Comment by ProblemFactory | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ProblemFactory | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

What did you see as the central claim of the article?

To me it was that personal finance and budgeting is being marketed to low-income people as a way of getting out of poverty and becoming rich (doctor, lawyer or software engineer rich, not billionaire rich). And it is both misleading in ways that could actually happen and labels them "irresponsible" if they fail to budget their life from $15/hr to European cars and vacations.

I don't know how widespread this marketing is, but the article is clearly written in response to something. Maybe we on HN just don't notice it, because sensible budgeting and investing on a software engineer's salary actually does make you "software engineer rich".

----

The comparison to dieting is probably more familiar and insightful for us.

Eat smaller portions, avoid sugary drinks and beer, maybe even eat healthy and exercise. Make that your lifestyle not a temporary hack and you will be fit. That works and realistic advice follows it.

But there is clearly a lot of fad diet, gadget and pill advertising out there. Just yesterday I saw an ad for an electric mattress that promised to give you a beach body in 3 months on the highway home. Marketing is selling fat people that they just have to suffer for a few months, after which they will have made it, and can go back to enjoying life (pizzas) of their dreams.

It seems that this article was written because there is a lot of personal finance content just like that out there.

I guess if the central thesis is that there are people dumb enough to believe that a mattress will make them fit then they are also dumb enough to believe that saving will somehow double income then that fits. I mean PT Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute. However, the goal is to not be the sucker and to learn the better “lifestyle” choices.

There are some people who make so little that no matter what they do they will always be insecure and barely making ends meet. However, there are arguably many more people who are insecure, living paycheck to paycheck, super stressed out about money etc. who have no reason to be. They make enough that they could trade consumption for peace of mind if they wanted to/learned how to.

Eg. I now make almost exactly 8x what I made 14 years ago. But am only slightly less worried about money now as I was then because I was never that stressed to begin with. I always lived within my means and I was careful to save vs increase consumption. I still drive the same 2005 Subaru sedan that I did 14 years ago even though getting a Tesla etc. would be an unnoticeable financial decision.

As I read it, the argument is that "budget culture" blames the individual instead of systemic bias, and therefore all of the personal financial advice marketed toward the 99% is harmful.

There is some truth to it - Dave Ramsey does downplay/ignore systemic bias. And he focuses on the success stories where people pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

But to then claim "budgeting doesn't work" is like saying "eating healthy doesn't work".

A budget is part of a healthy financial lifestyle, not a panacea. It can help people build momentum in the right direction.

I'm most familiar with Dave Ramsey's material, so I can't speak to the rest of the "budget culture". But the "baby steps" are not in the same category as fad diet. They're more like "stop drinking soda, eat more vegetables, get good sleep, make good habits" kind of advice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com