Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

SmileyFace wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:29 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:25 pm
smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:23 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:20 pm
smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 2:28 pm

Save and spend the same amount each year towards what goal?
Why save without a goal?

The only purpose of money is to spend it, no other reason at all.
The main reason to save is FI. If you don’t care about FI, then don’t save.
I guess you are replying for Klang.
OK - what do you do at FI then?
Become an artist and give your time to charity or buy air planes. Maybe collect cars. Crazy stuff that celebrities do. You don’t have to work.
Depends upon your definiton of FI. There are a lot of folks (some here, some elsewhere) that live like paupers to FIRE. I don't agree with it necessarily but FI doesn't necessarily translate to wealthy. Many that claim they are FI utilize ACA and other government subsidies.
I was just curious what the goal of money was for Klang and Rockstar - some say FI, some say freedom, some say other things.
But do they mean it?
User avatar
SmileyFace
Posts: 9184
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:11 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by SmileyFace »

smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:42 pm
SmileyFace wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:29 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:25 pm
smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:23 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:20 pm

The main reason to save is FI. If you don’t care about FI, then don’t save.
I guess you are replying for Klang.
OK - what do you do at FI then?
Become an artist and give your time to charity or buy air planes. Maybe collect cars. Crazy stuff that celebrities do. You don’t have to work.
Depends upon your definiton of FI. There are a lot of folks (some here, some elsewhere) that live like paupers to FIRE. I don't agree with it necessarily but FI doesn't necessarily translate to wealthy. Many that claim they are FI utilize ACA and other government subsidies.
I was just curious what the goal of money was for Klang and Rockstar - some say FI, some say freedom, some say other things.
But do they mean it?
Fo Klang (based on his posting history) I believe it was to weather downturns in his industry to survive long periods of being unemployeed and also to have the ability of to retire early if desired/forced. I beleive he has now achieved the latter goal at this point (still working but can retire if needed).
I personally have concerns about ageism and not being allowed to continue to work for as long as I want to so while I like my job and may enjoy working until 60 or 65 or even 70 I know in reality I am one layoff away (with a harder ability to find work I want to do as I age) from that happening.
alfaspider
Posts: 4816
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 4:44 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by alfaspider »

I think the warning about lifestyle creep is because it can "creep" up on you. Your spending is the collective result of a bunch of small decisions. An extra night out, or paying a bit more for a premium hotel isn't by itself going to bust a budget. But the successive decisions can compound over time.

There isn't a problem with increasing your spending as your means increase per-se, the problem is if those spending increase outpace your means increases. This is especially a problem if your increase in means turns out to be less permanent than you thought. The other (related) problem is one of the hedonic treadmill. If you get used to always flying first class, it will take a private jet fight to feel like a splurge and sitting in coach will feel like a penalty. If you've gotten to that point, you've increased your built-in cost structure for travel. You can extrapolate that to any expense- housing, cars, restaurants, etc. It can happen almost unnoticeably. You upgrade to first class once for a special occasion, decide you like it, do it again, and eventually have trouble going back.

The real point is to be intentional about your spending so that you don't lose financial control. There are people living paycheck to paycheck on high six and even seven figure salaries. That to me seems like a total waste of what could be an easy path to financial independence.
Tamalak
Posts: 1989
Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 2:29 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Tamalak »

I'm in favor of lifestyle expansion because you are making a conscious choice to spend more money on things that you judge are worth that money.

I'm not in favor of lifestyle creep because it implies an undisciplined and passive trend towards spending more money without necessarily getting a better life in return.
User avatar
SmileyFace
Posts: 9184
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:11 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by SmileyFace »

Tamalak wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 4:11 pm I'm in favor of lifestyle expansion because you are making a conscious choice to spend more money on things that you judge are worth that money.

I'm not in favor of lifestyle creep because it implies an undisciplined and passive trend towards spending more money without necessarily getting a better life in return.
Love this.
MathWizard
Posts: 6560
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by MathWizard »

Create a plan where you will reach retirement at a spend level which can be supported by your portfolio and other passive income .

If you have net earnings of X and you save Y, your are living on
X-Y. The larger Y is, the less income you need to replace , and the more savings you have to generate income to supply X-Y in retirement.

Remember to take into account taxes and any benefits you lose in retirement, like health care, flex benefits, and remember taxes that you will have to pay .
MnD
Posts: 5194
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 11:41 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by MnD »

rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:43 pm
MnD wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:14 am We accepted it gladly.
Our savings averaged around 20% plus employer match (and I have a pension), taxes were paid and we spent the difference despite our income varying a lot and generally going up for ~35 years. When we retired mid-50's our net after tax income was about the same as when we were working so we didn't save everything for later, nor did we under save and have to cut back spending in retirement.

You can never get back missed family experiences and other enjoyments and no-one is guaranteed a long life or a healthy one.
In my experience kids will try to maintain their parents lifestyle via taking on debt.
So financially successful parents are supposed to maintain a pauper lifestyle (akin to entry level out of college) for decades in order to prevent their kids from borrowing a mid-late career financial lifestyle from Day 1? Our young adult kids certainly didn't do that. We' didn't do that and neither did our parents or grandparents despite comfortable upbringings. If anything it was a huge advantage since parents were good with money and passed along tons of valuable advice. I know many people who had parents that were financial disasters regardless of income and all say it was a big additional hurdle to overcome.
70/30 AA for life, Global market cap equity. Rebalance if fixed income <25% or >35%. Weighted ER< .10%. 5% of annual portfolio balance SWR, Proportional (to AA) withdrawals.
User avatar
ram
Posts: 2281
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:47 pm
Location: Midwest

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by ram »

Yes.

Otherwise down the road you have to get advice from this thread.viewtopic.php?t=396112
Ram
User avatar
Doom&Gloom
Posts: 5417
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Doom&Gloom »

Accepted?!?!
It should be encouraged. Or even a goal.

Life is for living; not for simply breathing as long as possible.

As others have posted, save/invest what you need and spend the surplus. Figuring out what you need is the hard part. Do that, and then let 'er rip! Ideally, your income will increase as your working years go by; perhaps not year-by-year, but more likely in fits and starts.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

SmileyFace wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 4:02 pm
smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:42 pm
SmileyFace wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:29 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:25 pm
smitcat wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:23 pm

I guess you are replying for Klang.
OK - what do you do at FI then?
Become an artist and give your time to charity or buy air planes. Maybe collect cars. Crazy stuff that celebrities do. You don’t have to work.
Depends upon your definiton of FI. There are a lot of folks (some here, some elsewhere) that live like paupers to FIRE. I don't agree with it necessarily but FI doesn't necessarily translate to wealthy. Many that claim they are FI utilize ACA and other government subsidies.
I was just curious what the goal of money was for Klang and Rockstar - some say FI, some say freedom, some say other things.
But do they mean it?
Fo Klang (based on his posting history) I believe it was to weather downturns in his industry to survive long periods of being unemployeed and also to have the ability of to retire early if desired/forced. I beleive he has now achieved the latter goal at this point (still working but can retire if needed).
I personally have concerns about ageism and not being allowed to continue to work for as long as I want to so while I like my job and may enjoy working until 60 or 65 or even 70 I know in reality I am one layoff away (with a harder ability to find work I want to do as I age) from that happening.
I do not believe your data to be correct for Klang.
FWIW - If I was concerned about being 'allowed to continue to work' I would address that challenge/problem directly as opposed to attempting to save my way out ahead of time. That is actually what we have done in the past.
RoadThunder
Posts: 175
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 8:32 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by RoadThunder »

finance_learner wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:31 am Hi

I recently changed jobs with a nice bump in salary. I've been thinking about how my finances affects my life goals and I think that I should allow for a degree of increased spending. Hear me out:

1. What I mean by life style creep is a conscious and quantitatively limited allowance for increased spending above prior life standards
2. Goal of my personal finances is to stably provide items, time, and experiences that allow for maximal happiness over an entire lifetime (if you were to plot life years on the X axis and happiness over the Y, it would be the area on the curve that I would want to maximize)
3. The marginal effect of spending the next $1 on happiness diminishes with increasing levels of spending, therefore the best strategy to maximize the effect of spending on happiness is to have an even amount of spending throughout life
4. As income/wealth increases, the expected average lifetime spending should also increase.
5. For the past ~6 years I've lived as though I were still in college, way below my means to the degree that I lose certain degree of happiness, which, if I were still in college is acceptable. (e.g. 1-2 arguments in a year w/ the wife about finances, wearing jackets around the house b/c of low thermostat settings, saving money taking up head and emotional "space" many days)
6. But I'm beginning to have a sense that it's not rational, spending *should* increase with income/wealth. But only to some degree which equals average lifetime spending accounting for things like compounding in earlier years.
7. Practically, that means I should do some new projections of average lifetime spending, and use that as my new budget. This budget would include things I previously thought were not "frugal" but now are acceptable since my goal is maximizing lifetime happiness (e.g. buying time with house cleaning service, taking trips with family etc.)

Does this make sense? I'm sure someone has expressed this better than I have. Can you point me to a source? What kind of ways are cost-effective for "buying time"? I would love to see someone's post of ways to buy time at each income/wealth bracket.

Thanks!
Scratch the itch of what you want and be done with it- don’t “buy around it” if you think you can afford it do it. After repeating this many times over the years, I don’t get many new “itch’s” anymore.
User avatar
SmileyFace
Posts: 9184
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:11 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by SmileyFace »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:26 am FWIW - If I was concerned about being 'allowed to continue to work' I would address that challenge/problem directly as opposed to attempting to save my way out ahead of time. That is actually what we have done in the past.
I do both. I recognize not everything is always in my control.
EnjoyIt
Posts: 8272
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:06 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by EnjoyIt »

Triple digit golfer wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:32 pm I think of this like a business. There should be some efficiencies to be gained with higher income for a person/family (or revenue, for a business).

If you make $100k and spend $75k, then your salary doubles to $200k, your expenses shouldn't double to $150k because many of your fixed costs shouldn't change, or at least not proportionally with your pay increase.

For example, if your salary doubles, I doubt you'll want to double your home size. Your budget for vehicles shouldn't double either. Nor should your utilities, much of your insurance, your grocery bill, etc.

So, do the old "save half of every pay increase" (or 75% or whatever number makes you happy) routine. That is, if you make $100k and spend $75k, if you get a raise to $200k, spend $112.5k. This way, you're saving a big chunk of your increase but still enjoying additional spending and increasing your lifestyle.

Is this lifestyle creep? I guess it depends on your definition. If your savings increases in both dollars and as a percentage of your pay, I don't consider that lifestyle creep. Just make sure that you can go back if you need to.

What I like to do is consider what would my expenses need to be if I made a salary that I know I could easily go find. For me, it's about 25% less than I make now. So, we live off that number, knowing that if I had to reduce my income to that number, we'd still do well and save money.
I posted similar earlier in this thread but in your example what I would do is increase spending to $85k for 1-2 years, then $95k for a few years, then $105k for a few years and then finally get to $112.5k/yr. This way you enjoy incremental lifestyle creep which I think will bring happiness far more than once big splurge that you get accustomed to within a year or two.
A time to EVALUATE your jitters: | viewtopic.php?p=1139732#p1139732
EnjoyIt
Posts: 8272
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:06 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by EnjoyIt »

tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
A time to EVALUATE your jitters: | viewtopic.php?p=1139732#p1139732
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

SmileyFace wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:07 am
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 7:26 am FWIW - If I was concerned about being 'allowed to continue to work' I would address that challenge/problem directly as opposed to attempting to save my way out ahead of time. That is actually what we have done in the past.
I do both. I recognize not everything is always in my control.
FWIW - before we retired, we were each out of work twice in fields that did not really recover. We were mostly prepared but you are never fully prepared for that. In the long run it worked out better for us that we did get shoved out of work more than once.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am
tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 4412
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm
Location: Southern Appalachia

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by firebirdparts »

Maximum life cycle happiness is a reasonable target, but it's pretty hard to write effective specifications for it. You could make specifications clear but you have no way of knowing if they're right.

As you get older, you become more accurate in your happiness measurements (if you're self aware) but there are always areas where you're too late.
This time is the same
Broken Man 1999
Posts: 8626
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:31 am
Location: West coast of Florida, near Champa Bay !

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Broken Man 1999 »

rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:43 pm
MnD wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:14 am We accepted it gladly.
Our savings averaged around 20% plus employer match (and I have a pension), taxes were paid and we spent the difference despite our income varying a lot and generally going up for ~35 years. When we retired mid-50's our net after tax income was about the same as when we were working so we didn't save everything for later, nor did we under save and have to cut back spending in retirement.

You can never get back missed family experiences and other enjoyments and no-one is guaranteed a long life or a healthy one.
In my experience kids will try to maintain their parents lifestyle via taking on debt.
Not necessarily. Those with education and initiative could easily exceed the lifestyle of their parents with higher relative lifestyles with no more reliance on debt than their parents. Given the opportunities available today I don't think it unlikely at all for our grandchildren to do just that, much like our children have done.

Broken Man 1999
“If I cannot drink Bourbon and smoke cigars in Heaven then I shall not go." - Mark Twain
tibbitts
Posts: 23718
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by tibbitts »

EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am
tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
Not necessarily, lots of people have declining income as careers go on. Athletes would be an example, but also some tech workers.
tibbitts
Posts: 23718
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by tibbitts »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:56 am
EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am
tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
User avatar
quantAndHold
Posts: 10141
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:39 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by quantAndHold »

rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:43 pm
MnD wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:14 am We accepted it gladly.
Our savings averaged around 20% plus employer match (and I have a pension), taxes were paid and we spent the difference despite our income varying a lot and generally going up for ~35 years. When we retired mid-50's our net after tax income was about the same as when we were working so we didn't save everything for later, nor did we under save and have to cut back spending in retirement.

You can never get back missed family experiences and other enjoyments and no-one is guaranteed a long life or a healthy one.
In my experience kids will try to maintain their parents lifestyle via taking on debt.
Not in my experience. If anything, the kids are more sensible with their money than we were at that age. None of them are living like broke college students, but they all have good jobs, and 2 of the 3 make more money than their parents did. All of them have savings, invested sensibly, and minimal debt.
stoptothink
Posts: 15368
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by stoptothink »

quantAndHold wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:25 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:43 pm
MnD wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:14 am We accepted it gladly.
Our savings averaged around 20% plus employer match (and I have a pension), taxes were paid and we spent the difference despite our income varying a lot and generally going up for ~35 years. When we retired mid-50's our net after tax income was about the same as when we were working so we didn't save everything for later, nor did we under save and have to cut back spending in retirement.

