How to Spend Like a Frugal Millionaire

[desertdug08]

Interesting article from Yahoo. Sorry, can't seem to past the link. Article go on to detail shopping habits for cars, clothes, food, etc. Basically a lifestyle of delayed gratification, and living within one's means. Nothing new for this forum, but nice to see in the general media.

"Frugal millionaires are unique thinkers when it comes to spending money: 1) they can easily delay their need for gratification when purchasing; 2) they are resourceful in getting what they want by carefully timing their consumer purchases; 3) they make living below their means painless; 4) they don't like wasting anything (especially money); 5) their sense of "self-entitlement" is highly minimized: and 6) spending is OK with them...depending on what they are buying (think: appreciating vs. depreciating assets)."

Cheers,

DUG

[nisiprius]

Here's the link: How to Spend like a Frugal Millionnaire.

[chaz]

Thanks for the link. The article describes my approach to spending.

[HearDoc]

The whole "article" can be boiled down to " These millionaires keep more money than they spend". The rest is guess work of recycled Consumers Report type generalizations which can be wrong. As in buying used cars:
with current rebates its very probable to get a better deal on a 2009 now than on a newer used car.
Spend less than you earn sums it up for even the thickest consumer.

[mvm]

Read this book: THE MILLIONAIRE NEXT DOOR.

You will see that millionaires - real millionaires - spend less than you do. That's why they are millionaires.

[mortal]

While by no means a millionaire, sometimes i think im too cheap for my own good. Ive saved for a car since 2006. The problem is my truck still runs fine. At some point though, you have to ask yourself what you're saving the money for...

[Index Fan]

Read this book: THE MILLIONAIRE NEXT DOOR.

You will see that millionaires - real millionaires - spend less than you do. That's why they are millionaires.

Reminds me of that old commercial on TV where a wealthy elderly gentleman is still driving a Model T or some other ancient vehicle. When asked why he still drove such an antiquated car, he said, "How do you think a man like me got to be a man like me?"

While by no means a millionaire, sometimes i think im too cheap for my own good. Ive saved for a car since 2006. The problem is my truck still runs fine. At some point though, you have to ask yourself what you're saving the money for...

Just pass on some of that sensibly frugal philosophy to the guys in line buying lotto tickets at the convenience store.

[jeffyscott]

While by no means a millionaire, sometimes i think im too cheap for my own good. Ive saved for a car since 2006. The problem is my truck still runs fine. At some point though, you have to ask yourself what you're saving the money for...

I think it is a question of how this makes you feel. Do you feel you are depriving yourself of something you really want or do you just think you should spend more, because that is what we are all expected to want to do? Since we are now in a position where it is very unlikely that our economic wants/needs will ever exceed our income/assets, I bought a new car a couple years ago just because I wanted to, even though I could have kept driving an old minivan (that we still have).

OTOH, my wife and I don't eat out much, this is not really because of the cost, it is because we'd rather be at home. Eating at home can be either eating home cooked food or food that was picked up and brought home. When we do eat out, such as on a recent weekend trip, we don't have any desire to go to expensive, fashionable, restaurants with tiny servings of bizarre food. Instead we went for pasta/italian one night and Thai the other, both places were about $10-15 for most of the entrees. While on the road it was lunch at Taco Bell...can't beat that value menu 8) .

[LH]

While by no means a millionaire, sometimes i think im too cheap for my own good. Ive saved for a car since 2006. The problem is my truck still runs fine. At some point though, you have to ask yourself what you're saving the money for...

Financial Freedom : )

If I want to work, I work. I may not really ever get there entirely. But if I want to work a bit, and not a lot, would be nice to have that choice : )

To heck with new cars, I do not really care. Now if you do, sure, work hard and buy a real nice one, but to me, to work a bunch of shifts to get some fancy car, ugh, consume a lot of MY time, for an expensive car?


I would rather have the ability to have the free time if I choose. Now, there is no choice, must work, but I hope soon there will be : ) I will likely work anyway heheheh. But having the choice to work or not to work, will make it tons better.

[Martello Shores]

There was a similar book out several years ago--perhaps by the same author--"The Millionaire Next Door". The author surveyed millionaires re habits and values. I remember that it was easier for manager of a trailer park to become a millionaire than it was for a high earner expected to maintain a flashy lifestyle. Unusually high representation among people of east European and Scottish heritage--the latter because of our defensive stance, I think! They seemed to buy cars "by the pound" and "creampuff" used vehicles. Wives--they were all men, if I recall correctly--clipped coupons. They seemed to prefer beer and sandwiches over fancier fare at a reception staged by author.

It was interesting to read how the millionaires funded their kids: no limits for education, don't help 'em buy more house than they can afford, big debate on equal portion inheritance v. helping neediest, etc.

[EDM]

Thanks for the link. The article describes my approach to spending.

I hope not. The article is actually a synopsis of a book that is quoted for the proposition that millionaires are frugal if they:

"Buy day old bread...and freeze it..."

"Buy "vintage" clothing..." (buzz word for used?)

"Eating out: Bring half a meal home to eat later..."

"Eating in: Eat oatmeal...the most cost effective breakfast food."

I'm not making this up!

I expect the 2nd "revised" edition will delve into the fine points of dumpster diving...and herein lies the problem with books about templates for financial success and how to achieve it: All the basic points like:

(1) earn a lot of money;

(2) spend less money;

(3) Save and invest wisely, the sooner the better;

(4) Good health = wealth;

(5) Good marriage = symbiosis and stability;

(6) And the absence of bad luck, all beg the issue...

Thus there are books after books beating on the branches, such as freezing day-old bread, rather than going for the root. John Bogle beat the low-cost-no-turnover-broad-spectrum-index to death in his valuable "Little Book." Jim Cramer is not reticent in touting his own high-input-investing template.

Last night I attended an investment seminar in Rockfort IL (sponsored by my bank), put on by Dr. Jeremy Siegel; he never mentioned his WisdomTree Investments, except in passing as an example of yields ranging from 4.5% to 7.3% in this down market. I guess I'll have to buy his book, Stocks for the Long Run, which I suspect dovetails more closely with Bogelheads than Cramerisms.

Siegel is a dynamic public speaker, somewhat in the mold of a dithering professor emeritus, which he is. He put much of the current economic situation in context and hinted of a light at the end of the dark tunnel. He showed charts that tracked interest and dividend yields since 1900, and the dividends led interest till 1958 when they crossed over and interest led dividends. The rationale was that stocks were once seen as risky and thus a higher return warranted...until inflation cut into fixed-return bonds and the inflation hedge of stock earnings growth became attractive post-1958. Investors with "current-yield" blinders on have been sitting on the sidelines for 50 years, giving up the growth potential of common stocks. And the chart was quite dramatic, especially in the present tense where dividend yields exceed interest for the first time in 50 years.

There must be a lesson in this: Price/earnings ratios regressing to the mean = cheap stocks at increased yields based on present cost. A buyer's market! What to buy?

I'd say forgo the day-old bread and "vintage" clothing, and the "cost-effective" oatmeal for breakfast (unless you really like oatmeal); as to bringing restaurant food home in styrafoam for left-overs (not the dog)--why not order one excessive-size meal to split (with possibly a plate charge), plus an extra side salad, maybe a bottle of wine, and have room to share a dessert. This is not just "frugal" but shows some class by not equating a decent restaurant with a Burger King carry-out. In a word: MODERATION. When I see fully-fed customers carrying away food in little white boxes from a sit-down restaurant, I don't think "Frugal Millionaires"--I think "trailer trash" and the decline of American civilization.

As one who has bought several three-year-old Volvos and run them up to a quarter-million miles, and still uses a 1985 F-150 4x4 on the farm, some of the "Frugal Millionaire" stuff smacks of my own lifestyle. And in retrospect, not spending money heedlessly must have contributed something to my financial situation...given my personal situation. But one size does not fit all: Not everyone can use a 22 year old truck or can keep a used high-mileage Volvo going or likes oatmeal.

Punchline: A book based on interviews with people not ourselves, which isolates supposed elements of achieving millionaire status, is just gossip. First read Bogle three times; then read Cramer twice; then read Siegel at least once. Go where the money is: To equate the "savings" of stocking-up on day-old-bread to Bogles premise of low-cost-Index-Funds savings of capital is just plain silly, as is the shopping involved to find "vintage" clothing as a counter-point to Cramer's shopping around to go long on an under-valued stock. Methinks that lifestyles, frugal or otherwise, are ingrained and mostly in the eyes of the beholder. Other recent threads have covered "Getting Rich" and the definition of "Wealthy."

Frugalizing (I invented this word) one's way to millionaire status ain't gonna work. Buy low and hold, with time spent doing homework on a regular basis, is a proven way to minimize downside risk. Whether the market goes back up in the short run is problematical, but investors must park their wealth somewhere. Dividends yields are above interest for the first time in 50 years; stocks can grow through reinvested earnings (fixed-income investments do not). A great many of the corporations that have suffered the panic selling are very profitable and have raised dividends of late, notwithstanding the media-incited gloom. Bogle says, "buy and hold"--Cramer says, "buy and do homework"--Siegle says, "dividend stocks seem favored at this time in history." I agree with all three.

Meanwhile, some guy named Jeff Lehman has a new book about The Frugal Millionaires that has recently been critiqued in U.S.News and touted on Yahoo Finance. Every time I start to think about writing my own book about successful investing/lifestyle strategies, something like Frugalizing comes along and gives me pause to do something different, like go fishing... or buy T...or see what's happening with PG or MMM or JNJ...so much to do and so little time to shop around for day-old bread. EDM

[saurabhec]

This is not just "frugal" but shows some class by not equating a decent restaurant with a Burger King carry-out. In a word: MODERATION. When I see fully-fed customers carrying away food in little white boxes from a sit-down restaurant, I don't think "Frugal Millionaires"--I think "trailer trash" and the decline of American civilization.

I don't understand this at all. Exactly what is cheap or "trailer trash" with taking home left-overs from a meal that one has fully paid for? It would seem far more sensible than letting it be thrown in the trash by your waiter after you leave. If you think it is unclassy, it would seem that whichever restauranteur you patronize has duped you into believing that you somehow owe them something for free, just because they deigned to let you in the door? Generally, I tend not to view dining out as not being an exercise in pandering to a self-esteem boost (aka I am "classy" vs "trailer trash") but merely to enjoy food and company.

