• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Premium can be mainstream

bozack

Diamond Member
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ss...y.mpl/business/2850582

'Mass affluent' save on the basics and then splurge on the luxuries
By JOLAYNE HOUTZ
Seattle Times

You know you are trading up when:

You start the day with a $3 latte from Starbucks instead of a 99-cent cup of coffee from 7-Eleven.

You splurge on a Coach watch for $205 rather than a $22.99 Timex at Target.

You opt for the "near-luxury" 3-series BMW ($29,300) over a Pontiac for $21,300.

You spring for an American Girl for your daughter's birthday ($84) and forgo the $11 Barbie at Wal-Mart.

A Kent, Wash., school-district manager spends almost $2,500 on a luxury vacation to Tahiti, complete with a skipper for her chartered catamaran ? but buys discount clothes and eats "whatever vegetable is on sale that week."


Trading up, trading down
Luxury is not just the exclusive territory of the super-rich.

American middle-class consumers are "trading up," paying a premium for luxury items they value with high-end features or cachet, compensating by "trading down" in other areas.

"New luxury" products and services appeal to the 47 million households making $50,000 or more a year, according to marketers and researchers who have coined a word for this trend: "masstige" ? prestige for the masses.

The "mass affluent" pay $3 for coffee at Starbucks, buy $27 Isaac Mizrahi pumps at Target and stock their kitchens with imported Italian dinnerware from Williams-Sonoma and $5,700 Sub-Zero refrigerators.

"This phenomenon is best observed by going into Costco. It's piled high to the ceiling with stuff that ... were luxuries the day before yesterday," said James Twitchell, author of Living It Up: America's Love Affair with Luxury.


See and touch
Two Seattle-area companies are among the new luxury leaders: Issaquah, Wash.-based Costco and Seattle-based Starbucks. Others include the Cheesecake Factory; Samuel Adams beer; American Girl dolls; BMW; Whirlpool; and Victoria's Secret.

New luxury products are distinguished by better design, ingredients or packaging ? technical advantages that "translate into functional benefits that consumers can see, touch, describe," said Michael Silverstein, a marketing expert who co-wrote the 2003 book Trading Up: The New American Luxury, which popularized the concept.

Among the demographic drivers of this trend, according to Silverstein: higher levels of education, an increase in disposable income and greater numbers of working women with more influence on spending decisions.

People have always saved a little here to spend a little there, said Carl Obermiller, professor of marketing at Seattle University.


Standard of living
What is different now: a steadily rising standard of living and brand-name goods that are more available and more affordable than ever. For better or worse, almost anyone can have a taste of luxury.

"It used to be middle-class Americans didn't know what the super-rich bought or did," Obermiller said. "Now we can emulate them. ... . It's not just what yacht they're buying. It's what shoes they wear."

To afford luxury, middle-class consumers have to make tradeoffs. Where one indulges, another economizes.

Becky Hanks has 68,000 miles on her 6-year-old Toyota Camry and plans to drive it "until it dies."

But the school-district communications manager does not scrimp on travel. Last year, it was a trip to the British Virgin Islands. In 2002, she and some friends chartered a 37-foot catamaran in Tahiti. The price tag: nearly $2,500 per person.

"Living the high life is not a part of my day-to-day experience. It's a major treat," said Hanks, of Des Moines, Wash. "I save up for it and ... just eat up every moment."


Champagne, diamonds
At Costco, customers can simultaneously trade up and trade down at the same checkout stand.

Jim Sinegal, co-founder and CEO of Costco, calls his 441-warehouse chain "the epitome" of new luxury. Costco is the largest seller of Dom Perignon champagne in the country and one of the largest retailers of diamonds, he said.

Peek in the shopping carts being rolled out of any Costco Warehouse, and you will see evidence of masstige spending: a $205 Coach watch nestled next to a bag of boneless, skinless chicken breasts; a 12-pack of Duracell batteries sandwiched next to a $40 bottle of imported French wine.

With the mainstreaming of luxury, the purveyors of new luxury are confronted with a paradox: How to offer affordable luxury while maintaining exclusivity.

"If everybody can buy an indulgence, then the indulgence has lost its value," said James Twitchell, a University of Florida professor of English and advertising and the author of Living It Up: America's Love Affair With Luxury.

Thus, the emergence of a tandem trend: "massclusivity," or exclusivity for the masses.