You can never get back missed family experiences and other enjoyments and no-one is guaranteed a long life or a healthy one.
In my experience kids will try to maintain their parents lifestyle via taking on debt.
Not in my experience. If anything, the kids are more sensible with their money than we were at that age. None of them are living like broke college students, but they all have good jobs, and 2 of the 3 make more money than their parents did. All of them have savings, invested sensibly, and minimal debt.
Everybody is going to be different. In my family, 5 of my 6 siblings spend every last penny before it hits their account, with the usual excuse being that we had nothing growing up. We all make more than my mom did raising all of us (although she never made a decent income until her 50's, she is quite financially responsible), but only two of us are not a complete financial mess. All my wife's siblings seem to be following the model of her parents: spend every last penny that someone is willing to loan you. My wife tells me she was the same as a young adult, but life taught her some harsh financial lessons before we ever met.

We try really hard to model financial responsibility to our kids, but we have to accept that they are individuals who will ultimately do whatever they want.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:28 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:56 am
EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am
tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

quantAndHold wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:25 pm
rockstar wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:43 pm
MnD wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 10:14 am We accepted it gladly.
Our savings averaged around 20% plus employer match (and I have a pension), taxes were paid and we spent the difference despite our income varying a lot and generally going up for ~35 years. When we retired mid-50's our net after tax income was about the same as when we were working so we didn't save everything for later, nor did we under save and have to cut back spending in retirement.

You can never get back missed family experiences and other enjoyments and no-one is guaranteed a long life or a healthy one.
In my experience kids will try to maintain their parents lifestyle via taking on debt.
Not in my experience. If anything, the kids are more sensible with their money than we were at that age. None of them are living like broke college students, but they all have good jobs, and 2 of the 3 make more money than their parents did. All of them have savings, invested sensibly, and minimal debt.
Similar with us - our daughter has quite a bit saved up before 30 and still works more than one job. And she knows additional funds are coming her way from us. Willing to spend but willing to work to get it.
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4880
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

I’m in the camp of generally erring on discretionary spending splurges, not increasing fixed costs (houses/assoc. taxes and maintainance costs, luxury cars & assoc. maintainance costs that I hate).

By far travel was our biggest cost last year, luckily aligned with a good income year. It doesn’t mean the $60k+ I spent last year is now a baseline though. Thankfully dw and I are on the same page.

We will travel and spend this year, but a more reasonable amount. Hopefully closer to half what we spent last year (special trips & a few of them last year!). So lifestyle creep can be lumpy and decline too. My pops used to say he’d be happy with a bike if he had to sell his car - loved that quote. In most/all other countries, they do not purchase as much ‘stuff’ that we do in the US. I’m sure of this, but don’t have datapoints handy for proof.

I’m now really content with most physical items at this point. There is nothing physical I want to buy on my wishlist. In fact my wish list is now: I want to retire before having to deal with another layoff at work. More incentive for me to save up 2 years cash 💰
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
tibbitts
Posts: 23718
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by tibbitts »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:28 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:56 am
EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am
tibbitts wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:34 pm I guess lifestyle creep should be accepted, but what's the opposite of "creep"? As an example, through say your 20s and 30s, you earn more in real terms most years, and enjoy some lifestyle creep. But after that, you earn less in real terms every year (from all sources, even including investments.) It seems to make sense to accommodate creep in those earlier years, but then what's the term for what you should do in the later years?
You must be talking about doctors.
I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:28 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:56 am
EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:42 am

You must be talking about doctors.
I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
tibbitts
Posts: 23718
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by tibbitts »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:28 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 11:56 am

I am not sure what tibbitts is talking about and we were not Dr's, but it does not apply to us.
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
secondopinion
Posts: 6011
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:18 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by secondopinion »

You must look at living below your desired lifestyle as an investment in hopefully an improved lifestyle in the future. Lifestyle creeping is merely the reallocation of the spending versus saving allocation. So, some amount of creep is desirable if the end goal is a more expensive lifestyle (since there is a risk of not enjoying it).

For some like me, the standard of living is almost at the intended level already; any raises I get that exceed inflation will end up being saved for the most part.

