I read YMOYL when I was on vacation up here on the island on my first visit, in the late '90s. I retired on the spot and didn't really return from vacation, buying a house here before I'd finished the book even. I never really bothered with the charting and such, but the message that time is not a replaceable resource was quite compelling.Originally Posted by iris lilies
Yes, that is the Gold Nugget of the book. I always knew that concept. I was listening to Bob Brinker in the 70’s? 80’s? on the radio talk about getting to “critical mass” long before I read YMOYL. At “Critical Mass” you can stop working.
I knew about YMOYL long before I read the book.
The Gold Nugget in Millionaire Next Door is, I think, It’s not how much money you make, it is how much you keep of it that matters.
I stumbled into YMOYL when a friend and I went on vacation to Portland Oregon the week that Princess Diana died. During that trip we also went to some small town in the southern part of the middle of washington where the founder of the previous version of this site resided and he explained the book to us. As you've both mentioned, I immediately glommed on to the idea of the cash value of my time. Within weeks after returning home from that trip I'd read YMOYL and became aware of how many "hours of life energy" I was spending on everything. Lunches eaten out were one of the first things I cut. I never really "did" the rest of the stuff suggested in the book but that one aspect of it has driven much of my financial life in the 25 years since.
Oh, was Ramit ever wrong in the podcast I heard today!
I listened to an older podcast by Ramit where he interviews one couple whose household income is $270,000. I get the impression they are under 30. Their assets total $1 million. The wife called in for help because the friends and family consider them cheap.
She says her husband won’t buy a winter coat and they live in Canada. She says their friends stopped asking them to go out to eat because they don’t want go to expensive restaurants. Ramit started grilling them about why they couldn’t spend money and how do they feel whrn their friends commented on things they wouldn’t do. They don’t have much furniture in their house, and none of it is new.
The husband said he doesn’t value material goods, he values experiences.
But here’s where Ramit was WRONG. he seemed to ignore the husband who said they budget $20,000 a year for vacations because they value experiences. They spend more than $20,000 a year on food even though they want to cut back. They buy top quality organic everything.
They complain that their friends choose very expensive restaurants and they don’t want to spend money on that even though they budget $3000 a year on restaurants. They complained that their friends planned a wedding celebration and charged their share as $600; the friends didn’t even consult them just expected them to chip in $600. Their siblings expected them to chip in $1700 on an expensive lawnmower for their parents.
Ramit spent the first 20 minutes harassing them about being “cheap “and ignored the nugget of gold when the husband dropped that they want to retire when they’re 50 years old.
So this young couple sounds right on target to me. They spend a lot of money on the things they value which is high-quality food and good travel experiences. They do not let their friends and family bully them into spending on dumb shit they don’t value. If they were my kids, I would be very proud of them.
Ramit later pontificated that he didn’t think the husband would actually retire when he was 50 because he wouldn’t be able to let go of that income stream. That is sheer projection, and while it is true a lot of money hoarders like that never do retire, he doesn’t know these people very well.
I was not impressed with his podcast at all, and frankly, it’s the second time I’ve heard him push people to spend money when they really do not want to.
Last edited by iris lilies; 2-17-23 at 7:25pm.
Junior year of college I had three roommates. We'd sit around having pizza and beer, and talking about Our Great Plans For The Future. We all four decided "hmm, if I had $2 million, I'd retire and live my life on my own terms". (This was in the mid-1980s).
All of us hit that goal in our early/mid 30s. Two of us "retired" as we had discussed. One continues to work today as a research neurologist, and doesn't seem motivated at all by money or material goods, simply the joy of discovery. He'll probably be working until he can no longer hold a beaker. The fourth continues to work endless hours, spending little time with his wife (who also works 60+ hours/week) and kids, but boy does he have nice mansions, airplanes, yachts, and that sort of thing. He visits here once a year for a week, flying his own jet, and always seems so stressed out about the need to "relax while he's on vacation".
One of my other classmates became a billionaire from the last startup we did, he lives a simple life still, "retired" by the time he was 50, and seems to spend most of his massive pile of loot quietly buying up land and conservation easements to protect important bits of the ecosystem. He did not retire as early as he could have, but he was greatly enjoying his role at our company, and making a difference there, and as soon as that stopped, he waved goodbye.
So, the message from jp's, IL's and bae's posts points to why we are all connected through YMOYL.
IL, I agree with your assessment of Ramit's podcast. The unfortunate truth is that some people equate mindful spending with being cheap or austere. Recognizing the value of your life energy and then "spending" that in the way that works for you is going to be a different blueprint for everyone.
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
His advice seems fairly common sense from googling, I like it (not the keeping up with your wealthy friends part mentioned above). But it is NOT going to make one rich.
Trees don't grow on money
He preaches “a rich life” which *I* think means money security and spending according to your values.
yesterday I heard him kind of harangue another non-spender, and I have to say he does this more often than I would like.
This non-spender was only three years into a relationship with his girlfriend. They are not married. They have net assets of $200,000. The non-spender is worried about what happens when and if they decide to have a baby and the girlfriend quits work. The non-spender was trying to keep the entire household afloat on his salary alone which was generous at $130,000, but his girlfriend also made a little bit more money.
From my point of view, these people don’t have a solid history of a relationship and she could leave him any moment with or without a kid. With@kid, this would not be a excess monies. The non-spender is right to be cautious.
But he's not a non-spender:
"the husband who said they budget $20,000 a year for vacations because they value experiences. They spend more than $20,000 a year on food even though they want to cut back. "
well, this “non spender” was part of a different couple. THIS non spender thought $6,000 was a good amount to spend on a blow out vacation to Cambodia.
But you are right that the men folk in both couples were the tightwads, and maybe to the detriment of their relationships.
Me—I would marry both of them! Haha.or rather want my daughter to marry them.Fiscal responsibility is HUGE in my value system.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote