[csense]

> Now imagine someone who...holds business meetings at starbucks...[or] drives late at night...and...keeps himself awake by buying coffee from starbucks

These examples are unusual. The typical case imagined by the OP is that the value of movies and Starbucks is smaller than the price paid for them, and for a consumer in that typical case, it's possible to arbitrage by reallocating budget away from them.

From the article:

> I try to hold off or not buy at all, when it’s just a "want" without any real obvious value beyond the purchase.

It's pretty clear that he's saying to avoid purchases where cost >> long_term_value (where ">>" means "much greater than"). He is taking the benefits into account, but largely restricting his attention to cases where the benefit is minimal -- at least from a long-term view.

> There is a big difference between negative EV betting (lotteries), and positive EV betting.

You're definitely right to criticize the author on that aspect -- his stated reason for avoiding lottery tickets doesn't give a favorable impression of his understanding of probability.