Frugaling

Save more, live well, give generously

Archives for September 2014

How Do Your Favorite Companies Make Things Right?

By 9 Comments

Share This:

Last week I prepped and dressed for a major event at my college. Deans and various important people would be in attendance. My energy was waning from a long week, and I needed a coffee first. I ran up the block to the Starbucks and grabbed my regular “short” coffee. That’s when some serious trouble started.

When I left the store, I noticed the cup was leaking. Drips were landing all over the concrete, and despite attempts to avoid my clothes, the coffee stained what I was wearing. I thought, “Great! Nothing better than being around everyone in the college with big stains.”

I decided to snap a shot of the cup and tweet @Starbucks. And surprisingly, customer service asked me to email them. I emailed them last week and did not hear anything for a couple days.

Today, I received a response:

I am so sorry the lid was leaking. I want to thank you for bringing this issue to our attention, and assure you that your feedback has been forwarded to our manufacturing department for further review. This is definitely an issue we need to get fixed. I would like to invite to participate in our bring your own cup promotion that will give you a $0.10 discount on your beverage purchase. I would like to send you a Starbucks Card that you may use towards the purchase of your own personal tumbler. If you would please be so kind to reply to this email with your name and mailing address and I will send it right out. Thanks for giving us the opportunity to fix something that went wrong. [emphasis added]

My head goes in two separate directions regarding large, multinational corporations. On one side, I think about their effects on local communities. Starbucks is notorious for ousting local coffee shops and destroying competition. Many companies (here’s looking at you Wal-Mart) exterminate mom-and-pop stores that can’t buy large enough quantities to lessen consumer prices and maintain margins. On the other side, there are companies that actually try to make things right when your experience is negative. Starbucks is one of them.

Large companies have arsenals of social networking and customer service individuals. Some recognize that an awful social media presence and negative comments can weigh on profits. While motivated to quiet negativity, some actually reach out to correct experiences and leave you happy to come back.

Starbucks isn’t alone. My favorite companies know how to make things right. For example, I’m a big fan of Zappos, the online shoe retailer, because of their customer service. I’ve received incorrect sizes, colors, and flawed objects. Each time that’s happened, I’ve been able to receive next-day replacements and refunds. There was even a time when they accepted a return on running shoes, which had given trouble on my feet but had already been broken in. That secured my loyalty with the company.

As a frugal person, it’s important to consider where I make my purchases. Not every item will work out. When those occasions arise, I want to be able to trust that my goodwill can be returned in kind. Frugality is about more than low prices. It requires an active role in consuming goods — aiming to find long-term value.

Here are some tips for finding companies that respect your choice to shop with them:

  • Do they accept returns without receipts?
  • Will they allow you to return, exchange, or replace without question?
  • How easily can you reach customer service? Are they just a tweet away?
  • How do your favorite companies make things right?

What are some of your favorite companies? How do they make things right?

Stop Dehumanizing The Poor, Homeless

By 16 Comments

Share This:

Anti-Homeless Spikes Hostile Architecture Photo
This is an anti-homeless spike in London, England.

The last couple weeks I’ve suffered from intense writer’s block. My mind has been focused on something more important than this site (sorry, frequent readers!): graduate school. Part of my role as a doctoral student requires gaining experience counseling others. This year I’ve acquired a spot at the local homeless shelter. It’s forever changed my understanding of homelessness and the financial concerns/distress they face.

Prior to working at a homeless shelter, my perspective was naive and simple. Generally, I felt for them and wondered how I could most help. Whenever I spoke with friends, I talked about how we should help people like this. Sometimes I gave pocket change or a cup of coffee to someone on these streets. But despite a couple moments in high school as a soup kitchen volunteer, I had never taken the time to serve/help the most vulnerable in America. That bothered me.

I’ve been at the homeless shelter for about a month now. The experience is different every day, and because it’s related to the practice of counseling psychology, I can’t say much about it due to confidentiality. What I can speak to is that the people I’ve met smashed my preconceived notions and gave me a framework for understanding how someone gets there.

