]

If she's at work all day and cannot pop home at lunch to do it, maybe that's necessary? Can dogs handle not being able to pee for 12 hours?

 

In that case, can she afford to support a dog?

 

I mean, obviously so, technically, but at least she can recognize that it is optional.

[Laura Corin]

Why do people keep saying that she won't be able to buy a house?

 

The expert said if she saved more she very likely could in 4 to 8 years, that would put her in her mid-30s.

 

 

 

There's a contradiction there.  He says that she can save a 10% deposit of 35,000 in that time.  But she still won't be able to get a large enough mortgage to cover the rest on her own, as he says at the beginning of the article.  This is the calculator from Martin Lewis' own site.  Even if her income is 45,000, rather than 35,000 by then, it doesn't work (and the prices of the properties will have gone up too, because they always do):

 

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/mortgages/how-much-mortgage-borrowing

Edited January 29, 2018 by Laura Corin

[SKL]

Coming from a corporate / professional services career, I agree that there is some practical use for some amount of social eating / drinking.  However, there are ways to keep it reasonable.  You have to plan for it and have a good answer that doesn't make you sound like a dweeb.  (Says this former dweeb.)

 

You can say something like "I have a standing lunch with a [hopefully non-extravagant] friend I used to work with, but how about Thursday?"  "I have a tight deadline so I need to eat at my desk today."  "I brought some delicious leftovers from yesterday's supper, would you like to try some?"  "I need to run down to __ do xyz personal errand over lunch today."  Sometimes you would say yes, but you don't have to every day.  And when you do, if it's a shared bill (vs. on the boss's card), you can order something reasonable and/or pack half of it for another meal.

 

To avoid the after-work drinking, you could say you have plans to drop in at a non-profit and do some volunteering, walk your dog, check in on your elderly parents, get to your chess club or basketball league, whatever.  If you aren't a teetotaler, do have a drink sometimes, but don't use work as an excuse to do it too often.

[Jean in Newcastle]

In that case, can she afford to support a dog?

 

I mean, obviously so, technically, but at least she can recognize that it is optional.

 

Even if someone can financially support an animal doesn't mean that they can give it the care that it needs.  I don't mean making it your substitute child, but giving it the exercise, and attention that it needs. 

[EmilyGF]

Coming from a corporate / professional services career, I agree that there is some practical use for some amount of social eating / drinking.  However, there are ways to keep it reasonable.  You have to plan for it and have a good answer that doesn't make you sound like a dweeb.  (Says this former dweeb.)

 

You can say something like "I have a standing lunch with a [hopefully non-extravagant] friend I used to work with, but how about Thursday?"  "I have a tight deadline so I need to eat at my desk today."  "I brought some delicious leftovers from yesterday's supper, would you like to try some?"  "I need to run down to __ do xyz personal errand over lunch today."  Sometimes you would say yes, but you don't have to every day.  And when you do, if it's a shared bill (vs. on the boss's card), you can order something reasonable and/or pack half of it for another meal.

 

To avoid the after-work drinking, you could say you have plans to drop in at a non-profit and do some volunteering, walk your dog, check in on your elderly parents, get to your chess club or basketball league, whatever.  If you aren't a teetotaler, do have a drink sometimes, but don't use work as an excuse to do it too often.

I think this is sort of like weight loss - you realize that a lot of social eating is actually optional and can be done in lower calorie/fat/money ways and/or minimized without offending people. 

 

Emily

[eternalsummer]

Yes, there is a reason we don't have a dog.  We make a good income, but we have 6 kids and we rent.  We're already not the most desirable renters (I don't think anyone really wants to rent to someone with 6 kids) and with a dog I think our options would be quite limited, plus of course we'd have to feed it (we don't eat factory farmed animal products so that would be expensive), pay pet rent, make sure we find a place with a large fenced yard, etc.  Pets can be expensive.  

[Catwoman]

Like I said, I didn't read the article. She does spend quite a bit on food but she doesnt seem to spend a ton of money on hobbies, clothes, or anything else. If she really wants to save, she always has the option of cutting back. However, life can be pretty miserable when you are frugal about everything all of the time.

 

ETA: I get savings are important. I also get that being frugal has its upside. But, at some point you have to enjoy life. That's my point. It's about balance.

 

:iagree:

 

She is living within her means and she has no debt other than the student loan, so she is enjoying her life and not going into debt to do it. I think that's commendable. It would be nice to see her saving more money for her future, but she's young, single, and carefree right now, and her priorities are different from someone whose only goal is to own a home or start a family.

