No big deal. I've lived on much less than that in California.

Wow, that is pretty cool. She has such an amazing spirit. Good luck, Donna. Poeple think its impossible to live on so little, let alone do it on cash.

Everytime I think I have it rough, I hear about another family living below the poverty line, and yet paying of their debt and prospering.

We should all be so motivated to try and make-do with less, even for just a short period of time.

Yeah, what amazing spirit. I wonder what she would do if her ex-husband wasn't still paying her for nothing... get a job like other college students do?

Oh come on. Um, the lady is a student. $12,000 as a student is nothing. Especially with financial aide at her "income."

What would be more impressive is if she relocated to a low cost of living area. Then, worked full-time at a college, living like a pauper, and pocketing the rest.

That's not to say the woman isn't cheap/frugal/whatever, but,... it's a temporary situation during her college experience. It's not quite "real world" live this way for 20 years. If, in 20 years, she's still living on $12k a year and banking the rest, I'll be impressed.

She states that her income: "....consists of alimony and a portion of a school grant."

Lucky, very very lucky. Job + college _+ volunteering + social life + paying your own way = totally possible for the rest of us.

"...get a job like other college students do?"

Exactly.

That's not to say that I don't give kudos to the woman, but it's not like her circumstance is horrid or unnormal or even dire, compared to most students.

I did that for almost three years, paying $600/month in rent. It's really not that hard, if you can entertain yourself for cheap (I played computer games a lot) and don't go out to eat that much. You can even go out to a movie every month or so. However, I may be considered lucky because I have good health insurance and don't need to worry that much.

Blah, I am more fugal than her. I need not be but as a trained economist I like to practice what I "preach."

She needs more Lifehacking...

I hate to be a snob, but giving away used gifts that aren't awesome and one-of-a-kind is one of my major pet peeves. A girl I used to work with would dumpster dive for our Christmas gifts because she was cheap (she made more than I do, btw) and it totally disgusted me. If you want to save money on gifts try making them or just not giving out as many. Not every person you know needs something for Christmas. Plus, homemade gifts show much more love than a book (or garbage-can sweater).

"dumpster dive for our Christmas gifts"

That is flipping disgusting. I can understand (sort of) dumpster diving (if it's legal) for your OWN stuff, but for someone else? GROSS.

Wow, middy.

"Paying her for nothing" -- I doubt it. More likely, paying her for years of contributions and sacrifice toward HIS career and HIS earning potential. Not all wives get alimony any more; The fact that it was awarded means she likely was an at-home mom for years while her ex built his career and his life.

My ex-husband and I and our first baby lived on $25,000 a year for a while in the mid-90s. We shared a car. I made baby food. We used cloth diapers. More recently, since my divorce, I have been living on about $1600 per month -- That's with 3 children now. I take every advantage I can (Free babysitting from relatives, hand-me-down clothes for the kids), and I try to be very grateful that somehow, so far, we are surviving.

Poverty can be terrifying, but it also gives one so much gratitude.

I wonder why people here are so down on Ms. Freedman?

She explained clearly: Last year, she worked excessively and was a student also -- But she was exhausted and ill. News flash, people: Those of us who are no longer twentysomethings really do have health concerns that may prevent us from working 60-hour weeks while we attend school full-time.

Compassion is a simple gift to give. I give it to her. Divorce is difficult. Starting over is difficult. Poverty is difficult.

I wonder why so many of you are angry at her? She's just out there doing her best. What gives?

Responding to everyone who thinks that $12K a year is plenty for a student: it's not really in this case. When you were a student, you probably didn't have to pay full rent with full utilities (dorm living is really heavily subsidized), you didn't have the medical expenses of a 48-year-old, you didn't have to cook for yourself and pay for groceries, you didn't have to maintain a car and pay for insurance, you didn't have a daughter whose wedding you were saving up for. Most importantly, as a student, you had your parents to fall back on when times got tough. When you got $12,000 a year as a student it was $12,000 in spending money, Donna doesn't have but $400 a month that isn't allocated already and that needs to cover food, medical expenses, gasoline and utilities, not to mention savings.

