erejacob

I (the OP) don't know why it was posted either, but the post is proven correct, so far. The great performance over the past 3 years was made possible by the terrible performance in 2007/09. The market still hasn't reached its high of the past decade. In fact, today's level of 1387 was first reached back in 1999, so that's 13 years with a flat trend and counting.

Those common facilities are mainly intended for tourists and weekenders who would rather not have to clean their shower, toilet or deal with the pump-out station after they go home again.

Permanent residents (like we are) will have their own sewer hookup (a hose coming out of the RV which is tied into a receptacle in the septic or city sewer system), electricity, and water. So it's more like living in a small house that could technically be driven away. Every few days I have to empty the tanks which, since everything is permanently hooked up, means pulling two levers that flush the tanks into the sewer. It takes about five minutes to empty them and I can go and collect my mail while that happens.

A quick search on craigslist reveals several places for less than that and that's just in the past few days.

http://neworleans.craigslist.org/search/apa?query=&srchT...

Usually underpriced places get snatched up within a day, much like any other good deal on craigslist, so set up an RSS feed and monitor it constantly.

And I lived on less than $7000 per year when I was single. Yes, one scenario has two persons and the other has one but economically it's the same. This is covered elsewhere in this thread.

BTW, I'll take that bet. We have a joint account, so it's pretty clear where the money is going.

That's not quite accurate. Depending on how one measures somewhere between 40% and 70% of health care costs are used to treat lifestyle diseases (too much stress, too much food, not enough exercise) like high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, tobacco, alcohol, avoidable accidents, etc. Those problems are not genetic. They're behavioral.

Of course one can suffer these things without having the risk factors. I presume the experts who calculated those numbers corrected for that.

So in about half the cases (half the cost to be precise), sickness really is your fault.

One of the reasons high deductible plans have such low premiums despite not screwing people over with small print is that they attract a more healthy segment of the population, because a high deductible creates some incentive to avoid those [preventable] diseases.

As it is, people are only hit on their regular expensive plans if they smoke. Imagine if they were also hit with higher premiums if they were overweight (BMI>25, 2/3s of Americans are overweight), drank too much, smoked too much, didn't engage in regular physical activity, etc. Then the premiums for those who have a lifestyle which wasn't likely to cause chronic diseases would only pay half of what they're currently paying. Those who engage in risky lifestyles would see their premiums increase by 50%.

Nah, after a while it just becomes automatic. Kinda how toddlers must concentrate on how to walk but adults don't. Actually, I have a hard time writing about money saving tricks these days because it's all automatic/subconscious to me.

As someone else noticed in this thread, it's more of an attitude.

Also to clarify a bit, the method I recommend is more about crushing pounds or dollars than pinching pennies. It's much easier to attack a few large expenses like housing, transportation, and food than worrying about hundreds of little things.

Have you considered airsoft or reballing? I used to play airsoft, never played paintball. The land/playing area would usually be provided by someone one of the players knew, private forests, empty barns, junk lots, etc. We all had our own guns. We usually managed to scrape together 5-10 people for our games. Not sure about 100. That sounds rather ambitious for a game(?)

The general trick to owning expensive equipment is to find something with very little depreciation (usually top quality items) and buy used. This makes the carrying cost rather low. For example, my hand planes for woodworking are $300+ each, but I could sell them again for 90%+ of what I paid for them, so my effective cost is only thirty bucks. A brief search on the net reveals one can get 2000 paintballs for $30. Now I don't know if they're any good or not, but that sounds pretty cheap to me. How many shots for a game? 100? That's less than two bucks.

So I think you could do it pretty cheaply if you "invest" the money and do the organizing footwork.

0% coinsurance on mine. Go to www.ehealthinsurance.com and see what pops up (that's what I've used ... they may not include your state very well, but for CA, it finds 20 HSA eligible plans for me, 12 of which don't have coinsurance.)

Try something slightly higher, like 83%. Maybe 5.4 years. You did get pretty close there. You're in the ball park.

Tax laws differ by income. If you make less, taxes go down. The capital gains tax goes away. Dividends become qualified.

What I'm trying to say is that people who are ultra-frugal are sometimes told (insofar they don't keep it secret) that their life sucks and they're not having fun or various things about their stuff. (See examples above.) This is followed by comments about building credit and some moralizing(?) that we should be cool and spend like everybody else.

The millionaire next door [there or to be] types---the silent majority?---may get caught in the crossfire.

However, having seen this recession coming from two years away and having tried to warn people about it only to be told by some/many that there's no problem and everything is fine, etc. I can't really sympathize that much, sorry. While it may not be someone's fault for being laid off or not being able to find a job, it certainly is their fault for not having the savings to cover two years of unemployment given the known 20% risk of it. I don't feel smug about it. I feel exasperated having told people who proceeded to do nothing. And now they want my sympathy?