Starbucks recently began selling limited quantities of rare coffees from around the world ? coffees so precious, they say, "that to miss them once could mean you'll never experience them again." The story behind the coffee, and its limited availability, "is part of the romance of it," Saunders said.

Twitchell says consumers are drawn to products that tell a story.

"Starbucks ? don't get me wrong, it's good coffee. But it's just coffee. The difference is it's coffee with a story," he said. "The taste of modern luxury is not inside the product. It's inside our imagination."

Is it troubling that we are buying all this stuff we do not need to lift our spirits?

Obermiller said there may be a cost across society when people go upscale without also cutting costs.

Personal bankruptcies in the United States have nearly doubled in the past dozen years.

Silverstein dismisses worries about excessive materialism as a "media concern."


Conflicted feelings
Yet even some consumers have conflicted feelings about their access to affluence.

Laura Clenna of Seattle likes the quality and clean, simple style of Coach handbags, and she has amassed 10. The last one she bought cost more than $200.

The King County elections worker drives a 2000 Toyota Land Cruiser, which her husband drove before she "fell in love with it" and took it over.

She shops sales and discount retailers for basics such as underwear, but says buying luxury items is still "a difficult thing in my head."

"My mom was a secondhand-store shopper. I didn't have these things growing up," she said. "It makes me feel good ? and it's just nice to get into heated leather seats."

Pause.

"It's totally disgusting," she laughs.

Just saw this linked on craigslist and it hit home as I have seen more and more people who do "ok" who also splurge on luxury goods, far more often then people did in the past...I myself admit to doing it at times...just wondering what people thought of this recent phenomenon (or relatively recent) and if it was good, bad or indifferent.....personally I think it is good to have access to nice stuff instead of relegating oneself to economy items, but also see it as bad as people can get too caught up in trying to amass so many higher end material items that it impacts their savings if they even have one to begin with....

Also this line stuck a note:

"If everybody can buy an indulgence, then the indulgence has lost its value,"

Something I have heard related to many mainstream luxury brands such as BMW, Rolex, Montblanc, Coach...etc....is this better or worse for society/luxury items?? also loved the costco reference.

thought this would be a departure from the usual election threads.
 
Originally posted by: bozack

Just saw this linked on craigslist and it hit home as I have seen more and more people who do "ok" who also spurge on luxury goods, far more often then people did in the past...I myself admit to doing it at times...just wondering what people thought of this recent phenomenon (or relatively recent) and if it was good, bad or indifferent.....personally I think it is good to have access to nice stuff instead of relegating oneself to economy items, but also see it as bad as people can get too caught up in trying to amass so many higher end material items that it impacts their savings if they even have one to begin with....

Also this line stuck a note:

"If everybody can buy an indulgence, then the indulgence has lost its value,"

Something I have heard related to many mainstream luxury brands such as BMW, Rolex, Montblanc, Coach...etc....is this better or worse for society/luxury items?? also loved the costco reference.

thought this would be a departure from the usual election threads.

Nice self pat on the back thread for the Neocons, Way to Go :thumbsup:

Interesting to see the true colors of the Neocosn as we approach the Election, it's sort of like when Gays come out of the Closet. :shocked: :laugh:
 
There was once a time when flatware and cotton cloting were considered luxuries.

Welcome to the march of economic development.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: bozack

Just saw this linked on craigslist and it hit home as I have seen more and more people who do "ok" who also spurge on luxury goods, far more often then people did in the past...I myself admit to doing it at times...just wondering what people thought of this recent phenomenon (or relatively recent) and if it was good, bad or indifferent.....personally I think it is good to have access to nice stuff instead of relegating oneself to economy items, but also see it as bad as people can get too caught up in trying to amass so many higher end material items that it impacts their savings if they even have one to begin with....

Also this line stuck a note:

"If everybody can buy an indulgence, then the indulgence has lost its value,"

Something I have heard related to many mainstream luxury brands such as BMW, Rolex, Montblanc, Coach...etc....is this better or worse for society/luxury items?? also loved the costco reference.

thought this would be a departure from the usual election threads.

Nice self pat on the back thread for the Neocons, Way to Go :thumbsup:

Interesting to see the true colors of the Neocosn as we approach the Election, it's sort of like when Gays come out of the Closet. :shocked: :laugh:

So what you're saying Dave, is that it's not enough that the standard of living continues to rise steeply. You're just jealous that the rich still have more than you. You won't be happy until you have everything that the wealthy do.