Having just finished our 2006 taxes, I was amazed to recall that our gross income in 2005 was around $14k. We were both students with part/full time jobs and financial aid. I thought the stuff she talks about was pretty much standard fare for students.

But hell, if we could've afforded to give away $20 a month we sure would've felt high on the hog! We thought we were living the rich life when we'd buy coffee on Saturday mornings!

I don't think people are angry at her. It is just that surviving on 12k a year for a student is not that impressive. It's the way it is. I'm used to my student life with actually less money than that. True, it was a hard transition, as I was earning more money when I was working before I chose to go back to do grad studies, but it is not that horrible. Yeah, I don't get the latest and greatest. No eating out, no movies too often. But it is not that bad.

Think this belongs over at the Consumerist.

I also think she should get a job. If for nothing else to put the extra income in savings. Some people devote so much time to saving a penny that they end up loosing a dollar doing so. If she can work a job into that busy schedule of garage sales and dumpster diving she would have another $12,000 ready to go for next year. I think her time would be better spent working than waisting time praying for halogen lamps. IMHO

Best,

Tim

as a student, there's always internships in between semesters... My internship during grad school got me about $11000 before rent/food/etc. in one summer.

However, I think the main thing is not that she _can_ live off of 12k a year, but that if it is possible for that amount or less, then those of us with even higher incomes should be able to take some of that and save even more of our hard earned income.

//end of rant

I had a different concern. She writes:

"I'm poor by choice, because I needed to change my life."

And then:

"I love to eat. I don't love paying for it. ... So I shop very, very carefully, and I go to the food bank."

It seems inequitable to choose to make little money and then take from a food bank. If you have the power to do so, I would think it would behoove you to make some money before you take advantage of an organization that is meant, implicitly, to feed people who are involuntarily in poverty.

Particularly when she is taking from a limited pool of food, and then giving away $20 a month to her church.

I don't know. It doesn't seem right to take advantage of other people's charity by "gaming the system" and then patting yourself on the back for giving something away.

Here's a tip: eat two meals on the weekend. Wake up late on both days, go to the cheapest all-you-can-eat and stuff your face. $12 to get you through the weekend. Sucks...but it works.

I'm glad that A_B saw what was messed up with this article. The food bank isn't there for people who want to save money, it's for people who don't have money.

I didn't think of that, but I do agree. Kind of sucks to be taking from people who really have nothing. One thing to be frugal...another to steal from others.

@pixielauren: You're on point here. Seems like people are down on her for literally no legitimate reason other than their own haughtiness - if someone chooses to live a frugal and limited life, emphasis on the "choose," that's their business. She's trying to prove a point as to whether or not it's possible that she can get by on little to nothing, and mind you that's really nothing, and still study full time without distractions earning only the money she's getting in alimony (that was a really cheap and moronic shot at alimony, I'm glad you called that guy out on it, pixielauren.) and a portion of her school grant.

Sure she could just "get a job," but then she may not be able to focus entirely on school and getting her degree and tend to the other issues that are obviously under the surface in her life. Lay off of the self-sanctimonious attitude a little people, and focus on the point of the article: how to live frugally.

"It is just that surviving on 12k a year for a student is not that impressive. It's the way it is. I'm used to my student life with actually less money than that."

Exactly.

I can't believe she CHOSE to go to school, chose NOT to get a JOB, and goes to the food bank. That is appalling. Save the food banks for those with many children, wage earner jobs, etc. who can't afford ramen. She repulses me for doing this.

I agree with others who say she should get a job.

Or, at least, not take advantage of the food bank. I draw the line there.

"It seems inequitable to choose to make little money and then take from a food bank. If you have the power to do so, I would think it would behoove you to make some money before you take advantage of an organization that is meant, implicitly, to feed people who are involuntarily in poverty."

Bingo.

I'm done reading this. The fact that she has the NERVE to take advantage of a food bank because of her CHOICES-- and student-ness, NOT poverty-- is absolutely pathetic.