Neither is wrong, but there are life trade-offs for the decisions.
Passive investing: not about making big bucks but making profits. Active investing: not about beating the market but meeting goals. Speculation: not about timing the market but taking profitable risks.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:44 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 12:28 pm
I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s. It seems reasonable to accommodate some creep while income is increasing, but less reasonable to accommodate it when income is decreasing. So regarding the original question, lifestyle creep alongside other types of upward creep (income, saving, etc.) seems reasonable.
"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
Interesting - we just don't know anyone whose income and investing earnings were flat (did not rise) after 30's.
Manufacturing, marketing, LEO's, Firefighter, small businesses, nursing, engineering, data/mailing, etc
tibbitts
Posts: 23718
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by tibbitts »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:48 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:44 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm

"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
Interesting - we just don't know anyone whose income and investing earnings were flat (did not rise) after 30's.
Manufacturing, marketing, LEO's, Firefighter, small businesses, nursing, engineering, data/mailing, etc
It could be that people who have increasing income are more likely to discuss that, or otherwise make it obvious, than those who don't. Or it could be that due to lifestyle etc. you would be less likely to encounter people who don't have rising incomes.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:55 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:48 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:44 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
Interesting - we just don't know anyone whose income and investing earnings were flat (did not rise) after 30's.
Manufacturing, marketing, LEO's, Firefighter, small businesses, nursing, engineering, data/mailing, etc
It could be that people who have increasing income are more likely to discuss that, or otherwise make it obvious, than those who don't. Or it could be that due to lifestyle etc. you would be less likely to encounter people who don't have rising incomes.
Some folks we ended up with due to our interests and hobbies - but in that time frame most folks we met were just friends of our daughters in school.
In our case that was public school all the way to college.
srt7
Posts: 1357
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2014 12:19 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by srt7 »

Of course!! It should be accepted but like everything else ... in moderation. I'm a firm believer of splitting all raises with my future self (spending 50% and saving the rest). It motivates me to keep going.

Over the years I've noticed a change though. Once I have the funds to scratch an itch that itch goes away. Maybe it was the challenge to see if I can scratch that itch all along? :D
Taking care of tomorrow while enjoying today.
Dottie57
Posts: 12379
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Earth Northern Hemisphere

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Dottie57 »

invest4 wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:57 am I would not overcomplicate this.

* Decide on your desired savings rate to achieve your goals.

* The rest is to spend as you wish.

My family has undoubtedly experienced lifestyle inflation during my working career…it has given us joy. Of course, there can be tradeoffs, such as working longer.

I am ok with that and am enjoying life along the way.

Best wishes.
This. I fully automated my retirement savings. So no decisions on whether to save or not.
EnjoyIt
Posts: 8272
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:06 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by EnjoyIt »

smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:48 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:44 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 1:46 pm

"I'm not sure why it's difficult to imagine income peaking in, say, your 30s."
We are retired now but, in our case, and with most all of our friend's income did not peak in our 30's.
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
Interesting - we just don't know anyone whose income and investing earnings were flat (did not rise) after 30's.
Manufacturing, marketing, LEO's, Firefighter, small businesses, nursing, engineering, data/mailing, etc
I reached peak income in my 30s as well. Prior to semi-retiring I made less than my peak. Just about everyone in my area in my industry went down during the same time frame.
A time to EVALUATE your jitters: | viewtopic.php?p=1139732#p1139732
User avatar
canadianbacon
Posts: 677
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2019 9:04 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by canadianbacon »

Bogleheads philosophy is to live below your means, but I don’t think most of us take that to mean you should have to wear jackets around the house.
Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered.
User avatar
rocket354
Posts: 679
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 11:31 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by rocket354 »

finance_learner wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 12:31 am Hi

I recently changed jobs with a nice bump in salary. I've been thinking about how my finances affects my life goals and I think that I should allow for a degree of increased spending. Hear me out:

1. What I mean by life style creep is a conscious and quantitatively limited allowance for increased spending above prior life standards
2. Goal of my personal finances is to stably provide items, time, and experiences that allow for maximal happiness over an entire lifetime (if you were to plot life years on the X axis and happiness over the Y, it would be the area on the curve that I would want to maximize)
3. The marginal effect of spending the next $1 on happiness diminishes with increasing levels of spending, therefore the best strategy to maximize the effect of spending on happiness is to have an even amount of spending throughout life
4. As income/wealth increases, the expected average lifetime spending should also increase.
5. For the past ~6 years I've lived as though I were still in college, way below my means to the degree that I lose certain degree of happiness, which, if I were still in college is acceptable. (e.g. 1-2 arguments in a year w/ the wife about finances, wearing jackets around the house b/c of low thermostat settings, saving money taking up head and emotional "space" many days)
6. But I'm beginning to have a sense that it's not rational, spending *should* increase with income/wealth. But only to some degree which equals average lifetime spending accounting for things like compounding in earlier years.
7. Practically, that means I should do some new projections of average lifetime spending, and use that as my new budget. This budget would include things I previously thought were not "frugal" but now are acceptable since my goal is maximizing lifetime happiness (e.g. buying time with house cleaning service, taking trips with family etc.)

Does this make sense? I'm sure someone has expressed this better than I have. Can you point me to a source? What kind of ways are cost-effective for "buying time"? I would love to see someone's post of ways to buy time at each income/wealth bracket.

