The advertising mantra of "pay yourself first" before you pay your bills in order to build your savings account...infuriates and depresses me. I'm not sure Wells Fargo Mortgage would be too keen if I told them that we weren't paying them this month because we paid ourselves first. Himself is a self-employed professional, meaning his income is not regular, and the current economy, which has been "current" for too many years now, has decimated any remote ideas of saving our "extra" income. I looked at several websites that promote the 3%-10% per month saving rate. They also stress that you have to live below your means. When you have two children at home, and the oldest has just had our first grandchild, there is little "extra expenses" to cut out. I find this theory is ludicrous. The Feed the Pig website has "ways to save" on those little habits that suck up money before you know it like: cigarettes, lattes, lipstick, etc. I couldn't find one item on their list that I actually use, let alone spend money on regularly, or irregularly. I suppose if you receive a regular paycheck every two weeks, and your annual income is over $100k, you could pull it off. But be sure to add a California coastal mortgage on a house that has severely depreciated in value, along with a couple of kids who do like to wear shoes and clothes now and again, and cars that seems to run better on tanks with gas in them. It appears one way to "live within your means" is to let your mortgage be foreclosed and move to a cheaper rental. Those of us trying to pay our mortgage on less income don't see this as a voluntary option. Then, we have two kids at home - kids that want to eat, alot, because they are growing. Food costs have shot up as fast as they have. They aren't obese so I can't just buy less food "for their health". They like to play sports, and that seems to always involve shoes or equipment for that sport: cleats, balls, basketball shoes dictated by high school coaches, etc. So, cut out sports? Sports are only for the wealthier among us? Really? Maybe if our kids weren't so active they would'nt need as much food. But avoiding sports may lead to obesity, and then they would need to do some sports, which will cost money, and on and on. Then later in life there would be health issues from the sedentary childhoods they had. A vicious cycle for sure. I think we'll keep the sports.
Of course, we do have pets and they will live longer if we feed them and take them to the vet when needed. The pets came home during the "good income years" and now are older, but heck it appears they don't fit into the budget anymore either.
The "pay yourself first" folks have substantially more income than any middle-class family that I know. Period. They are still taking vacations with their families, or do not have kids at all, but second homes somewhere. Of course, the folks that I know who are living la vida rica started out with substantial financial help from their parents, either through first homes or trust funds, or have maintained kick-ass jobs and are always stressed out about losing their jobs. Probably because they don't want to live like us. Can I relate to them? Only in opinions on food and wine.
Which brings me to my personal indulgence- wine. I have probably spent a total of $200 in shoes and clothes in the past year for myself, and $100 came from birthday money. I get my hair cut and highlighted twice a year (though as each year comes on, it might be every four months). I do buy a bottle, two in the summer, of wine each week. Am I buying Rombauer or Far Niente? I wish! Nope, my quest is to find a palatable Chardonnay under $10. That price point, and my allowance of only one bottle per week, make it difficult to gamble on untried labels (a poor purchase cannot be remedied until the following week). Once or twice I have had to decide to either drink the "poor choice" or pour it down the drain. Note: I have only poured one bottle down the drain, or rather half a bottle as I continued to see if the wine got better as it warmed up - it didn't. So, really this indulgence can actually be a sort of punishment. Then of course if I didn't purchase a bottle every week, I could put that $40 a month into a savings account. Yep, at 1%-2% interest a month, Himself and I could live high on the hog when we retire. I'll use the term "retire" in it's other verb definition: to go to sleep. Like in "the final sleep".
As I write this I am thinking, well if I did save $40 a month on unpurchased wine, I might lose 30 pounds of weight in the deal. It might take several months, and a bit of emotional adjustment, but I could do it. Oh, but then nothing in my closet would fit, so I would have to purchase something new to wear. Which would require spending money, the money in the savings account. I'm mulling over the pros and cons of such a decision - keep drinking the glass of wine or eventually have to purchase new clothes. Damn hard choice. Damn economy making me make such a hard choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment