Too much effort on reducing and not enough on growing?

lynzpower

Softstuff,

I have total agreeance with everything you said there.

Theres something very spiritual I find in reducing consumer desires, and getting back to being a human rather than a consumer

x

Softstuff

lynzpower wrote: »

Softstuff,

I have total agreeance with everything you said there.

Theres something very spiritual I find in reducing consumer desires, and getting back to being a human rather than a consumer

x

I read an advert in a free paper yesterday for some leather boots, it said:

"Women are much happier after a shopping trip and a great pair of boots to come home with is a real accomplishment"

You can imagine how mad that got me... accomplishment??? :mad:

Since when did spending money become a way of bettering yourself?

Sorry for the rant, but consumerism really is my bugbear. I've been working in sales or marketing in one form or another for so long that I know all the tricks. I studied marketing for 3 years. Not sure how much longer I'll be able to continue working in it the way I feel, so it's for the best I work to pay off the mortgage :rotfl:

Redbedhead

I know a lot of people are saying about cancelling Sky etc, but I do think it can have its place.

We don't have it because we aren't at home enough to be able to justify watching it. My brother has one of the packages and I believe it costs him about £40 per month. However, they have 3 kids under 5 and maybe go out together four times a year. £40 per month equates to £10 per week and they would struggle to find entertainment for them in the evenings and for the kids at times during the day for less than this.

They went through a stage where one of them would go out without the other at the weekend and they still do this on the odd occasion but once you factor in the cost of babysitters to the cost of going out, Sky actually seems a bargain!

GettingThingsDone

"Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves"

I've always ignored that saying - why bother with the pennies, why not just earn more pounds?

However, ever since becoming a dfw, I understand it is the 'attention to detail' is what matters, not the size of the financial transaction.

For example, just reviewing my Sky subscription meant that I went from an old £21 package to the near equivalent at £15. I cut my insurance drastically and got a quidco cashback, I got my bank charges back etc etc... I think we've all been there.

My point is, the reason it is good to ask people as to whether they need their Sky subscription or whether they need to spend so much on food etc is to force the SOA-poster to question themselves. And once you start questioning yourself you shine a light on all the things you are doing in your life and you start to get some control back again (instead of being a consumer on autopilot)

Just my thoughts anyway!

Cazzdevil

I started a couple of weeks ago on a "don't spend unneccessarily" fad.

I used to pop into TK Maxx every Saturday after I'd dropped my boyfriend off at work and invariably I'd see something I liked and end up buying it. Now I've started taking my bike with me and going for a ride straight from his work or have gone home and started odd bits of diy around the house instead and you know what... I don't miss the shops at all.

The whole notion of kids needing tv or video games for entertainment is laughable. When I was a kid (not THAT long ago, I'm only 27) we used to spend all day playing out in the street, riding our bikes, playing tennis (with plastic bats and foam balls!), playing on roller skates, playing Scram 50 (the Geordie version of hide & seek), ANYTHING to keep us busy and stop us having to sit in the house all day and we were fit and healthy and social and couldn't have cared less about tv. Mind you, despite being older nothing's changed except that now I go for walks or bike rides instead of playing Scram 50.

What is it about modern day that makes people think it costs money to keep yourself entertained?

Gemmzie

Personally my entertainment budget goes on DVD rental from Blockbuster. £14.99 a month and I on average watch about four films a week.

It's cheaper than the cinema, and I love film - it's definitely a hobby.

I'd rather have that than spend one night out, which is £15 easily with taxi's, club entry etc.

GreenNinja

Softstuff wrote: »

I think the thing that gets me, and I've noticed others commenting on here, is what people consider as necessities rather than luxuries. Be it a lavish grocery budget, new clothes, sky TV, household gadgets.

Rather than maximising what you earn, I feel for me it's more important to look at maximising what I get for my money. The way I do this is to look at what I actually *NEED*. Not want, not would like, but actual need.

Some examples:
I need to eat, and eat healthily. So I'll buy fresh fruit and veg as cheap as I can, and own brand extras. I don't *NEED* brand names, wine, soft drinks, supplements, sauces... so food shopping is very cheap for me.

I need a drink at work. So I take a refillable water bottle. I don't *NEED* a coffee from starbucks.

I need clothing. So I buy from car boots and charity shops as and when, if I get bored of whatever I sell it on ebay (but rarely buy there since it's dearer, and when I sell I tend to make a profit!).

I need entertaining. So I go regularly to the library for books, DVDs and magazines. I take walks in the local parks, go take a picnic or barbeque to the river, wander the charity shops, rent a DVD on cheap tuesdays (80p), sew, paint, do DIY, go for a swim at the beach.

I've said this before but I'll say it again, I work in a store that's full of little household gadgets and storage items, and I sell these actively every day. The number of people who come in and exclaim "ooh I *NEED* that!" is untrue. People seldom question what an actual need is.

And before anyone says I'm too tight, with a little patience I also find anything I *want* at charity shops, and allow myself that.