Thanks!
You should definitely allow yourself lifestyle creep, to a point. If it makes your life more enjoyable and if you can afford it, then go for it.

I recently became FI based on my annual spending. I'm still working, but decided that I will allow myself to spend up to the amount that my portfolio could support (so essentially 4%) and save the rest. That way I never "lose" my FI status at any point due to lifestyle creep.

One thing I'm doing to buy time is to sell off my rental portfolio. I sold two last year, and while it might on paper make sense to hold onto my last property, it is a time and energy sink so I'm going to let it go once the current lease runs out.

I think the best way to buy time is to simplify.
CletusCaddy
Posts: 2678
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:23 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by CletusCaddy »

EnjoyIt wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 8:07 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 3:48 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:44 pm
smitcat wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:17 pm
tibbitts wrote: Tue Jan 31, 2023 2:15 pm
My income peaked in my 30s, so now you know of one of the many cases of that happening.
Curious - what profession?
My career was in IT. I never earned anywhere near the big incomes you hear about but for example my peak annual income in my late 30s was considerably higher (even in nominal terms) than any annual income in my 40s or later. Technically I guess I should say my taxable income was as high later on, but that was entirely due to Roth conversions after retirement, and obviously we're talking about income in the usual business/employment sense here. My change in income was definitely not intentional; it was just a result of supply/demand for the services I provided.
Interesting - we just don't know anyone whose income and investing earnings were flat (did not rise) after 30's.
Manufacturing, marketing, LEO's, Firefighter, small businesses, nursing, engineering, data/mailing, etc
I reached peak income in my 30s as well. Prior to semi-retiring I made less than my peak. Just about everyone in my area in my industry went down during the same time frame.
My Medicare earnings hit $426k in 2021 at age 35. It dropped back down to $246k in 2022 and I don’t think it will ever reach $400k adjusted for inflation again.
JackoC
Posts: 4714
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:14 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by JackoC »

Triple digit golfer wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:32 pm I think of this like a business. There should be some efficiencies to be gained with higher income for a person/family (or revenue, for a business).

If you make $100k and spend $75k, then your salary doubles to $200k, your expenses shouldn't double to $150k because many of your fixed costs shouldn't change, or at least not proportionally with your pay increase.

For example, if your salary doubles, I doubt you'll want to double your home size. Your budget for vehicles shouldn't double either. Nor should your utilities, much of your insurance, your grocery bill, etc.

So, do the old "save half of every pay increase" (or 75% or whatever number makes you happy) routine. That is, if you make $100k and spend $75k, if you get a raise to $200k, spend $112.5k. This way, you're saving a big chunk of your increase but still enjoying additional spending and increasing your lifestyle.

Is this lifestyle creep? I guess it depends on your definition. If your savings increases in both dollars and as a percentage of your pay, I don't consider that lifestyle creep. Just make sure that you can go back if you need to.
Yeah, 'lifestye creep' is a meaningful concept to me only if it forces saving % below what you think it 'should' be. In the simple of case of person whose after tax* income rises steadily a little faster than inflation (the overall average $ outcome though not though not always so, and maybe not even usually for any given person) they are suffering 'lifestyle creep' if they revise their saving % down due to increased consumption. It is more complicated in cases where income increases a lot or increases then decreases. Also some people might anticipate saving a higher % from an expected income increase, the income increase pans out, but the savings % increase doesn't, again that fits 'lifestyle creep' IMO. But, while I'm not sensitive about what term other people would apply to our income/spending history, I would not say our 30 yr+ record of increasing spending (on 'normal recurring items') around 4.2% pa in 2.5% pa CPI increase environment was 'lifestyle creep', not even including 'special items' (cars, home remodeling etc.) that increased by more. Income increase early in the period resulted in a huge increase in % savings of after tax income vs the beginning of the period, which led to no need to work in the later part.

*saving as % of gross income only makes sense in some limited cases, but definitely not in case of big increases in income in some portion of working life. The higher % tax you pay was just not your money to save in the first place ('please can I have it back?, I promise to save it': no). trad 401k/IRA's in the US distort people's view of this perhaps. On a 'most people' basis in the US it might make some sense to talk about % of pre tax income saved but more generally it doesn't IMO.
smitcat
Posts: 13302
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:51 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by smitcat »

JackoC wrote: Wed Feb 01, 2023 9:17 am
Triple digit golfer wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 3:32 pm I think of this like a business. There should be some efficiencies to be gained with higher income for a person/family (or revenue, for a business).

If you make $100k and spend $75k, then your salary doubles to $200k, your expenses shouldn't double to $150k because many of your fixed costs shouldn't change, or at least not proportionally with your pay increase.

For example, if your salary doubles, I doubt you'll want to double your home size. Your budget for vehicles shouldn't double either. Nor should your utilities, much of your insurance, your grocery bill, etc.