[jeffyscott]

I agree that was really a ridiculous comment there. I don't order a meal with the intent of bringing half home to save money, but if it turns out to be too much to finish, then I am certainly going to take it with me, rather that have it be thrown away...even if some fool driving a 1985 pick-up truck thinks I'm "trailer trash" for doing so .

[woof755]

Has anyone ever taken his / her own wine to a restaurant? I surmise that there is a corking fee charged by the restaurant to recoup some costs.

While probably not uncouth, it seems to me a bit odd. Maybe to a local establishment that is very casual, I guess.

I dunno.

[ziggy29]

Has anyone ever taken his / her own wine to a restaurant? I surmise that there is a corking fee charged by the restaurant to recoup some costs.

While probably not uncouth, it seems to me a bit odd. Maybe to a local establishment that is very casual, I guess.

Out here a lot of eateries don't have a license to serve (liquor licenses are fairly tough to get, not to mention a few "dry" areas surround us), so BYOB for beer and wine is fairly common. In fact, we're planning to bring a bottle of wine to one such restaurant tonight for that reason.

[woof755]

That makes sense. I guess I was thinking about it from the standpoint of trying to save $10 or $20.

But, if you bought a case of your favorite wine, and want to enjoy it at your favorite steak house or Italian place, I guess that makes pretty good sense, too.

[moneym]

I agree that was really a ridiculous comment there. I don't order a meal with the intent of bringing half home to save money, but if it turns out to be too much to finish, then I am certainly going to take it with me, rather that have it be thrown away...even if some fool driving a 1985 pick-up truck thinks I'm "trailer trash" for doing so .

I would never call someone 'trailer trash' for taking home food, but I never understood why people do it.

First, I've read that food will spoil if kept unrefrigerated for two hours. By the time the food is out of the oven till it gets to your table, then you have your meal, pay the check, box up the leftovers, drive it home, and get it in your fridge, hasn't two hours passed? How much bacteria are on the leftovers? I imagine many people get sick from leftovers. Why risk it?

Also, how much money are you actually saving by eating these leftovers? I guess if it's a big steak it could be a few bucks, but pasta, chicken, and most other food is very cheap. Even if it costs you $20 for a pasta dish at a restaurant you could make the same dish at home for a buck or two and eat fresh.

Finally, it just isn't very appetizing at all. Scraped off half eaten food in a box that then sits there for a day or two and is then scrapped off into another dish thrown in the microwave. I'd rather just eat a cheap PBJ sandwich for lunch.

[woof755]

I agree that was really a ridiculous comment there. I don't order a meal with the intent of bringing half home to save money, but if it turns out to be too much to finish, then I am certainly going to take it with me, rather that have it be thrown away...even if some fool driving a 1985 pick-up truck thinks I'm "trailer trash" for doing so .

I would never call someone 'trailer trash' for taking home food, but I never understood why people do it.

First, I've read that food will spoil if kept unrefrigerated for two hours. By the time the food is out of the oven till it gets to your table, then you have your meal, pay the check, box up the leftovers, drive it home, and get it in your fridge, hasn't two hours passed? How much bacteria are on the leftovers? I imagine many people get sick from leftovers. Why risk it?

Also, how much money are you actually saving by eating these leftovers? I guess if it's a big steak it could be a few bucks, but pasta, chicken, and most other food is very cheap. Even if it costs you $20 for a pasta dish at a restaurant you could make the same dish at home for a buck or two and eat fresh.

Finally, it just isn't very appetizing at all. Scraped off half eaten food in a box that then sits there for a day or two and is then scrapped off into another dish thrown in the microwave. I'd rather just eat a cheap PBJ sandwich for lunch.

You, The College Years is wondering who this guy is!

I love leftovers. Especially Indian food (which I can't make at home). Mercy.

[livesoft]

First, I've read that food will spoil if kept unrefrigerated for two hours. By the time the food is out of the oven till it gets to your table, then you have your meal, pay the check, box up the leftovers, drive it home, and get it in your fridge, hasn't two hours passed? How much bacteria are on the leftovers? I imagine many people get sick from leftovers. Why risk it?

You have been mis-informed. The doubling time for common bacteria is 30 minutes under ideal conditions. So in 2 hours you will have 16 times the starting bacteria which isn't really much at all. If you can't eat it 2 hours later, then you probably shouldn't be eating it when it is brought 'fresh' to your table.

Of course, if you have ever worked in a restaurant, you would know that food prep can leave much in the way of sanitary practices by the wayside.

So with your attitude, you had better start growing and cooking your own food. Nothing wrong with that. But I come down on the side of eating in restaurants often and taking home leftovers to eat later all the time.

[moneym]

You, The College Years is wondering who this guy is!

:lol: Very true. I did a lot of disgusting things in college. But then $10 was a lot of money and getting sick didn't cost me much. So it worth it to risk eating day old pizza left on the counter to save a buck.

