-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
My toothpicks are only $500. That represents a significant savings over $35,000. How many would you like? Any orders over 50 pieces will receive a whopping 5% discount. I'll even pick up the freight.
How's that for a free market?
That's fine, if you can get someone to buy $500 toothpicks, then good luck with that...
-
Manufacturing and pertformance
I don't think you can extricate just performance for this argument. The manufacturing, or in the case of the cable, the dearth of manufacturing, is intricately linked to performance. As a component becomes more complex, more things can affect performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
do you believe an Amplifier can be worth $35K? Many persons claim there is nothing to justify an amp costing so much (and an amp is a lot more complicated than a toothpick or a cable or even a wa...)
I do believe it, although it needn't be that expensive for my needs.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by emaidel
Good Lord, has this thread ever gone waaayyyy off topic. The initial title was "$35K for speaker cables!" with the clear indication that that eye-popping price tag opened Pandora's box in terms of whether or not they were worth it. In my opinion, as well as that of some others, no freakin' way! That amount of money can buy a nice CAR, for krissakes!
A $35K automobile, while hardly outrageously expensive by today's standards, is still a pretty decent piece of machinery, taking hours and hours of labor, and thousands of parts to put together. Yes, the same can be said for a much cheaper car, but then a $35K car most definitely will be better appointed, be more comfortable to sit in and drive, and likely, outlast the cheaper car. In many respects, certain $35K cars are out and out "values."
One can't say the same thing for $35K speaker cables. Unless they're made of pure gold, or some other superexpensive material, there's just no reasonable explanation I can think of to justify the price. I'm sure they'll significantly outperform my $600 Z-Series cables, but certainly not enough to justify the difference in price between the two..
Insofar as my $4K (not $5K) watch, like pappa said, it's a "precison" timepiece, painstakingly and lovingly assembled in Switzerland. In the 15 years that I've owned it, it hasn't lost or gained a second (save the few times the battery had to be replaced), which I don't think can be said of a Timex (are they still around?), or a $200 Seiko. While not a "value," it's worth every cent of its price, and will likely outlast me, my step-children, and my grandchildren. And, those grandchildren can expect the crystal to be as clear and scratch-free as it still is since the day I received it.
I know this won't satisfy everyone, but it's my opinion, for whatever that may be worth.
It is your right to determine if your $4K watch is worth it to you... While I appreciate the exquisite craftsmanship and selection of materials involved in making such a watch, I don't personally see it as being worth the money... But who cares whether I think it is, you're the person who made the purchase...
$4K for a speaker cable is not worth it to me either, because I'd rather buy a pair of Speakers for that money and use some sub $200 speaker cables with them... But once again, who cares what I personally think it is worth... The man with the $4K should be allowed to make that decision himself...
It's not for me to tell you whether a watch, cable, phone or pair of jeans is worth $4K... That's a decision you make on your own...
I just find it amusing how willing we are to accept extreme prices for some products but are so offended by the prices of others...
An excellent condition copy of the first appearance of Superman sold recently for $1M... A Picasso print (not original) sells for an exorbitant amount of money... A bottle of wine can cost thousands... Yet we casually accept so many of these things...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
I don't think you can extricate just performance for this argument. The manufacturing, or in the case of the cable, the dearth of manufacturing, is intricately linked to performance. As a component becomes more complex, more things can affect performance.
I do believe it, although it needn't be that expensive for my needs.
So then we get to the question of what's the maximum you think an amp should sell for? and Also what's the maximum a pair of speaker cables should sell for?
Price is determined by what consumers are willing to pay... Why should a painting sell for $200,000??? Did the artist really put that much time and materials into the piece to justify such a price tag? If someone thinks that "10 years of the MIT founder's time for research" justifies the cost of the cable, then who am I to argue with him?
-
If MIT spent every day of those 10 years at developing just these cables, then I suppose it's a bargain, but we all know that's not even close to being the case.
I'd pay quite a bit for art (and I have) but that's again, a totally different subject - just like the watch, amp and car - completely different levels of complexity.
What I have such a hard time with is that something should cost what people will pay for it. This is nonsense. There will always be suckers, but at the $35K price point for cables, there is no such thing as market competition. That people are gullible enough to pay for it doesn't at all address whether these cables really are worth $35K. More importantly, that kind of blind extravagance leads me to believe that they probably wouldn't hear a difference from any other cable and probably couldn't care either way.
