I’m enjoying your blog posts and this one made me laugh. You and Jesse both need to read “The Tightwad Gazette” by Amy Dacyzyn. She wrote a similar article laying out the same exact points you made.

:)

I guess the true “savings” in that case would be the amount you put in the bank, minus the amount you spent on the item. I am also curious – have you ever spent more on the items that would have been covered under the warrantee than the amount the warrantee would have cost? I would guess that you haven’t, but I would be curious to know. Especially if you add up the cost of all warrantees on cars that you have past up compared to all costs that would have been covered.

Again, I love the ideas. Thanks for sharing.

I also do this with extended warranties, I politely turn them down and then transfer that amount to a Warranties account, and if the item breaks outside of manufacturers warranty and before end of life, I replace it from the fund.

Now, that could mean that you buy 25 lbs of flour for $10 instead of 5 lbs for $5. You only intended to buy 5 lbs and spend $5, so you actually bought more and spent more than planned. But flour is an ongoing part of your buying intentions and so you saved money (as long as you will use it before it goes bad). It could also mean that you go to the store intending to buy apples for $1.50 per pound and instead buy peaches because they are $1 per pound. You didn’t intend to buy peaches, but you substituted them as something that will serve the same purpose for less money.

The key is whether or not you are buying something that is not needed or planned for just because it is a good deal. If you go to the store for apples and come home with apples, a DVD and a hat (because the DVD and the hat were 50% off) you didn’t save money. You might have gotten a great deal, but you have spent money that you did not plan to, not saved it.

So many people that I talk to are “saving” so much money that they are broke and in debt.