Frugal Mama article in today's Washington Post

[Anonymous]

It bugs me when people allow children DVDS, but no TV programs. What's the difference between a Max and Ruby on TV vs one on DVD? Its the same. If you don't let your children watch commercials, that's different, but most kids programs don't have TV commercials during the shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many shirts does $500 really get you at Brooks Brothers? My DH only wears the ones that come "Buy 1 Suit, Get 3 Suits, 3 Shirts, and 3 Ties Free" at Jos A Banks.

Yes, this is more our speed as well. Syms is also our friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It bugs me when people allow children DVDS, but no TV programs. What's the difference between a Max and Ruby on TV vs one on DVD? Its the same. If you don't let your children watch commercials, that's different, but most kids programs don't have TV commercials during the shows.

I think the point was, she's saving $100+ a month on cable. Though I don't blog about it, this is a choice we've made too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It bugs me when people allow children DVDS, but no TV programs. What's the difference between a Max and Ruby on TV vs one on DVD? Its the same. If you don't let your children watch commercials, that's different, but most kids programs don't have TV commercials during the shows.

For us, it is a $$ thing, not really a philosophical thing. B/c I agree with you: "Max and Ruby" on DVD is same as "Max and Ruby" on TV. But we don't pay for cable so we get no TV coverage coming into our house. So, I do have about 10-15 kids' DVDs in a little shelf next to the tv (and sometimes let DD pick out some DVDs from the library) so that if, occasionally, DD wants to pick out a movie, I let her do that. I suppose, also, maybe it lends to more infrequent and sporadic (and therefore, less?) watching, b/c it's not like, everyday, at 4 pm, "Sesame Street" comes on so we get into a habit and it's just part of our regular routine. But then again, (I am thinking out loud here, and contradicting myself) people these days watch tv whenever they want via tivo, so it's not like it was when we were little and def. had to watch whenever the show was aired. So, I guess that doesn't make much sense. But for us, it has indirectly led to less overall watching, I do believe. But, to begin with, it was a financial decision, not a "less screentime" decision. Hope that helps...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It bugs me when people allow children DVDS, but no TV programs. What's the difference between a Max and Ruby on TV vs one on DVD? Its the same. If you don't let your children watch commercials, that's different, but most kids programs don't have TV commercials during the shows.

I think the point was, she's saving $100+ a month on cable. Though I don't blog about it, this is a choice we've made too.

No, she's saving price of cable/high speed wireless - whatever she pays for Fios - cost of DVDs. Which, while likely a savings, is probably not $100 a month. Every little bit helps, though - this is probably why she's got so much socked away for retirement.

Wait . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many shirts does $500 really get you at Brooks Brothers? My DH only wears the ones that come "Buy 1 Suit, Get 3 Suits, 3 Shirts, and 3 Ties Free" at Jos A Banks.

Yes, this is more our speed as well. Syms is also our friend.

And you are both more frugal than her in that department! But seriously, there are other less expensive stores that sell no iron shirts than Brooks Bros. So if she's touting the 'no iron' philosophy as saving money/time, but purchasing the item at a pricy store, that's penny-wise pound- foolish. Which seems to be a better title for her than frugal.

[Anonymous]

If you read the April 11 blog entry, it looks like he got the BB shirts at the Rack, so several (she doesn't say how many) for $500. Also, she argues that other, non-BB "no-iron" shirts still need ironing.

So I think she has something to offer and I'd be interested in reading more. Our family makes similar decisions (Roku-Hulu-Amazon instead of cable, BB no-iron shirts for DS).It's just that on her budget and with her choices, I wouldn't call her (or me) "frugal." Compared to, say, somebody on a real budget.

[Anonymous]

I really wish some of the people on here who read the article and/or the chat would write the Post.

I did neither, so I won't write in, but this really does seem to be ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Maybe someone should post a link to this DCUM discussion on her stupid little blog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the point was the they are frugal in some aspects of their lives (eating in, no after school activities, less driving, growing food, walking to school, going public etc.) so they can spend money on things that are important to them (i.e. their home, being able to afford staying home, save time by not having to run to the store every other day, etc.) These are choices most people with limited means make daily, even when "limited" in this area means "wealthy" somewhere else. Just different priorities, that's all.

It's just kind of crappy that in this city, THIS CITY, where the poverty east of the river is astonishing in some parts, that they tout choosing to grow veggies as a smart, feel-good, frugal choice when in reality, sure it's frugal but it's such a small slice of the bigger picture. It's not newsworthy, and it's verging on elitist to write about it in such a way that essentially says "praise this woman and her blog and her philosophies!". Just IMHO.

Actually that part of the story is a good idea for those east of the river - nothing wrong with growing your own food - poor or not.

Except that getting a garden to be productive costs money, in come cases, a lot of money. Not to mention time. If you're low-income and work FT, gardening is not going to be practical outside of things like potted herbs and maybe potted tomatos and peppers. In which case, how much money are you really saving? It's a nice theory, but it does take some startup costs and a lot of commitment. Ever read the $64 Tomato? Now, if there were community gardens available, that would be great (and more practical as the cost of things like conditioning the soil and infrastructure like water systems, etc would be shared). But those are few and far between, which means that gardening remains something that people with money do to feel good about how 'frugal' and green they are.

I garden, always have. I grow herbs on my apt patio because I think it's important for my kid to see where food comes from and it does save me a few bucks since I like fresh herbs better than dried and fresh is expensive. When I tried to really garden (lived in the country for a while), it cost a lot to start and there's no way I could have kept up with it working FT with a kid. I wish I had the space, money and time to really garden again, but it's just not practical.



As far as actually being frugal goes . . . I don't even own a car. I shop once a week, with a grocery budget (including paper products and toiletries) of $300/mo, I meal plan so I can make everything stretch. I live in an apartment. Not a single piece of furniture in it was purchased new, 70% of is hand-me-down stuff that I refinished, repainted or reupholstered myself if needed, the other 30% is Craigslist or Salvation Army finds. 50% of my wardrobe is second-hand, I cook 6 nights/wk, bring lunch to work all but one day a month, DC will be going to preschool at a 2nd tier charter and has no extra-curriculars. I don't have cable, internet, a house phone, a gym membership or a smartphone. I give myself $100/mo for 'fun' stuff like getting a babysitter and meeting friends for drinks.

Oh, and I sock away $200/mo in savings for an emergency fund and $200/mo in retirement (with a match by my employer). I'm in my late 20s and freaking out a little since I only have $8000 in retirement, no college savings for DC and just can't squeeze any more savings out of my budget right now. Oh, and I just finished paying off $15K in debt from my marriage and divorce 2yrs ago. That's being frugal.

[Anonymous]

This thread reminds me of this skit from Chapelle Show

[Anonymous]

I told someone I no longer get the Post, because I think its quality has declined so dramatically. It's a lot of "Celebritology" and stuff like this. The person I was speaking to said he still subscribes to the Post because he has pet birds and the paper is a good for lining birdcages. He probably didn't mean it quite like it sounded, but it was funny nonetheless.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree that it is $$ to get a garden up and running. My DH kids me about one year I tried container gardening in our deck and each tomato I yielded cost us like $20. If you are doing it for frugality alone, you're not really gonna hit your mark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I told someone I no longer get the Post, because I think its quality has declined so dramatically. It's a lot of "Celebritology" and stuff like this. The person I was speaking to said he still subscribes to the Post because he has pet birds and the paper is a good for lining birdcages. He probably didn't mean it quite like it sounded, but it was funny nonetheless.

You're absolutely right. We do not get it either. Why pay $$ when it's all online??

[Anonymous]

I do not see how this article or this woman show frugality at all? If I was looking for advice on how to cut expenses and budget better...this article and her blog would be useless.