(I am politely excluding that very small percentage of rich specialists who believe they do hear a difference under their own very unique set of circumstances - more power to them).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
If MIT spent every day of those 10 years at developing just these cables, then I suppose it's a bargain, but we all know that's not even close to being the case.
I'd pay quite a bit for art (and I have) but that's again, a totally different subject - just like the watch, amp and car - completely different levels of complexity.
What I have such a hard time with is that something should cost what people will pay for it. This is nonsense. There will always be suckers, but at the $35K price point for cables, there is no such thing as market competition. That people are gullible enough to pay for it doesn't at all address whether these cables really are worth $35K. More importantly, that kind of blind extravagance leads me to believe that they probably wouldn't hear a difference from any other cable and probably couldn't care either way.
(I am politely excluding that very small percentage of rich specialists who believe they do hear a difference under their own very unique set of circumstances - more power to them).
Art prices are about complexity then? So when an unknown artist spends an entire week painting a forest scene in order to capture each detail of the scenery and gets a meager $150 for his painting, while a renown artist splashes a yellow dot on a white canvas and sells that work for $15K, that's an issue of complexity?
The reason so many accept art prices is because we have been socialized to believe that these things represent having refined and exquisite tastes... much like wine, watches and cars... Audio is scrutinized and insulted because it is not regarded the same way (at least in the western world!)...
IMO, there is absolutely nothing to justify why a painting should cost $35K, but a cable shouldn't... The materials cost of the cable is likely far more expensive than paint and a canvas... and the actual man hours whether for R&D or hand assembly are possibly much greater too...
-
The funny thing about those MIT guys, is they would do the research for free. I'm sure a fun weekend for them is snuggling with a calculator and microscope.
-
Ajani, you seem to think that those of us reponding to this thread feel high prices are justified for anything and everything except audio equipment, and that's just not so.
Criticizing prices for works of art is a bit silly, since art collectors and museums aren't, and never have been, concerned about how much time it took to paint a certain painting, how much the paint itself cost, and such. The value of many artworks is an intangible, and "worth it" to those involved either in the industry, or as collectors. I suspect the original of the Mona Lisa, should it ever become available for sale, would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but it surely didn't cost da Vinci anywhere near that to paint it. Does that make the price "ridiculous?" Of course not.
What most of us here have a problem with is a matter of degree. I will happily pay hundreds of dollars for speaker cables, and audio interconnects, and have done so many times. I also have paid thousands for amplification. But I will NOT pay anything near $35K for a set of wires, no matter how "exotic" they may be, because I simply refuse to believe they can offer anywhere near the level of performance such a high price commands.
I drive a Mercedes E-class automobile. "Conspicuous consumption?" Hardly.
We purchased a 1997 E-420 as a used "Starmark" vehicle in 2001. Today, with over 222,000 miles on it, it's still tight as a drum, drives and handles superbly, and due to my slavish attention to the finish of the car, inside and out, it could still sit on the showroom floor. Routine servicing is done by a competent shop that specializes in Mercedes and BMW automobiles.
New, the car retailed for $54,000. That's still expensive, even today. Was it worth it? By your standards, no, since you seem to object to anything that's expensive as "excess." To me, the answer is a definite, "Yes, it is." Would a 1997 Camry, Accord, Taurus or Impala have held up as well? I hardly think so. That doesn't mean those cars are "junk,." What it means is that the high price for the E-420 was justified.
$35K for speakers cables isn't.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by emaidel
Ajani, you seem to think that those of us reponding to this thread feel high prices are justified for anything and everything except audio equipment, and that's just not so.
Criticizing prices for works of art is a bit silly, since art collectors and museums aren't, and never have been, concerned about how much time it took to paint a certain painting, how much the paint itself cost, and such. The value of many artworks is an intangible, and "worth it" to those involved either in the industry, or as collectors. I suspect the original of the Mona Lisa, should it ever become available for sale, would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but it surely didn't cost da Vinci anywhere near that to paint it. Does that make the price "ridiculous?" Of course not.
What most of us here have a problem with is a matter of degree. I will happily pay hundreds of dollars for speaker cables, and audio interconnects, and have done so many times. I also have paid thousands for amplification. But I will NOT pay anything near $35K for a set of wires, no matter how "exotic" they may be, because I simply refuse to believe they can offer anywhere near the level of performance such a high price commands.
I drive a Mercedes E-class automobile. "Conspicuous consumption?" Hardly.