So, do the old "save half of every pay increase" (or 75% or whatever number makes you happy) routine. That is, if you make $100k and spend $75k, if you get a raise to $200k, spend $112.5k. This way, you're saving a big chunk of your increase but still enjoying additional spending and increasing your lifestyle.

Is this lifestyle creep? I guess it depends on your definition. If your savings increases in both dollars and as a percentage of your pay, I don't consider that lifestyle creep. Just make sure that you can go back if you need to.
Yeah, 'lifestye creep' is a meaningful concept to me only if it forces saving % below what you think it 'should' be. In the simple of case of person whose after tax* income rises steadily a little faster than inflation (the overall average $ outcome though not though not always so, and maybe not even usually for any given person) they are suffering 'lifestyle creep' if they revise their saving % down due to increased consumption. It is more complicated in cases where income increases a lot or increases then decreases. Also some people might anticipate saving a higher % from an expected income increase, the income increase pans out, but the savings % increase doesn't, again that fits 'lifestyle creep' IMO. But, while I'm not sensitive about what term other people would apply to our income/spending history, I would not say our 30 yr+ record of increasing spending (on 'normal recurring items') around 4.2% pa in 2.5% pa CPI increase environment was 'lifestyle creep', not even including 'special items' (cars, home remodeling etc.) that increased by more. Income increase early in the period resulted in a huge increase in % savings of after tax income vs the beginning of the period, which led to no need to work in the later part.

*saving as % of gross income only makes sense in some limited cases, but definitely not in case of big increases in income in some portion of working life. The higher % tax you pay was just not your money to save in the first place ('please can I have it back?, I promise to save it': no). trad 401k/IRA's in the US distort people's view of this perhaps. On a 'most people' basis in the US it might make some sense to talk about % of pre tax income saved but more generally it doesn't IMO.
*saving as % of gross income only makes sense in some limited cases"
Exactly - and why these types of conversations about those %'s most often leave no value.
aj44
Posts: 309
Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 11:22 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by aj44 »

It’s a choice, personally I live within the same budget (inflation adjusted) that I did 20 years ago. Categories have changed, when I paid off the mortgage that moved to entertainment and now childcare spending. I’ve piled the rest into investing for early retirement.
HeavyChevy
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2021 7:07 am
Location: Below the Mac bridge (Troll)

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by HeavyChevy »

Tamalak wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 4:11 pm I'm in favor of lifestyle expansion because you are making a conscious choice to spend more money on things that you judge are worth that money.

I'm not in favor of lifestyle creep because it implies an undisciplined and passive trend towards spending more money without necessarily getting a better life in return.
This comment resonates w me. As a 2+ year retiree we eat out regularly, we move freely between our two residences, and we travel as we wish - because for our last few years of employment we saved 80K/yr additional after maxing out my 401K the last 20 yrs of work. We saved our entire working lives, put two kids through in-state Univ Michigan (retail - minor merit scholarships) and are reaping the benefits now. I prefer to fly comfort+, but even if I chose first class, it wouldn’t hurt me enough to matter. Retirement to us is living where we want, when we want, with no meaningful restrictions within our own desires and expectations.
"It's not the best move, but it is a move." - GMHikaru
Ependytis
Posts: 617
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:10 am

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Ependytis »

I find it interesting you equate happiness to spending more. I don’t know about others, but I think my happiest times was when I was in college and had absolutely no money. Could the difference be that I was young and carefree? I don’t know, but something to think about. I’ll give you a specific example. Right before graduating from high school and going to college, I went on a foreign exchange program. The exchange program was one of the best experiences of my life, other than the birth of my son. I would be curious if others would agree. This experience made me want to retire early, so that I could do what I wanted when I wanted with my time. This freedom doesn’t necessarily mean I would have unlimited funds, but enough to be able to travel and enjoy new experiences.

For most of us, free time equates to 2 to 6 weeks of vacation. To me, that's where there's real creep is, not income. The more we advance in our positions, the less time we have two enjoy free time. I have teacher friends that work 190 days per year. That frees up 40 to 60 days a year compared to the average person. By the way, they faced almost no risk of layoffs like most of us do. In my area, grade school teachers make about $100K and work less than 8 hours per day. Because of this, I never hear them talk about not being able to afford the things they want like vacations or not having enough time to enjoy life. YMMV
Last edited by Ependytis on Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:47 am, edited 3 times in total.
H-Town
Posts: 5905
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 1:08 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by H-Town »

Tamalak wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 4:11 pm I'm in favor of lifestyle expansion because you are making a conscious choice to spend more money on things that you judge are worth that money.

I'm not in favor of lifestyle creep because it implies an undisciplined and passive trend towards spending more money without necessarily getting a better life in return.
It's all about your choices. Your life is made up of the cumulative choices that you've made in the past, the present, and the future. Some choice has bigger consequences than others.