 

As I noted earlier, she appears to have written the article because she was "testing an assumption," not because she was desperate to own a home and she was trying very hard to save money, but she felt the situation was hopeless. She never said she was actively trying to save money for a house; if she had, I'm sure many of us would be criticizing some of her choices, but it seems like she was doing an experiment based on what she considers to be the lifestyle of an average twenty-something, not because she thought she was making lots of sacrifices in order to save for a home. 

 

Because she appears to have no problem living within her means, I think she would also be smart enough to realize that she needs to spend less if she wants to save more. It's just that right now, that's not a big priority for her.

[SKL]

As for whether finding a spouse is a plan ... I think he meant that she doesn't have enough control over that situation to budget on it.  Some of us always expected to get married but still never did.  :P

 

Also, there is no guarantee that your spouse is going to put you in a better financial position in the foreseeable future.

[Catwoman]

I don't think it's EXCESSIVE.....to me, excessive would be spending more than she makes, buying  her booze on credit cards, struggling to pay rent, etc. 

 

I think it's wasteful because she is spending a lot that she just doesn't NEED to spend.  Now, yes, everyone spends money they don't NEED to spend.  And at some level, that's not necessarily wasteful, to me.  The difference I think is that she is doing it a LOT.  That's what makes it wasteful to me. 

 

The thing is, it's not up to us to define how much is too much for anyone but ourselves. We all have different opinions of what constitutes wastefulness.

[freesia]

CW--my Dad was a journalist,and we lived on his salary, in Washington DC and my parents owned a house. He was raised working class during the depression and we lived frugally ( but not poverty level--we had occasional weeks at the beach and one trip to Disneyland and a summer pool membership). One persons idea of a necessary lifestyle is not another's

 

But I get it--where I live folks spend so much on extracurriculars that it begins to look normal. I think that has a lot to do with why she thinks it is normal--everyone around her does it.

 

Marrying can't be a financial plan bc you can't count on getting married.

[G5052]

I pretty much lived like that for several years when I was on a contract that gave me a salary, $25/day for meals, wardrobe allowance, a leased car, and a furnished apartment. I still had a mortgage on my place back where I was based, but it wasn't unreasonable. My car there had no loan.

 

When I look at what I spend now, it's almost laughable. We eat out maybe once a week. With DS away, I think DD and I will get by on $50-80/week, even with some gluten free convenience foods and a lot of produce.

Edited January 29, 2018 by G5052

[Entropymama]

CW--my Dad was a journalist,and we lived on his salary, in Washington DC and my parents owned a house. He was raised working class during the depression and we lived frugally ( but not poverty level--we had occasional weeks at the beach and one trip to Disneyland and a summer pool membership). One persons idea of a necessary lifestyle is not another's

 

But I get it--where I live folks spend so much on extracurriculars that it begins to look normal. I think that has a lot to do with why she thinks it is normal--everyone around her does it.

 

Marrying can't be a financial plan bc you can't count on getting married.

 

Yes, this. DH makes a very good salary for his line of work, and our kids have all kinds of perks that I never had growing up - last summer they all had season passes to a local amusement park, they wear Nikes and own iPads. We own a large, if older and a bit of a fixer upper, home and three cars. We are not flush, we have to say no to a lot of things, and we won't be paying for college, but we are definitely not poor. We live in an area where all the kids play several sports and get private music lessons and take family vacations to Florida over spring break and out of the country in the summer. My kids feel we are less well off because their perception of normal is skewed in an upper middle class direction. 

 

I think this same issue of perspective is at work with 20-somethings who live in big cities. When everyone else is doing it, it seems normal, and I imagine it sounds insane to live off ramen and never go out with your friends. I agree that it might make one a bit of a pariah, and maybe it's not worth it. 

[SKL]

And I also agree that young, unmarried professionals should view this as their time to save money.  Once you have kids, you want to have the means to make choices that require financial flexibility.  It's not PC to tell young women that they might want / need to cut back their career for family, but reality bites.  If you have a chance to build up a nest egg before kids, do it IMO.

 

The other thing you want to do "when you can" is volunteering / giving to charity.  I didn't notice any of that on the writer's schedule, but maybe I missed it.  Now's the time to get out into the community, educate yourself about charitable causes, try out volunteer positions, choose a pet cause.  When you have kids, well, that's not the time to be writing your Treasurer reports at 2am ....  Plus, you can't take kids with you on most volunteering gigs until they are pretty big.  I felt better knowing that when I fell off the volunteering grid because of kids, I had put in a lot of time already.  :)

Edited January 29, 2018 by SKL

[SparklyUnicorn]

I just think at this point saving more wouldn't even be painful.  That is often not the case.  We save some, but we certainly would like to save more.  It's just not possible though unless we lived on ramen or really cut expenses to the bone.