Taking from the truly, involuntary poor like this, she doesn't deserve jack. That is absolutely pathetic of her.

Whatever her age is, she could get a job of some sort-- such as, at the school for free tuition and to support herself.

"Sure she could just "get a job," but then she may not be able to focus entirely on school."

Um. A part-time job wouldn't kill her. Many of us worked-- part-time, if not full-time-- during school and came out okay.

Ok, enough reading about a woman who steals from the truly poor folks food bank. *#*(!@!!!!

No, it wouldn't kill her - I had a part time job during my undergrad studies and a full time job during my graduate studies, and yeah, I made it.

And yeah, I paid for my own food and didn't go around "stealing" from food banks and community pantries.

...but that doesn't mean I have nothing to learn from or have the call to shout shit about someone who's doing it differently than I did. That's my point. Off the high horse and out of the "I'm better and I can do it better and she should too" saddle and let's come back down to see what we can learn, even if we don't like the way she's doing it.

As if I didn't feel bad enough about my spending habits. Of course, $20k a year in rent alone doesn't help any.

Time=Money (if you have the skills that can be put to use that is). Some of the stuff she listed is actually a waste of time. To the people who support her by saying she is too old to get a job should probably take note of the effort she might have to put in for some of those activities.
I used to spend time trying to find deals and rebates for the stuff I bought I was a student - I learnt that it was not always worth spending 1 hour on the phone for a $10 rebate.

focus on the point of the article: how to live frugally.

That's what I thought the point was, too. It wasn't intended an attempt to garner sympathy for being poor.

"focus on the point of the article: how to live frugally."

... with handouts.

Um, the woman has several part time jobs. Did y'all even read the article?

I support my daughter and I on less than $8,200 a year. We live a decent life. I moved to an area that has a very low cost of living. We eat a poverty diet which isn't the healthiest but we eat. We have health care and low co-pays. Do I miss living on 110K a year? Not really, being poor and thinking about what I do is much more rewarding than "having" to buy a new computer each year to keep up with the tech industry.

As for getting food from the food pantries, it's there for her. Food pantries are done for people who can't get food stamps for whatever reason. The author makes too much money to get food stamps. You do have to go through a qualifying application to get food from food pantries. You can't drive up in a Lexus and get a can of beans.

As for her $20 monthly donation - do the people who complain about it even do that much? Do you all give that much to people who need help? Look at it this way - it's her spending money and she's spending it on helping people rather than a a few songs at the iTunes store. Another way to look at it is that she;s giving it to the food pantry she goes to.

I wish the best for Donna in the upcoming school year. It's going to be very uncomfortable.

I do wish she were more specific about the college details - she mentioned she went back to college - is this a four year college, a community college, or a vocational college? I went to 2 years of community college so that I could afford the remaining 2 years at a state college (20% of it came from loans, the rest was through working 50 hours a week). That saved me at least $9,000 a year; at the time I was only paying $11 per unit (only 5 years ago!).

The part-time job is a must, however. As she noted, the 20 hours will mean food stamps. A job on campus will pay more than elsewhere. And instead of tithing the $20 she herself could use to the church, what about volunteering her time there? I'm sure that would mean more than hard cash.

@IBelieveInFairies: She doesn't qualify for food stamps because "I don't have a "regular" job of at least 20 hours a week, I don't qualify for food stamps." Not because she works too much. In any case, I'm also appalled at the food bank hand outs, if she's choosing her "frugal" lifestyle. That point makes absolutely no sense to me, and guess what...if you're investing in your educated future which will hopefully include a decent job, then I would think it worthwhile to take out 1-2K in student loans (fed or private) to feed yourself properly!

"@IBelieveInFairies: She doesn't qualify for food stamps because "I don't have a "regular" job of at least 20 hours a week, I don't qualify for food stamps." Not because she works too much. In any case, I'm also appalled at the food bank hand outs, if she's choosing her "frugal" lifestyle."

