On advice

I've changed a lot over the last ten years, but one thing for sure hasn't changed: I have very little tolerance for unsolicited advice. I also like to think that I don't dish it out, but I may slip sometimes.

The thing is, there's a kind of advice that is completely useless. Well, there are several, starting with the kind that frustrates most women to no end but somehow finds itself in comments from men all the time. It's the "you must think I'm stupid/no, I'm just helping you solve your problems" advice. For example:

Woman: I'm not sure I like this book.
Man: Well, don't read it, then.

Volumes have been written about that, and we've all probably experienced it, so I'll move on to the next useless kind of advice: That which starts with "you should."

As a wise woman put it, "'should' can be found in the dictionary between 'shit' and syphilis'." And that's because none of us is really in a position to tell another person what they should do. Only you know your situation, your goals, your priorities, etc.

If I may define that type of advice in the negative, i.e. by describing what useful advice would be, I'd say that useful advice takes the form of factual information. Let's contrast:

Useless: You should go to Las Vegas.
Useful: Depending on what you're interested in, Las Vegas is a good place to go because there is outdoor stuff to do just outside, and the city itself has its draws.

Useless: You should buy a new car now because they're offered at great prices.
Useful: If you're in the market for a car anyway, now is as good a time as any.

Over the years, I've gotten tons of both kinds of advice on jobs, real estate and relationships, and I'm glad that-- with the first two, anyway-- I was able to distinguish the good from the bad (and tune out the useless, because something about "you should" just makes me stop listening).

What got me thinking about this again was another great column from M.P. Dunleavey. The theme reasserted itself throughout the homebuying process, throughout the course of which everyone and her grandmother is full of useless advice. If you listen to other people's guidelines about how much of your income you should commit to housing, you'd be hard-pressed (on my income, anyway) to live in any major metropolitan area. I mean, I could have bought farther out to save $150 per month, and then committed that $150-- as well as more time-- to commuting costs. I've probably gone on, in these pages, about how years ago when I got out of grad school and took a job with an hourlong commute, my parents and their friends emphatically urged me to move closer, and I couldn't be happier that instead assessed my own priorities and refused. A friend of mine who bought a beautiful condo in the city often talks about how her monthly payment, high by the standards of any financial adviser, couldn't be more worth it.

Maybe I'm feeling the need to wax philosophical about this because I want to reassure myself that I made the right decision to go on a very expensive vacation (and then another vacation five weeks later). The same MSN money, which as you can gather, I strongly recommend for personal finance advice, just updated its financial savvy quiz. I do pretty well on these things, but the one thing I always get wrong is when they ask, 'a friend calls you up and invites you to a once-in-a-lifetime ski trip that you haven't budgeted for; what do you do?' The right answer is 'turn it down and start budgeting.' Well, I don't believe in turning down travel opportunities, unless they are truly exorbitant, and in that case they're not opportunities in the true sense of the word. I turn down, for example, offers from Smith College alum association to participate in $10,000 trips, but that's because for that kind of money I can take myself there on my own schedule. I mean, everyone's situation is different, but if you're securely employed, and I know that's a big 'if' these days, you'll make the money, but will you always have another chance to see a new part of the world?

Another friend spoke of the mental accounting that she was doing when she thought about remodeling her kitchen: she'd rather borrow to redo her kitchen than borrow to go on vacation. For some reason, it seemed more responsible, even though it's the same money, which is being borrowed so that she can do both. And I understand the mental accounting logically/emotionally-- I do it all the time-- but I'm going to argue that travel is a perfectly legitimate expense.

The financial advisers' rule of thumb is 'don't borrow for depreciating assets,' i.e. cars and clothes. Travel provides experiences of a lifetime (hopefully in a good way, but you'll never no unless you try).

This is especially the case for we single people, because we can't just decide to go somewhere and have a spouse at the ready as a travel partner. In lieu of that, we have to take those opportunities when they come up. I couldn't agree more with Ms. Dunleavey: sometimes it's worth making the decision that goes against all (or most) of the conventionally accepted financial advice.