Super Scrimpers

sistercas

mrbadexample wrote: »

Not impressed at all. I could learn more on here in 5 minutes.

Not only that, why are they featuring people who can quite clearly afford not to scrimp?

Lady Muck manages to be virtually self sufficient. First, start with 30 acres. Well, that's nice. What do we do when we haven't got 30 acres?

The family from Birmingham. Annual income >£100K. Well, they must be feeling the pinch, let's see what we can do to help them squeeze a bit more out of a very comfortable lifestyle.

How about helping people that actually need it? :mad

I can't see as I'll be watching this one again in a hurry.

here here , i completely agree :T:T

BitterAndTwisted

I do understand why some are discontented with the programme but that's because so many of you are immersed in old-style economy already and have been for quite some time. This series isn't for people like you (and me most of the time): it's for people who have not yet accepted that it's possible to enjoy a reasonable lifestyle without hurtling headlong into bankruptcy. It's the trap between income/expectations and outgoings that's turning a lot of people into a nation of potential beggars. There are so very many out there in denial and the I think the first programme was used to illustrate that and get people thinking. Perhaps the others in this series might focus a bit more on the kind of practical "making-do and mending" which most of us on here are interested in. I had to laugh when they had the WWII footage with those middle-class ladies in the clip: what they were espousing was exactly the way my grandparents already lived. They had to because they had no other choice and didn't need the war-time shortages to encourage them.

I was shocked SHOCKED! at that family spending nearly THREE GRAND A MONTH more than they earned and thought they were extremely brave to put their finances and lifestyles under the microscope like that.

Hardup_Hester

Like most of us here I didn't learn anything new but I did recommend the programme to a couple of people I work with who are overspending to a similar amount & on a much smaller income, so I'm hoping that it will give then some ideas, also if they made the programme too extreme very few people would watch it.
Hester

Alison_Funnell

I was so glad the people featured were unable to cope on an annual income that amounts to a over 3 years average income (source BBC) and have to over spend on more than a not inconsiderable number of people have to live per month.

This was a pale attempt at a 'contemporary climate' programme. Whilst there seemed some sweet people with some interesting ideas not all were really suitable from most people. Quiet country lanes are great for foraging but lots of them are poluted from vehicles (in and around the little village I grew up in) so you'd really need to be a bit more picky so advice about that would have been useful.I agree with others, 30 acres - hmmm, even in the country not many have even 1/4 acre - so really attainable!!!

As for the undies issue. Buy white and bleach every now and then! Far cheaper than buying commercial dyes.

Toilet rolls do not rot away that easily and I have often found the mouldy tube still around the root ball months later.

There seemed to be a insurmountable gap between the programmes PR and its acheivements. Maybe the programme makers are not real scrimpers or have a true understanding of it?

ceridwen

Not watched this programme yet - now remind me why I bought a t.v.? (think might as well have been for ornament purposes...)...but must watch and see anyways.

Re nettles (or anything else in country lanes) - by the time one takes account of "Not ones at dog height" and "Are any nearby farmers organic? (because if they ARENT:eek: then chemicals will have blown onto nearby roadside plants" and "How to tell if nearby farmers arent organic", etc, etc...whew....

As for the underwear - why dye? Just buy everything in black in the first place...problem solved:rotfl:. In my "dating days" I used to have some nice matching sets...these days I think the cheapest/easiest way to do something along the "underwear has to be matching you know...." lines is to buy packs of black pants and some black bras. That way - it all goes together and doesnt go Grotty-coloured..(must admit to not liking the odd glimpse of once-used-to-be -white bra straps one sometimes notices peeps have....and thinking "grooming!!!!/clothes that need replacing!!!!")....but black on the other hand...

BitterAndTwisted

Agreed but black undies won't go underneath everything if not all of your outer clothing is also black. Black bras under a light-coloured top was a sure sign of a woman of dubious morals according to my Mum and I've inherited that aversion from her. And the trouble with bleaching white bras is that the elasticated bits go yellow (shudders) so I can see the undies-dyeing lady's point. I thought her purple panties were rather fetching although I'd be disinclined to wave mine about on national telly. I haven't dyed anything for yonks: is it quite pricey these days?

alec_eiffel

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

I do understand why some are discontented with the programme but that's because so many of you are immersed in old-style economy already and have been for quite some time. This series isn't for people like you (and me most of the time): it's for people who have not yet accepted that it's possible to enjoy a reasonable lifestyle without hurtling headlong into bankruptcy. It's the trap between income/expectations and outgoings that's turning a lot of people into a nation of potential beggars. There are so very many out there in denial and the I think the first programme was used to illustrate that and get people thinking. Perhaps the others in this series might focus a bit more on the kind of practical "making-do and mending" which most of us on here are interested in. I had to laugh when they had the WWII footage with those middle-class ladies in the clip: what they were espousing was exactly the way my grandparents already lived. They had to because they had no other choice and didn't need the war-time shortages to encourage them.

I was shocked SHOCKED! at that family spending nearly THREE GRAND A MONTH more than they earned and thought they were extremely brave to put their finances and lifestyles under the microscope like that.

I agree with you.

As I said yesterday on another thread I had a bit of a lightbulb moment a couple of years ago when listening to Dave Ramsey. Someone called up with huge debt and huge income and it was shocking. Dave said to everyone listening and judging to knock a zero off their figures and see how we wouldn't judge someone on a smaller income with the same ratio of debt. It's easy to live up and above your income whatever it is, some people just have a bigger shovel than others to dig themselves out of the mess.

BitterAndTwisted

Did they actually mention how much credit-card debt that family had racked up? One dreads to think how long they may have been over-spending. Still, as you say, once they'd put together a realistic budget they could most probably clear it relatively quickly. Still, on their sort of income they would be seeing about SIX GRAND a month coming in after tax! The mind absolutely boggles.

esmf73

Know what you mean B&T. I have just watched this programme and to be honest, apart from feeling shocked at what the family got through (and wondering how it would equate to our family!) I didn't feel that there were any useful tips on there that I either didn't pick up from my Mum or that I haven't picked up here. My OH could do with a bit of it though!! Dying clothes can be quite pricey - especially as many manufacturers may use cotton material but use polyester thread which doesn't dye.

My mum tried to revive her undies by dying them with teabags (lovely saffron-y colour) except they just looked manky. Trust me, have dyed the childrens bedsheets in the past from pale pink to navy blue (I have boys!) and where they have previously wet the bed it comes out like salt marks on shoes. I'm not that concerned with sheets, but have previously been disappointed by other dying results due to polyester stitching.

short_bird

Cullumpster wrote: »

what the hell is toilet water ?? is it perfume?

It's a translation of eau de toilette which is a "milder" version of a perfume. Usually less expensive.

I haven't seen the programme yet; however, I note that Cath Kidston does kilt pin brooches and will be checking to see if it is one of hers. Because they aren't very :money: unless they're a present.... sorry, Cath!