We purchased a 1997 E-420 as a used "Starmark" vehicle in 2001. Today, with over 222,000 miles on it, it's still tight as a drum, drives and handles superbly, and due to my slavish attention to the finish of the car, inside and out, it could still sit on the showroom floor. Routine servicing is done by a competent shop that specializes in Mercedes and BMW automobiles.
New, the car retailed for $54,000. That's still expensive, even today. Was it worth it? By your standards, no, since you seem to object to anything that's expensive as "excess." To me, the answer is a definite, "Yes, it is." Would a 1997 Camry, Accord, Taurus or Impala have held up as well? I hardly think so. That doesn't mean those cars are "junk,." What it means is that the high price for the E-420 was justified.
$35K for speakers cables isn't.
Well put. +1 here...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
That's fine, if you can get someone to buy $500 toothpicks, then good luck with that...
If someone wants to spend it, well.... it is their money. They have that right.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by emaidel
Ajani, you seem to think that those of us reponding to this thread feel high prices are justified for anything and everything except audio equipment, and that's just not so.
Criticizing prices for works of art is a bit silly, since art collectors and museums aren't, and never have been, concerned about how much time it took to paint a certain painting, how much the paint itself cost, and such. The value of many artworks is an intangible, and "worth it" to those involved either in the industry, or as collectors. I suspect the original of the Mona Lisa, should it ever become available for sale, would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but it surely didn't cost da Vinci anywhere near that to paint it. Does that make the price "ridiculous?" Of course not.
What most of us here have a problem with is a matter of degree. I will happily pay hundreds of dollars for speaker cables, and audio interconnects, and have done so many times. I also have paid thousands for amplification. But I will NOT pay anything near $35K for a set of wires, no matter how "exotic" they may be, because I simply refuse to believe they can offer anywhere near the level of performance such a high price commands.
I drive a Mercedes E-class automobile. "Conspicuous consumption?" Hardly.
We purchased a 1997 E-420 as a used "Starmark" vehicle in 2001. Today, with over 222,000 miles on it, it's still tight as a drum, drives and handles superbly, and due to my slavish attention to the finish of the car, inside and out, it could still sit on the showroom floor. Routine servicing is done by a competent shop that specializes in Mercedes and BMW automobiles.
New, the car retailed for $54,000. That's still expensive, even today. Was it worth it? By your standards, no, since you seem to object to anything that's expensive as "excess." To me, the answer is a definite, "Yes, it is." Would a 1997 Camry, Accord, Taurus or Impala have held up as well? I hardly think so. That doesn't mean those cars are "junk,." What it means is that the high price for the E-420 was justified.
$35K for speakers cables isn't.
Nope, you still don't get my point:
I don't object to anything (you guys are the ones who object to expensive cables)... Whether your Mercedes or your watch is worth it should be your decision and not mine... I am just saying that the same courtesy should apply to HiFi...
Why do persons feel it's OK to laugh at someone for buying very expensive HiFi and yet feel offended if someone else questions the value of their car, watch or art?
The same way you feel that your watch and car are worth their high price tags, a golden eared audiophile feels that his expensive cables are worth theirs... So why is he ridiculed and you are defended?
The same way that some persons may buy a Mercedes because they love the car, while others will buy one just to show that they have money; is the way that some audiophiles will buy an expensive cable because they believe the performance is worth it, while others will buy it just to show off...
Anyway, I've made my points enough time in this thread... So clearly all I'm doing at this point is repeating myself... For those who still don't agree with me and think we should all ridicule persons who buy expensive cables, then we just have to agree to disagree at this point...
-
One man's excess is another man's pocket change. If someone has the disposable income to spend $35,000 on speaker cables, I want them to do it. It's better for us all if that money is floating around the economy rather than sitting in one person's bank account.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Nope, you still don't get my point:
I don't object to anything (you guys are the ones who object to expensive cables)... Whether your Mercedes or your watch is worth it should be your decision and not mine... I am just saying that the same courtesy should apply to HiFi...
Why do persons feel it's OK to laugh at someone for buying very expensive HiFi and yet feel offended if someone else questions the value of their car, watch or art?
The same way you feel that your watch and car are worth their high price tags, a golden eared audiophile feels that his expensive cables are worth theirs... So why is he ridiculed and you are defended?
The same way that some persons may buy a Mercedes because they love the car, while others will buy one just to show that they have money; is the way that some audiophiles will buy an expensive cable because they believe the performance is worth it, while others will buy it just to show off...
