Financial style

[zengirl]

Olive Oyl made a very good point in a long thread, not long ago, but it was at the end of the thread, so nobody bothered with it:

 

 

I think it's important to think about what you will do with the information once you find out -- if anything.

 

I have always been a saver and have had a policy of staying away from debt (sometimes I will put things on a credit card, but am able to pay off right away or very quickly). The idea of working, yet living paycheck-to-paycheck is somewhat foreign to me.

 

Well, after several months of dating my BF I discovered that despite having a pretty reasonable income, he's been living paycheck-to-paycheck for some time (paying off debts, child support, etc.). Now I know a number of people would consider breaking things off for such fiscal "irresponsibility." But I thought about it and realized I love him and want to be with him regardless. I don't need someone to take care of me financially. We are able to go out and do fun things. He pays often when we go out, however I pitch in often too. As far as I know he's not "reckless" with money; it's just things got a bit out of hand, and he's paying for some past mistakes (i.e., debt).

 

If we consider getting married and merging accounts, then I will be more concerned about it. Also, although I'm not "banking" on it, I'm hoping my general frugal and financial philosophy will start rubbing on him too. I can't guarantee that this will never be an issue, but money and material things are not as high priority for me as they are for others.

 

With several financial threads, on the board, I would like to ask three questions:

 

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

2. Was it always aligned? Did this change over time? Experiences, etc?

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

 

I'll add my own experiences eventually, but truly want to see where people fall on such things and think Olive Oyl's very good post is much better than any personal experiences I could share.

 

ETA: I'm not sure if this is possible on LS, but please do NOT make this into a gender issue and attempt to discuss in a gender-neutral way, if possible. Nothing like, "Women expect this" or "Men should do this." I'd really like to hear individual views on financial style and how they have impacted or could impact relationships.

Edited April 24, 2012 by zengirl

[threebyfate]

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

Yes, H. lives way below his means like myself. It's been part of my dealbreakers for a long, long time.

 

2. Was it always aligned?

 

Yes.

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

 

Refer to my response for question #1.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

 

Many marriages end in divorce due to differing financial styles, particularly in times of financial stress. People need to take this component very, very seriously.

[january2011]

Nice catch and great idea for a thread, zengirl!

 

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

- I think it is. When we've spent time together, I don't remember any arguments about money. We've both exhibited both whimsical and frugal financial decision-making behaviour in the current as well as in past relationships. Of course, he's LD and other than plane tickets, we've not really had to make a decision about any other major purchases. So that's not been tested. While we've talked about money and have worked out that our long-term goals pretty much align in terms of what we want to save for and what we want to spend it on, again, it's not really been tested. We haven't shared exact numbers regarding our finances but we do talk about things like debt, credit cards and spending. We also have a general idea about our incoming and outgoing numbers as well as a basic breakdown for each of these.

 

2. Was it always aligned? Did this change over time? Experiences, etc?

- I don't think I've spent enough time with him to answer this question.

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

- After coming out of a very long-term relationship, I've realised that this is actually more important than I thought. I read on metafilter a post that stated, "one of the most important financial decisions you'll ever make is who you choose to marry, " or something along those lines. Over the past few years, I've realised that this is very wise statement.

 

On an additional note, other than when we first moved in together, my ex was very secretive about his finances. I don't want to be in that kind of relationship again.

Edited April 24, 2012 by january2011

[FitChick]

The men I've dated have always made lots more money than I have and were more financially savvy so I deferred to them. When I'm single, I am frugal so I can splurge when I want to later. Sometimes debt is unavoidable, like unexpected car repairs, medical expenses.

 

As for people who live paycheck to paycheck, in this lousy economy, that might be considered good financial management if you have no debt since most people are drowning in debt. Tough times.

[threebyfate]

The men I've dated have always made lots more money than I have and were more financially savvy so I deferred to them. When I'm single, I am frugal so I can splurge when I want to later. Sometimes debt is unavoidable, like unexpected car repairs, medical expenses.

 

As for people who live paycheck to paycheck, in this lousy economy, that might be considered good financial management if you have no debt since most people are drowning in debt. Tough times.