[moneym]

You have been mis-informed. The doubling time for common bacteria is 30 minutes under ideal conditions. So in 2 hours you will have 16 times the starting bacteria which isn't really much at all. If you can't eat it 2 hours later, then you probably shouldn't be eating it when it is brought 'fresh' to your table.

16 times sounds like a lot... especially consider all the people who handle your food in a restaurant. Oh well. I have no problem with people who eat leftovers, they just aren't for me. I'll save money other ways.

[HearDoc]

Read this book: THE MILLIONAIRE NEXT DOOR.

Reminds me of that old commercial on TV where a wealthy elderly gentleman is still driving a Model T or some other ancient vehicle. When asked why he still drove such an antiquated car, he said, "How do you think a man like me got to be a man like me?"
.

Was that Jed Clampett with Elie May ?

[HardKnocker]

I take home leftovers if I can't finish.

I have no shame.

[Ron]

I take home leftovers if I can't finish.

I have no shame.

I'm with you. Anyway, if I don't want them, my dogs certainly enjoy a treat.

Another story; when I order ribs, I always take the bones for the dogs. Often I'm met with a questionable smirk from the waitperson, who has never had anybody ask for a "doggie bag" for an actual dog.

My dog's never turn their noses up at "twice served". Guess they are just as frugal as me.

- Ron

[TFM]

Hello fellow Bogleheads. I'm Jeff Lehman and I wrote the book you are all talking about.

Let me clarify a few things that might help you understand where the US News / Yahoo article was coming from:

Point 1: The senior editor for "Alpha Consumer" at US News asked me to write a guest article of 600-700 words and she specifically wanted it to be about very consumer oriented spending tips. (FYI - She loved the bread and the oatmeal tips.) So I took 20 or so of the OVER 800 tips in the book and crammed them into summary version specific to her needs. Is the way to become a millionaire by buying day old bread and eating oatmeal? Um, no. But that might be the way to help stay one. What you didn't see mentioned from the book were the pages and pages of practical tips on investing (including index funds), stock options, mortgages, real estate, marriage, attending "free" money making seminars, retirement planning, etc., etc. If you want to read more on the book and see the table-of-contents, go to TheFrugalMillionaires dot com. You can also take a free frugal test to see just how frugal you think you are. (Over 4600 people have taken it…1000 of them did so in the last 24 hours. The average score has been about 63/100, which is failing.)

Point 2: You can’t “boil down” a book with 800 tips and a ton of other information and ideas into: “They keep more than they spend.” The first question people will ask is: How do they do that? If it is so easy to be a millionaire why does only 2% of the US population have a net worth of over $1 million? Think about it.

Point 3: Regarding The Millionaire Next Door. I loved that book, but it is now 12 years old. It's short on practical tips and long on research analysis. I enjoyed the "average cost per pound" that millionaires spent on their cars analysis, but seriously, when was the last time you bought a car by the pound? The Frugal Millionaires is more of a contemporary complement to TMND.

Point 4: Regarding buying used cars. As new car prices drop so do used car prices (sorry if I’m stating the obvious, I was an economics major). In fact, many used car dealers are doing very well these days. I just came back from Orlando where I was guest lecturing about the book. I heard a radio ad for new $30,000 Chrysler Sebring Convertibles being discounted to $14,900. I still wouldn't buy one. And believe it or not, you can buy a 2 year old BMW with 30K miles on it for a decent price these days and the certified pre-owned warranty is good for 6 years and up to 100K miles. That means you get a 70K mile warranty over four years. That's better than their new car warranty (4 years and 50K).

Point 5: For those of you who think that bringing food home after dining out smacks of “trailer trash” I’d say that says more about you than the people taking the food home. They could care less what you think about them…and that’s another thing I uncovered when interviewing the frugal millionaires: they don't care what you think! Can you imagine how much that saves them on fancy cars and McMansions otherwise needed to impress others?

Point 6: If you don’t like oatmeal, don’t eat it. If you don’t want to amass a fortune being smarter with your money and learning how from others who already have, then don’t. If you think you “know it all” not even the frugal millionaires can help you…nobody can. Use whatever tips from The Frugal Millionaires that you think will work the best for you. It’s totally your choice. (Insert: "It's a free country diatribe" here...!)

Final Note: You all should know that, in return for their participation in the book, the frugal millionaires gave me names of charities that they wanted the profits of the book to go to once we covered the costs. We are about to start making those donations. Literally all the profits from the book will go to charities. We’re not like the guys who are lining their pockets with your money selling you a bunch of stock advice that is staler than day old bread (that isn't frozen) by the time it’s printed. We’re giving back, not only to help you, but others who aren’t as fortunate as you.

Thanks for reading.

Jeff Lehman

[livesoft]

Jeff, thanks for posting. I took the frugal test.

One question about how long one keeps cars did not have choice of more than 10 years.

Also, the best test score result should probably be, "You are a miserly bastard. Go out and spend more money."

[EDM]

I agree that was really a ridiculous comment there. I don't order a meal with the intent of bringing half home to save money, but if it turns out to be too much to finish, then I am certainly going to take it with me, rather that have it be thrown away...even if some fool driving a 1985 pick-up truck thinks I'm "trailer trash" for doing so .