Anyway, I've made my points enough time in this thread... So clearly all I'm doing at this point is repeating myself... For those who still don't agree with me and think we should all ridicule persons who buy expensive cables, then we just have to agree to disagree at this point...
I think that the point you seem to miss (or at least haven't acknowledged) is that there is a lot more involved with building a car or watch than a wire or toothpick.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
I think that the point you seem to miss (or at least haven't acknowledged) is that there is a lot more involved with building a car or watch than a wire or toothpick.
Nope, I have not missed that... and how do you know that there is more involved in a watch than in the "magic box" attached to the MIT cables?
Complexity alone is not justification for cost...
Is a watch more complex than an iMac???? Nope, so why do so many watches cost substantially more than the most expensive iMac? Is a watch more useful than an iMac??? Hell No! But persons will pay excessive amounts for a Platinum and Diamond watch but would be utterly pissed if a more expensive iMac model is released.... It's just a matter of what people have been socialized to accept... If I buy a Platinum and Diamond Watch for $10K, I have refined tastes and appreciation for the finer things in life, but If I bought a suped up iMac for that money, I'd be a dope....
Anyway, as I said before: Let's agree to disagree... and I will leave this and future bashing threads to persons who wish to do so....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Nope, I have not missed that... and how do you know that there is more involved in a watch than in the "magic box" attached to the MIT cables?
Complexity alone is not justification for cost...
Is a watch more complex than an iMac???? Nope, so why do so many watches cost substantially more than the most expensive iMac? Is a watch more useful than an iMac??? Hell No! But persons will pay excessive amounts for a Platinum and Diamond watch but would be utterly pissed if a more expensive iMac model is released.... It's just a matter of what people have been socialized to accept... If I buy a Platinum and Diamond Watch for $10K, I have refined tastes and appreciation for the finer things in life, but If I bought a suped up iMac for that money, I'd be a dope....
Anyway, as I said before: Let's agree to disagree... and I will leave this and future bashing threads to persons who wish to do so....
Do you really think that magic box is more complicated than a car or watch?
As far as Ipods, I'm sure if you made one out of gold and diamonds, someone would buy them. (I'd laugh at that too)
Nobody is saying that people can't spend their money any way they want. We're just laughing at $35k for a wire.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02audionoob
One man's excess is another man's pocket change. If someone has the disposable income to spend $35,000 on speaker cables, I want them to do it. It's better for us all if that money is floating around the economy rather than sitting in one person's bank account.
Or they could donate it to help people when their unemployment or health coverage expires due to a$$holes the US Congress.
I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Or they could donate it to help people when their unemployment or health coverage expires due to a$$holes the US Congress.
I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.
It would help my family if they started buying my toothpicks.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Or they could donate it to help people when their unemployment or health coverage expires due to a$$holes the US Congress.
I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.
Damn, I hate how my lack of self control refuses to let me stay out of this thread :mad2: :mad2: :mad2:
But this always reminds me of some of my favourite lyrics from "Praying for Time" by George Michael:
Quote:
This is the year of the hungry man
Whose place is in the past
Hand in hand with ignorance
And legitimate excuses
The rich declare themselves poor
And most of us are not sure
If we have too much
But we'll take our chances
Because god's stopped keeping score
I find it to be an apt description of most of us (middle class)... When do you have too much??? I only own a humble $2K pair of speakers, so that's not extravagant... The guy with the $20K pair has too much... Yeah sure... Tell that to the homeless man... Tell him that a $4K watch is a justifiable expenditure...
At the end of the day, we all choose to deny that we have more than we need, but we are quick to point fingers at the excesses of persons with more than us...
-
I believe the children are our future, teach them well and...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
I believe the children are our future, teach them well and...
let them lead the way... show them all the beauty they posses inside... :8:
I love sing alongs!!! Now let's all join hands and sing together as one Audiophile community!!!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
let them lead the way... show them all the beauty they posses inside... :8:
I love sing alongs!!! Now let's all join hands and sing together as one Audiophile community!!!
Kumbayah, My Lord, Kumbayah
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.
You are absolutely right. It's not because one has the money that one should spend it mindlessly.
-
Well that's just the point...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
...and how do you know that there is more involved in a watch than in the "magic box" attached to the MIT cables?
