Results 1 to 8 of 8
Thread: Do you agree?
04-26-2012, 09:54 PM #1
Do you agree?
This blog post of a finance tracker website has got me intrigued. Especially with fish as a pet having the lowest cost.
Do you think this is true? : Lifetime Costs of PetsDa name's Paul. Not Dave. ROFL
Learn to give and take. That's how things should always work.
04-26-2012, 10:12 PM #2
I somewhat agree. I do think fish are the least expensive type of pet (usually, there are of course exceptions with people who buy a bunch of tanks or maybe get a SW tank). I do have to partly disagree with some things though, such as that food will cost $800.00, especially when considering that it only has supplies listed as $400.00. Well actually, I think this entire thing just depends on what fish you own and how you treat it, what size tank you have, etc.
Anyway, I notice I am just blabbering on. I do agree it is probably the cheapest pet to own.American League Champions! TIGERS!
04-26-2012, 10:12 PM #3
a single goldfish yea.
I'd hate to total up what I've spent in 3 years lolUsed to try and keep track of my fish here.....
Ran out of room and time!!!
Instead I'll tell you the best piece of fishkeeping equipment ever....... Algae Scrubber :)
04-26-2012, 10:32 PM #4
Pet rock FTW :-P
0Originally Posted by pjaldave
You could hardly call the list comprehensive since they do not include many many types of pets such as snakes, spiders, scorpions & sea monkeys just ottomh.Gas mileage isn't everything OIIIIIIIO
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.
Why pretend there are no stupid questions? Actually, There are many stupid questions: "Should I drink this bleach?" Is just one example.
Having said that, Just because it's a stupid question doesn't mean that it shouldn't be asked. It's better to know.
A warm beer is better than a cold beer. Because nothing is better than a cold beer, and a warm beer is better than nothing.
04-26-2012, 10:59 PM #5
Fish are expensive when you factor in time as well. Anyone who thinks fish are low maintenance pets probably shouldn't keep fish.
04-26-2012, 11:00 PM #6
hey! i think my fish are low maintenance but thats cause i enjoy keeping them clean lolKING OF THE GOLD BARBS RAWR!!!!
I wonder if i plant one of my tiger barbs would the demon seed grow to a full tree?
gotta love them bunnies!
I.R.S.: We've got what it takes to take what you've got!
04-26-2012, 11:11 PM #7
i think not. Because a pet hamster you think
-supplies: $30 can get you a pretty nice cage, with bowls and water bottle included; another $30 gets you all sorts of toys and the house for them to live in
-food: hamsters eat so little, that where i go i can get 2 lbs of food which lasts 2 months and costs $3.
-bedding: recycle and use shredded paper from old newspapers and mail.
Definitely cheapest animal is a hamster. :) The above total comes out to $72 for the first year plus the $10 for the hamster, and years after that its $60 cheaper due to not needing another cage and toys. I spend $300+ every year on fish, plus you have to factor in the energy costs to run all the equipment, and the money to buy the stock and the tank and stand and equipment in the first place...
Disagree totally. With my proof. :)
04-29-2012, 11:38 AM #8
Definately not. The time, food, equipment, SW changes, not to mention initial startup add up. I mix 55 Gallons at a time just for my weekly SW water changes. Although inexpensive, I have to add the Prime as a cost as well. I use a variety of foods such as Shrimp, Octopus and Squid as well as Mysis and Brine shrimp. Thats just my Eel tank. The additives, Phyto plankton and Cyclops I need for my 24G cube adds up as well...Life is tough, it's even tougher if your stupid.
If your not angry, your not paying attention...
9 Tanks (1-29G QT) ranging from 150G to 10G for my 1/2 moon Beta