Hey, at least you're honest.
 
As long as you pay cash for it go for it. Otherwise those emotional buys are silly and stupid. Paycheck to paycheck Americans flirting in banruptcy aquiring liabilites instead of assets for image. Fools. My sister is this way. Makes about 85K a year as a pshychologist for state and my parents had to loan her DP for house cause she's flat broke.
 
I just spent 7 days in the Dominican Republic.. let me tell you, even the poorest Americans are wealthy compared to most of the people who live there. I don't think the middle class is shrinking, I think our definitions of 'wealthy', 'poor' and 'middle class' have changed.

Honestly, its insane what we have in the United States.. I saw true poverty while I was there, but I also saw people who were happy and made a living for themselves... there is no welfare there.. you work, or you don't eat.. Being 'poor' in the United States means having to settle for that mid 80's Caddy, or 1988 Chevy Cavellier as your mode of transportation.. instead of having to ride around on 20 year old mopeds if you are lucky.. and having to live in an apartment with only a window airconditioner instead of central air.. or perhaps several fans... instead of living in a 1 room shack with no windows, with your mother, father, brothers, sisters, cousins.. etc... being poor means having to use your food stamps to get your grocerys, instead of having to farm your own food and raise your own chickens.

Running water in the rural areas of the Dominican Republic meant you pumped rain water up to the roof your your house into a huge tank..

There is no true 'poverty' in the United States.. there is varying degrees of 'wealthy' as I see it.

Being poor doesn't mean settling for the 27inch Color TV with surround sound as opposed to the 42" Plasma with 5.1.. but thats honestly how we define it in this country. When I was in highschool (10 years ago now) we brought food to the 'hungry' during Thanksgiving. When we dropped off this food we saw what the poor had in our country. They all had TV's, they all had expensive tennis shoes, they all had nintendo, and stereo systems.. they all had cable.. they all had cars.. they all had stoves, pots, pans, running water, at least some fans, usually air conditioners, they all had running water, gas, furnaces, etc...

Thats not poverty.. it may not be 'rich', but its not poverty.. we have redefinited the poor in this country to mean those who who don't have as much as other people..

This whole 'The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer' line that people use is just BS.. The poor of today have WAY more than the poor of the 1970's.. and the 1950's.. and the 1920's.. etc.. etc.. etc.. We just keep raising the bar of what we consider poor, then make the statement that there are more poor people. Well, OK.. but lets be realistic.. do the poor of today live better than the poor of 20-30 years ago? Is there standard of living better? Of course, MUCH better.. Living in Poverty in the United States means living like a king in most 3rd and even 2nd world countries.. And I think thats the point this article was trying to make.. we all live the life of luxery in the United States to some extent..
 
Originally posted by: Crimson
I just spent 7 days in the Dominican Republic.. let me tell you, even the poorest Americans are wealthy compared to most of the people who live there. I don't think the middle class is shrinking, I think our definitions of 'wealthy', 'poor' and 'middle class' have changed.

Honestly, its insane what we have in the United States.. I saw true poverty while I was there, but I also saw people who were happy and made a living for themselves... there is no welfare there.. you work, or you don't eat.. Being 'poor' in the United States means having to settle for that mid 80's Caddy, or 1988 Chevy Cavellier as your mode of transportation.. instead of having to ride around on 20 year old mopeds if you are lucky.. and having to live in an apartment with only a window airconditioner instead of central air.. or perhaps several fans... instead of living in a 1 room shack with no windows, with your mother, father, brothers, sisters, cousins.. etc... being poor means having to use your food stamps to get your grocerys, instead of having to farm your own food and raise your own chickens.

Running water in the rural areas of the Dominican Republic meant you pumped rain water up to the roof your your house into a huge tank..

There is no true 'poverty' in the United States.. there is varying degrees of 'wealthy' as I see it.

Being poor doesn't mean settling for the 27inch Color TV with surround sound as opposed to the 42" Plasma with 5.1.. but thats honestly how we define it in this country. When I was in highschool (10 years ago now) we brought food to the 'hungry' during Thanksgiving. When we dropped off this food we saw what the poor had in our country. They all had TV's, they all had expensive tennis shoes, they all had nintendo, and stereo systems.. they all had cable.. they all had cars.. they all had stoves, pots, pans, running water, at least some fans, usually air conditioners, they all had running water, gas, furnaces, etc...