On the one hand MIT claims it doesn't do anything to the sound, and at the same time they say it's extremely complex stuff developed from years of research. That flies in the face of everything we know about hi-fi: complexity is the very source of coloration. Something doesn't add up, here.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
On the one hand MIT claims it doesn't do anything to the sound, and at the same time they say it's extremely complex stuff developed from years of research. That flies in the face of everything we know about hi-fi: complexity is the very source of coloration. Something doesn't add up, here.
A reviewer (from Stereophile, I think) once said that he never reviewed cables because he regarded them as just expensive tone controls...
Personally, I am deeply suspicious of what is actually in the box...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
You are absolutely right. It's not because one has the money that one should spend it mindlessly.
Fine. So at what point does it become mindless? And who has the right to determine that point? You? Me? Rich? Middle-Class? Poor?
-
I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Fine. So at what point does it become mindless? And who has the right to determine that point? You? Me? Rich? Middle-Class? Poor?
Can I pick?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.
Nope... we don't agree on that.... I'd never spend that much money on cables, but I wouldn't call it mindless either...
As for how people spend money:
I believe in encouraging people to give to the less fortunate, but not in condemning the purchases of those persons who have more money than me... As I'm not interested in those with less money than me, condemning me for my purchases....
I don't see that any of us has a right to point fingers at others, while indulging in our own money wasting activities...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
Can I pick?
:hand:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
I think we can both agree that a 35K pair of speaker cables enters the mindless category.
Not to a person who has the money to burn....like Oprah!
IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.
fenchmon
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.
fenchmon
You would?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchmon
Not to a person who has the money to burn....like Oprah!
IF I had millions, I would do it in a heart beat.
fenchmon
Would you also buy a 24k gold mains socket for 20k? lol
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
...
As for how people spend money:
I believe in encouraging people to give to the less fortunate, but not in condemning the purchases of those persons who have more money than me... As I'm not interested in those with less money than me, condemning me for my purchases....
I don't see that any of us has a right to point fingers at others, while indulging in our own money wasting activities...
BTW, Ajani, I agree with you that how people spend their money is their business. And certainly we all spend money frivolously.
Earlier, in suggesting one might give $35k to charity rather than to a cable hawker, I was only mentioning it as an alternative. In fact there are a minority of people who would actually get more satisfaction giving to charity. I'm not saying that I personally would give to charity, much less that I am judging charity-givers better people. After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.
However what I was earlier questioning from an ethical perspective was the economic argument that all consumption is equal. This might be true in terms of economic stimulation, but it isn't an moral justification for self-indulgence at a time when others are suffering.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.
Better that not giving at all, right?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
Better that not giving at all, right?
Yes it is... but I think the real point is to not start patting ourselves on the back for minor contributions we make, while pointing fingers at others....
Yesterday I went into town to the bank, to make a wire transfer of 400 USD (shipping included) to Emotiva for a UPA-2 Amp... Now even the stingiest anti-audiophile among us is unlikely to give me grief for buying a $300 amp (heck, Pix owns one!)... On the way from the bank, I stopped in BK and bought a burger... I dropped my change into the Haiti relief fund can on the counter.... I left BK and walked through town, and passed a homeless man lying dead on the side of the road... Now I can give myself a huge pat on the back for dropping some spare change in the Haiti Relief fund, and ignore the fact that had I given that 400 USD to that homeless guy when I got paid last month, he might not be dead... It's not like I really need the amp... I have an excellent sounding $2K Headphone setup and a very decent sounding set of $400 active speakers already... and even if I didn't, I still wouldn't "need" the amp...
So I don't see how I can realistically sit here and claim the guy spending loads of money on cables or art or watches or cars is being brainless or selfish, when I'm wasting money on stuff I like...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
BTW, Ajani, I agree with you that how people spend their money is their business. And certainly we all spend money frivolously.
Earlier, in suggesting one might give $35k to charity rather than to a cable hawker, I was only mentioning it as an alternative. In fact there are a minority of people who would actually get more satisfaction giving to charity. I'm not saying that I personally would give to charity, much less that I am judging charity-givers better people. After all, likely they doing it for the selfish reason of popular or self approbation.
However what I was earlier questioning from an ethical perspective was the economic argument that all consumption is equal. This might be true in terms of economic stimulation, but it isn't an moral justification for self-indulgence at a time when others are suffering.
I do agree that there is a significant difference between donating to charity and buying expensive toys in order to "help the economy"...