The Cassandra complex comes to mind. Given how I come across to you, it indicates that I'm just a poor salesman when it comes to getting my point across to your demographic.

I haven't seen any indications anywhere that California provides funds to my insurance company. However, plans do cost different amounts in different states.

Welcome to my life.

You could just do something else then. I'm not saying "everybody copy me". There are paid versions of my activities, but I eventually found the versions there were free or almost free. This holds for almost everything unless you insist on a particular paid version. For instance, when it comes to going out. Lots of people like that, but why are they really going out? Probably not to sit in a particular restaurant and pay money. Maybe more about not having to cook and meeting friends? If so, this could be accomplished by taking turns inviting each other for dinner at home. If the cooking isn't great, that's something that can be learned. Just an example.

+1 on the difference between choosing to and having to... while I haven't made lots of money or purchased big ticket items, I did make relatively much as a high school student (more than my peers) and blew it all on graphics cards, SLR cameras, airsoft guns, 23" CRTs (yes, I'm that old), and what have you. After I while I noticed that I got no permanent satisfaction out of those purchases. Perhaps it's good I realized this early.

On the other hand having money that was put into savings instead of stuff creates the feeling of power and potential. When I started saving I counted my net worth in cars (because consumerism was still my frame of reference). Imagine walking past a car lot and knowing one has enough money to buy 1-2-3, .... later 8-9-10 ... today dozens of cars (now I count in houses instead ;-) ) on the lot in _cash_ is a very interesting and positive feeling. It's the feeling of being in control and essentially being able to do what you want. Things no longer happen to you. One has financial agency. This is completely different from a reactive mindset.

Fun fact: One third of scientists (on a global basis) do not live in the country they were born in. (See http://www.fasebj.org/content/18/9/936.full) This comes from a lack of opportunities. For example, there are no groups working on what I was trained for in myCountry other than the one I was in. I would essentially have to replace my supervisor by competing with the other students he graduated with only one winner. This is what happens when each professor trains 10 people to replace him and proceed to determine the winner by whoever can work the hardest. This is not good faith investment. That's a callous winner-takes-all system with a built in oversupply to lower prices---like those competitions where you get webdesigners to work for free to make a logo. I don't feel any moral obligation to participate in that Ponzi scheme. Ever noticed how people hawking university degrees aren't exactly upfront about placement ratios and things like that and how students usually have to learn about what's really going after they're already committed?

Since the salary for an academic scientist is rather low, I could have made the money MUCH faster as a long haul trucker. At $17.5/hr a framing carpenter apprentice is paid substantially better than a grad student. At $37/hour a journeyman level carpenter (after 4 years as an apprentice) would make nearly twice as much as a postdoc. A watchmaker (2 year education) makes 40k. Yes, skilled tradesmen make that much. I never knew.

Had I known back then what I know now, I would never ever have gotten the degrees I did. It was and is one of the most inefficient means of making money I can imagine. Other than being a sign spinner or a dancing pizza (which still pays more than being a research assistant with a MSc, no kidding). I would have way more resentment towards the system if it wasn't for the fact that I enjoyed my work at the time. This enjoyment probably saved me from wasting my money on stuff to compensate for my lack of happiness working.

And I have enough savings to pull this off for decades should it come to that.

Granted if one gets so sick so as to max out the deductible every year consistently, one's life expectancy is probably not that long

If one stays healthy, unused money in the HSA becomes the equivalent of an IRA and can be used for nonhealth-related expenses after a certain age (I forget whether it's 59.5 or slightly higher).

I actually opted out of my employee plan when I was working in order to get in on this for the tax deduction. (My employer wasn't offering HSA eligible plans.)

Have you checked out Seabrook (dunno what your feelings are towards salt marches and nuclear plants). I hear they almost pay people to live there. We were talking about moving to the Free State for a while but the property taxes are scary. Now it looks like we'll be buying a house in Oregon.

Okay, to be more precise: >>Don't pay any interest or fees<<. I do run online purchases through my credit card and then pay off the balance in full every month.

Since 2001 and up to now.

Are you positively sure you have the cheapest rent in town? We lived in the same city for two years before we found a place that was 30% cheaper. Go to craigslist and set up an RSS feed. The underpriced places don't stay on the market for more than a day before someone snatches them up.

I agree with you to an extent. However, it's a lot easier to think about the money you do have than it is to work for the money you don't have. My attitude towards spending is more of a game to see what I can get away with, e.g. getting the same thing for much less than just ordering it on amazon with next day shipping. I find this entertaining much like some people find shopping entertaining.

