[Boglehead vs Mr Money Mustache philosophies]

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:40 am

Re: [Boglehead vs Mr Money Mustache philosophies]

Post by TheHouse7 » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:53 pm

phisher4 wrote:
Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:18 am
Is there a forum that represents the polar opposite of MMM/Bogleheads? I would be greatly interested in reading a spend-all-you-can/seize the day/go into debt forum.

If not, perhaps it's a good business idea. :twisted:
Perhaps building a big enough income to leverage up everything to the max could be your goal to FIRE in a far away country! :D
"PSX will always go up 20%, why invest in anything else?!" -Father-in-law early retired.

Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 5:26 pm

Re: [Boglehead vs Mr Money Mustache philosophies]

Post by Curlyq » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:55 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:47 pm
So, it's all just a pipe dream?!

Good one!

Posts: 667
Joined: Wed May 21, 2008 12:36 am

Re: [Boglehead vs Mr Money Mustache philosophies]

Post by HornedToad » Wed Oct 11, 2017 7:57 pm

VictoriaF wrote:
Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:33 pm
avalpert wrote:
Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:20 pm
VictoriaF wrote:
Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:05 pm
I use the word "selfish" literally, i.e., for one's own benefit.
I do not use "selfish" moralistically, i.e., I don't imply that there is something immoral in pursuing self-interest.

I'm sorry but I don't see how 'reducing investing cost' is 'for one's own benefit' in a way different from MMM frugality and early retirement is being recommended to be done 'for one's own benefit'.

This seems like far more than a reach.

I would also add again that nothing in the boglehead framework requires that it be applied for one's own benefit - someone could be using it to advise others, someone could be donating all savings from expense ratios to charity etc. - it is at worst agnostic.
Here is an example of what I mean:

I am a Boglehead, and I am not claiming a moral high ground. As a Boglehead, I save money on investment costs and use my funds for my pleasure. For example, I may use some of these funds to fly to Prague. When I am flying I am generating carbon emissions. When I am staying in a hotel in Prague, I am claming two places at once. It's not all bad. I am also using my money to support worthy causes, and so my net impact on the planet may be positive. But the essence of being a Boglehead is that I save money by prudent investing.

A MMM follower, let's call him John, is saving money to retire early. John is living in a small home. John does not have a car; he is biking instead of driving. John is not buying stuff. The essence of being a MMMer is that John saves money by not polluting. After John retires at an early age, he may start using his time for something environmentally damaging. Or he may work on environmentally beneficial causes. But what he does with his freedom does not define him as a MMMer. He is defined by his lifestyle leading to his early retirement.

I see what you mean but this logic means poor people are less selfish than rich people because they don't have money to buy stuff and consume/pollute.

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 40383
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: [Boglehead vs Mr Money Mustache philosophies]

Post by LadyGeek » Wed Oct 11, 2017 8:23 pm

This thread has run its course and is locked (topic exhausted, no added value to continue). See: Locked Topics
Moderators or site admins may lock a topic (set it so no more replies may be added) when a violation of posting policy has occurred. Occasionally, even if there are no overt violations of posting policy, a topic (or thread) will reach a point where the information content of the discussion has been essentially exhausted and further replies are much more likely to cause distress to the community than add anything of value.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.