I was following a Dutch blog on personal finance, lots of musings and some good advice. Today she says that her income will be cut in half (from 2000 to 1000 euros, so about $1300 less) and that she doesn't know how to compensate for that, do we have advice? I look at her blog, and the only thing I can think is: "Well, you shouldn't have bought a $520k house if the mortgage eats up all your money, so that with two people who work (her husband works as well) apparently you can't even lose half of one person's income without getting in trouble.". Sigh.
Disillusionment -another financial blogger not practicing what she preaches
-
Christopherjart
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:03 am
- Contact:
-
jacob
- Site Admin
- Posts: 16156
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
- Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
- Contact:
I doubt there are that many people who can sustain a 25% hit [because most people's savings rate isn't that high] if they follow the standard advice.
On a more general note, I think it's helpful to get away idealization/iconic representation that the media-world seems to have induced... that public figures aren't real people with real issues and that what is seen in public is not the full picture.
In particular people often see what they want to see in a public figure. And then they complain when said figure doesn't live up to their idealizations.
And it's pretty hard to simultaneously live up the various and sometimes mutually exclusive idealizations of the demographics that read what you write. [Warning: torturous analogy] If all one has is a hammer, the whole world reads as a nail. And people have different hammers, so they see the same nail as different nails.
I have a lot of personal experience with this. For example, many e-r.org guys were "outraged" (<- probably a strong word) that the ERE guy didn't remain retired because they figured I was mostly about the retirement just like them---but count up exactly how many posts I've written about "retirement"; actually very few. The bogleheads saw it as me realizing what they'd "known" all along --- that one needs 5 million in savings to satisfy the need for an indoor bowling alley in the basement and that I finally realized that "I didn't want to live with the sacrifice of not being able to bowl in my basement". Some were unhappy (to say the least) that I went to work for a trading company because they somehow saw my views on consumption or environmentalism as being incompatible with their [in my opinion limited] understanding of how capitalism works---obviously, to them, capitalism is purely evil. And some just thought it was atrocious that I didn't spend my time in the way they thought I should.
Or consider the "outrage" that some readers displayed when JD managed to write well enough about getting out of debt to make his blog very successful and very well paying. Some of them seriously thought that this rendered his advice about getting out of debt useless.
My point is ... bloggers, rockstars, politicians, etc. are not gods. They are people. They are allowed to change their mind. They don't know everything and many of them aren't being compensated will enough to play the public role that the public wants them to play.
As you said "lots of musings and some good advice"... why care what the blogger does in their own life then? We need to separate the message from the messenger... in particular the message should be evaluated separately from the messenger.
On a more general note, I think it's helpful to get away idealization/iconic representation that the media-world seems to have induced... that public figures aren't real people with real issues and that what is seen in public is not the full picture.
In particular people often see what they want to see in a public figure. And then they complain when said figure doesn't live up to their idealizations.
And it's pretty hard to simultaneously live up the various and sometimes mutually exclusive idealizations of the demographics that read what you write. [Warning: torturous analogy] If all one has is a hammer, the whole world reads as a nail. And people have different hammers, so they see the same nail as different nails.
I have a lot of personal experience with this. For example, many e-r.org guys were "outraged" (<- probably a strong word) that the ERE guy didn't remain retired because they figured I was mostly about the retirement just like them---but count up exactly how many posts I've written about "retirement"; actually very few. The bogleheads saw it as me realizing what they'd "known" all along --- that one needs 5 million in savings to satisfy the need for an indoor bowling alley in the basement and that I finally realized that "I didn't want to live with the sacrifice of not being able to bowl in my basement". Some were unhappy (to say the least) that I went to work for a trading company because they somehow saw my views on consumption or environmentalism as being incompatible with their [in my opinion limited] understanding of how capitalism works---obviously, to them, capitalism is purely evil. And some just thought it was atrocious that I didn't spend my time in the way they thought I should.
Or consider the "outrage" that some readers displayed when JD managed to write well enough about getting out of debt to make his blog very successful and very well paying. Some of them seriously thought that this rendered his advice about getting out of debt useless.
My point is ... bloggers, rockstars, politicians, etc. are not gods. They are people. They are allowed to change their mind. They don't know everything and many of them aren't being compensated will enough to play the public role that the public wants them to play.
As you said "lots of musings and some good advice"... why care what the blogger does in their own life then? We need to separate the message from the messenger... in particular the message should be evaluated separately from the messenger.
Learn from her mistakes. I understand the desire to point fingers at others in shame, but I try to see the world as having infinite series of causes and effects. Most of what occurs in the world is beyond our control, and I try to step back and remain depersonalized from much of what goes on. If I read about a blogger being a hypocrite, I try to think, "The blogger did things that led to certain unfortunate consequences. I will try to not emulate her behavior. Sequences of events will occur, and I shall try not to allow a God complex to take a hold of me."
I love Jack Lalanne's famous quote, "I can't die, it will ruin my image."
For me, holding myself up as an example forces me to practice what I preach. Not so much for what others think but for what I think about myself. It also make me really test what I believe before spouting it to a class or group.
That said, the ability to change is important. The world around us is changing and we've got to be able to adapt. It is foolish to lock ourselves into a particular way simply because we taught it and want to remain consistent.
Constant improvement requires flexibility and seeing things from different and new perspectives.
For me, holding myself up as an example forces me to practice what I preach. Not so much for what others think but for what I think about myself. It also make me really test what I believe before spouting it to a class or group.
That said, the ability to change is important. The world around us is changing and we've got to be able to adapt. It is foolish to lock ourselves into a particular way simply because we taught it and want to remain consistent.
Constant improvement requires flexibility and seeing things from different and new perspectives.