Yes, money can be an agent of change. Time also. Some may do best working in a traditional structure. Others do better on their own. I helped found a nonprofit organization during my first year of "retirement". However, I found that I could be far more effective on my blog talking directly to people instead of spending time writing grant proposals, so I quit the nonprofit.

But 2-3% of my assets. I wouldn't get too hung up on the details. I didn't earn 40k every year. Some years were less. And some were more (see FAQ). I didn't live in New York.

Everybody can run their own spreasheets for their personal income and tax situation presuming an expense level of 6k/year. Figure an investment return of 3%+inflation (so 6% or so total). See what you get.

It wasn't written "for a general audience". I and my regular readers are regularly judged negatively for not choosing to consume and go into debt like everybody else so the blog is more of a support group for those who are willing to go against the stream and actually save money so they can avoid the typical middle class problems above.

I admit, there's a bit of "I told you so"-attitude, although one quickly learns that nobody really wants to take responsibility for the poor choices they've made or for that matter are going to make. Whereas everybody is willing to attribute their good decisions to their personal genius. The general zeitgeist of the housing boom and subsequent bust illustrates this well.

Okay, that's nitpicking. Make that 26k invested then. Also, you can reduce the taxes by diverting into an IRA. Also, after the first year, you can begin to add investment income on top of your regular income. This investment income will increase by about $1000 each year.

Why do people here have such a fascination with toilets?

The way a regular toilet works: Water automatically enters the bowl. You do your thing. You press a lever.

The way an RV toilet works: Water enters the bowl when you press a pedal. You do your thing. You press another pedal. That's my toilet anyway. From the perspective of one's posterior it's pretty much the same thing and you can do all this while sitting on the throne.

Some RVs have flush toilets or even vacuum toilets.

It is really a pity. If I had just claimed that I spend twice as much as I actually do, people wouldn't be so quick to discard the idea. However, it really is a matter of efficiency. It wouldn't surprise me at all if my neighbors spent 50%, 100%, 200% or even 400% more than me despite living in essentially similar structures and enjoying similar things. As mentioned elsewhere, it's mostly an attitude towards what money is, means, and can do for you.

I was living on 5-7k for five years before I got married. Being single or married doesn't materially affect the math. If you're single, you can live in a smaller space, but you'll spend slightly more on rent. This is nearly a wash. However, if you're single you don't have to go along/compromise with your partners less than frugal choices.

@rorr - Uhm, yes, your point? I did say I was living on 5-7k/year.

I pretty much spend my time trying to "educate" unaware, materialistic consumers. I've affected more people than I can count (those who've told me) and presumable more beyond those (who didn't tell me).

So I have a blog, a book, a forum, and now a wiki. There's not really a rat race option for what I do, but if there was, maybe I'd take it.

Incidentally, I don't really have a problem with people using the freedom they've gained from stepping off the treadmill to do nothing. If someone wants to use their freedom to become a "beach bum" I have no problem with that.

I think you can make that argument for my country of origin. They can add negative for the brain drain as far as I'm concerned. I guess the same holds for a lot of Indian or Chinese students who came to the US. As for grad school and postdocing, the way it works is that this has very little to do with training or investing. I feel I earned every cent they paid me for doing research.

Grad school and the postdoc system pretty much a cheap way for universities to get labor at 50-70% of the private market rates. Universities call grad students "students" so they can get around various labor laws and not paying for things like health insurance. The use postdocs because it's easier to lay off people compared to staff scientists.

So they hire persons with masters degrees to do grunt work for 25k/year and call them grad students. Then they hire the smart ones with PhDs for 40k/year and call them postdocs.

Basically you're put in front of a computer or in a lab and told to work on this task much like private industry except maybe your work is a bit more interesting(?) You write reports about your work called "papers" and after 4 years you write a giant progress report and call it a "PhD Dissertation". There's very little actual training or education involved in this process. Or at least not more than you find in the private sector.

It's pretty much labor like it is in private industry. I guarantee you that without grad students and postdocs, very few scientific papers would be published, because grads and postdocs are the ones doing the actual research.

When you see news of some professor discovering something, you can pretty much be sure that it was discovered at 11 in the evening by some grad student or postdoc of his. He was just the manager and subsequently in charge of public relations. That's fine BTW ... it's not like Steve Jobs single handedly built the iphone, but he still gets all the credit for it.

I myself published over 30 papers in my career, many of them first authored putting in 100 hours week a lot of the time, so I think I earned the money I made.

You can argue whether those papers are the equivalent of an $800 toilet seat, but that's a different discussion altogether. I put in the sweat equity "on the bench". I earned that money.

Professors mostly spend their time teaching, managing their workers, excuse me, "teaching" their grad students and postdocs, and writing grant proposals. Academia has the same typical structure as anywhere else. The only time you spend any meaningful effort being "educated" without giving back is as an undergraduate.