*blink*

[unixronin]

So, in one or another of the Batman movies, one of the journalist characters comments that the rich are different from other people.  If this item is anything to go by, I'd say the difference is they're more gullible.  $1895 regular retail for a vest that, aside from the name on the label, isn't noticeably different from similar items sold for about $1830 less by the likes of, say, Old Navy or Dillard's?  Just what exactly does over $1800 worth of "better" look like that doesn't show in this photo?

Fashionistas are from another planet.  Seriously.

Comments

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

I am not really missing the point.

There is a tendency to lump all the rich into the "Paris Hilton" crowd. That is simply because that group is conspicuously rich and incredibly wasteful.

The wealthy that I know are the founders of companies, or sit on the boards of Russell 2000 companies, or are past executives of those companies. They are clearly in the top 1% of all earners in the country. The tendency you are describing, to have a "doesn't matter" threshold much higher than mine, doesn't survive contact with any of my personal experience.

I think that Sam Vimes has a clearer perspective on what it means to be wealthy than most of us. It means not buying a $10.00 pair of boots that will only last a few months, so you have to replace them six times a year. It means buying the $50.00 pair of boots that you will never need to replace. It means saving everything, so that when you need something, you never need to go out and buy it, it just needs to be pulled out of storage. Given that Terry Pratchett is the second most wealthy author living in the UK, he just might have some real insight.

I am not missing your point, I just feel that it doesn't match my personal experience, so I believe it to be in error.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

It means not buying a $10.00 pair of boots that will only last a few months, so you have to replace them six times a year. It means buying the $50.00 pair of boots that you will never need to replace.

When I go out and buy tools, for example, I don't buy the cheapest tool I can find that'll get the job done. I buy the best quality tool I can justify buying for that job and the number of times I expect to use that tool again in future. Since I try to avoid buying specialized tools that are only good for one job that you might have to do twice in ten years, that usually means I have a lot of future uses of the tool in mind.

That way, I very seldom have to buy a tool twice.

$1800 for a fairly boring and vanilla vest is still insane, even if I liked that style or had a use for it, which I don't.

(I believe I've identified a safari vest that will do what I wanted, for $30 from an online milsurp vendor.)

Exactly!

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

The quote you use is not mine, but Sam Vimes, a character in Terry Pratchett's Discworld. In that fantasy, the $10.00 boots are the only ones that are possible to buy because of income, $50.00 is three or four months gross salary.

Why would anyone assume that someone who is capable of amassing large quantities of cash, (or even just keeping the same) loses the habit of frugality? The habits that enable folk to become wealthy do not allow spendthrift behavior, even at the sub dollar level. They are just like you and your tools. They buy the best that they can justify. That is probably better quality than I can afford.