Thats not poverty.. it may not be 'rich', but its not poverty.. we have redefinited the poor in this country to mean those who who don't have as much as other people..

This whole 'The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer' line that people use is just BS.. The poor of today have WAY more than the poor of the 1970's.. and the 1950's.. and the 1920's.. etc.. etc.. etc.. We just keep raising the bar of what we consider poor, then make the statement that there are more poor people. Well, OK.. but lets be realistic.. do the poor of today live better than the poor of 20-30 years ago? Is there standard of living better? Of course, MUCH better.. Living in Poverty in the United States means living like a king in most 3rd and even 2nd world countries.. And I think thats the point this article was trying to make.. we all live the life of luxery in the United States to some extent..

No federally funded rural water/electricity..no welfare..no taxes.. sounds like a conservative haven..Why'd you come back?
 
Anyone else notice that everyone of these peoples were sucking the tax payer tit for thier luxeries? If this is your example of "prosperity" , taxing Americans, then redistributing it to people who it takes an act of congress to get fired, and get guarnteed raises every year I suggest moving to scandinavia where 55% tax is the norm to support the government and thier employees. Also it's show nothing about the health of our middle class or economy.
 
What kills me are the people that are low-middle class, maybe making $40k a year driving new $35k SUVs. Talk about bad investments. People are in general, stupid.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Nice self pat on the back thread for the Neocons, Way to Go :thumbsup:

Interesting to see the true colors of the Neocosn as we approach the Election, it's sort of like when Gays come out of the Closet. :shocked: :laugh:

Dave, I don't understand your comment, this has nothing to do with being a neo conservative or what not, more of a comment, or a reflection on the changing views of society as a whole and what people's thoughts were on it....

I think Kibbo summed it up nicely when he said there was once a time when flatware and cotton clothing were "luxuries" yet now that people have more access to information they have the ability to research and discover items/brands which were once reserved for only those very well to do....my comment was more on the article where you have many people buying into the higher end lifestyle on budgets that might not support it, or rationing their income to support high dollar purchase which are really not needed and what this says about our culture....also be full aware that this does not just effect the US but also many other countries namely Japan and England....

How does this effect consumers? is it really good that people are striving to have nicer items or should people focus more on savings and acquiring that which they "need", this all goes back to keeping up with the jonses....if anything I would blame mainstream media for alot of this as they promote these pseudo luxury items/lifestyle in either magazine ads, television shows, or most importantly movies (I have seen more designer plugs in many popular movies than virtually anywhere else)....

I guess my question is, what does this do to society and is it for the better or the worse? part of me says it is nice but another part says that it is silly and people are just buying into that which they cannot nor shouldn't admire....but remember also this goes back quite a ways as even Sean Connery as James Bond drove nice sports cars, wore nice suits and donned a Rolex watch....

thanks
 
Originally posted by: Todd33
What kills me are the people that are low-middle class, maybe making $40k a year driving new $35k SUVs. Talk about bad investments. People are in general, stupid.

Todd, this also hits home, especially where I live....I often times see those who one wouldn't expect to see driving a nice vechicle are carting around in a new A4, M3 or what not....I know alot of younger kids who wouldn't expect anything less...heck when I was growing up any car was better than no car, and many of my friends loved that which was affordable and fast....

The car analogy is good as those are horrible investments and also dreadfully expensive and also are along the same lines as this article hints at (even BMW 3 series was mentioned) but rather is it good that companies like BMW make lower (yet still higher than average) cost offerings for people to aspire to and waste their money on (Heck they target that market) and is it good that people are buying into this supposed image? or would society as a whole be better off following in their parents footsteps putting more weight on necessity and far less on image and supposed luxury??

speaking from my personal experience I don't make a ton of money and neither does my wife, but I have an affinity for nicer things (Watches, Cufflinks, Pens, Cars, Homegoods...etc) and she enjoys Coach purses along with other items...however our logical sides have a really hard time with such purchases as we know that from a truly functional standpoint they are a waste..

is society taking this desire for high end too far? I understand having a few nice things is good...but are we as a whole focusing too much on materialism and the image of luxury?