This great country heralds a flawed understanding of success and path to achievement. Basically, we oversimplify the rules of society and deliver a soundbyte to a highly complex idea: work hard and you’ll succeed. This is a disservice to everyone; the fortunate and suffering, alike.

We have resources in this country that help young adults, but they don’t guarantee success. The world needs to receive this message — not only our country. This meritocracy claim is flawed. The importance and reliance on hard work, self-motivation, and personal responsibility are beautiful aspirations, but they don’t adequately account for the many variables that attack individuals’ abilities.

Trust me. There are cracks in society, and people fall through them. I’ve seen it in the flesh. Medical bills from horrific accidents can pile up, leaving someone unable to work or transport themselves. The financial burdens can quickly engulf any hope for personal dreams. When I ask most people what they’d like to do if they could choose something, most answer that they just want a decent job — that pays the bills. That’s all.

See, the American dream is dead for many in this disenfranchised group. They’ve been kicked around from home to home, job to job, bill to bill, with little support. When I ask this privileged question about dream vocations, they can’t answer. It hurts to hear, but I can empathize with how they got there.

Hard work, self-motivation, and personal responsibility don’t account for death, abuse, domestic violence, psychological illness, and disabilities (to name a few). Each of these unaccounted for variables are swept under the rug, and personal finance websites often miss this target population entirely. Hell, most homeless people have severely restricted access to computers. Many need to go to public libraries to access the Internet — and only for short periods of time. Moreover, I can’t imagine many of them venturing on to personal finance websites because their problems are more fundamental.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs was introduced in 1943. The pyramidal structure postulated that individuals move through a process of needs, ultimately getting to “self-actualization.” If all your needs were met, you could feel secure, safe, and self-confident. Unfortunately for the most vulnerable, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving skills are reserved for states in the highest level of the hierarchy. When basic needs such as food and shelter are of concern — worrying about where the next meal comes from — it can be challenging to imagine personal finance questions or plan for that dream job. Despite the psychological understanding and history for the hierarchy, society largely ignores it.

Boasting on and on about complex ideals in American society, we can become inured and desensitized to the struggles of these people. I’m a firm believer that we naturally want to help others. But with homeless people, we seem to make exceptions. For instance, I’ve heard many say, “I would donate or give change, but they’ll probably just buy drugs and alcohol.” I’ve seen parents squeeze their children tighter, as they pass a homeless man. Most people that see a sign and cup pass without glancing — purposely avoiding eye contact. Society allows this dehumanization. That’s considered normal and okay. Who else in society can be so easily cast aside?

With psychological dissatisfaction directed towards the most vulnerable, society can sometimes get creatively disturbing. For instance, The Guardian recently profiled a horrific rise in anti-homeless architecture:

“…stainless steel ‘anti-homeless’ spikes…appeared outside a London apartment block recently, the benches are part of a recent generation of urban architecture designed to influence public behaviour, known as ‘hostile architecture’.”

That simple quote doesn’t do justice for the medieval constructions. From silver daggers that prevent curb-sitting to park benches with added breaks to prevent laying down, this design destroys comfort for those with nowhere else to go.

Today, I’m here to say that it’s not okay that we tell people, “You get what you deserve.” We need to deconstruct these faults and create an inclusive, collective, supportive society. It hurts everyone when we demonize and destroy the most vulnerable. In fact, it’s cheaper to give homeless people shelter, food, health care, and job training, instead of doing nothing.

As an avid writer and reader of personal finance blogs, we have a ways to go before we meet this population’s needs. How can you make a difference?

Pay for privacy: Apple’s new marketing campaign against Google

By 5 Comments

Share This:

On August 31st, news companies started reporting on a nasty, targeted attack on a variety of celebrities. Of no real fault of their own, these (mostly) female celebrities woke up to a shock: nude and intimate photos and videos, which were leaked onto the Internet. The “anonymous” hacker seemed to specifically target some of the famous celeb’s Apple iCloud information.