I don't believe in 'trickle down economics'... It's like thinking that if your company gets more customers (and profit) that it means the boss will give you all raises or even employ more workers... It might happen, but often it doesn't or at least not proportionately... so your boss may get a lot richer and you may see a slight increase in pay (or none at all) but a whole lot more work...
-
Interesting debate going on here. The bottom line is, most people with expendable cash tend to buy expensive items, not kmart items whether the item is any better than the other or not.
I am sure the 35K cable is a bit better than the $50 Blue jean but in no way is it 3500 times better and anyone with a brain would agree.
I have some friends with money and they do it all the time. They look down on us frugal people while spending way too much for a similar item of similar quality. They could not possibly admit to shopping at kmart, they had to buy the same thing at Nordstroms.
Now onto expensive cables. With the components I am currently using, I also got a pair of Synergistic Research Signature II speaker cables which are 16 feet long due to the location the original owners system was. I really only need about 6 feet and inquired about splitting the cables to make 2 8 foot pairs both randomly and through Synergistic. I don't see anything special but then I am not a cable termination expert.
The original owner spent about $1400 on this pair of cables. When I contacted Synergistic, I was told that they would only deal with an original owner and that they would only shorten them by reterminating one set of ends but not make 2 pairs. They also stated the cost would be $200 and that they would have to stop production of new cables to be able to do it.
WTF should it cost $200 to cut a cable in half and put a new spade on it? I chose to just have a mess of extra cable rather than do it myself and lose the total value of the cables. Since I am not the original owner, I did not have the other option which I still would not have done.
As far as the charity issue, most of the people I know who have money, do give to charities along with the rest of their frivolous spending. As far as the original topic goes, people with money tend to buy expensive things mainly as a sign of status or keeping up with the rest of the millionaire Jones's.
My same friend just had to have a Mercedes SL 500 convertable because he is a Dr and he could not be seen driving a lesser status car. That $125,000.00 could have been well spent in many other places and he could have bought a new car every 6 years until death. But, when you have the money, you tend to spend it. If I had millions, I would probably have gear that far outpaced its diminishing returns but would not care. I would also give a bigger chunk to charities than I do now also.
You can't point fingers at people who keep the economy going by putting their hard earned, or otherwise, money back into a failing economy. Would we be better off if they spent the $35k at Wall Mart or an American Small Business? I would rather give the cash to a small business.
I just purchased a new suit that I will pick up today. I have not bought a suit for 20 years and have altered the two I have several times. I went to Mens Warehouse where some pushy female that barely spoke english tried to push me to buy any suit on the racks made by close to slave labor countries. I also could have bought the same suits at Macy's on a special sale. I chose instead to buy a suit from a small mens store in my neighborhood. Every suit they had was a fine Italian made piece. He had sales going on and what I got, at half price was still more than all the sales everywhere else. I chose to get one I really liked, while helping to keep a small local business going. I also see that as charity.
I say, if you have the money and choose to spend it on items deemed frivolous by others without, go for it. I wish I had money to blow like that and knowing all too well that a system like that will never sound 1000 times better than my present $15k system, I would still do it. I have had the chance to see and hear systems of that caliber and would love to have one. I never will of course but I would never say the next guy shouldn't.
I too would like to have a status watch, but at the same time I would also like to have a nest egg for retirement so my $100 dollar watches, that by the way keep time to within seconds a year same as a $20 Timex or a $20K Rolex, is what I will probably have on my wrist the rest of my life.
The only issues I see out of all this is people who do not have the cash to pay for things, go into debt over it, and the rest of us pay to bail them out of bankruptcy and pay more for the same items because the store lost their money too.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Or they could donate it to help people when their unemployment or health coverage expires due to a$$holes the US Congress.
I think it's time we end the hypocrasy that personal spending on extravagances of dubious value is as economically beneficial as directly helping people to eat and get medical treatment.
You stretched my comment to your own ridiculous extreme. I say it's better the rich man spends his money than stash it away in his bank account. You say than means I've said his extravagance is as good as a charitable donation. Not a logical interpretation.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio amateur
You are absolutely right. It's not because one has the money that one should spend it mindlessly.
If one has money, one may spend it as desired. There isn't really a "should" involved.
-
Ahem, if I may...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Personally, I am deeply suspicious of what is actually in the box...
Can we elaborate on this? I've been curious about these little dangling boxes that some manufacturers hang on cables, because I do believe it add complexity, hence a sound of their own.
Hyfi, props to you for buying local. Personally I will also buy local even if it does cost more. If only more of those money-to-burn folks would do this....
|