True. Loans, jobs (at least 20 hours a week; she said she quit some of her babysitting/whatever jobs already), etc. are all part of the student experience. If she worked full-time at a college, she wouldn't have to get loans. Period. And, she's hardly working-- she's getting handouts from the ex-husband, the food bank, etc.

- End rant. Happy hour.. drinks on.. erm.. her! Later, kids!

It's interesting to note in the context of alimony and support payments, which the author is living on, the spouse that was the significant money earner cannot artificially lower his/her income. He or she cannot decide, if for example, they were a brain surgeon, to start a free clinic and pay less in alimony (this example is taken from reality).

Whereas she's "dropped out" of society and living on alimony, her husband doesn't have that option. Generally speaking, he's on the hook for the alimony payment regardless of whether or not he feels like going back to school.

"As for getting food from the food pantries, it's there for her."

Food pantries are, as I understand it, for those who cannot afford to pay more for food. My impression is she makes less money than she can for personal reasons. She doesn't have a lot of money, but that's her choice. If she has untapped earning potential, which it sounds like she could easily revert to, then she shouldn't take advantage of a charity organization.

Another way to look at it is that she;s giving it to the food pantry she goes to.

She's essentially redistributing charity donations to her own ends. The food bank should be the group wtih control over its funds. Not her.

Imagine it this way: if the food bank has the resources to feed 100 people, and the author is #100, #101 doesn't get food. The author then gives her $20 to her church. But what if #101 has nothing to do with her church? The food bank, I'm sure, would rather feed #101, rather than have #100 take her excess cash and give it to a different organization.

Let's scale it up: What if she pulled up to the food bank with a truck, took all the food, sold it for cash, and gave that cash to her church so it could have a blood drive. Would that be right? What about all the people that gave to the food bank and wanted to feed people? Sure, a blood drive is good, but that's not what people wanted done with their donations.

What's particularly egregious, I think, is that she's proud of herself for what is, essentially, redistribution of resources.

@katana: I thought you were done? We already get it, you have nothing to learn or gain from this experiment, so why do you keep trashing it? Unless you have something to gain from continuing to diminish the article?

Handouts or no handouts, I think we could all easily substitute our own earnings in place of her "handouts," and I'd hardly call alimony a "handout," or her student grant, which could have been well earned, as another "handout," and take away something positive or at the very least non-grousing, from her experiment. I'm looking forward to reading what else she manages to do on meager funds, and how living with a short bank account forces you to change your habits and lifestyle.

I couldn't give a crap about the NATURE of her choice, or whether I have the right or the gall to say she's right or wrong for doing as she does. I'll leave the philosophical debate up to the people who prefer talking past the point.

I still don't get why people are focusing on where the money does or doesn't come from. How is it relevant? For all I care, her $12,000 could have been dropped on her doorstep by a flying unicorn. Her point was to describe what she does, to show that it's possible, and to help other people do the same.

"@katana: I thought you were done?"
--

I thought you were. And, I thought I was. Obviously none of us will stop, so why do you ask? The nerve of such a pathetic person- anyone- to accept food bank and similar items without being truly, unwillingly poor disgusts me.

"What's particularly egregious, I think, is that she's proud of herself for what is, essentially, redistribution of resources."

Exactly. That's what gets me. There's nothing to be proud of in her cause.

Show me someone who is EARNING a low income and supporting THEMSELVES.. then, I'll applaud you. In this situation, that is NOT the case. It's a student being given handouts. Big 'effin deal. Not impressive.

I'm a disabled person living on social security disability. Surviving on less than 12K a year is
an involuntary fact of life. I commend this womans commitment to improving her life. Especially returning to school at 48. Been there done that. I would make two suggestions. first she mentions riding the bus. If she has access to public transportation, loose the car. My disability doesn't allow me to drive anymore and after 6 years I still miss the lack of mobility, but the silver lining in this particular gray cloud was the huge savings when I no longer had to pay for gas, insurance, maintenance and sundry.
The other thing is the tithe, why not give it to the food bank instead. Giving it to the church puts an extra layer between the giver and the need, and usually that layer absorbs an inordinate amount of the gift.
I wish her well.