See, Apple has long been a terrible cloud provider. Their iCloud service has frequently suffered security leaks, downtime, and inexplicable bugginess. The beleaguered service hasn’t ever gained traction. Unfortunately, without the cloud, Apple’s future revenue might eventually suffer.

The release of private, celebrity photos came at a terrible time — just two weeks before the new iPhone 6 and Apple Watch keynote by Tim Cook. Apple’s taciturn answer: this is not the fault of iCloud servers or our security. Well, if it was that simple, we could pack our bags and move on from this perverted mess. And as a shareholder, I’d love to!

Reality is far murkier here. As it turns out, there were weaknesses in Apple’s iCloud security, which allowed hackers to penetrate into the “Find My iPhone” portion of the website, and repeatedly guess passwords without any restrictions. Through a brute force application (guess-and-checks tons of passwords over and over again until it gets a winner), the accounts were compromised, illegally downloaded, and provided access to a wealth of explicit photos. Likewise, this determined hacker and/or collective aimed for simple security questions, which were easily guessable for public icons like Jennifer Lawrence. This ultimately allowed for a massive leak of data. While Apple claimed innocence, they quickly rectified security gaps and patched problem areas. The hack was rendered inert; albeit, the damage was already done.

As media consumers, we seem to gravitate towards one scandal or story, and then quickly drift to the next — barely remembering what was important in the first place. This quick consumption of news seems to reduce the real importance of important stories. Frankly, it’s yet another consequence of the 24-hour news cycle — it’s literally endless. Apple is relying on us to rapidly forget the iCloud hacks of 2014.

It was a recipe for disaster, but now Apple is manipulating the message for public gain and increased profit. The genius is mind-bending, and it starts with the distinction between privacy and security. By definition, privacy is the right to be left alone. Simple as that. If you’d like to search for strange Christmas ornaments privately, the assumption is that you’re not tracked, nor should you be concerned about others chiming in on that search. Security, on the other hand, is about being free from danger or threat. From the mall cop to the password on your email account, security attempts to protect us from external threats.Privacy and security can be overlapping concepts, where security is necessary for privacy. Without security, privacy quickly disappears.

The point is, privacy and security are different, and Apple is purposively confusing the two. By hacking the iCloud accounts of various celebrities, this mercenary crew showed wicked flaws in Apple’s “secure” platform.

The evil brillance at Apple has been a prolonged offensive on Google’s data-mining business. Tim Cook has repeatedly spoken about the privacy and security embedded in Apple’s products, along with their commitment to respecting individuals’ rights. Each time Cook has mentioned their push for privacy, it’s come with a dig against Google. In the preceding video, Cook lambastes competitors for tracking users, while emphasizing Apple’s age-old push to “try not to collect data.”

Even in the recent keynote address, Apple executives emphasized the privacy features every step of the way. With the recent introduction of payments via Apple Pay (hold an iPhone in front of a receiver to pay), the company said they wouldn’t monitor transactions — that they were between you, the merchant, and credit card company. If you didn’t know better, you might assume that Apple is the most private company in the world.

Apple is clearly trying to quickly evade and rebrand themselves as the last privacy conscious mega-cap company in the country. And if people don’t pay attention, it just might work. If you are a consumer and you hear about individual hackers, corporate espionage, and governmental spies, you’ll want the most private hardware system you can find. Unfortunately, it’ll cost you and arm and a leg (around $1000 for the Macbook Air), and may not even be more secure than other platforms.

Take the Google Chromebook, for instance. This computer costs about $200 to $300 depending on the model you choose. The computer automatically updates to the latest operating system, protects you from viruses and malware, has a verified secure boot (which prevents internal changes from the operating system by outside hackers), and lasts about 10-12 hours on a single charge. These are considered one of the most secure systems on the market today. Chromebooks are perfect for most everything, and they’re a real threat to Apple’s business model. To save all that money, you sacrifice a bit of privacy to Google’s servers, but none of the security.

