There are are a lot of laudable things in this story, but it seems rather odd to attribute so much of the wealth accumulation to just Ms. Bloom. She had a husband who seems to have had three careers, two of which potentially had very generous pension benefits, and a third that often pays quite well.
Her husband died over a decade ago - the accounts being in just her name is literally proof of nothing, if they maintained separate finances prior to his death in most cases the assets would all be re-titled in her name.
For all we know her husband inherited $10m before he died, and she blew the difference in Vegas one weekend...
My point is that there is a lot of speculation in this article and not much in the way of facts
I think the point of the comment you responded to is that she was able to do what you say primarily because she and her husband didn't need (most) of her income at all: it was (almost) entirely disposable.