 

 

 

[Catwoman]

Yes.  And my opinion is that it's wasteful for her to go out to eat twice a day, multiple times a week.  That does not however mean that I think she has to stop.  If that's how she wants to spend her money that's how she wants to spend her money.  Now, if what she wants to spend her money on is a down payment on a house, then yes, she should stop spending so much on going out to eat and drinking.  But that is just about the math, not about any moral component.  I don't think it's wrong or immoral to waste money as long as your bills are paid (which they seem to be in this case.) 

 

As someone who often eats out twice a day, multiple times a week, I can't really judge her about that... :leaving:

 

BUT... I absolutely agree with you that if she was trying to save for a house, it's all about the math and she shouldn't whine about how she can't save money until she steps away from the bar and stops eating most of her meals in restaurants. She could save a lot of money if she cut back on the drinking and eating out, even if everything else stayed the same.

[Scarlett]

As someone who often eats out twice a day, multiple times a week, I can't really judge her about that... :leaving:

 

BUT... I absolutely agree with you that if she was trying to save for a house, it's all about the math and she shouldn't whine about how she can't save money until she steps away from the bar and stops eating most of her meals in restaurants. She could save a lot of money if she cut back on the drinking and eating out, even if everything else stayed the same.

 

 

Do you really? Your whole family?  I know there you have 3 in your family.....I get sick of eating out when I do it for several days in a row for whatever reason.

[Catwoman]

Do you really? Your whole family? I know there you have 3 in your family.....I get sick of eating out when I do it for several days in a row for whatever reason.

Yes, all three of us. :)

 

There are lots of restaurants in the area, so we don’t get bored.

 

Edited to add — We’re mostly eating at home right now, because this flu season is so bad. I’m mostly going out for necessities, not for fun, to minimize our exposure because dh is immunosuppressed and I would be so worried if he got the flu! I feel like a hermit, though, because we’re usually out and about every day.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Catwoman

[Jean in Newcastle]

Yes.  And my opinion is that it's wasteful for her to go out to eat twice a day, multiple times a week.  That does not however mean that I think she has to stop.  If that's how she wants to spend her money that's how she wants to spend her money.  Now, if what she wants to spend her money on is a down payment on a house, then yes, she should stop spending so much on going out to eat and drinking.  But that is just about the math, not about any moral component.  I don't think it's wrong or immoral to waste money as long as your bills are paid (which they seem to be in this case.) 

 

I agree.   I would never go around scrutinizing someone else's spending habits.  But if they put it all out there and ask for people's opinion then it's in that "well, you asked" category.  Not as a moral judgment but in a "is this the best use of this resource given what goals you've set out" type of way.  The only other time when I would have an opinion is if someone is wanting me to pay for their lifestyle or at least subsidize it.  Then I get to make a determination as to whether I want to do that.  In some cases, when someone is being frugal (even with small occasional splurges) but still needs help, I might choose to help them out vs. a situation where they really could do it on their own if they exercised some financial self control, so no, I'm not going to help.  But I have enough trouble managing my own finances and need to be careful who I help and can't afford to help people to have the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed just for the heck of it. 

[SKL]

I think most of us have "wasted our resources" in some way or other, in our own opinions, even more so in others' opinions.

 

Most people consider my pet money sucks extravagant; some of them are, even to me.  Oh well.  You only live once.  I sacrifice in some ways and splurge in others - like almost everyone.

 

I called the writer's spending "extravagant," but hey, it could be worse.  It's her money after all.  Actually I give her kudos for not trying to adjust or hide the truth in order to look less extravagant (as far as we know).  Sometimes we have little frugality contests as if there's some virtue in being the cheapest.  (And I have participated in many of these.)  Truth is, if she's wasting money on alcohol, I'm wasting time talking about it, LOL.  If I had to honestly list out all the things I waste in a month, it would not be pretty.  Time I could be working or sleeping, opportunities to eat well instead of badly, chances to brighten someone's day, opportunities for tough love on my kids, the chance to exercise instead of doing a jigzone puzzle on the internet ....

[Seasider]

Ah. This reminds me of some young folks I know who are going to college on loans and Pell grants, but a fresh cup of Starbucks is an accessory in every IG pic. Makes me wish I could introduce them to my dad and some other elders who grew up in the Great Depression Era.

 

FWIW, if one chooses to be an urban dweller and never anticipates buying real estate, the monthly cash flow may indeed be looser and allow for a lifestyle of perks. But everything comes with opportunity costs. To be indulging while carrying massive student debt... well, that's actually a mindset of one in poverty.