Debt is always avoidable if you save enough, not only for retirement but for emergencies.

[soserious1]

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

No & a partner's fiscal style won't matter to me should we marry, we will have a prenup that separates our finances, both sides will agree that there will be no alimony should the marriage end.. or there will be no wedding.

 

2. Was it always aligned?

 

N/A don't currently have a husband

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

 

It's not important in the slightest, all that would matter is if they can pay for their 50% of mutually agreed upon shared expenses, what he does with his money & assets aside from this is not my business.

[zengirl]

Debt is always avoidable if you save enough, not only for retirement but for emergencies.

 

It really depends when these things hit you (no pun intended). I know people who were hit with emergencies before they had time to save money and have to pay that debt --- for instance one of the guys on the Board of Directors (for my job) was in a motorcycle accident that was not his fault when he was 20. He had medical bills of about 50,000 that were not covered by insurance (he had some insurance, but really crappy insurance). He's also had recurring costs from the accident. He couldn't sue the driver who hit him because that guy filed bankruptcy. He could've filed for B himself, but he chose to be responsible and pay it back. I really respect that, personally. He's in his 40s now, and that debt is almost paid back.

 

Hubby has debt from college, but he tried to save for college for 5 years before finally giving up and just taking out loans and going. He would've been better off taking out the loans when he was younger (his debt would be paid off by now). He went to a short but very expensive and specific program, and he makes a REALLY good living and has since graduating. His loans were about 60K though. Pretty high. They're about halfway paid now, and he'll pay them off in 8 years instead of 10. At any rate, his debt was a good investment. Before college, he was lucky to break 30K a year and had spotty medical coverage (which was why he couldn't save money --- all his savings would go to those emergencies, since he has a pricey medical issue). Right now, he makes almost 3x that.

 

I grew up in a house where debt was basically the worst thing you could possibly do, and it colors my financial style a lot (I have NO debt and have hardly ever carried debt, even when I was young, but I was also relatively lucky) but I think you can get too carried away in saying ALL debt is bad or avoidable. Sorry if that's tangential, but just a thought. It's certainly relevant to how Hubby and I relate, financially.

[ThaWholigan]

As I am becoming more financially intelligent these days, it would be important to find a partner who doesn't spend outside their means so I'd imagine that would become important. Me myself, I find it difficult to save currently because I live with my mother and she isn't as good with money as she could be, so I give her what I have and that is it. Hopefully as I'm starting a business I will increase my income, so that I can cover myself and my necessities as well as my progression.

 

I think that it is important that I am dating someone who is as frugal as I would be under normal circumstances.

[threebyfate]

It really depends when these things hit you (no pun intended). I know people who were hit with emergencies before they had time to save money and have to pay that debt --- for instance one of the guys on the Board of Directors (for my job) was in a motorcycle accident that was not his fault when he was 20. He had medical bills of about 50,000 that were not covered by insurance (he had some insurance, but really crappy insurance). He's also had recurring costs from the accident. He couldn't sue the driver who hit him because that guy filed bankruptcy. He could've filed for B himself, but he chose to be responsible and pay it back. I really respect that, personally. He's in his 40s now, and that debt is almost paid back.

Why was he riding a motorcycle? No motorcycle, no accident. It's one thing to take incremental risks and another to take extreme risks.

 

Hubby has debt from college, but he tried to save for college for 5 years before finally giving up and just taking out loans and going. He would've been better off taking out the loans when he was younger (his debt would be paid off by now). He went to a short but very expensive and specific program, and he makes a REALLY good living and has since graduating. His loans were about 60K though. Pretty high. They're about halfway paid now, and he'll pay them off in 8 years instead of 10. At any rate, his debt was a good investment. Before college, he was lucky to break 30K a year and had spotty medical coverage (which was why he couldn't save money --- all his savings would go to those emergencies, since he has a pricey medical issue). Right now, he makes almost 3x that.

Educational debt is a real crap shoot these days, considering the cost of education with no guarantee of a job post-grad. Your husband was lucky but from the looks of it, also smart in his selection of career direction. So in this, point acknowledged.

