Family that lives on $270 per month.

This family has got it worked out.

They have "optimised" their expenses which has enabled them to focus on their priorities and be able to spend 4 days per week at home with their family.

IMO all that other "stuff" doesnt really matter eg
- brand name expensive clothes
- keeping up with the latest fashion
- buying the newest model mercedes, iphone, 60" tv etc

experiences, spending time with the people you love trumps this superficial stuff every time.

I bet you they are a really happy, healthy family. If the teenagers really wanted to they could pay for new clothes out of their wages but it obviously isnt an issue for them.
 
I can think of much worse things that can happen to a teenager than not being able to buy brand clothes and go to the movies on a sat night.

Emotional issues are more likely to occur in homes where the parents are so busy working that they don't have enough quality time for their kids. Or parents who are angry and stressed at the ongoing pressure that so often comes with debt and overwork.

there is too much stigma out there around the word 'frugality' but in truth it doesnt mean one is cheap, to me it just means being financially smart and not wasteful. Our over-populated and resource-stressed planet could certainly do with more frugal people.

this family look happy and united. Good for them!
 
I don't understand why it has to be two extremes. Expensive brand name clothing or op shop clothing aren't the only two choices - there are plenty of mid-range choices as well. Another thing to keep in mind is price vs value. A lot of people confuse the two. You need to weigh up the cost (time/effort/other emotions) of what you're giving up compared to the benefit you're receiving.
 
Can you imagine a life for children with one parent working, or two parents working part time jobs?
Always having someone home, so they don't need to go into daycare, or after school care.

Having a landline, where everyone could share the same phone, instead of having individual phones. How did we become a society where everyone, including children, need their own phone?

This family has made it their job to reduce expenses. None of it difficult. They refuse to buy into the marketing of products. They instead dilute the product, because using less, is enough for the job.


What do you think children would pick at birth, if given the choice.
#1- Both parents work.
Child is shuffled off everyday to childcare, where they see other people more than their parents.
When they finally get home, their parents are stressed and it is hours before dinner is made...or worse, they get fed first, and not have a family meal.
On weekends, they must go the stores, when they must sit in trollies for hours at a time. As a prize they get a toy, for 'being good'
Before going home, they get a happy meal, with a crappy toy.
Maybe 1-2 times a year, they get to go on a vacation. Of course they will never remember this trip when they grow up.

#2- Child gets to spend time with both parents. They have time to enjoy being home, without always being told to 'hurry up..we need to go'. Instead of a lot of take away food, it is nutritionally prepared at home with fruit and veggies along with meat.
Being obese, and having other health related illness are decreased.
Instead of being over whelmed with a lot of toys, they appreciate the few toys they have, and their imagination fills in the rest.
Possibly going camping with family, enjoying simple things, is their vacation.
 
kathryn d said:
Possibly going camping with family, enjoying simple things, is their vacation.
Click to expand...
Agree.

When we lived in the USA we were on a really tight budget, but wanted to see as much as we could of the Country too.

Most weekends were spent driving to some destination such as a State Park, or small town in the middle of nowhere, beaches and playgrounds and general sightseeing - mostly low cost outings with home-made picnic lunches and staying in elcheapo cabins or our tent.

One of our most memorable events was tent camping at Lake Tahoe in summer, and other tenting trips similar to that. Very low cost, but very high on adventure.

Our son who was between 4 and 7 years old during this period had an absolute ball, and remembers with great fondness those times. He loves outdoors and bush walking etc as a result.

We still do this occasionally (way less time available at the moment) and despite the low cost of the events the kids have a terrific time.
 
Last edited:
I admire their ability to live well within their means but do wonder on the accuracy of the numbers. There are some unavoidable costs that living by candlelight will not eliminate.

Things like council rates - water/septic charges - school costs and excursions (even public) - dental.

And not buying brand name doesn't mean buying op shop ... I don't apologise that I never buy op-shop (can't stand the smell) - but have no qualms about buying a $3 on sale polo shirt from BigW.

And those government payments (taxpayer supplied) can sure add up. Junior went to school with a family where hubby worked as a posties - mother stayed home - 6 kids by choice - government handout of $1,000/fnt plus subsidised rent/utilities. Now - I know that probably only covers their grocery bill - but why so many kids if you can't afford them?
 
kathryn d said:
Can you imagine a life for children with one parent working, or two parents working part time jobs?
Always having someone home, so they don't need to go into daycare, or after school care.

Having a landline, where everyone could share the same phone, instead of having individual phones. How did we become a society where everyone, including children, need their own phone?

This family has made it their job to reduce expenses. None of it difficult. They refuse to buy into the marketing of products. They instead dilute the product, because using less, is enough for the job.


What do you think children would pick at birth, if given the choice.
#1- Both parents work.
Child is shuffled off everyday to childcare, where they see other people more than their parents.
When they finally get home, their parents are stressed and it is hours before dinner is made...or worse, they get fed first, and not have a family meal.
On weekends, they must go the stores, when they must sit in trollies for hours at a time. As a prize they get a toy, for 'being good'
Before going home, they get a happy meal, with a crappy toy.
Maybe 1-2 times a year, they get to go on a vacation. Of course they will never remember this trip when they grow up.

#2- Child gets to spend time with both parents. They have time to enjoy being home, without always being told to 'hurry up..we need to go'. Instead of a lot of take away food, it is nutritionally prepared at home with fruit and veggies along with meat.
Being obese, and having other health related illness are decreased.
Instead of being over whelmed with a lot of toys, they appreciate the few toys they have, and their imagination fills in the rest.
Possibly going camping with family, enjoying simple things, is their vacation.
Click to expand...

That's actually incorrect. Obesity is much more common among low income and/or less educated parents. I know housewives that use many processed or convenience food items. Obesity is heavily linked to car dependency - not working. Dual income families who, because of this fact, can afford to live in inner city walkable areas are the least likely to be obese. Families living in outer suburbs or regional areas (like this family) are the most likely.

Also the shampoo diluting thing is very silly. I buy good quality hair products online and it comes to $2/week for shampoo, conditioner and 2 styling products as I don't need to use much. They are very concentrated. It's not even worth the effort for me to dilute it to save a couple of cents. I'd be curious to see how many cars they own too. They probably spend more running their car/s than they do on food :p
 
cimbom said:
That's actually incorrect. Obesity is much more common among low income and/or less educated parents. I know housewives that use many processed or convenience food items. Obesity is heavily linked to car dependency - not working. Dual income families who, because of this fact, can afford to live in inner city walkable areas are the least likely to be obese. Families living in outer suburbs or regional areas (like this family) are the most likely.

Also the shampoo diluting thing is very silly. I buy good quality hair products online and it comes to $2/week for shampoo, conditioner and 2 styling products as I don't need to use much. They are very concentrated. It's not even worth the effort for me to dilute it to save a couple of cents. I'd be curious to see how many cars they own too. They probably spend more running their car/s than they do on food :p
Click to expand...

This family didn't look obese. Too many families refuse to cook, and do rely on on convenience food. I don't think obesity is linked to car dependency..more to overeating.

I thought it said they had one car?

Nothing silly about diluting shampoo. $2.00 a week is a lot of money for hair products. We'd spend maybe that every couple of months.
Shampoo is shampoo..basically all the same. For anyone who buys hair detangler for their children..mix 2 tablespoons of conditioner to 2 cups of water. Shake, spritz, and comb.

They may not save a lot on separate purchases, or any cost-saving practice, but it adds to quite a tidy sum...doesn't it?
 
kathryn d said:
This family didn't look obese. Too many families refuse to cook, and do rely on on convenience food. I don't think obesity is linked to car dependency..more to overeating.
Click to expand...

Obesity is linked quite significantly to low income due to processed, saturated fat rich but nutrient poor food often being quite a bit cheaper than fresh veges.

Ever wonder why a burger can cost 99c but a salad is $3.99? A whole bag of oven fries for $2.50 or 3 apples for the same price?

It's not only in first world countries this problem occurs - Central American countries and the Pacific Islands have a terrible obesity and health problem amongst their poor.

Wonder how much the family uses their car ... I have only a cheapy 6 yr old Corolla and service, rego, green slip and comprehensive insurance alone cost me near $2,000 this month ($170/mth) ... haven't even put fuel in it yet.
 
I am with MTR for the concern of the social ramifications involved.

Growing up we were a fairly poor family. Dad rode to work since we only had one car, Grandma gave Mum money when we were running short of food, Mum made all our clothes, a group of families looked after each others kids when parents had to take on 2nd jobs and so on.

However, Mum was clever and would remove the Billabong and Quiksilver logos from my Dad's knock-a-bout clothes and sew them onto the clothes she made me. If I wanted to buy lunch on a Friday from the canteen, I had to spend the previous night putting cotton wool into test tubes (Dad was a lab tech at this stage, studying to be a Microbiologist, did this for extra money).

Anyway, moral of the story was despite our lack of money, I never knew anything was awry and never went without, and also wasn't socially outcast due to a few neat tricks around the home.

Oh and happy ending, parents are living a healthy retirement due to properties in Doubleview, and Dad paying super before it was mandatory.
 
This family isn't poor, Cimbom, they own their home outright. That possibly makes them wealthier than you are.

Look at the video. They eat very healthy home made foods that are not processed, this will not lead to obesity. They grow lots of vegies. They have one car and they possibly walk a lot or ride bicycles to match their frugal mindset.

I do agree the cupboard full of shampoo is OTT, even for me.
 
Also, her skin looks great and she's either using something cheap or nothing at all. I already knew that good skin comes from a good diet, anyway.

Don't mind the shampoo thing at all - in fact, diluted mine in the shower this morning! It might be better for my fine hair, anyway. Also stocked up on my fav brand half price this week.

On the other hand, I spent a lot more on my weekly shop than I usually do. What's happened? When I try to be frugal, I bust pretty quicky. But it comes naturally when I'm not working so much - and when I'm on a tight budget out of necessity.

cimbom - have you watched the clip yet?
Your arguments are out-wide and it's probably because you're not on the same page as everyone else with the basic knowledge of what we're talking about here.
 
$270 - so what? I only spend $50 per month on food! Absolute truth. Now THAT is amazing. Until you realise that I've misrepresented the truth by neglecting to tell you that my parents purchase the rest.

And then I'll tell you that the above is all actually a load of crap.

Probably much like the article in question :D
 
all you persons with alternate ideas
Stop it
there is only one way to do anything,
not permitted to think
not permitted to be different
$ = value, the more you spend the better person you are

bloody hell, no change, no brains
 
Seriously, that family is great! I admire them for living within their means, and those kids don't seem deprived or anything. They are just not wasting money stupidly. Ps. Sydney is missing out... We don't have Savers shops. Best op shop experience in the world. Diluting shampoos, body washes... Great idea!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Off the plan in Melbourne... withdraw issue
2 3
Replies
41
Views
7K
Terry_w
Terry_w
M
$58K to start with and read on
2 3
Replies
59
Views
16K
mflying
M
Frito
Inheriting property with sibling and father to stay on in home
Replies
4
Views
2K
Frito
Frito
S
Builders - recommendations
Replies
2
Views
2K
westminster
westminster
geoffw
Real estate in Panama
Replies
7
Views
2K
geoffw
geoffw
Back
Top