So Jeffyscott, I've got your attention: Here's how "fools" get rich (and not one step away from dumpster diving): They have a perfectly serviceable 1985 F-150 bought with $12,000 cash, new in '85, with 4x4, crawler transmission, heavy-duty springs, special shock-bumper for pulling grain wagons, used and maintained when actively farming and fully depreciated for tax purposes. Then they retire and rent the farm to a cash grain farmer, what to do? Sell the truck? No. It's nice to have such a vehicle to run around the farm...haul deer out of the woods during the season, cut wood, pull stumps, go mushroom and raspberry picking. No need to license or insure it because it never leaves the farm.

I suppose we could have traded the old F-150 in on something like a new 2009 4x4 at around $35,000 to $40,000 that, because of strictly personal use, we would have had to earn 220% of the cost of the new truck to pay the various governments 8.25% sales tax, 28% federal income tax, 3% Illinois income tax, plus 15.3% SSI and Medicare self-employment tax. Thus a $35,000 new truck would really have cost us $77,000 before the tax gouge. John Bogle makes the point in favor of his low-cost Index Funds being that "churning" mutual funds has not only management-fee an brokerage-fee implications, but tax costs when gains are realized preemptively by rapid buying and selling. So who is the fool? Methinks it's the knee-jerk guy who suggests buying new, no matter the circumstances? This is not sensible or frugal. One size does not fit all...

And herein lies another lifestyle truth: You are what you eat. And Americans eat waaaay too much. It has become expected when one dines in a restaurant that one menu meal will serve two--or one person twice. Knowing this, my wife and I generally share a meal (like pasta) or order the 6-8 oz steaks, not the all-you-can-eat-and-haul-home meal, and not because we are frugal or cheap, but because we don't want to get fat (the percentage of corpulent Americans is shocking). This was the essence of my original post...there is no rule that you have to eat all that is offered: SHARE, pay the plate charge (if there is one), have wine, and maybe a dessert. The pleasures of eating out should not be measured by the weight of take-home booty.

Health is wealth. Those 300- and 400-pounders riding electric shopping carts at Walmart are not healthy or frugal or on their way to financial security. The fact that a proposal to stock up and freeze day-old bread and haul leftover food home from a restaurant comes up in an investment book, then Yahoo Finance, and now on an investment blog--with defenders!--is a sorry testimonial to what, for some, constitutes "investing" for financial security.

Hauling food home is not going to make you a millionaire, contrary to one of the trite suggestions made by the guy who wrote The Frugal Millionaires book. My point is that not ordering more than you want to eat at one sitting is a better way to enjoy restaurant food. If the essence of eating out, for some, is hauling a meal or two home in a "Doggie Bag," and you don't have a dog, so be it, different strokes...; however, the next logical extension of this "hoarding free food phenomenon" is dumpster diving, which also has nothing to do with making or keeping a million.

So in conclusion, if one is warranted, I can understand young upscale singles eating out and bringing leftovers home as a matter of expediency, given the time of life, apartment living, busy schedule, etc., etc. and I don't confuse these people with the trailer trash that hit the all-you-can-eat buffets like Willie & Ethel in the comic strips. But I don't expect such young-upscale people, who are seriously into investing, to defend buying lottery tickets as the best way to achieve retirement security--yet I recall a survey to the effect that many people do. And it surprises me that "supersizing" restaurant food (at McDonalds or elsewhere) has a following here--expedient, maybe; the path to financial rewards? I doubt it.

EDM

[jeffyscott]

On your test, I don't really consinder investments to be "spending", but I answered that in question 1, since about 1/3 of our money goes to that category.

As was mentioned on cars, where is 12+ years? I think that makes up for buying them new with (cash, not financed).

I scored 79.

[EDM]

Hello fellow Bogleheads. I'm Jeff Lehman and I wrote the book you are all talking about.

If it is so easy to be a millionaire why does only 2% of the US population have a net worth of over $1 million?

I uncovered when interviewing the frugal millionaires: they don't care what you think!

If you don’t like oatmeal, don’t eat it.

If you don’t want to amass a fortune being smarter with your money and learning how from others who already have, then don’t.

If you think you “know it all” not even the frugal millionaires can help you…nobody can.

Final Note: You all should know that, in return for their participation in the book, the frugal millionaires gave me names of charities that they wanted the profits of the book to go to once we covered the costs. We are about to start making those donations. Literally all the profits from the book will go to charities. Jeff Lehman

Jeff: As a person with four books in print--conventional publishing contracts, advance paid--I can tell you what you already know: 99% of published authors don't make McDonalds wages and they don't get free french fries. That said, I congratulate you for getting in print, which is especially difficult in the well-traveled investment advice genre, and close to impossible with today's print media situation.

I took your test--great website, by the way--and I scored 68, which was partly because the questions were skewed toward young people who could profit from your tips, rather than someone like myself, age 68, where the die was cast many years ago. And yet I always considered myself frugal; buying a new or used vehicle can be situational, not a litmus test. And trying to second guess whether spending money on travel or investing would raise my score is not an either/or option for certain people.