That’s the problem: Google and their Chromebook line is a threat. Apple has a moment to quickly switch the media spin cycle to full blast, argue that they’re a privacy-focused company, and get you to pay about $800 more on a laptop than necessary.

Apple Pay More For Privacy

We live in a world where privacy and security are threatened in a multitude of ways — not least of which by capitalistic disinformation. From private hackers to the NSA, security is being attacked. And as security goes, so does privacy. But privacy should be a right; in fact, it’s a part of the Fourth Amendment. Privacy is a right afforded to us by our constitution, and one that we must continue to defend. We should never need to pay for privacy, as Apple would have us believe.

You Aren’t Frugal Enough!

By 21 Comments

Share This:

Sale Ends Today Banksy Art Consumption

The world currently exists in an infinite growth paradigm — an impossibility that will lead to the planet’s destruction if not curtailed — where increased production and consumption are desired. A pressure to work, spend, and consumptively “contribute” can come from both internal and external sources. This environment makes frugality challenging.

Individually, I struggle to save money, eat out less, and make healthy financial choices. It’s easy to pull out excuses: I’m tired, stressed, or too busy. This monologue pushes me to spend on items that should make me feel relaxed and content. They don’t. My precarious budget necessitates and encourages an alternative. Moreover, I’m motivated to reduce my environmental impact due to climate change. To consume is human (i.e., food), but to buy endlessly and without reason is disastrous. But I can’t say it’s easy, as I must be continually mindful of my spending. Mistakes happen when I’m not actively working at it. Last weekend I spent about $35 going out for food and drinks, in a moment of total unconscious spending.

Along with this self-promulgated racket, there are also social pressures that encourage spending. Society has certain expectations about wealth and success. Usually, achievement in the eyes of our capitalist system requires a paycheck of about $50,000 or more — with continual raises and bonuses. Income must also be spent conspicuously. In other words, you should find ways to spend on things that provide no material value — they just occupy space (i.e., larger cars, homes, and the crap to fill them).

Buy Me. I'll Change Your Life. Art Graphic.If you aren’t making these purchases there can be a social reaction or rejection. This is where frugality gets messy. For instance, I tried a dating site that asked whether I owned a car. The question seemed innocuous enough, but upon further inspection I realized it was aimed at attractiveness. See, asking whether I had a car was meant to give information to potential women. They would be asked the same thing, but I could see many women’s profiles needed the man to have a car. It made me feel bad. Not having a car made me less attractive; an obvious societal pressure, which still felt unexpectedly horrible. I clearly wasn’t meeting the expectations of those on the site. I wished I owned a car momentarily.

It’s not just cars. Look at the phone in your pocket. If you’re a millennial, it’s likely a smartphone — mine is! When you see someone pull out a flip phone or a “brick,” you may judge that person’s income level and status — I have. But is that fair, right, or healthy?

The greatest challenge to my frugality has come from those who verbally question my decisions (fortunately, none of my friends 🙂 ). For example, there are people who tell me I’m not frugal enough or could/should be doing better. Essentially, they’re saying, “You’re trying to be frugal, but you haven’t met my expectations. If you really want to be frugal, you’d do this…” The other critique I receive is that my frugality hurts the economy. By reducing my consumption, I’m somehow not doing my part. When I more accurately reflect on these situations, I realize that something about my goals are creating a reactionary defensiveness in some people.

I’ve found that my method of talking about frugality and saving money greatly affects how safe others feel about their own choices. A spendthrift may inherently be insulted and/or self-conscious by my choices. What they don’t realize is that their social pressures (or critiques) can act on a healthy budget to encourage conformity and consumption.

Becoming more frugal isn’t without challenges — both internal and external. The frugal life isn’t always easy, but it certainly feels rewarding when done right.

Best Of

Recent Posts

Follow