I contribute posts here about how you can save money and improve your personal finances.  If you’re a regular reader, you’ll know that I stop short of being a total “frugalista”, though.  I certainly believe in following through with simple actions that can save you money and hate the idea of overpaying as much as the next guy, but there are certain things that I wouldn’t cut and items on which I won’t compromise.

Example:  Creamed corn.  The name brand stuff costs twice as much as the store brand, but I’ll always reach for the Jolly Green Giant’s stuff.  Why?  I think the store brand is gross, runny and of such inferior quality that I’m willing to spend an extra fifty cents for the good stuff.

Another:  Cable TV.  I could save over $1200 per year by killing off my cable package.  I won’t do it.  I like having it.  I like it a lot.  I’ve lived with it and I’ve lived without it.  I’ve made the personal judgment to keep it.  

You see, I believe there is a fine line separating smart spending and frugality from self-imposed deprivation and a decreased quality of life.  You might not agree.  You might agree, but would isolate different “must haves” than me.  I’m sticking with my opinion either way.

When someone critical of the “brown bag it to save money on lunch” idea explained that those small changes weren’t going to rectify major errors and that big picture planning was more important, the blogger over at Simple Dollar jumped on the remark.  They noticed, and accurately so, that the comment seemed to link consumer spending with the quality of life.  Although the reply stopped short of calling the comment shallow, it certainly did seem to imply that we should look for our happiness outside of the consumer economy.  I agree with that on some level, but not to the extreme.

At times, some act as if we’re supposed to be ashamed that we take pleasure in the things we buy.  I don’t.  

Are possessions and consumption the key to a happy life, of course not.  Not even close.  Money can’t buy happiness.  Money can buy some neat stuff sometimes, though, and there’s nothing inherently evil about enjoying those things–even when they aren’t the most frugal option out there.

I found an interesting blog post that talked about the ways frugality improved the quality of one’s life.  There were a few good points, but most of the items on the list weren’t really about the charms of austerity.  Most were merely explanations of how you could almost replace “the real deal” while spending less money.  It makes me wonder if some of those who are committed to being as frugal as possible are really as enlightened as some would like to believe.  

It doesn’t seem like they’re “above” spending money on a movie and popcorn.  They want to do that.  They just don’t want to spend for the experience so they pop up their own corn after grabbing a year-old flick from the library.  There’s nothing wrong with that.  I do it.  But sometimes, I like the red velvet curtain, the feeling of participating in a social tradition, the slimy butter substitute the theater uses and sitting through the credits.  Don’t hate me for loving new releases, okay?  

The first commenter on that post made my head spin a little.  The remark explained that frugality was a quality of life enhancer because it gave the commenter “something to think about”.  They liked thinking about how to save money at every turn.  Me?  I’d prefer to let my idle thoughts wander into other territory.  The world is full of exciting ideas to explore and creative opportunities.  A constant focus on buck-stretching doesn’t seem all that enjoyable–or as productive.

That’s one reason I like the spending formula that divvies up your resources in a way that stops short of Draconian austerity measures.  It seems a little more reasonable to me.

I’m not attacking those who want to save as much as possible.  I just don’t buy into the idea that hardcore frugalism is the only way to go.  I understand how the scalability of frugal measures can make a huge difference in one’s life and I really do respect the commitment and level of responsibility shown by those who fully embrace a frugal lifestyle.

That being said, I think there’s a middle ground that works best for me.  It’s somewhere between allowing the idea of money (and how not to spend it) to dominate my every thought and thoughtless spending.  It’s the place where I will cut a coupon to save $10 on a big brisket but doesn’t extend to the point where I give up cable television.

As I was thinking about the interplay between frugality and the quality of life, I stumbled upon something Andy Hough wrote at Tight Fisted Miser.  

The difference to me is that I will be choosing to give up those indulgences. I won’t be forced to give them up. This goes to my underlying philosophy of frugality which is that frugality is about choosing to do less expensive things not depriving yourself of things.

Choice vs. deprivation.  That makes sense to me.  It’s important to make informed choices, aware of both the opportunities and opportunity costs involved with them.  If you’re making those choices in a way that’s designed to improve the quality of your life, full speed ahead.  If you’re making them because you’ve set up an arbitrary set of limiting rules or out of a compulsion to save every penny…  That’s a different story.