For me, being frugal in this way leads to something very simple, I plan to be mortgage free by 35. Not bad since I'm nearly 30 and we only bought our own place this year. I also plan to renovate my kitchen and bathroom in that time (though not by buying new, but buying used ). After 35 I'm not a slave to my work, can do part time, maybe go back to uni, maybe just paint.

The point is do you want to work hard forever to get those "niceties", or do you want to rethink consumerism and wind up working a whole lot less?

Sorry for the long post

I think you really have hit the nail on the head there, the sacrifices now are worth it for the lifestyle you want in the future, a future with no mortgage which allows you to get of the "treadmill".

I would like to have the time to have several dogs and take them on long walks every day and live in the country. To do this I would need to only be working a few hours a week and my mortgage at the moment means that I have to work full time, so I am not able to "fulfill my dream" at present.

My half sister worships at the temple of the god of money! She lives in Dubai and walks around with her nose in the air. It is very apparent to me that she is NOT HAPPY even with all this money and the lavish lifestyle, she even texted me the other day to tell me she had bought a pair of jimmy choo shoes for £435, not sure whether she was boasting about it or seeking approval. My immediate thought, was crikey I would like to have that amount of money to pay off my mortgage.

My point being in 10, 15, 20 years time her husband will still be working to support their lifestyle and they will probably never get off this money treadmill. Can anybody truly enjoy their life when all they are doing is keeping up with their neighbours and telling people how rich they are? I don't think so. My boss is a multi millionaire is quite young and good looking but is one of the most miserable people I know.

Anyway enough from me.

:j

Spendless

Cazzdevil wrote: »

I started a couple of weeks ago on a "don't spend unneccessarily" fad.

I used to pop into TK Maxx every Saturday after I'd dropped my boyfriend off at work and invariably I'd see something I liked and end up buying it. Now I've started taking my bike with me and going for a ride straight from his work or have gone home and started odd bits of diy around the house instead and you know what... I don't miss the shops at all.

The whole notion of kids needing tv or video games for entertainment is laughable. When I was a kid (not THAT long ago, I'm only 27) we used to spend all day playing out in the street, riding our bikes, playing tennis (with plastic bats and foam balls!), playing on roller skates, playing Scram 50 (the Geordie version of hide & seek), ANYTHING to keep us busy and stop us having to sit in the house all day and we were fit and healthy and social and couldn't have cared less about tv. Mind you, despite being older nothing's changed except that now I go for walks or bike rides instead of playing Scram 50.

me too, of course this was in the days when my parents were not in the slightest bit bothered that I was out unsupervised from the age of about 5, and had no idea where I was or who I was with from the time I went out to the time I came back. Afraid I'm a bit more fussy about knowing where mine are, but my parents method was certainly cheaper.

climbgirl

lynzpower wrote: »

Softstuff,

I have total agreeance with everything you said there.

Theres something very spiritual I find in reducing consumer desires, and getting back to being a human rather than a consumer

x

I absolutely love this side-effect of the debt-free journey, it makes you focus on what is important in life. And it usually isn't the consumer gadgets. I think back on all the cr*p I wasted money on and it embarrasses me (no car-mats, luckily ) (and thanks for missing me Lynz, have been frantic at work and I don't have a computer/internet at home so I haven't been posting much lately).

I think the OP's comments about little bits not making much difference are quite interesting. As SouthernScouser so rightly points out, getting rid of the debt involves a complete mind-shift and change of lifestyle. The size of the income/debt is almost irrelevant - maybe £75 isn't much to someone who earns a lot (and I suspect to have £145,000 of unsecured debt, the OP does earn a lot). But that's not the point. The point is that it was money spent that didn't need to be spent. Money that could have reduced that debt, even if in the tiniest way. Because that's where the Jeffrey Archer quote is quite misleading - one paper round isn't going to pay back £1m in debt, no. But a whole series of small changes will add up to pay it back.

The OP is entirely right in saying that being social needs are important and the bbq certainly would fit into Maslow's hierarchy. However, this is where the mind-shift comes into play. Instead of saying, "I need to entertain people and be social, £75 is only a couple of hours work, it won't impact my debt much", you need to shift the attitude. You need to say. "I want to entertain and be social, how can I do it in a way that's still fun but doesn't cost anything?" Be creative with solutions instead of throwing money at it, the bbq would have been exactly the same if you'd asked people to bring their own food - a lot cheaper (and probably a lot less work!) for you. Yet still fulfilling the important social needs.

I think the OP needs a bit of an attitude adjustment here (apologies if I'm reading too much into these posts). Everytime you think about spending money you need to ask yourself if there's a cheaper way of doing it that won't necessarily compromise the fun. As Lynz points out, it's an interesting journey as you realise just exactly what is important to you and what isn't.

Apologies if I'm sparking off a debate that died - I've been battling the glasto mud for the past few days!

southernscouser

climbgirl wrote: »

I think back on all the cr*p I wasted money on and it embarrasses me (no car-mats, luckily )

That was well below the belt! :rotfl: