Help me save money

I understand what you're saying MTR. The point I was trying to make was 'At what point does a focus on saving money become unproductive?'

I mean, what are we talking about here? 40 or 50 bucks a month? I spend more than that on beer down the pub in one night. Surely there are better things to focus one's attention on.

well, if spending 3 hours once off to get a free night out at the pub once a month indefinitely,

SIGN ME UP BROTHER!
 
I want to expand on the idea of 'At what point does it become unproductive to focus on savings' a bit more, I'd like to find out what others think. Reason being is that I've been listening to a few entrepreneurial podcasts lately where the idea has been raised that it's more important to focus on increasing income than worrying about saving every last dollar.

Let me provide an example. Let's say Person X needs $1,000 a week for essentials. Essentials = necessities (food, utilities, shelter, etc.) plus the things they enjoy (internet, Foxtel, mobile phone plans, a boat, running an expensive car, etc.). You get the idea. Person X's income from all sources is $1,500 per week. Knowing how pedantic people are on here, I'll preempt several responses by saying let's just assume that the income comes from sources Person X has no desire to cut, nor will they lose any by quitting their job or whatever. The $1,500 is set for the long term.

So... using the example above, could it be considered unproductive for Person X to focus on reducing spending in certain areas, to save a relatively small amount of money each month when that time could be spent thinking of ways to increase income (either new or existing)?
 
I simply don't have a TV.

The Y-man

Somehow over the years we've ended up with 5. :eek:

Not sure if I could go without my TV, I watch most content online, but sometimes it's handy to have ABC4Kids and ABC News 24 to amuse myself.

On the topic of saving vs earning, both have merits. You can save on expenses and choose to work less to enjoy a certain lifestyle (e.g more time at home with growing kids) or put your savings into further investments. Most savings require up-front effort (eg. getting a better price for services) or sacrifice (the day we gave up Foxtel is still etched into the kids memories), but I don't think it's too time consuming if you're getting reliable, recurring savings.

On the other hand, finding a way to work smarter and earn more (without necessarily clocking more hours or taking more risk) is great because you can have your foxtel, craft beer, overseas holiday *and* savings (maybe).

My partner and I chose the saving path and both work part time so we can spend more time with the kids. I haven't regretted it yet, and we're still putting nearly as much money aside for savings/investments as we did before.
 
So... using the example above, could it be considered unproductive for Person X to focus on reducing spending in certain areas, to save a relatively small amount of money each month when that time could be spent thinking of ways to increase income (either new or existing)?

Yep but not everyone is cut out for making bigger money.
 
Let me provide an example. Let's say Person X needs $1,000 a week for essentials. Essentials = necessities (food, utilities, shelter, etc.) plus the things they enjoy (internet, Foxtel, mobile phone plans, a boat, running an expensive car, etc.).

Interesting thought. My perosnal thoughts are that given a budget, I'd focus on reducing in one area of enjoyment to increase another - a "doodad allocation" if you will.

For example, if the car needed more $ per month because better tyres were needed, the Foxtel could be cut back (esp if it wasn't being used because you were out driving all the time)

The Y-man
 
Somehow over the years we've ended up with 5. :eek:

Not sure if I could go without my TV, I watch most content online, but sometimes it's handy to have ABC4Kids and ABC News 24 to amuse myself.

Yeah, I guess for us, no kids, so no need to plant them somewhere to get a few minutes peace (I thoroughly get it looking at ny extended family)

ABC News 24 is on the net, so no probs there.

We do watch video reports over dinner etc (so yes, a big monitor instead of a TV :eek: )

The Y-man
 
Interesting thought. My perosnal thoughts are that given a budget, I'd focus on reducing in one area of enjoyment to increase another - a "doodad allocation" if you will.

For example, if the car needed more $ per month because better tyres were needed, the Foxtel could be cut back (esp if it wasn't being used because you were out driving all the time)

The Y-man

But if, as per the example, you have a significant excess of income coming in every month, then why cut back on anything at all?
 
But if, as per the example, you have a significant excess of income coming in every month, then why cut back on anything at all?

because if a few tweaks is going to cut your costs by $1000 per year and get the same product for your neeeds, then why not???
 
What are you talking about? There aren't any 'tweaks' necessary, as per Y-Man's post, you can afford to get new tyres for the car and maintain Foxtel, so what's the point of cutting back on either one?
 
Do both - see where you can make more money and also save money.

I think it's good every now and again to see where you can save money and make more money. It's not a one-or-the-other scenario.

For example, is it worth the effort to call your lender to try to get a lower home loans rate? Yes.
Lower phone charges? Yes absolutely.
Hobbies that even earn me money? Yes! (I do volleyball work in my spare time... I enjoy it and I get paid. Double win!) :)
Dropped the unnecessary gym membership as soon as I could/never had any TV subscriptions, changed to a less expensive health fund & decreased the level of insurance cover (eg. Death cover in the super)

I'm on Vaya $18/month month to month phone service which uses the Optus network. No issues there. But I have switched off background data on the phone as it was chewing up the data (I have 1.5GB per month). At least know I can't go over that because the service cuts out instead of stupidly large bills, plus it tells you if you have reached 50, 80 or 100% of your limit for the month. Before the $18 I was on a Vodafone plan costing $30 a month and this is just as good.

I also switched health funds cause I could get a better and cheaper one through work. (Now working for CBA :))

I realised I haven't switched my tv on in probably 6 weeks or longer and rarely sit down to watch it. iPad is my new tv.
I did get the Foxtel go details from my parents but I only used it once so I could watch the world league volleyball being played in Italy - live internet streams generally have **** poor quality.
 
But if, as per the example, you have a significant excess of income coming in every month, then why cut back on anything at all?

I would like to think that I can cut back on things I don't need or am needlessly paying more for the profit of a company I don't own shares in, and contribute that difference to a worthier cause, even if I had a significant excess.

But a car can swallow up quite a bit of excess...... :(

The Y-man
 
I would like to think that I can cut back on things I don't need or am needlessly paying more for the profit of a company I don't own shares in, and contribute that difference to a worthier cause, even if I had a significant excess.

This is the only problem I have with your logic Mr Fab. If I can prevent myself having to earn extra money to cover things I don't use, or can access alternatively, it'd be silly to do so. I agree that constantly churning phone/internet plans to save cents/week is petty and a waste of time.
 
This is the only problem I have with your logic Mr Fab. If I can prevent myself having to earn extra money to cover things I don't use, or can access alternatively, it'd be silly to do so. I agree that constantly churning phone/internet plans to save cents/week is petty and a waste of time.

After purchasing tv a few months ago and locking into a 2 year broadband plan with telstra, I am wasting more time than ever before. Simply because I feel the need to use the 200gb per month for which I have to pay whether I use it or not - when I had not owned a tv in the first 38 years of adult life. But not much I can do about it once signed up to two year plan.
 
After purchasing tv a few months ago and locking into a 2 year broadband plan with telstra, I am wasting more time than ever before. Simply because I feel the need to use the 200gb per month for which I have to pay whether I use it or not - when I had not owned a tv in the first 38 years of adult life. But not much I can do about it once signed up to two year plan.

Do you drive your car at 220km/h all the time because thats what the speedometer says it can do, so you have to max it out every time you use it?
 
I want to expand on the idea of 'At what point does it become unproductive to focus on savings' a bit more, I'd like to find out what others think. Reason being is that I've been listening to a few entrepreneurial podcasts lately where the idea has been raised that it's more important to focus on increasing income than worrying about saving every last dollar.

Let me provide an example. Let's say Person X needs $1,000 a week for essentials. Essentials = necessities (food, utilities, shelter, etc.) plus the things they enjoy (internet, Foxtel, mobile phone plans, a boat, running an expensive car, etc.). You get the idea. Person X's income from all sources is $1,500 per week. Knowing how pedantic people are on here, I'll preempt several responses by saying let's just assume that the income comes from sources Person X has no desire to cut, nor will they lose any by quitting their job or whatever. The $1,500 is set for the long term.



So... using the example above, could it be considered unproductive for Person X to focus on reducing spending in certain areas, to save a relatively small amount of money each month when that time could be spent thinking of ways to increase income (either new or existing)?

To keep an extra $1 with taxes, medi-care levies, superannuation, and other costs, you have to earn $2. To save a dollar, that's still just a dollar.
It is more productive, on a buck's per bang, to save reduce expenses, than increase income.

I don't want to make more money.
What I want, is for my current income to pay for the lifestyle I enjoy, which it does.
I don't like to waste my money either.

It's like going to the grocery store. I can go to "A" and pay $2 for oranges, or go to "B"and pay $5. You just need to figure out if saving $3 is worth the extra trip....or if you can wait until oranges comes on sale at your "A" store.

Same as using a/c. Don't complain about the cost of electricity, if you aren't willing to spend just enough on a programmable thermostat to make it run when you are home, and stop when you are out. More bucks for the bang.
You still have a cool house...which is your primary objective.


I'm still reading my way thru Mr Money Mustache.
He makes some very good points, but also others which I wouldn't do (such as ride a bike..I'd walk first)
His biggest lesson to people is Pay off your Mortgage. When that happens, life is much cheaper.
 
Mobile phones
sometimes the best cost reduction is increase the plan
I had a $25 phone plan, never needed more
then as battery bob: started making more calls about breakdowns on my phone,
on the 25 plan cost $150/month going over
went to the $50 plan, cost $50 /month no overages,
the bloke I always called, tow driver, went to the 75 plan same reason but he makes even more calls

Australian internet sucks, slow, expensive, /bit charges

Canada: Gigabyte speed; no data charge,
last data statement was 164TB for a month
have 2 huge home networks with 8 wireless ap and cable routers and smart switches, so that internet works all over the lots 1 acre and 3 acre, and allow free access to tenants, visitors, tradesmen, people walking past on the street, anyone with wifi can access the internet thru them, dont have to care

enough data speed that everyone get 200Mb/s in their apartments, when everyone is cable connected
slower by wireless, because wifi slows down the more people connect to it
$59

government regulation in Aus, does not seem to be helping much
 
Back
Top