 

I grew up in a house where debt was basically the worst thing you could possibly do, and it colors my financial style a lot (I have NO debt and have hardly ever carried debt, even when I was young, but I was also relatively lucky) but I think you can get too carried away in saying ALL debt is bad or avoidable. Sorry if that's tangential, but just a thought. It's certainly relevant to how Hubby and I relate, financially.

I too grew up in a household where debt was/is considered worse than Satan.

[zengirl]

To answer my own question:

 

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

Only somewhat. Hubby makes far more than me, spends far more than me, and has debt. He does see value in paying down his debt somewhat quickly, but not extremely quickly, especially when interest rates are low. Hubby has an extremely secure job (in a field where there are few employees and there is always a need) so that perhaps colors his POV. I am a squirrel. I have always found ways to make extra money (translating, tutoring, etc) on the side and eliminate debt. I have a lot of savings in various forms, no debt, and live FAR below my means to the point where I feel guilty buying organic produce for 20 cents more and still clip coupons. Hubby finds this absurd but cute.

 

2. Was it always aligned?

 

It used to be less aligned. We have come to a lot of financial agreements, in getting married, such as he is working to eliminate his debt faster (I offered to just pay it off, but we both realized I make higher interest on the funds I'd use than he pays, so that's silly) and so forth, but I am also working to be okay with living like people who earn a decent income, as we both do.

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

 

I used to think this was VERY important, but I actually question whether it is now. I think what's always been most important to me is the potential to be independent, financially, coupled with the desire to be interdependent, as a family.

[xxoo]

We were raised with very different financial situations and examples, and got together young. No, we were not financially aligned when we started dating. He was irresponsible with money (imho). I was damned stingy . I even fussed when he spent money on me (my mother pulled me aside at one point and told me to stop doing that!).

 

Money was one of the growing points of our dating relationship. By the time we married, we had a mutually agreed financial plan. Money has not been a point of conflict in our marriage. FTR, he moved much farther to my side, mostly because of growing to know and respect my dad. And I grew a bit less stingy

[thatone]

it's not necessarily wise to avoid debt!

 

a couple years back i re-financed a car that was paid off (worth about ~35k at the time). why? otherwise i would have been cashing out short term investments to pay the IRS that year, i wound up owing them more than i thought i would due to some income irregularity that year. why would i pay my own money that's earning 12-15% when i can borrow at 3.75%? the total cost of that car loan is around 37.5k. over the same 3.5 years my 35k in cash that i kept winds up being 52k assuming that 12% return (and that's not a hard assumption to make at the bottom of the worst stock market crash in ~80 years). that's a no-brainer.

 

one of the first and wisest thing my dad taught me was never ever put your own money into your own business dealings unless you absolutely have to. if there's a loan, take it. interest is a risk pricetag. there's a pricetag on risk because risk always exists.

 

people who preach the evils of debt are in effect breaking a golden rule of investments that they're surely familiar with: "don't put all your eggs in one basket". people with too many assets and not enough debt are in effect putting all of their eggs in a very familiar basket: themselves. if they stopped to ask themselves "am i more credit worthy than the SP500?" they would surely answer 'no'. therefore they have made a poor decision by NOT having debt.

 

the same principle in reverse applies to credit card debt. one of the dumbest things people do is trade credit card debt for home equity loans. hello? if you're struggling to pay now, why would you trade unsecured debt for secured debt? failing to get an unsecured consolidation loan...simply tell the cc company to go f*ck themselves. sure, they might sue you, but that'll be years off. in the meantime you can save up plenty to settle with them when that comes around. as long as you have your home refinanced to a reasonable interest rate and aren't concerned with moving in the next few years, you won't be otherwise inconvenienced all that much, except for having a higher rate on car loans, assuming you don't move in the next 8-10 years. and driving 3500 dollar cars is a lot less inconvenient than risking your home to credit card debt.

 

(and before anyone gives me the "it's wrong" speech, spare it. you think the person who buys that note will consider it 'wrong' to toss you out on the street if you miss a couple payments after taking out that home equity loan? hint: no, they won't...)

 

as with anything else, there's good and bad. there is no right or wrong but a whole lot of grey, depending on how well you stick to your plans and how the debt markets go.

