Reader Story: A Fresh Start on the Path to Prosperity
Published on - January 2nd, 2011 (Modified on - August 8th, 2011) (by J.D. Roth) This guest post from Louisa Rogers is part of the “reader stories” feature at Get Rich Slowly. Some stories contain general advice; others are examples of how a GRS reader achieved financial success — or failure. These stories feature folks from all levels of financial maturity and with all sorts of incomes. Previously at GRS, Louisa told us what it’s like to have even better than enough.
“May you have a prosperous New Year!” the saying goes. Although I’ve never been poor, some of my lifelong habits would certainly make you wonder. Until recently, my sense of financial well-being never matched the contents of my wallet. Now, I do feel a sense of prosperity, and it came about only because of gritty, purposeful change on my part — the kind of change we talk about as we embark on a new year.
I’m naturally frugal — or is that cheap? I’ve been called both. In either case, I don’t have trouble staying within my limits. I’m someone who can order every airline credit card that offers 25,000 frequent flyer miles, and stash the unused cards in my desk drawer while I happily fly the friendly skies. My husband teases me that while I love to earn, once I actually have the cash, I have little desire to spend it. (He spends it for me!)
But the downside of my particular brand of frugality is the stinginess that comes with it. I’m not saying this is true of all frugal types, but generosity isn’t my strong suit. I’ve been working on this “issue” (as we say these days) for awhile. Over time, I began to sense that before I could find my generosity gene, there was another step I needed to take.
Coming clean
I have a long history of stealing food from supermarkets. I started as a teenager in the Sixties. So what? Many people steal during adolescence, right? Yeah, but I only stopped a few years ago, and I’m, um, 59.
I used to open a package of oatmeal cookies in a supermarket, eat a handful, then hide the unfinished container on the back of a shelf behind other products. I snatched food from the bulk bins — and not just the occasional grape. I’d hide fat mounds of chips or dried figs or sesame sticks in my hands and munch on them as I wheeled my cart around the store. Before I left the supermarket, I’d go back for more — grabbing a few handfuls, quickly, stealthily, before an employee could catch me in the act.
Strangely enough, until a couple of years ago, I never called this “stealing”.
Now I belong to a 12-step program, and one of the steps says to “make direct amends to such people we had harmed wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.” After many long conversations with my sponsor, I decided to refund the money I owe for the food I’ve taken. Some of the stores are located in other parts of the country (indeed, the world), or may not even exist anymore. So my efforts have been imperfect. But I’ve tried.
Doing the math
I calculated estimates for the amounts I owed, and took bills of $30 or more to the store owner or customer-service manager. They didn’t always make it easy for me. Sometimes I’d find myself standing in the business office, fumbling over my words, wondering how to explain my odd request, and they’d interrupt me and say, “Look, don’t worry about it. We assume some sampling, it’s part of our pricing structure.”
“Yes, I understand,” I’d say, “but unless it’s too much trouble, I’d appreciate it if you’d accept my money anyway.” I knew it was the right thing to do for the stores, but I was only partly doing it for them; ultimately, I was doing it for me, so that I could walk around like a regular person and not feel like a thief.
Yes, it was awkward, but for the most part I was at least talking with strangers — except in the case where the store was actually a client of mine. I had given management seminars to their supervisory staff. I saved that refund until the end. But as my sponsor pointed out, the goal of this exercise wasn’t to make me squirm and feel as yucky as possible. I didn’t need to humiliate myself and make myself talk to my immediate client. In the end, the staff member I spoke with didn’t even ask my name.
The bulk of the stealing I did involved food. But I also occasionally snuck into the back entrance of a health club so that I could work out without using up one of my day passes. I refunded the health club, too.
Personal impact
After returning the money, I felt physically lighter, like I’d lost a few pounds. And I felt lighter about money, too. Which was odd, since after refunding, I had less money than I’d had before — not huge amounts, but still somewhat less. This would have once made me feel anxious, yet now I felt more relaxed.
In exploring this with my sponsor, I realized that for many years I’d had an underlying belief that the world owed me. Because of this, I felt like I didn’t need to abide by the same rules other folks did.
Why did I have this belief? Good question. In my 30s and 40s, I spent many hours in therapy exploring why I felt “owed.” I vaguely remember blaming the usual suspects — my mother, my father, my childhood. But even after all that therapy, I couldn’t tell you today where exactly that belief came from, and frankly, I don’t care anymore. These days, I pay attention to that attitude when it kicks into gear, but happily — maybe because I no longer steal — I don’t feel it much anymore.
A work in progress
Since repaying my debts, I’ve noticed that real opportunities for generosity show up often. For example, I frequently visit a neighborhood coffee shop and read the daily paper from the stack. I used to bring my own mug and teabag and pour myself hot water from the insulated jug to avoid paying $2.50 for a cup of tea. Recently, I thought about all the times I’d sat at a table without contributing. I approached one of the owners, whom I knew. Handing her a $20 bill, I said I’d like to give her something towards my use of the place from time to time. “Great!” she said. ”That’ll help pay for the wifi.”
It’s amazing how good I felt that whole day. I was free! Free to hang out and read the newspaper, without feeling sneaky. I’ll give her another $20 down the road.
My niece graduated from high school this year. I worried about whether to send her a graduation check, because I couldn’t remember if my husband and I had given her older sister and brother checks when they graduated. Back then, I was definitely cheaper. Was it fair to gift her and not the others? I finally decided, whatever happened or didn’t happen before, it was better to err on the side of generosity. I wrote the check.
These may not sound like big steps to some of you; I’m still a work-in-progress when it comes to generosity. But my heart is open and I want to be more generous. Maybe that’s the biggest change. The darker side of frugality gets lighter with every step I take.
GRS is committed to helping our readers save and achieve your financial goals.Savings interest rates may be low, but that’s all the more reason to shop for the best rate.Find the highest savings interest rate from Ally Bank, Capital One 360, Everbank, and more.
This article is about Frugality, Psychology, Reader Stories
Disclaimer: This content is not provided or commissioned by American Express. Opinions expressed here are author's alone, not those of American Express, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by American Express. This site may be compensated through American Express Affiliate Program.
Discover is a paid advertiser of this site. Reasonable efforts are made to maintain accurate information. See the Discover online credit card application for full terms and conditions on offers and rewards.
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES



@Dink:
“Earning $50K a year, even if you just push papers around a desk all day, is worlds apart from earning $20 million for spending four months making a movie.”
Dink, it’s an issue of supply and demand. The simple fact is, if 50 million people are willing to pay $10 each to see a movie with Tom Hanks in it, who’s to say Tom Hanks only deserves to earn $50,000 for his work in the film? Who deserves the other $499,950,000? I suppose the makeup crew, set designers, camera and sound techs all deserve $50,000 each, too, so that takes care of another $50,000,000 or so. But that still leaves $449,950,000. Should the studio just give the money back to the customers? Donate it to charity? Give it to you? Stop making movies completely, because obviously the numbers are too screwy?
Movies have a theoretically unlimited supply. Anyone who wants to see a movie will be able to see it. The studios will simply keep the film playing until the demand has been met. But what about an example where the supply is limited? Like, say, tickets to the Superbowl?
Let’s say the Superbowl is being held in an arena that can hold 125,000 people. If they sold tickets for $5 each, they’d sell out in, oh, probably about 18 seconds. If tickets were $1,000 each, they might not sell them all. So the promoters set an array of prices to ensure that supply meets demand just about perfectly, and every last ticket is sold for maximum value.
Then, of course, there’s the TV rights. And the $25,000-per-second advertising time. Let’s say that all-in-all, the Superbowl generates $350,000,000. I’m just picking numbers out of the air here.
Now, how much of that should go to the athletes? I mean, they’re really only doing a couple hours’ work, and it’s not even really work for them – they enjoy it! So surely they don’t deserve more than a few hundred dollars for their efforts, right?
So where should the other $349,995,000 go? To charity? Should ticket prices be slashed? But then what’s a fair way to determine who gets the tickets, if 5,000,000 people are willing to pay $5/ticket to see the Superbowl, if the arena only holds 125,000 people? Luck?
Why are you trying to solve a problem capitalism has already solved? Why are you trying to circumvent the simple basic principle of supply and demand? Why does it offend you so much that these people earn so much more than you?
If you want a piece of the action so badly, why don’t you just make something that 50 million people are willing to pay $10 for?
loading....
@Elizabeth: I had a conversation about this very recently, actually, and this is the argument that was given to me (that makes some sense):
In the case of a book, or a DVD, you buy it, you read it, you lend it to a friend, or you’ve taken it out of the library. It can (in practical terms) only be used by one person at a time.
In the case of a CD, if you buy it, burn it on to your computer, lend it to your friend, they burn it onto their computer then share a few tracks with a friend of theirs, now three people can use it at once, and that’s where it becomes thievery.
@Dee: in my conscience, what you’re describing is technically illegal but I don’t think it’s immoral and I wouldn’t argue that you’re stealing, since you’re watching it once then deleting it.
loading....
I know TylerK doesn’t need anyone to defend him, but the anti-TylerK comments here are getting ridiculous (I’m looking at you, #99 Kevin). He said, many times, that the fact that there’s a difference between “theft” and “copyright infringement” does not make either one okay.
They ARE different things. They just are. That doesn’t say anything about either one of them, just that they are different concepts that are treated differently under the law. In that way, TylerK’s comment really had no point, since he was just pointing this out. I could have said, “stealing from a grocery store is different from holding someone up at gunpoint,” and both comments would contribute very little to the conversation. But the fact that people either can’t see the difference between theft and copyright infringement, or are too blinded by both being “bad” that they just won’t discuss it anymore, is very confusing and very irritating.
I personally don’t think TylerK’s comment had much of a point as a comment on this post (though, to be fair, if it had sparked interesting discussion, I would feel differently), but it is a FACTUAL comment that makes, pointing out an ACTUAL difference between two concepts.
loading....