I think it was Jacob that said, in one of his "nomopomo" posts, that in a world of moral relativism with no universal definition of right and wrong, hypocrisy becomes the only sin. I think this analysis is correct. However I actually think it's healthy to change one's mind in response to changing circumstances, new information, or personal growth.
I remember John Kerry and then John McCain being excoriated as flip-floppers based on positions they had changed over the course of 30 years. Yes, opportunistic pandering is bad, but I'm actually very uncomfortable with leaders who aren't open minded enough to reconsider anything ever. I know my own stated positions are different now from what they were 10 years ago, or when I was a teenager.
I remember John Kerry and then John McCain being excoriated as flip-floppers based on positions they had changed over the course of 30 years. Yes, opportunistic pandering is bad, but I'm actually very uncomfortable with leaders who aren't open minded enough to reconsider anything ever. I know my own stated positions are different now from what they were 10 years ago, or when I was a teenager.
Whatever knowledge the blogger has she wasn’t born with, and a past decision on a mortgage, even a foolish one, doesn’t seem disappointing to me.
As to the more general point, it is a mistake to think that any written work, no matter how brilliant, can contain a life. Even in his own time Seneca was derided as a hypocrite for being wealthy. Thoreau spent only two years in intermittent residence at Walden Pond, leaving to return to his job as Emerson’s butler to pay off his debt and after a few years of that moved into a large house in Concord. Dolly Freed got bored with possum living and went to college with student loans and got a job as an engineer at NASA. Even Dick Proenneke had food and items ordered from Sears flown in by a friend, and he eventually left the cabin to live with his brother in California. I don't think less of their respective works, or of them, because of these things. Writings are just a snapshot of an author’s ideas and experiences at a given point, not a lifelong straightjacket (or hairshirt).
As to the more general point, it is a mistake to think that any written work, no matter how brilliant, can contain a life. Even in his own time Seneca was derided as a hypocrite for being wealthy. Thoreau spent only two years in intermittent residence at Walden Pond, leaving to return to his job as Emerson’s butler to pay off his debt and after a few years of that moved into a large house in Concord. Dolly Freed got bored with possum living and went to college with student loans and got a job as an engineer at NASA. Even Dick Proenneke had food and items ordered from Sears flown in by a friend, and he eventually left the cabin to live with his brother in California. I don't think less of their respective works, or of them, because of these things. Writings are just a snapshot of an author’s ideas and experiences at a given point, not a lifelong straightjacket (or hairshirt).
Changing your mind is one thing. Going through life making mistakes because you never use it is another.
I'd wonder, when she bought the house did she take some calculated risk that didn't work out, or was there some percieved necessity that lead her to buy it? Or was she blinded by some shiny granite countertops? The former could happen to anyone, the latter is to be publicly shamed when it leads to your financial ruin.
I'd wonder, when she bought the house did she take some calculated risk that didn't work out, or was there some percieved necessity that lead her to buy it? Or was she blinded by some shiny granite countertops? The former could happen to anyone, the latter is to be publicly shamed when it leads to your financial ruin.
I'm pretty sure everyone has at least one really stupid decision lurking in their past. It doesn't mean they can't have any good ideas or good advice going forward (in fact, if they learn from these mistakes, they may have better advice than most!). Jacob's statement about expecting people to conform to your own personal ideal really rings true with me in this case. I've also noticed people pointing these kinds of fingers on the Mr. Money Mustache blog a lot, basically saying that b/c he and his wife earned a combined salary of $100k+ pre-retirement, they can't be giving advice on achieving FI because it was too "easy" for them. Which ignores that much of the stuff he advocates doing will result in a higher savings rate and thus a closer FI point for someone at ANY income. When it comes to PF blogs, I really only take issue with sites that give blatantly bad/unethical advice, or give off a scammy vibe. If those to factors are absent, I can't get too worked up about them--I will just take a pass if the advice is not applicable to me (e.g., I no longer read GRS because I'm kind of beyond about 99% of his advice, and because the post topics are getting repetitive, but not because JD does not make the RIGHT decisions as defined by me).
In terms of this specific person, if she is owning that her decision to take on a huge mortgage maybe was a bad idea (or if she has some very good explanation for why it WASN'T a bad idea), and taking proactive steps to deal with her loss of income, I would not be judging too much, or dropping the blog (she'll probably start coming up with some new frugal ideas if she's a resourceful person--learn from her!). Houses/mortgages are one of those things that once you've made the decision, you are kind of stuck for a good long while. If she decided to buy this house 15 years ago but only had her PF epiphany 5 years ago, you really can't fault her for making a hypocritical decision.
In terms of this specific person, if she is owning that her decision to take on a huge mortgage maybe was a bad idea (or if she has some very good explanation for why it WASN'T a bad idea), and taking proactive steps to deal with her loss of income, I would not be judging too much, or dropping the blog (she'll probably start coming up with some new frugal ideas if she's a resourceful person--learn from her!). Houses/mortgages are one of those things that once you've made the decision, you are kind of stuck for a good long while. If she decided to buy this house 15 years ago but only had her PF epiphany 5 years ago, you really can't fault her for making a hypocritical decision.
@Tac. Today, the next day, she writes:
"...also an honest advice from someone with experience: when you're pursuing a mortgage, don't take the most you can get on the two salaries you&your partner bring in. Even steady jobs could end. So don't do it! Rather save up first if you want a bigger home than you can pay mortgage for on one salary."
Okay, she learned something
"...also an honest advice from someone with experience: when you're pursuing a mortgage, don't take the most you can get on the two salaries you&your partner bring in. Even steady jobs could end. So don't do it! Rather save up first if you want a bigger home than you can pay mortgage for on one salary."
Okay, she learned something