And the car question was difficult: My last two Volvos were three-years old--used; the present V70 S/W was bought new in 2003 (135,000 miles now). The 1985 F-150 (90,000 miles now) that we use on the farm was bought new 22 years ago...the Road Trek motor home was bought new in 2007 (35,000 miles now)...but all this is situational, having to do with personal circumstances and present-day needs, and hardly defines frugality or lack there-of. Yet many of the points made in the Yahoo Finance article I can identify with...and I see how the focus of the article on day-old bread may have submerged the other 799 helpful hints that could be more availing. Yet it did get attention, which should help sales, and, in turn, your charities.

Writing a book all too often winds up being essentially "charitable," even when it is intended otherwise. So Frugal Tip #801: Writing a book is not frugal; better to spend the time working behind the counter at Mc Donalds and get free french fries to boot.

Sorry about the "trailer trash" comment; my issue is really with the excessive portions that are served in the States and Canada--not so overseas, where I am 6-on and 6-off, so this was somewhat a cultural faux pas. I have friends in the restaurant business state-side and they say that double portions are expected and they get complaints and lose customers if the portions are limited. Hardly a "frugal" way to run a food business.

Good luck with your book; being frugal, I'll wait for the movie... EDM

[jeffyscott]

I love leftovers. Especially Indian food (which I can't make at home). Mercy.

We also tend to like to order things that are difficult to make at home, rather than steaks or other slabs of meat that can easily be made at home. We don't take leftovers home to save money, we take them home because they are delicious.

[woof755]

Hello fellow Bogleheads. I'm Jeff Lehman and I wrote the book you are all talking about.

[snip]

Point 5: For those of you who think that bringing food home after dining out smacks of “trailer trash” I’d say that says more about you than the people taking the food home. They could care less what you think about them…and that’s another thing I uncovered when interviewing the frugal millionaires: they don't care what you think! Can you imagine how much that saves them on fancy cars and McMansions otherwise needed to impress others?

Jeff Lehman

This reminds me a lot of Jim Collins' description of "level 5 leaders" that help companies go from Good to Great in his book of that title.

[HearDoc]

It still all boils down to spending less than you earn... and investing the
difference wisely.
To each their own....

[On Approach]

One question about how long one keeps cars did not have choice of more than 10 years.

My next-to-newest vehicle is 8-1/2 years old, then 16, then 20, then 24. All are driveable, registered, and insured. I won't even mention the vehicles (both run) that are 33 and 38 years old . By the way, the 5 oldest are all Toyota 4WDs.

[MP173]

I scored 72.

Since my car is used for work and I travel for work, I tend to trade off every 3-4 years....the last car purchased was new when I literally rolled to a stop 150 miles from home at a dealership and wanted to get home for Christmas. So the car questions hurt me.

I also tend to save over 20% of my income. If I do want something that costs over $100, I purchase it, but my threshold for "wanting" is pretty high, so those occasions are infrequent. I purchase new clothes (at 6'7" it is difficult to find used). I also tend to purchase plenty of other new things, because as a single parent, I dont have time to look around.

I also believe that my 14 year old son is being taught how to be frugal. He has already earned $100 this week mowing lawns, in addition to having excellent grades, participating in sports, and riding his bike when practical around town. He is well on his way to financial independence and learning time management.

Regarding freezing the day old bread...I bake ours from scratch and prepared most meals at home. Food shopping is at a low cost store with no personal preference for brands. I read over 30 books yearly, most are checked out of the library (this is a change made the past year, before I made monthly trips to Barnes/Noble). My last auto loan was paid off in 18 months. My mortgage was paid off in slightly over half the duration. I invest over 20% of my income, sometimes considerably more (I have a variable income...in these economic times it is 1/3 of two years ago, yet I still save).

Yet I scored a 72. Sometimes you must balance reality, practicality, time, and happiness. I am pretty happy with my life.

BTW, we generally eat the homemade bread within 3 days and dont freeze it and if a generous amount of food is leftover from a restaurant meal, it is my lunch the following day.
ed

[avalpert]

Hello fellow Bogleheads. I'm Jeff Lehman and I wrote the book you are all talking about.

Point 6: If you don’t like oatmeal, don’t eat it. If you don’t want to amass a fortune being smarter with your money and learning how from others who already have, then don’t. If you think you “know it all” not even the frugal millionaires can help you…nobody can. Use whatever tips from The Frugal Millionaires that you think will work the best for you. It’s totally your choice. (Insert: "It's a free country diatribe" here...!)

Congratulations on the book and the press - but frankly I find the premise rather unfortunate. I took your little quiz and score okay but apparantly I still have a bit further to go until I see significant financial results. Except, I am easily on target to be a millionaire at 34 (32 now), and I have done so without forgoing life along the way.

Being a millionaire as a goal seems shallow and the line between frugality and meiser may be thin. In the end, if dialy oatmeal was truly a neccesary (even if not sufficeint) component of becoming a millionaire I'm not sure why anyone would bother.

In the end, I'll happily give money to charity, but via a purchase of the book would seem like an unnecesary, and very unfrugal, way to go.