It's a shame that even though we dislike the method with which she conducts the experiment, we can't look to her conclusions as valuable information.

I'm with the people who agree that where the money or the food comes from is irrelevant to the discussion. Whether you agree with her methods or not is up for debate, but it's a shame to see what could have been an informative thread derailed in favor of a high-horsed philosophical debate over ethics in a case where we don't have anywhere near enough information to make a remotely educated conclusion.

Regardless, I'm looking forward to her updates. I think that regardless of whether her meager funds are "handouts" or (more likely) not, and whether her methods are pallatable to some folks' egoes, there's a lot to be learned here.

I lived by myself (no parents aid, no gov aid, etc), for 12K € per year in two different cauntries, (ireland (dublin) and spain (madrid) working 38-40 hours per week (6,5€/hour), and it's no big deal to survive. Just change the way you live, share your house (even your bedroom), go by bike or bus, say goodbye to your car, find the cheapest food, etc.

p.s. and please, throw away the idea that europe or spain are cheap places to live. Rent a single room apartment cost around 400-600€, and a double room apartment 700-900€ per month (only for the rent, no extras included like internet, light, etc).

I think a real quest is live with 600-800€ per month

Glyph45, you represent true need and commendability.

Unlike the lame student featured in the article who wasn't really in a hardship of any sort, you seem to be.

While the "idea" of being cheap, living cheap, etc. is good, the method in which she does it is neither inventive, impressive, nor rare. She's a student who does not work often and receives alimony, grants, etc. Aside from where the money comes from, the article isn't as heart warming as a true hardship story would be.

Some people are legit. and involuntary undergoing hardships. Let's look at the figures.

For *workers*, the poverty level in the U.S.A. for one person is $9,800 (source: http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/06poverty.shtml).

I would much rather hear about any of the 31.2% of children in Arkansas in 2003 who (or whose families) managed to help themselves reached a sustainable income. That aside, there are those that are actually truly poor at there-- and for those folks, I feel sorry for them.

Other interesting facts:

"24 -- percentage of the workforce in low-wage jobs (under $9 per hour) 9

31.2 -- percentage of children living in poverty in 2003 in Arkansas, the state with the most impoverished children in the nation 1

46.8 -- percentage of Americans aged 65 or older who would have had incomes below the poverty line without Social Security benefits, from 2000 to 2002 10

8.7 -- percentage of Americans aged 65 or older who did have incomes below the poverty line, even with Social Security benefits, from 2000 to 2002 10"

(source: http://www.grist.org/news/counter/2006/02/13/poverty/)

One woman's pity party aside, for those of us whom actually work and pay our own way in life in a responsible and independent fashion, we could *work* to keep our own costs cheap/cheaper.

For sentiment's sake, I would agree that her story is neither impressive, rare, or heartwarming, but I fail to see anywhere in the article where that's supposed to be the point or aim of the experiment, or the article, so I can't see the value of claiming that her points are invalid because she's "not really poor"/"chose to be this way"/"takes so-called handouts"/"etc, etc, ad nauseum."

The experiment is to share knowledge on the lessons of living on meager funds, making the kinds of CHOICES that we can make to immediately make ourselves richer by decreasing our wants and needs. There's nothing that those of us who "work" for our living can't learn from someone who may not choose the path that we do, even if, as stated before, it's not palatable to our personal ego.

@katana

links dont work =[

I must admit I give her credit for trying this "experiment" with a daughter and the responsibilities of a grown adult female. But I'm not sure that this is 'new' or 'exciting' to the rest of the world. Much of the world lives on less than that. Many single parents, students, and others live on less.

Maybe the point she is trying to make is not the end result, but the transition. I'd like to see a blog of this or at least an update a couple times a month.

Is she revolutionizing or even making a dent in her lifestyle? No. But a lesson learned may be with the year.

I think it's great. There's nothing wrong with scaling back and simplifying. One of the authors of Your Money or Your Life said he lived on $6,000 a year (this was in the 90s). I've also scaled back a lot in the last couple years (How I Save Money, A Guide to Living Frugal), and I haven't felt like I was depriving myself at all. It's all a matter of priorities.

Here's the shorter version of how to survive on $12k a year.

1) Ramen Noodles
2) Library card vs. tv/computer/internet

At least I'm not "eating frugally" by swiping food banks.

While an enormous number of people are living, pursuing their interest, and even raising children on that income, her tone reflects the fact that what she is doing is outside of her experience, not that she is the first person to do it. Would we rather read about her staying in a loveless relationship but having a really kick-ass media center?

Like some of you I'm surprised by the hostility in some of the comments, Lifehacker normally being about a lot of pretty cool folks helping each other out. Remember the context everybody... It's a one page essay from MSN Money. Lets get back to the love. Or at least the lifehacking.

Wow!

It's funny that people are saying she doesn't deserve to shop at the food pantry. Why not? She is working (She still has part-time babysitting and writing jobs, she says) AND going to school full-time. She's got more than a full-time workload when you add school plus work.

Lots of government programs help those who are going to school. It's not rocket science: She'll no longer need the food pantry when she's done with college and earning a decent wage. It's not taking advantage. She REALLY IS poor. And if she is poor "by choice" -- Well, what is her alternative? To work at a low-wage job for the rest of her life because she can't afford school without using the food pantry?

How about my situation as another example: I earn very little because I did not work for more than 10 years (I raised my kids). In 2006 I began working full-time, but I did not have enough money. I had two choices: Get a second job, or get public assistance.

I got the assistance (Food stamps).

According to the logic of those who are angry at Ms. Freedman, you'd all say I should have taken the second job, and leave the food stamps for those who "really" can't afford food.

I mean really? When is somebody "allowed" to use public assistance? When do you think it's "okay" -- Seems like until somebody has three jobs and is working their fingers to bloody stumps, you all think they should not be allowed to go to a food bank.

A note to A_B:

You mention that the ex-husband cannot also choose to alter his life such that he could not afford to meet his alimony obligation.

True, I suppose, but what you're missing is, he (probably) already had the chance to attend school, get a degree, and build a career. All while his wife (probably) ran his errands, cooked his dinners, cared for his child, cleaned his home, did his laundry, and delayed her own education and career.

Of course I'm making assumptions about Ms. Freedman's marriage, but I make them based on her alimony award: She wouldn't have been awarded it if his financial/career status weren't much higher than hers, nor if the judge believed she had not contributed significantly to his income or job status.

Her husband had his chance to create a life that he loves. Now, it's her turn.

Lastly: Alimony payments are a finite obligation. He can go be an altruist, join the monastery, start a hippie commune, whatever, in a few short years, I'm sure.

Her marriage aside i think the bottom line here is that this woman is robbing from poor people just so she can save a couple bucks as A_B pointed out. It's just plain wrong and there are people out there living on the streets who are missing arms and legs who actually CAN'T go out and get a job. Meanwhile this woman who seems perfectly healthy enough to live on such a diet by choice is taking advantage of the system. Why doesn't she just get on welfare and and take advantage of food stamps and have SSI pay her rent for her while she's at it.
Or maybe she could even adopt a kid and get a tax refund and just have WIC pay for her food.

@pixielauren and all
Agreed. In some situations, struggling by sleeping on couches, starting companies in garages, eating the same thing all the time, is seen as admirable, but touch those resources that help us to feel OK about the incredible poverty in this country, and look out. It seems like just about any mention of them gets tense quickly. Those resources are tax dollars, and personal donations there to help individuals, and in the long term all of us prosper. The people screwing this up are the the ones who have cut the meager funding available to those people trying to do good.