1) House: when you choose to buy a bigger house than you need (or can afford), your fixed cost will get stuck at that high level unless you choose to sell. Many items in your budget will increase with the price and the size of the house (house maintenance, utilities, services, taxes, interest, etc.)
2) Car: when you choose to buy that new luxury car, it would feel like a punishment if you don't buy a new luxury car again within the next 3 or 5 years. Car industry is masterful at making you come back for more.
3) Health: if your lifestyle leads to chronic illness, you can't do well at your job and you will pay more for your doctor and hospital stays.
4) Education: putting kids in private schools is a choice. It's not just 20k-30k tuition a year for grade school, it's also expensive keeping up with the Jonese because friends of your kids are very likely from affluent families.

So if you make the right decisions on house, car, health, and education, you don't have to worry about lifestyle creep. You may treat yourself to nice meals at the restaurant, spontaneous vacation, new gadgets, paying for services for the house, etc. Those are not fixed cost, and you can cut them in a heartbeat.

At the end of the day, time is the ultimate currency. Money comes and goes, but you can't take back the time that has gone by.
Time is the ultimate currency.
User avatar
ResearchMed
Posts: 16795
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:25 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by ResearchMed »

sailaway wrote: Mon Jan 30, 2023 9:46 am Lifestyle creep is the opposite of well considered choices to increase spending.

Creep happens when you skip the well considered step. When you think "well, I got a raise, now I deserve X" vs "my situation has changed, how does that affect my goals and priorities?"

This ^

"Creep" suggests something not under one's conscious control.

Here is a definition, first thing that popped up on Google:

Definition of "creep": "move slowly and carefully in order to avoid being heard or noticed."

And that's exactly a big part of the potential problem... that the increased spending or "nicer" lifestyle isn't really even noticed!
It may not be noticed in the sense of, "Maybe we should consider getting a new house", without a reason, vs. "This house is so nice; we've been here x years and we still feel so happy/fortunate to be able to live here".
[Note: We are heading into year 21, and still sometimes sit in the driveway, mumbling, "I can't believe we are living in a house like THIS! This really is the cutest house ever!" And we sure do feel fortunate, still!]

Or, worse, the increased spending isn't noticed, except perhaps for "why are we still so short of money!?"

So I wouldn't consider choosing "nicer living circumstances to be "lifestyle creep" IF it's considered and within budget - a budget that includes saving, etc.

Whether something is "too much" is difficult for others to judge. It's the thoughtful decision making that should be involved if one is upping one's "circumstances".
Some may want to spend more on a big house. Others on a fancy car. Yet others on lots of travel... etc.
And some may be fortunate enough to be pretty much content. Presumably, any lifestyle changes (creep or not) have already happened. Most probably aren't still living like a poor student, in a creaky walk-up room with a bathroom down the hall.
And NOTE: For some people, such accommodations would be considered LUXURIOUS.
A lot of this is extremely relative, and it's very easy to lose sight of the real alternatives.

As has been written here before:
At some point, "you can have [almost] anything you want. You can't have everything you want."

RM
This signature is a placebo. You are in the control group.
HeavyChevy
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2021 7:07 am
Location: Below the Mac bridge (Troll)

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by HeavyChevy »

Ependytis wrote: Thu Feb 02, 2023 11:07 am I find it interesting you equate happiness to spending more. I don’t know about others, but I think my happiest times was when I was college and had absolutely no money. Could the difference be that I was young and carefree? I don’t know, but something to think about. I’ll give you a specific example. Right before graduating from high school and going to college, I went on a foreign exchange program. The exchange program was one of the best experiences of my life, other than the birth of my son. I would be curious if others would agree. This experience made me want to retire early, so that I could do what I wanted when I wanted with my time. This freedom doesn’t necessarily mean I would have unlimited funds, but enough to be able to travel and enjoy new experiences.
True fact: I never felt richer than when working on my PhD with $900 monthly stipend and my wife working a low pay admin job. At the end of every month our bank acct grew.
"It's not the best move, but it is a move." - GMHikaru
Silverado
Posts: 1650
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:07 pm

Re: Shouldn't lifestyle creep be accepted?

Post by Silverado »

I’ve been a little thinking about this since it first popped up. For me, I have “creeped” in the opposite direction compared to a lot of comments. Sort of lifestyle contraction instead of expansion. If I simply use the monthly taxable account as a quick measure, I can make a rough judgement. Monthly investment increase has a CAGR of 16% over the last 27 years. Salary increase has a CAGR of 7% over the same period. (All tax deferred retirement accounts maxed as well, but the taxable account is what I use to really “judge” the health of our situation)

Not a perfect measure (or even worthwhile…) but makes me somewhat satisfied. If we would stop the corporate relos into higher COL areas at somewhat poor timing (early 2008, mid 2021 come to mind) we would really have interesting numbers. Vacations have stayed somewhat constant, vehicles are still every 10 years or so, hobbies have gone cheaper (triathlons to running only as an example), and so on.
Post Reply