Edited April 24, 2012 by thatone

[threebyfate]

thatone, you've mixed and matched a number of issues (business and personal), as well as relying on assumptions of 12% return. Pie in the sky if you're in reliance of unrealized extrapolations.

 

There's a reason why personal and business financial management shouldn't be comingled.

[johan]

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

No & a partner's fiscal style won't matter to me should we marry, we will have a prenup that separates our finances, both sides will agree that there will be no alimony should the marriage end.. or there will be no wedding.

 

2. Was it always aligned?

 

N/A don't currently have a husband

 

3. If you don't have a partner, how important is it to you that they have a similar financial style to you and what expectations of financial style do you hold?

 

It's not important in the slightest, all that would matter is if they can pay for their 50% of mutually agreed upon shared expenses, what he does with his money & assets aside from this is not my business.

 

In a marriage, what benefits your partner will also benefit you. I can tell you're loosening up a bit.

[soserious1]

In a marriage, what benefits your partner will also benefit you. I can tell you're loosening up a bit.

 

"The Benefit" to both comes from the mutually agreed upon, shared expenses, we can both live really frugally & pocket extra cash or we can decide to share the cost of a more lavish lifestyle, one that we wouldn't have had on our own.

 

There's no "loosening up" of anything

[mostlyclueless]

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

More or less. He's a little spendier than I am, but he also makes more, and we end up having a lot more fun. I think we both agree that debt isn't great, but we'd rather have an enjoyable and happy life and some debt than make ourselves miserable paying it off (or not go to college, or not have a car, or forego medical treatment, etc).

 

2. Was it always aligned? Did this change over time? Experiences, etc?

 

No changes so far.

 

Edited: It occurs to me now that he has changed the way I manage my money for the better. I had never made a budget before; we made one together and stick to it pretty easily.

[thatone]

thatone, you've mixed and matched a number of issues (business and personal), as well as relying on assumptions of 12% return. Pie in the sky if you're in reliance of unrealized extrapolations.

 

There's a reason why personal and business financial management shouldn't be comingled.

 

but that's my point, it's not as cut and dried.

 

there is no practical benefit to being 'debt free' if you own any sort of capital asset outright (and people consider their homes, in my example, to be a capital asset).

 

because in our modern economy, liquid assets have a higher rate of return than non liquid assets, generally.

 

as for that 12%, speaking of...

 

S&P 500 Index (1960 - Present Weekly)

 

has anyone's grandmother's house increased in value 30x since 1960?

 

apparently not...

 

Historical Census of Housing Tables - Home Values

 

fwiw that rate of return averages out to 7-8% going back to 1960 on the SP500, but that's not really accurate since that includes years with wildly high interest rates that we'll never likely see again, a 30 year chart going back to 1980ish will show a rate of return of right at 12.5% year over year, averaged, even riding out the crashes of 87, 00, 08, etc.

 

the world has changed. we live in a cash/credit driven economy. the economy of our parents that was rewarded with constant reinvestment and ownership of real property and other non liquid assets is dead and gone. what was left of it died in 2008 when the sacred cow of real estate prices always going up went down in flames.

 

this isn't opinion or politically weighted suggestion, it's simply observation of fact. cash earns more than tangible assets do over time in this day and age.

 

and as such, debt isn't automatically evil. if debt shelters existing cash or provides more cash to invest, you can get ahead with it.

 

of course that requires rational decision making just like any other form of budgeting does. you can't get rich shopping at the mall or buying new cars. but you can arguably do so by saving cash and making wise use of debt.

 

as it pertains to this thread:

 

1) a person who has 20k in a brokerage account and borrows 20k to buy a car is smart

2) a person who has a modest home financed to the hilt and puts extra money into a IRA/401k rather than paying down that house note is also smart

3) a person who pays for vacations and adult toys like cars and motorcycles with debt when rates are favorable rather than spending cash is also smart

 

and the flip sides of those..

 

1) a person who owns a car and a home without any debt is foolish

2) a person who pays cash for big ticket items that can be had at sub 5% interest rates is foolish

3) a person whose home is his or her most valuable asset is foolish

 

so my argument is that the debt free person is not wise by default, in fact the debt free person can accurately be described as living on false assumptions and hindering him or herself, especially considering the circumstances of the 2008 crash.

