2008 - Live on £4000 for a full year.

lingojingo

Jumble-Bee wrote: »

hang on a minute....now correct me if im wrong, but does that mean that this nun is in fact (gasp) a knickerless nun???
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: well i never

ps oh no, looks like im gonna be awake all night again, i have also neglected to budget for towels wearing down... crickey i think id better just pull out right now...;)

:T:rotfl::T:rotfl::T:rotfl:

whitewing

Don't know if this will make you feel better or worse.. but we know a pig farmer who has a contract with one of the supermarkets chains. He collects all the waste daily from the branches and it is fed to the pigs. Not wasted.

Can't believe that I'm scrimping and pigs are eating malteasers though!

MarkyMarkD

nykmedia wrote: »

The supermarket waste demonstrated was ridiculous. If it HAS to be binned, for reasons of politics and economics, then it should not be simply 'binned'. The supermarkets responsible should be made dispose of it properly, possibly via charitable outlets. If it's notpast its 'use by' then why not use it somewhere like the prisons?

Whilst what you suggest sounds attractive, it's completely unworkable in practice. Institutions like prisons, residential homes, etc. have to plan their menus and order their food in advance. They can't simply use up a random selection of left-overs from a supermarket, with no notice.

The only sensible way for supermarkets to clear stocks is to price-reduce the goods, gradually and then aggressively, so everything's sold by its use by date.

When I worked in Sainsbury's, they would sell off bread for 10p a loaf, for example, when there was any signficant quantity to get rid of. But now Sainsbury's near us seem to go for namby-pamby 15-20% reductions on things.

Burlesque_Babe

I've just been having a read on Digital Spy (forgive me for straying outside MSE!) and apparently a charity called FareShare do have some of the supermarket waste occasionally which is distributed to the homeless and now I think about it I'm sure that rings a bell of truth in the back of my mind somewhere from a feature I saw on TV a few years back.

hopeless_spendthrift

Jumble-Bee wrote: »

Just noticed this....



hang on a minute....now correct me if im wrong, but does that mean that this nun is in fact (gasp) a knickerless nun???
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
well i never

God Forbid! One would hope that was NOT the case, but then, if she can't afford them.....poor love! (sob) what is the world coming to? See how lucky we are? We are CHOOSING to do this challenge; to live so frugally and in such fortitude and squalor, but what about poor nuns such as our dear friend highlighted above who have no choice but to go around knickerless? I propose an immediate whipround and a setting up of a knickers4nuns fund. Thank goodness this problem has been highlighted to those of us in the dark on the matter!

justme111

i see, people feel offended with me calling their lifestyle "hardship"
the original idea was "it is not good to pursue the number of £s spent on life to be reduced while enduring hardship as money does not buy happiness and when you have them you are often long for what's gone while you were strenously collecting money". I was warning people about this challenge from the point of view of "been there, done that"
While doing the math it became aparent that a number of people can deal with this challenge while not enduring significant or indeed any hardship at all because of particular circumstances (e.g. because they had bought tons of clothes at 18-19 while living with parents or have someone to give them a lift when necessary).
I reckon my warning does not apply to all and I wish loads of money coming while keeping on with a challenge to those.
My point was that applying this £4000 number to a working paying for all him/herself person withj no storage of 200 knickers from the past as they were not wasted money on in a previous year will result in harm to their mental and physical health.
Btw it was not my budget at all, why you made a conclusion it was? It was a budget of an average person with many things that cost money as well not included.
P.S. - I am sorry I will not be able to reply to further post quoting mine as it takes too long to do it, it ends up taking all my time

Burlesque_Babe

I'd be intererested where you got the 'average' budget from in such detail ? I'd like to read the rationale behind it, it would make interesting reading.

I certainly don't feel my life has any hardship whatsoever. I have well over 20k in savings in the bank which I could plunder at will if I chose to buy lots of unnecessary materialistic 'stuff'. But I don't and trust me, I've stupidly plundered a fair few grand over the years (mostly in my early 20s) and now my situation is different and I'm debt free, I've vowed never to go back there again. I've chosen to work from home albeit on a low wage and cut my cloth to fit my purse.........or whatever that saying is.

grandma247

Your posts over the last few days have made me laugh till I cried especially the knickers ones.

Just me 111 we have a proverb which is quoted and explained here
"cut your coat according to your cloth [SIZE=-1]proverb[/SIZE] undertake only what you have the money or ability to do and no more."

There are many of us who have no choice but to live frugally but we are not unhappy.
There are those in this country who earn a lot of money but they are not happy at all. I heard a saying sat the weekend "Happiness is a journey not a destination" We are happy with the journey we are on in trying to be frugal as well as helping the planet by not buying things that we really do not need.

The problem you have may also be a cultural one as I would guess you are from a place that people have and expect a better standard of living.

Burlesque_Babe

ah yes, grandma - we must be psychic - but you got the right words and I didn't!!!

Frugaldom

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

Whilst what you suggest sounds attractive, it's completely unworkable in practice. Institutions like prisons, residential homes, etc. have to plan their menus and order their food in advance. They can't simply use up a random selection of left-overs from a supermarket, with no notice.

What if we campaigned for frugality lessons as part of the national curriculum and in prisons / rehab? Learners could be taught creative cooking by being presented with an odd selection of foodstuffs and asked to improvise. I'd have signed up for that if it had been available anywhere (at school I mean, I haven't 'done time' :rotfl: ) Or what about evening classes with the produce supplied by local stores? Or, purely for entertainment value, here's a really good telly schedule:

Frugal School - Reality tv series teaching youngsters 'alternative' cooking skills
Frugal Chef - weekend viewing with someone like Gordon Ramsay
Fast and Free - cookery challenge quizz show
Big Frugal - reality show with 10 housemates trying to live on a budget

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

OK, what about politics? I'll vote Frugalism On the other hand, we might look upon it as part of a learning curve to avoid opulent waste when we become millionaires. The interest on a million pounds would keep 16 challengers per year.