[Chip]

Jeff,

Thanks for posting. I scored an 82 on your test, despite not eating oatmeal or freezing day old bread . Maybe I make up for it by doing most of my own car maintenance (current vehicles 12 and 17 years old, 284K combined miles).

What did YOU score on the test? 8)

Chip

[CAP]

I agree that was really a ridiculous comment there. I don't order a meal with the intent of bringing half home to save money, but if it turns out to be too much to finish, then I am certainly going to take it with me, rather that have it be thrown away...even if some fool driving a 1985 pick-up truck thinks I'm "trailer trash" for doing so .

I would never call someone 'trailer trash' for taking home food, but I never understood why people do it.





In my opinion Americans are really wasteful as far as food is concerned. If there is any food left after we have eaten at a restaurant, rather than just leave it for the trash I take it with us & give it to the wild birds, wildlife, or the feral cats who visit our backyard. This way there is no food wasted as it all is eaten by some creature. I do this with our food at home too.

[Valuethinker]

Sorry about the "trailer trash" comment; my issue is really with the excessive portions that are served in the States and Canada--not so overseas, where I am 6-on and 6-off, so this was somewhat a cultural faux pas. I have friends in the restaurant business state-side and they say that double portions are expected and they get complaints and lose customers if the portions are limited. Hardly a "frugal" way to run a food business.

Good luck with your book; being frugal, I'll wait for the movie... EDM

For most restaurants, I expect that food is sub 20% of the total operating cost, maybe even sub 10%.

Wages, rent, taxes, utilities, capital cost. These are the big bills.

So serving more food is generally not very expensive vs. dissatisfying even a minority of customers.

[HardKnocker]

Frugal score = 79

Some of the questions do not have enough choices.

[Sidney]

Some of the questions do not have enough choices.

Right, test is invalid for retirees.

[Ron]

Some of the questions do not have enough choices.

Right, test is invalid for retirees.

Agreed; the test is (IMHO) geared more to folks in the accumulation phase, not those who are retired, met the goal, and are more interested in a lifestyle to maintain/grow assets in retirement.

- Ron

[EDM]

Sorry about the "trailer trash" comment; my issue is really with the excessive portions that are served in the States and Canada--not so overseas, where I am 6-on and 6-off, so this was somewhat a cultural faux pas. I have friends in the restaurant business state-side and they say that double portions are expected and they get complaints and lose customers if the portions are limited. Hardly a "frugal" way to run a food business. EDM

For most restaurants, I expect that food is sub 20% of the total operating cost, maybe even sub 10%.

Wages, rent, taxes, utilities, capital cost. These are the big bills.

So serving more food is generally not very expensive vs. dissatisfying even a minority of customers.

I showed my wife this thread and she chided me about the "trailer trash" comment. I said, "when you think about entertainment in the context of someone carrying a styrafoam container out of a restaurant, do you think of Audrey Hepburn having Breakfast at Tiffany's or Earl leaving the Crab Shack?" She got my point and I got hers. But in the final analysis, a little debate will sell books, in the context of: "Call me anything, but not late for dinner"--pun intended.

In retrospect I should have been more reticent. Just last night we ate out at Pearl Lake (South Beloit IL) and the fish fry was excessive, so we, in fact, did get the ubiquitous white container and supplemented ParkerDog's breakfast this morning, chunks of cod making up for a third of a can of dog food with his two cups of dry food. Thus we saved the cost of 1/3rd can of dog food on our way toward millionairedom. Every little bit counts.

Meanwhile we had a chat with the owner of the restaurant--a long-time friend--and Valuethinker is correct about the nominal cost element of over-serving versus letting a customer, under any circumstances, or at any stage of terminal obesity, think that they were shorted on their two-for-the-price-of-one entitlement as an American over-consumer. On the other hand, if every little bit counts, as in eating cost-effective oatmeal, then a 20% element of a restaurant's variable costs is something that can control the bottom line. The "big bills" are fixed costs...Econ. 101...

But all this is twice silly; First of all that we are debating people food versus dog food on a investment/millionaire website thread, and--mea culpa--I pulled the old "Boots Trick" in critiquing the book, The Frugal Millionaires. Frugal? Maybe if I had read the book rather than just the blurb on Yahoo Finance, which, as it appears in retrospect, reduced what might be a wonderful read to triteness with the day-old bred and oatmeal nexus.

As to "Boots": This is a red herring way of viewing a small insignificant part of a much greater whole, calling undue attention to it, and, thus, depreciating the whole. The Internet and Drive-by media fosters this sort of partial-truth agenda-driven analysis. Here's the origin of the "Boots" critique legend: A famous French artist spent years painting a gigantic mural showing the glorious French military history, era by era, a 100 meters long and 5 meters high, thousands of soldiers and horses and war machines, depicted life size, doing battle so realistically that it looked almost alive. Finally the artist's life work was completed and the mural was unveiled to the public, other artists and art critics first... One critic looked at one soldier's image and said loudly, "Boots!" and stomped out, later lambasting the otherwise acclaimed work as completely worthless, because, according to the critic, one soldier was painted wearing a version of combat boots that weren't issued by the French military until a year or so after Waterloo, the era depicted.