[Bluegoat]

There's a contradiction there.  He says that she can save a 10% deposit of 35,000 in that time.  But she still won't be able to get a large enough mortgage to cover the rest on her own, as he says at the beginning of the article.  This is the calculator from Martin Lewis' own site.  Even if her income is 45,000, rather than 35,000 by then, it doesn't work (and the prices of the properties will have gone up too, because they always do):

 

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/mortgages/how-much-mortgage-borrowing

 

Ah, ok.

 

Still - she may not always want to be in London, especially if she has kids at some point.  

[Bluegoat]

:iagree:

 

She is living within her means and she has no debt other than the student loan, so she is enjoying her life and not going into debt to do it. I think that's commendable. It would be nice to see her saving more money for her future, but she's young, single, and carefree right now, and her priorities are different from someone whose only goal is to own a home or start a family.

 

As I noted earlier, she appears to have written the article because she was "testing an assumption," not because she was desperate to own a home and she was trying very hard to save money, but she felt the situation was hopeless. She never said she was actively trying to save money for a house; if she had, I'm sure many of us would be criticizing some of her choices, but it seems like she was doing an experiment based on what she considers to be the lifestyle of an average twenty-something, not because she thought she was making lots of sacrifices in order to save for a home. 

 

Because she appears to have no problem living within her means, I think she would also be smart enough to realize that she needs to spend less if she wants to save more. It's just that right now, that's not a big priority for her.

 

With regard to the bold - that's true, I did get the impression though that she started out thinking that the amount she could save wouldn't be worthwhile, and it was a bit of an eye-opener to look at her own spending and think about whether it was stuff that really was worth it.

[Jean in Newcastle]

The problem is the adjectives, in my opinion.  For one thing, adjectives are relative.

 

So wasteful compared to what?  Unusual compared to what?  Personally, I wouldn't use those adjectives.  I would look more from the standpoint of a financial planner just like the one she consulted with - what are the goals?  And can they be achieved? 

[amy g.]

I don’t understand the idea that 20 somethings are never going to be able to buy a house. I really think what they mean is, “I’m not willing to do what it would take for me to be able to buy a house.†And I think that is a perfectly fine choice. But it is a choice.

 

My son is 21. He didn’t finish college, but he makes more than either Dh or I did out of college. Dh was almost 30 before he hit that pay level. And that is his base salary. He is hourly, so he works every hour of overtime that he can.

 

At the end of the year, he was working 30 hours, sleeping in his car for a couple of hours and the going back in to work some more.

 

He eats once a day. He ran the numbers and it is cheaper to go out to eat for that meal than to buy groceries and cook because that takes time that could be used working.

 

He saves almost every dollar he makes. He is investing some of his savings into a a company he has started with a friend.

 

He has one account of money for recreation. He uses that for day trading.

 

He drinks free coffee at work. I bought him a Stanley french press travel mug for Christmas so he can have caffeine on the drive in.

 

I don’t necessarily think he has a healthy lifestyle. He can’t play piano anymore because he is getting carpal tunnel from all of the hours at a computer.

 

He doesn’t date because who has time for that.

 

I have no doubt that he will continue to be financially successful.

 

Does he live in a difficult time? Are their stressors and challenges?

 

Yes, but he doesn’t use that as an excuse to give up. It just makes him get creative, think up a back up plan and keep trying.

 

And in the end, the people who make it are the ones who keep trying.

[SamanthaCarter]

The only person I know who seems to spend like that also lives and owns a condo in Jersey City across the water from NYC. Wads of money though. I’m positive theyre saving for a good retirement.

 

On the whole, this is not a common thing that I’ve seen except among people who are in poverty. And thier luxuries that they are buying because of no point in saving are a little different.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MaeFlowers]

I understand enjoying life, but you aren't going to enjoy it long if you dont establish a habit of contributing towards your retirement or your emergency fund - categories the lady in the article doesn't seem to have. I guess she figures she will be fine on her pension and she'll always have a job and her health. And not having a car is certainly saving her a lot of money.

That was my point about balance. But, she's 26. She is probably is also a little naive about life and has never needed an emergency fund. She has time to learn these things later. Most of us tend to learn the hard way.

Edited January 30, 2018 by MaeFlowers

[Ausmumof3]

The thing is, it's not up to us to define how much is too much for anyone but ourselves. We all have different opinions of what constitutes wastefulness.

I mostly agree. I think where the judginess comes in is where we socialise care for people in tight circumstances. So if you have holidays to Europe this year but need help with housing next you are probably going to get a rent allowance. Young singles get judgy about people with big families because they get tax benefits. i don't want things to change but we do to some degree (in Australia or the Uk) mitigate (by socialising) the natural consequences of poor decision making. I think that's partly why people get judgy about poor money decisions, smoking, obesity etc. it's a hard balance to find because obviously no one wants to see anyone starve or kids miss it on a decent quality of life because of poor decisions by parents.