Edited April 24, 2012 by thatone

[threebyfate]

You're relying on averages to determine specifics. It's pretty much a no-brainer that if your rate of return on your investment exceeds the loan rate, you'll go into debt. But...you're playing terminology footsy with people since the net effect is that you're not in debt.

 

As for suggesting people give the finger to the credit card company with the hopes you'll save enough in time to pay the piper, that's negligent financial management advice.

 

Your average person doesn't and shouldn't be playing russian roulette with their finances. If you wish to play high risk, you also have to be prepared to lose the entire enchilada. This is why the investment industry ensures they understand the risk tolerance in concert with the biological age of their clients.

[Queen Zenobia]

1. Is your financial style aligned with your partner (if you have a serious partner)?

 

My husband and I are both economists. If we were bad with money I'd seriously question the academic institution we graduated from.

 

2. Was it always aligned? Did this change over time? Experiences, etc?

 

Grew up with two fairly frugal parents (my father was born literally dirt floor poor). So I've always been money-conscious.

 

And just to add, if I were to ever be single again, financial abilities would be very high on my list.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Queen Zenobia

[thatone]

You're relying on averages to determine specifics. It's pretty much a no-brainer that if your rate of return on your investment exceeds the loan rate, you'll go into debt. But...you're playing terminology footsy with people since the net effect is that you're not in debt.

 

As for suggesting people give the finger to the credit card company with the hopes you'll save enough in time to pay the piper, that's negligent financial management advice.

 

Your average person doesn't and shouldn't be playing russian roulette with their finances. If you wish to play high risk, you also have to be prepared to lose the entire enchilada. This is why the investment industry ensures they understand the risk tolerance in concert with the biological age of their clients.

 

i'm not suggesting playing russian roulette. i'm saying decisions should be made based on the numbers, not based on assumptions or the advice of older relatives whose world no longer exists.

 

there is no practical benefit to paying down a mortgage with cash. you're trading at the very least a 7% return on money, and more accurately a 10-12% return on money, for saving 4.5% money. that does NOT add up.

 

furthermore, the advice about credit cards is perfectly feasible. there is no way a rational person should add to the amount owed on the home they live in to pay off unsecured debt. it's UNSECURED. they can't throw you out on the street, a lein holder can.

 

and yes, i know people who have made these mistakes, everyone told them it was good advice when they were given these ideas, and those people suffered from "good advice" because they didn't consider advice rationally.

 

a realtor friend of mine's assistant lost her house when she took out home equity loans to cover credit card debt in 2008. she lost her job and they no longer qualified for any mortgages on their current home and found themselves unable to refinance the house to reflect their lesser income. they now live in a 2 bedroom apartment. if they had simply ignored their credit card debt yes they would be in default on those, but they wouldn't have lost their house.

 

my brother made the "pay off your house" mistake when he sold a business 4 years ago. he's now faced with losing a lot of time in another business he owns because money to finance things for his current business is a lot harder to get than it was pre-2008 and he gave away his cash to foolishly pay off his mortgage. he can't buy equipment he needs and as such is working longer hours for free because he bought into the advice of "be debt free". he'll never save what he gave away to pay off that house, he's too old (almost 50). he's living proof of "paying off your house is a bad idea". the only difference in his example is he can go back and finance the house, it'll just take him awhile to wake up to the idea. he's not out on the street like the secretary in example #1. however, like so many other people, his house is worth less than it was pre-2008 so there's still a permanent loss involved in his situation.

 

debt is not inherently bad. if you treat it like it is you can get yourself in just as much trouble financially as you can by putting yourself in too much debt.

[threebyfate]

While I understand your point, you're determined to rely on averages for a consistent rate of return. If you've ever invested in the market, you're going to know that sometimes you win and other times not. But you're not guaranteed the silly 12% rate that you're determined to superglue to.

 

As well, what kind of knowledgeable investor throws everything into one pot that might or might not realize a 12% gain? Most diversify so they don't lose their shirt when the market tanks. This includes a chunk invested into GICs and money markets where principal is either guaranteed or at least relatively safe. How the hell does anyone get 12% on these types of investments?

