Comments | frugal_fans: Article about the Psychology and Philosophy of Spending

kuzibah in frugal_fans

Article about the Psychology and Philosophy of Spending

Feb 23, 2005 08:29

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Savinganddebt/Savemoney/P107710.asp

A few choice quotes:

The trappings of affluence are no longer limited to those who can afford them. Increasingly, middle-class Americans will pay top dollar just to have the ( Read more... )

Comments 12

wesleysgirl February 23 2005, 14:19:45 UTC

I think that's probably true for a lot of people, and it's hard to escape that kind of mindset.

We drink cheap wine. The cost of a bottle of wine doesn't seem to have anything to do with whether we like it or not. We often like a cheap wine just as much as a more expensive one, and it doesn't make any sense to me to spend more money just because we 'should' have that kind of taste. Maybe if someone really knowledgable about wine sat me down and had me try expensive wine I'd be able to tell the difference. Or maybe not. :-P

kuzibah February 23 2005, 14:49:05 UTC

Actually, it's funny you bring this up. I have a friend who is a big wine lover, and he claims cost alone is not a good indicator of quality, and an educated wine consumer can easily find good "bargain" wines just by doing a little internet research.

Of course, I don't drink, but it was interesting from an academic perspective.

lemniskate February 23 2005, 14:25:14 UTC

yeah, it's... we've got this instant gratification culture, and this buys into it -- there was an interesting article in Wired about how high ticket items are becoming more available and at more reasonable prices (compared proportionately to the cost of living and income levels in the past) at places like the big warehouse clubs. Expensive items used to actually mean you were rich -- now, they might mean that, or they might mean you have messed up priorities ;)

spikewriter February 23 2005, 15:14:16 UTC

Yes...and no.

My mom is a great one for the frugal, but when I was growing up in Texas, I remember her shopping regularly at Neiman-Marcus and having a Neiman's charge account. (This was back in the days when Nieman's was the upscale store in Texas.) I asked her once why she did this. She explained that a Neiman's card looked good on the credit record and she paid it off when the bill arrived ( ... )

I knew people would pick up on the sheet thing kuzibah February 23 2005, 15:35:46 UTC

Mainly because this has only become a selling point in the last few years. I mean, they probably listed it before, but I can't recall ever hearing anyone say they just bought whatever-count sheets until recently. I have a set of sheets I bought when I got married 14 years ago. They were JC Penney, not the cheapest on the shelf, but not very expensive, either. I don't know the thread count, but I doubt it's 1000. They are still good. Colors haven't faded, no worn spots, elastic still springy, etc. Seriously, they could fall apart tomorrow, and I wouldn't consider they owed me anything, but I expect them to last awhile longer. How much better would sheets have to be to justify a ten-fold price tag? I do a lot of sewing, myself, and admire well-made cloth, but I can't justify $600 sheets when I know a $60 set will last 15 years with care. Does it feel just as soft and luxurious against my skin? Well, no, but it's not like it's keeping me awake, either ( ... )

Re: I knew people would pick up on the sheet thing spikewriter February 25 2005, 15:14:35 UTC

Oh, Penney's sheets are definitely not a 1000 thread count, but they're probably 200-300 count, which seems to be the bottom level for respectable sets in the last fifteen years or so. (Showing my age, I remember when 200 ct was the big selling points about 25 years ago.)

Part of the reason I picked up at it was because I happen to have had a set of 100 count sheets, courtesy of my m-i-l. These were -- I kid you not -- used motel sheets that she gifted the husband and I with just after our wedding. We'll leave aisde the fact that when I saw the stamp on the sheets proclaiming them motel property, there was no way I was putting these things on my mattress when I had other sets available, and focus on the fact that these were horribly rough, like the fabric one would use on an outdoor chaise, just not as heavy.

Trust me, if you have an alternative, you don't want 100 ct. We cut the sheets up and used them as rags, btw; it was the only thing we could see doing ( ... )

nancylebov February 23 2005, 16:25:56 UTC

If I'm at all typical, people have some items where quality is important to them and others where they can't tell the difference between decent and wonderful. For example, I really don't seem to get much out of fresh-ground parmesan, and the $4/pound ground Asiago makes me happy. After a number of purchases, I'm pretty sure that I just don't get entertainment value from soap. On the other hand, good chocolate does matter to me, though, say Black and Green (more expensive than Hershey's but not the most expensive) really does contribute to my quality of life.

tx_cronopio February 23 2005, 16:33:36 UTC

While I have no opinion on thread count, I'll weigh in about keeping up with others. I'm experiencing this inflation of expectations in less tangible ways. For whatever reason, my social circle consists of folks who have/make a lot more money than I. I've found that it starts affecting the friendship. The way many of my women friends socialize is, "hey, let's go to Italy together next month," or "Why don't we do Canyon Ranch this spring break?" Or, always wanting to meet at expensive restaurants.

It's been really hard for me to be creative and maintain these friendships with women I love, all the while being the one who declines every invitation.

I hope this isn't off-topic --- I'm thinking along the lines of people equating quality time with their friends with the "wealth and luxury" model cited in the original post. Sometimes it really is OK to just go for a walk in the park, or grab a cup of coffee.

Anyone else find this to be a problem?

nope... ngakmafaery February 24 2005, 23:48:11 UTC

...most of my current friends are poor too. Still, maybe desserts and coffee at a great restuarant is more affordable than a meal...? Maybe doing the spa thing at home for an evening together with components bought from everywhere (costly, mid-range, drugstore, so people can bring what they want and then everyone compare what's really worth it, for example) might be fun...it also depends on how thoughtful the friends are, and if they're real friends. There's nothing wrong with them or you wanting to do fun stuff together, but good luck when it's all expensive and you're not rich...!

Re: nope... tx_cronopio February 25 2005, 04:00:37 UTC

Thanks for your comment, I completely agree. I've let a couple fall by the wayside when it became apparent that they weren't willing to consider cheaper activites...like you said, not real friends. Still, it can be lowering.

Re: nope... ngakmafaery February 25 2005, 14:35:26 UTC

I think it can be very disappointing, because the fact that 'money' means so much, to the point that countless people and animals etc. have died for lack of it, is complete BULLSH*T. Really! It's not even food itself, or heat itself, or safety itself, but this other imposed middle-man! And the society is so messed up it still is not accepting that there's an outrageous imbalance which will make things worse in future (like many many angry poor people have staged lots of revolutions in past, etc.). I think there's no reason why people shouldn't have nice things or fun adventures etc. if they want to, without the money barrier...I personally think that money is on its way out, and not that many people accept that as maybe-true yet...there was a recent survey that fifty percent of the people were frantic over debt (49 to 51%, I think), and the others weren't, and I think that indicates big big problems...oh well...so much for that subject!