The Opposite of More Money Than Sense?

[Apollonius]

Sorry, I was and agree wholeheartedly with this post, although you probably have had to have gained some sort of financial success to truly believe that.

I think you are right. Money doesn't buy happiness, but lack of it can be pretty depressing.

 

[Shortandcrisp]

Financially prudent.

 

[screenman]

Money may not buy you happiness but it could make your misery nicer.

 

[mikeymustard]

I've got more sense than money. That's not saying much

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Due to the typical “More money than sense brigade” comments being used continually this week again, in the interest of balance, I wonder what the reciprocal is?...

"Demands real value for money"

As one of the posters you are probably alluding to in your comment above, my criteria to spend money is very simple; if I think the thing is genuinely good value, I will spend. If I think it's worthless tat/tasteless & garish/a pointless gimmick/grossly overpriced for what it is/does, then my cash stays in my pocket.
Latest Model Year bikes and cars are a case in point; you pay a premium to have the latest version brand new, yet a well-treated year-old example to all intents and purposes is just as good as new but is 25-30% cheaper if not more. I would just rather someone else get stung for the VAT and depreciation, rather than me.
Say I completely took leave of my senses and bought a brand new high end carbon road bike costing a total of £6k - which I could do if it took my fancy, as it's not poverty that stops me buying such things it's the perceived poor value they offer.
£1k of that would go straight to the Taxman, it wouldn't be buying me a better bike. At best, I'd be getting a £5k bike for my £6k outlay. Take value to the extreme, and my £20 used classic steel bikes, that some people poke fun at, are just as functional as brand new £500+ quality ones (and I would argue they were nicer made too), but the £480 I have left over by not buying new is still available to spend on something else.

 

[bpsmith]

"Demands real value for money"

As one of the posters you are probably alluding to in your comment above, my criteria to spend money is very simple; if I think the thing is genuinely good value, I will spend. If I think it's worthless tat/tasteless & garish/a pointless gimmick/grossly overpriced for what it is/does, then my cash stays in my pocket.
Latest Model Year bikes and cars are a case in point; you pay a premium to have the latest version brand new, yet a well-treated year-old example to all intents and purposes is just as good as new but is 25-30% cheaper if not more. I would just rather someone else get stung for the VAT and depreciation, rather than me.
Say I completely took leave of my senses and bought a brand new high end carbon road bike costing a total of £6k - which I could do if it took my fancy, as it's not poverty that stops me buying such things it's the perceived poor value they offer.
£1k of that would go straight to the Taxman, it wouldn't be buying me a better bike. At best, I'd be getting a £5k bike for my £6k outlay. Take value to the extreme, and my £20 used classic steel bikes, that some people poke fun at, are just as functional as brand new £500+ quality ones (and I would argue they were nicer made too), but the £480 I have left over by not buying new is still available to spend on something else.

You’ve answered exactly as expected and, you may be shocked to read, I absolutely agree without any caveats.

I am hoping that you, and others, may now take on board my reason for creating this thread?

What you’ve said above, is common sense without question. What you’ve said in other threads, by using the More Money Than Sense comment and further comments alongside it, is ridicule others because they like to buy new and like to spend more than you believe is necessary.

I don’t pity anyone, certainly not because they choose to buy a cheaper bike of any nature or price. I also don’t assume that people couldn’t do it if they actually wanted to.

I had a sneaky feeling that you may actually have the cash but enjoy not spending it and nabbing a bargain and respect that. I don’t respect being ridiculed for choosing to buy new and neithe do others.

My purchase recently, to replace a damaged bike, was a £3,699 RRP bike which cost me £1,999.99. By my reckoning a year old bike which has depreciated 10% (industry standard used is 10% p.a.), minus the VAT (20% of gross used) is worth £2,663.28. I believe that I am better off to the tune of £663.29.

Please don’t think I am singling you out, as you’re not alone, but just wanted to suggest that it might be worth considering that your views are not necessarily the best for all of us and by ridiculing others your potentially wise words are completely lost.

 

[bpsmith]

From what I can see amongst the guys I ride with, "parenthood" would be a good name for it.

Definitely changed my spending decisions since having my Son. I just find a way, longer term, to still have a few things once everyone else is covered. The key for me is in buying the right item that I value and keep it for a longer period. It’s often Procrastination for quite some time. Lol

 

[Slick]

Definitely changed my spending decisions since having my Son. I just find a way, longer term, to still have a few things once everyone else is covered. The key for me is in buying the right item that I value and keep it for a longer period. It’s often Procrastination for quite some time. Lol

Lol that's exactly the scenario I was thinking of, make sure everyone else is covered before considering yourself. Seems fairly common amongst the guys I ride with. One guys teenage daughter has 2 lovely bikes compared to her dad's old BSO.

 

[bpsmith]

Lol that's exactly the scenario I was thinking of, make sure everyone else is covered before considering yourself. Seems fairly common amongst the guys I ride with. One guys teenage daughter has 2 lovely bikes compared to her dad's old BSO.

The real beauty of it is that the enjoyment received by buying those bikes, for his daughter, completely outweighs using for himself.

 

[screenman]

But, what happens when everyone want wants a bargain and taxes stop coming in.

 

[Tin Pot]

Due to the typical “More money than sense brigade” comments being used continually this week again, in the interest of balance, I wonder what the reciprocal is?

So far I can only come up with the following two (forum friendly ones at least), but keen to hear what others think is the fair equivalent term?

1. Less Money than Moans
2. Got the Money, but prefer Martyrdom.

There must be better options out there...

More debt than sense?

No, more debt than income.

 

[bpsmith]

More debt than sense?

No, more debt than income.

Agree with that too. The tricky thing is that people don’t know whether any debt exists when posting silly remarks.

 

[screenman]

Talking to a guy last week he informed he had bought a new car, I suggested maybe he had bought a month's worth of new car which is now a used car and that he is never going to be the owner.

 

[Slick]

The real beauty of it is that the enjoyment received by buying those bikes, for his daughter, completely outweighs using for himself.

Definitely. I totally get it, and after going to watch her race I think it may even be the same for me.

 

[Saluki]

I like the old one, if common sense was dynamite, you wouldn't have enough to blow your hat off on a windy day.

I always thought that it was 'If brains were dynamite she/he couldn't blow her nose'