Hacker News Reader

Comment by criley2 | Hacker News Reader

The Mercedes was far above their means. A fully paid off, expensive, imported luxury vehicle.

They made a choice: Sell the Mercedes (likely for $8,000 - $12,000 in cash) and support their family by supplementing their income for six month to a year on that, less after buying a $3000-$4000 daily driver. When you're in food-stamp-hyper-frugal-mode, $8,000 cash can keep your family alive for some time!

They chose to get food stamps and keep the luxury car instead.

It was their choice, but when you're driving around your "emergency fund" and your bank account is hovering at zero while Uncle Sam puts food on your table, some would suggest your priorities and means are a bit confusing.

View on HN

So a $30,000 car (or less if bought used) when you make $120k is living outside your means? If you have no debt and you have the ability to buy the car cash or pay it off within 1-2 years, how exactly is this bad- especially since you'd enjoy it? Sure, the boring thing to do would be to put all the money in savings... but if you think a 30k is outside your means, then you're probably so cheap you don't take vacations

>So a $30,000 car (or less if bought used) when you make $120k is living outside your means?

You realize that their means change when they lose their job and apply for government benefits right? That we should reevaluate our priorities and budgets when our means change (we lose our job and become unemployed for a long period of time!)

If you make 120k/yr and you receive government benefits like food stamps, I have some harsh words regarding your clear abuse of our safety nets.

>then you're probably so cheap you don't take vacations

Some offense intended: Just how young are you? Too "cheap" to take vacations? We're talking about losing jobs in a dual income family situation. How boring am I? Boring enough to budget and successfully raise a child.

How immature are you? Because it clearly sounds like you are WAY WAY WAY too immature to raise a child. "Too cheap to take vacations"!! The audacity of an entitled young twenty-something! You sound like someone who is too immature to successfully put food on the table for your child because you're too busy spending your money validating your entitled luxury lifestyle to save your money and prepare your family for the unknowns of life.

Woah there internet tough-guy

So now being able to take vacations (even if you're in financially good shape) is off limits? I'm not justifying anything that the lady in question did... but I think a 30k car and one vacation a year is reasonable on a 120k salary. Sounds like two people, yourself included, have said no- that is not acceptable (and that makes you entitled for thinking so). I know some extremely thrifty (or smart if you will) people that don't place any value on emotional experiences that might "recharge your batteries" that would argue it's a waste (even if you have more than enough money). Looks like you're one of them.

When you lose your job, you're right- the "means" change and you need to re-evaluate things. I'm not questioning that. I was questioning how is a 30k car out of the means of $120k/year person, especially if they can buy it in cash.

I think, given the context (accepting food stamps), it's somewhat reasonable to expect the family to cutback on luxuries until they get their finances in order. No one is saying they can't buy a car or take a vacation, but if they don't have any savings and are taking tax payer's money to support themselves, it's perfectly reasonable to claim that's irresponsible.

I can definitely see that now, I look like an ass, my bad

Yes, you should absolutely do whatever it takes to support the family, including selling the Benz.

I misread that original comment as "Benzes are only for rich people, not for peons that make $120k or below" and made a Jackie Chan face

"So now being able to take vacations (even if you're in financially good shape) is off limits?

Of course not. This is outside the context of the thread where a family LOSES JOBS and starts accepting food stamps because they cannot afford food.

Yes -- IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD FOOD, you are too poor to take luxury vacations. I apologize if that is offensive.

Otherwise: PLEASE learn to follow basic context. This isn't a generalized conversation of yuppie finances.

It's a specific conversation of a specific case where a dual income family becomes a no-income family, but keeps luxury vehicles while accepting government money.

I find it irresponsible to store value in a depreciating luxury vehicle while asking your neighbors for food, but there are other opinions on the subject.

> So a $30,000 car (or less if bought used) when you make $120k is living outside your means?

Yes!

> If you have no debt and you have the ability to buy the car cash or pay it off within 1-2 years, how exactly is this bad- especially since you'd enjoy it?

Enjoyment does not enter into whether or not it is rational to put a substantial portion of your wealth in a depreciating asset such as a car.

> Sure, the boring thing to do would be to put all the money in savings...

But then you wouldn't be buying foodstamps five years down the line.

> but if you think a 30k is outside your means, then you're probably so cheap you don't take vacations

Being cheap and being smart with money are not the same thing, and using words like 'cheap' to target a person indicate that you are not approaching the subject rationally but would rather attack a person that has an opinion different from yours using a negative term than to bring a solid counterargument. Pity.

The real pity is the lady in the article having the 1st world problem mindset of treating WIC like it's something she gets as punishment

I'm with you- as long as you make more than you spend and you can squirrel away 6 months of savings (to avoid situations where you need assistance), you're doing great.

But enjoyment does count for something, which is what I was getting at. On paper, vacations are a complete waste of money, there is no rationalizing them; they're purely for enjoyment and you have nothing tangible at the end.

The real mistake for these folks was not the $30k car purchase (that they paid off)... but the $200k of debt they introduced themselves to buy purchasing a house in a questionable market and being legally tied to it (unable to sell because it's underwater).

And to buy an expensive car when they could have gotten a cheaper one instead and use the difference to reduce the principal (which is exactly what I did when I bought the house I live in). For years I drove in ugly but reliable sub $1000 cars to pay down the debt as fast as I could.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com