Samantha:
I hear you, I just get annoyed at pedantic twits who get their jollies out of “correcting” word usages that have become perfectly acceptable colloquialisms.
If we wanted to continue down this pointless path, Tyler could just as rightly point out that folks are using the word “piracy” incorrectly too, unless they’re copying their DVDs on the Black Pearl, courtesy of Captain Jack Sparrow.
Would people like Tyler also interject and correct an environmentalist who describes oil companies as “raping the environment,” since no actual rape is occurring?
Does he feel a need to correct people who describe rockets as “blasting off,” since it’s not actually an explosion, but rather a controlled burn?
See what I mean? It gets annoying. He knows what people mean, why needle and poke at people, just to make himself feel smart? It makes him look insecure, and it just annoys the heck out of the rest of us.
loading....
@Dink (#78) – Wow. So, it’s okay to steal from artists because historically they make nothing anyway. Their work should be free because you don’t want to pay for it. This mentality is disturbing on so many levels. What you would say if I think the services you provide should be free because I don’t want to pay for it? And don’t say your services are more important than an artist’s because you’re an accountant, engineer or whatever.
If your world comes to fruition, your entertainment options will be severely limited.
loading....
@Elizabeth (#100) – Borrowing a book from a friend or the library is not stealing. Your friend or the library paid for the item and are free to do with it what they will, except to make a copy of the book because they are not allowed that right when they purchased the book.
When you pirate an e-book, you are NOT borrowing the item, you are making another copy of the book, which is illegal.
loading....
In terms of copyright, piracy, and morality, we need to separate the issues.
1) Is it stealing to pirate something, and
2) Is it moral to pirate something?
The answer to #1 is clear, as has been made clear earlier. When you digitally pirate a file, you are not stealing because you are not physically depriving anyone else from the original.
The answer to #2 is not so clear.
Most of us have an inclination to say that it is not moral because artists have a right to earn money from the work that they do, so long as that work is valued by other people enough for those people to consume it. (I have no illusions that I should be paid $100k per year by drawing stick figures… no one cares about my drawings because I have no artistic talent.)
At the same time, however, the availability of cheap and free content has actually improved the industries in several ways. It reduces the cost of content delivery, and it increases overall consumption.
To use the music industry as an example… although the large record companies and top artists are making less, it is actually much easier to make a living as a musician now. This is good for consumers as well, because it allows for much greater variety… a musician no longer has to be as mainstream to find a following and make a living.
How does this happen? Free digital content allows an artist’s reputation to spread much more quickly and rapidly. Even if, say, 8 out of 10 people who listen to your music don’t buy your record and choose to pirate instead, word of mouth means that there are far greater numbers, and those 2 out of 10 add up. And maybe one out of 100 buys the special premium package that costs $250 with signed liner notes and a record dipped in gold or something.
(To add to that, people who pirate can’t be counted as “lost sales” automatically. Many times, those who pirate would never ever pay money for the vast majority of content that they download. Counting those downloads as lost sales just doesn’t work financially, because in a world without pirating, those sales wouldn’t happen anyway.)
It’s like Google’s freemium strategy. SO MANY people use Google’s free tools, but the small percentage that choose to upgrade float the costs of the free services.
Of course, piracy on an individual level is still sticky morally. It would be better if artists could choose to opt-in to this model or not, even if the smart ones mostly would.
But piracy isn’t going anywhere, and maybe it’s time that we all re-think our premises about the concept of copyright and intellectual property.
loading....
Thank you for that great story!
I too have tendencies to be extremely frugal (cheap) and then hoard the results. It was comforting to hear that you are managing to deal with this successfully. I hope that 2011 finds you making even more progress!
loading....
Louisa,
Thank you for another well written and honest post.
I can relate to these feelings as I too try not to spend money. In the past I often defended my stinginess by saying things like, “I’m a volunteer, I do not earn much.”
The people of Guatemala have taught me so much. Despite having very little they always give me food when I visit them. I wonder where this natural generosity comes from and I am ever so thankful that it is beginning to rub off on me after 21 months here.
Since embracing minimalism, I have come to learn that “stuff” including money and food come and go, it is life experiences that shape us into the people we want to be.
loading....
Very brave post.
#61…about getting things for free after coupons. I am sure stores love types like you. But if the item is on sale (by the store) and you use a coupon to get it free, the store will get their money back from the manufacturer. Your $1 coupon is actually worth $1.05 or maybe even $1.10 to that store owner. They treat those coupons with care. They do get reimbursed. Never fear.
But using your logic, do you make sure that each purchase you make is only when the store makes money? Don’t you ever buy “loss leaders” or “clearance sales” when stores just want to clean out their inventory and you can get pairs of pants for 99cents, etc. You can be sure that the store didn’t pay only 99cents for them (retail value $50).
I think your sense of morality needs to be retrained. Maybe some lessons in economics. OTOH, the stores love you.
loading....