On a lighter note:

I want to second libraries. Books, computers, CDs, DVDs, copiers, scanners, coffee, some sketchy characters, and some super nice people. Next time you are killing time (Yes you do), remember that you can search most library systems online and they will haul your request over to your local branch for you. Most every time I stop by my local branch, one or more of the two million items they have spread all over town are sitting on a shelf waiting for me. Can't beat it.

http://www.publiclibraries.com/

I might have been harsher than I needed to be nevertheless I just cannot comprehend how Freedman could fail to optimize her life with tips found on lifehacker and seemingly dish out her lackluster tips. Darn I am being harsh once again...

I would say that the tips found in these comments are superior as well as the tips found on leo.babauta site.

How about a Lifehacker challenge by frequent commenters on how actually life frugal and truly thrive? I would be down to continue to live below my means and post about it. I cannot matcher Freedman in housing costs but all else equal I think that I can give her a run for her money...

@zolielo & all
Agreed. While I manage to keep some thing crazy low, spending stops me from being able to call myself frugal (Damn you Bensbargains.net!), and that would mean so much more time/energy to put towards my totally silent, whole wheat, linux waffle server.

...Request line?

I am a PhD student. I recently found out that I owed more than $4000 because I had taken a class that my department didn't want to pay for. They didn't let me know this until after I had finished the class.

My income, minus rent, and before taxes is 13,600. Paying for the class leaves me with 9,350. I was lucky enough to have some savings which made my income closer to Ms. Freedman's. I was also lucky enough not to have debt. I don't own a car. I had a lease that I couldn't easily break, so I continued to live in my over-priced apartment. Part of the conditions for my stipend are that I cannot easily have an additional job. Not to mention that I'm in lab six to seven days a week.

After all that sob story, I really didn't find living within my means all that difficult. I shop for meat, and bulk supplies at Costco - my wonderful parents give me my membership fee for Christmas every year (this is a great gift for your broke friends). I get my veggies at the veggie truck for a dollar a bag. My friends know that I'm broke, so they don't expect me to be able to go out with them all the time - or we go places where I can afford. I don't buy books at all, ditto music. I don't own a car. I'm lucky enough to live within walking distance of my workplace. I don't buy too much clothing.

I am surprised that Ms. Freeman doesn't qualify for the Federal work-study program. As someone who works in a field where we hire work-study students frequently, I'd be happy to have someone working 20 hours a week. I know that going to school full time and holding a job, even a part time job, is difficult. But no one said that she had to work the full 20 hours a week. Working 10 hours a week at a work study job, she could add three thousand dollars to her annual income. And, if she's lucky she could score a job at a library where she could multi-task and get some homework done. Perhaps the reason she didn't take advantage of this possibility is that it would be recorded income and allow her alimony to be readjusted. Her other jobs sound like they could have easily been under the table.

That said, I think that there's probably a lot left out of her article. She doesn't discuss, other than mentioning insurance, the cost of running her car.

Its much more than average salary person gets in my country and most prices are really high here. Stop whining...

this essentially belittles the actual struggles of those who actually hold jobs and get paid crap. Without the alimony and student aid, could she do it then? If she had to find a job that paid minimum wage (which wouldn't make it to the 12K mark) could she do it then.

I think some of her ideas are great, for sure. I've done a few, but some are practically stealing or socially not polite (pocketing extra candies). I have been relatively poor. For a year I had a "free" place to live (my employer's house) and only got paid enough to buy some food here and there... I ate a lot of rice, corn, chicken/ground beef and jiffy mix. Not much else... earning my dues I guess.

In college I had a work study job. It's not income. I was expected to buy my books with it, but I actually had to GO TO CLASS to learn anything, so finding time to squeeze in on the job (I didn't have a STUDY-work job) was hard.

The sentiment is good... her situation is much easier than most will ever have.

Oh, and her being poor by choice and going to the food bank is morally questionable. Sure, I could get more food for my money going there, but we donate food to the bank for people who suffer by no choice of their own.

I agree with some points in this thread, but the most shocking thing to me was the link to an article smack in the middle of this one titled "Scraping by on $150,000 a year"

My question: Was this article meant as a jab at the other??

I applaud her for being able to live off of $12,000 a year, but as a college student myself. I would NEVER leave my finances up to prayer :).