Published at
Did you read my colleague Marie-Eve Fournier‘s column last week on cellular plans? Marie-Eve highlighted the fact that we often pay for data-rich plans, but in the end, the usage was much more restricted than that, and that it was wasted money. No less than 90% of the cell phone bill could thus be paid in a vacuum1.
We could read there that people sometimes pay $75 for their cell phone plan. And that’s just for the package. Add in a device, and the bill can exceed $100 per month, before taxes.
I’m going to take a moment to work on myself and pull myself together.
That’s it, it’s done.
My opinion? Paying $75 or $100 per month for a cell phone is a completely legitimate expense for people who own a mortgage-free home, have no debt, and hold somewhere between $5 and $10 million in financial investments.
If this is your case, I have nothing to teach you here. Otherwise, I have great news: It is optional to self-inflict high bills and pay into the void in many areas in 2025.
For the cellular plan, Marie-Eve’s text gave a series of options ranging from $30 to $42 per month.
For those who often have access to WiFi, Public Mobile also offers a 5 GB plan for $25 per month.
And, to unlock the ultimate level, a 1 GB plan is offered at $19 per month.
Can the human species survive on 1 GB or 5 GB per month? Or is it the tragic end of an experience that has lasted for 300,000 years now? The question is open.
And, remember: going from an $80 monthly bill to $25 doesn’t save $55. That saves $10,000.
This is the amount that you will accumulate every ten years, if we calculate a return of 7% on the amount invested.
Living in the void
If I like to break down expenses like the cell phone bill, it’s because they are recurring. And so we save constantly, and above all without effort.
Calculating what goes to waste is an excellent way to optimize our expenses.
For example, the biggest item of expenditure is of course housing. Here too, we spend in a vacuum, and not roughly.
There were 4 people per household in Quebec in the 1960s. We are at 2.2 people per household today.
So the houses are smaller, right?
We all know the answer. The average single-family home built in the last 10 years is 76% larger than that built in the 1960s, according to an analysis by Protect Yourself2.
“Of the 41 OECD countries, Canada offers the highest number of rooms per capita, at 2.6,” notes the magazine. It is thus ahead of New Zealand and the United States, at 2.4. The average for OECD countries is 1.7. »
We are the champions of the void! A self-inflicted void that must be furnished, heated, maintained, renovated, and for which we pay school and municipal taxes, in addition to paying interest on the mortgage loan.
OK, but we’re happier when we live in a big house, right?
This is a case where research goes against the reflex: as I talked about in a text last summer, studies show us that the link between the size of a home and happiness is weak or non-existent.3.
Moving air
Speaking of vacuum, the one you carry with you every day is also surprisingly expensive.
At 1.2 people per vehicle on average, our beautiful big machines are mainly used to move air. Yet, as with houses, their size has exploded in recent years.
Here is a table taken from the most recent edition of the book Retirement at 40by Jean-Sébastien Pilotte. It shows the true cost of owning a motor vehicle, including depreciation, gas, maintenance and insurance, among others.
To make his calculation, Jean-Sébastien Pilotte used data from the CAA, and calculated the investment of the sum at the end of each year with a return of 7%.
The next time you see a Porsche 911 Turbo, spare a thought for the 3.6 million dollars that its driver incinerates in order to forge an imaginary identity and to “consume at the height of one’s social rank,” as Mr. Pilotte writes.
Even the car of my dreams, a sparkling new Toyota Corolla, impoverishes its owner by almost $700,000 over 30 years!
Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying to never spend on anything. It would be a sad way to live your life. But I like to face the true cost of things. This avoids having regrets later.
We hear everywhere that saving is impossible. For a person who has a precarious job, who earns little money, yes, I can understand it. But for a person who earns a good living? Being unable to save is not a normal or inevitable condition. It is the consequence of choices we make, often without realizing it.
Strangely, at the heart of these choices, we often find… emptiness.
1. Read the column “Cellular telephony: 90% of your bill paid in vain”
2. Read the article by Protect Yourself
3. Consult the study “Housing and Happiness: an empirical study” (in English)