So, I--and others--have pulled the "Boots Trick," by singling out oatmeal and day-old bread while ignoring the other 798 Frugal Millionaire Tips (which, in mitigation, were mostly absent from the Yahoo Finance blurb). Still, any millionaire who attributes success to cost-effective breakfast food might be better described as being eccentric...and I have known a few. EDM

[tim1999]

This is not just "frugal" but shows some class by not equating a decent restaurant with a Burger King carry-out. In a word: MODERATION. When I see fully-fed customers carrying away food in little white boxes from a sit-down restaurant, I don't think "Frugal Millionaires"--I think "trailer trash" and the decline of American civilization.

I often take home leftovers from desserts from upscale restaurants. I like having my dessert with dinner, but usually can't handle a 1,500-calorie piece of chocolate cake in one sitting. So I bring it home and finish the next day. Maybe once or twice a year I'll bring home dinner leftovers to eat for lunch the next day. I'm hardly white trash, unless you're a part of the Rockefeller family, etc. looking down on me.

Interestingly, the only people who have ever scoffed at me for this practice were dressed-up folks in their 70s and 80s. Must be some kind of generational or old money thing. Nobody my age (20s) that I know would think twice about getting their leftovers to go if they wanted to, whether it's Burger King or Morton's.

If I paid for it, I'm going to take it with me, unless restaurant policy forbids it.

[HardKnocker]

I showed my wife this thread and she chided me about the "trailer trash" comment. I said, "when you think about entertainment in the context of someone carrying a styrafoam container out of a restaurant, do you think of Audrey Hepburn having Breakfast at Tiffany's or Earl leaving the Crab Shack?" She got my point and I got hers. But in the final analysis, a little debate will sell books, in the context of: "Call me anything, but not late for dinner"--pun intended.

In retrospect I should have been more reticent. Just last night we ate out at Pearl Lake (South Beloit IL) and the fish fry was excessive, so we, in fact, did get the ubiquitous white container and supplemented ParkerDog's breakfast this morning, chunks of cod making up for a third of a can of dog food with his two cups of dry food. Thus we saved the cost of 1/3rd can of dog food on our way toward millionairedom. Every little bit counts.

I take the food home because I liked it, and I want to eat it. Not to give to my dog.

Some thing also tells me you haven't seen hard times if you throw out good food. If anything it's a compliment to the chef that you want to take it home. If it was lousy you wouldn't want it.

Possibly you have experienced hard times and leaving the food makes you feel successful. In other words you leave the food because you can afford to leave it. A symbol of success.

Nobody really cares if you take the food home. Do you think people are judging you? And who cares if they are?

I guarantee nobody cares what you do.

Regarding the book or Frugalness, I don't think taking food home from a restaurant will make you a millionaire. It's ridiculous.

Now, staying home and not going out at all might.

One question on the test was "How many times a week do you go out to eat/dinner?"

The choice of "None" was not available. Personally I go out perhaps a time or two a month. Going out to eat just isn't a big thrill for me.

[EDM]

...we ate out at Pearl Lake (South Beloit IL) and the fish fry was excessive, so we, in fact, did get the ubiquitous white container... Thus we saved the cost of 1/3rd can of dog food on our way toward millionairedom. Every little bit counts.

I take the food home because I liked it, and I want to eat it. Not to give to my dog.

Some thing also tells me you haven't seen hard times if you throw out good food. If anything it's a compliment to the chef that you want to take it home. If it was lousy you wouldn't want it.

Possibly you have experienced hard times and leaving the food makes you feel successful. In other words you leave the food because you can afford to leave it. A symbol of success.

Nobody really cares if you take the food home. Do you think people are judging you? And who cares if they are?

I guarantee nobody cares what you do.

As I said in my original post, lifestyles are personal, and, thus, one style template does not fit all. Hauling excessive portions home has nothing to do with being "frugal." You say you do so because you "like it," and/or "have seen hard times," and/or see doing so as a compliment to the chef...let me tell you how one compliments the chef:

The Pearl Lake restaurant I mentioned is seasonal--April to October-- and only open Friday evenings thru Sunday brunch. Carol, the "chef," has been there over 30 years. In October when they have their "Last Supper" before closing for the cold months, Carol comes around thanking everyone...and I express my compliments by slipping her a $50 bill. This pays dividends all the following year.

As to leaving food as an emblem of success, you gotta be kidding...

And as to "Nobody really cares..." You are spot on. The author of The Frugal Millionaires (TFM on this thread, above) cites one element of frugality as: "...another thing I uncovered when interviewing the frugal millionaires: They don't care what you think!"

When I was a kid growing up in the '40s and '50s, it was every "Beaver Cleaver" mother's article of faith that "clean plates" in America were somehow helping the "starving kids in China"--in other words, eat excessively. As a young adult in the '60 I heard an after-dinner speaker at a CPA seminar suggest that "moderation" was the path to a successful life and economic security. So we have gone from excessive to moderate to frugal...and being frugal involves consuming excessive portions in moderation. Words don't mean anything anymore. And according to HardKnocker, TFM, and the "frugal"--some may call them "eccentric "millionaires--"Nobody really cares..." EDM