 

Fully 1/3 of invested monies was "lost on paper" based on 2008 figures. Some of those losses were realized when people panicked, selling out their portfolios. Some didn't panic, regaining their initial investment, albeit not to 2007 levels. Some didn't panic but played the bear, holding on for dear life to overinflated investments whereby the economic crisis resulted in a much needed correction.

 

As far as real estate, I don't consider real estate a worthy investment beyond a principal home. Too many bubbles for something that's not necessarily liquid. But I do encourage people to buy a home if and when they can afford it. Renting is a slow bleed to nothing. If you don't have a nest egg sufficient to handle job loss for an extended period of time (not going to define length of time since it will rely on both the job and the individual's CV), you've overextended yourself.

 

Playing russian roulette with your credit rating is about as foolish as anyone can get. This is where I superglue myself.

[thatone]

While I understand your point, you're determined to rely on averages for a consistent rate of return. If you've ever invested in the market, you're going to know that sometimes you win and other times not. But you're not guaranteed the silly 12% rate that you're determined to superglue to.

 

As well, what kind of knowledgeable investor throws everything into one pot that might or might not realize a 12% gain? Most diversify so they don't lose their shirt when the market tanks. This includes a chunk invested into GICs and money markets where principal is either guaranteed or at least relatively safe. How the hell does anyone get 12% on these types of investments?

 

Fully 1/3 of invested monies was "lost on paper" based on 2008 figures. Some of those losses were realized when people panicked, selling out their portfolios. Some didn't panic, regaining their initial investment, albeit not to 2007 levels. Some didn't panic but played the bear, holding on for dear life to overinflated investments whereby the economic crisis resulted in a much needed correction.

 

As far as real estate, I don't consider real estate a worthy investment beyond a principal home. Too many bubbles for something that's not necessarily liquid. But I do encourage people to buy a home if and when they can afford it. Renting is a slow bleed to nothing. If you don't have a nest egg sufficient to handle job loss for an extended period of time (not going to define length of time since it will rely on both the job and the individual's CV), you've overextended yourself.

 

Playing russian roulette with your credit rating is about as foolish as anyone can get. This is where I superglue myself.

 

 

i agree that too much debt is a path to ruin. at the very least, a path to a forced frugal 7 years .

 

the larger picture i was trying to paint is that things are a lot more complicated now than they were even 10, nevermind 20 or 30 or 40 years ago.

 

and i run into this sort of thing in talking with my own family in particular pretty often. my dad is from that era where paying off debt and owning real property and non liquid assets outright was the way to go. my siblings often take his advice to their own detriment, and i wind up having to argue with them to stop listening to pops, because he doesn't understand how much the world has changed.

[aj22one]

i agree that too much debt is a path to ruin. at the very least, a path to a forced frugal 7 years .

 

the larger picture i was trying to paint is that things are a lot more complicated now than they were even 10, nevermind 20 or 30 or 40 years ago.

 

and i run into this sort of thing in talking with my own family in particular pretty often. my dad is from that era where paying off debt and owning real property and non liquid assets outright was the way to go. my siblings often take his advice to their own detriment, and i wind up having to argue with them to stop listening to pops, because he doesn't understand how much the world has changed.

 

A lot of this is so very true. Being smart with money is the key.

[Titania22]

In the 2 relationships I have had we were not in alignment, and it was added strain on the relationship. In my marriage, since I was the saver/responsible spender, it became my constant role to always be the one to have to say "no we can't afford it" and that sucks, and also remember to pay the bills an budget for them. It takes all the fun out of life, when you know the other person is relying you to always be the one to make sure we are afloat.

 

And in my last relationship, it just ment I paid for alot more then I should have had too, and was pressured into getting debt, and i was the one liable for it. So again so much stress for me and responsibility.

 

Gee, it's hardly a wonder I am sick of taking care of everyone, and would love to only have to look out for myself now. Still will be a few years yet, before I get the chance though.

[thatone]

A lot of this is so very true. Being smart with money is the key.

 

yes, precisely. being objective about decisions is the point, and disregarding conventional wisdom goes along with that.