Thanks
 
Originally posted by: Todd33
What kills me are the people that are low-middle class, maybe making $40k a year driving new $35k SUVs. Talk about bad investments. People are in general, stupid.

Originally posted by: bozack

Dave, I don't understand your comment, this has nothing to do with being a neo conservative or what not, more of a comment, or a reflection on the changing views of society as a whole and what people's thoughts were on it....

Somebody said at least I am honest :thumbsup:

That used to be looked up as part of the American Dream, now it has been relegated to a Pipe Dream thanks to the Neocons.

As far as my comment?

Simply weak minded that have keep up with the Jones's mentality , 3 Words:

Wannabe Rich Neocons
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
As long as you pay cash for it go for it. Otherwise those emotional buys are silly and stupid. Paycheck to paycheck Americans flirting in banruptcy aquiring liabilites instead of assets for image. Fools. My sister is this way. Makes about 85K a year as a pshychologist for state and my parents had to loan her DP for house cause she's flat broke.

I agree, most if not all of our indiscressionary purchases are made through funds I amass through ebay sales and what not so we try our best not to touch our income....I know too many who work 40K/year jobs who buy 60K cars and other items and then kick their own asses for it later on.
 
There have always been some people that pick the items they want to buy as a luxury. Some people choose a $3000.00 computer to play video games. Some people buy a $55,000 SUV, some people have to have a $50,000 boat, some people like fine clothes. Others want a $100,000 race car. Others dont care about much other than their Front yard and having a better kept house than the Jones's.

Dont forget the health nuts that have the $2000.00 mountain bike and designer bike clothes or running suits.
 
Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: Todd33
What kills me are the people that are low-middle class, maybe making $40k a year driving new $35k SUVs. Talk about bad investments. People are in general, stupid.

Todd, this also hits home, especially where I live....I often times see those who one wouldn't expect to see driving a nice vechicle are carting around in a new A4, M3 or what not....I know alot of younger kids who wouldn't expect anything less...heck when I was growing up any car was better than no car, and many of my friends loved that which was affordable and fast....

The car analogy is good as those are horrible investments and also dreadfully expensive and also are along the same lines as this article hints at (even BMW 3 series was mentioned) but rather is it good that companies like BMW make lower (yet still higher than average) cost offerings for people to aspire to and waste their money on (Heck they target that market) and is it good that people are buying into this supposed image? or would society as a whole be better off following in their parents footsteps putting more weight on necessity and far less on image and supposed luxury??

speaking from my personal experience I don't make a ton of money and neither does my wife, but I have an affinity for nicer things (Watches, Cufflinks, Pens, Cars, Homegoods...etc) and she enjoys Coach purses along with other items...however our logical sides have a really hard time with such purchases as we know that from a truly functional standpoint they are a waste..

is society taking this desire for high end too far? I understand having a few nice things is good...but are we as a whole focusing too much on materialism and the image of luxury?

Thanks


My opinion is these peoples are fools and will be working till they drop.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Somebody said at least I am honest :thumbsup:

That used to be looked up as part of the American Dream, now it has been relegated to a Pipe Dream thanks to the Neocons.

As far as my comment?

Simply weak minded that have keep up with the Jones's mentality , 3 Words:

Wannabe Rich Neocons

I guess then my question is, do we feel the American dream is changing? I remember when I was younger the American dream was homeownership, having a loving family, and just a decent life overall...however now it seems that people are not content unless they have many designer names and what not...or has this always been the case? people were happy with a nice ford or chevy, wearing quality well made clothes and what not and having enough for a good dinner at thanksgiving and gifts under the tree....now unless you are driving a foreign car, shopping at restoration hardware and what not you are not well to do or even remotely well off in many peoples minds....I know it will sound xenophobic but I wonder if the influx of euopean ideals and culture into the US is what is working to change the overlook of society's wants as I know many Italians, British, Germans and Asians are heavily influenced by designer items and what not whereas in the past I don't recall it being as much of an issue for the states (at least until the mid 80s).....I think it is nice to want nice things and have a sense of style but also wonder if we and other nations are taking it a bit too far.

Is this the American dream, or have Americans themselves helped to change the definition of what is "nice" to such a level that attaining a "wonderful life" is much harder than in the past....
 
Originally posted by: bozack


I agree, most if not all of our indiscressionary purchases are made through funds I amass through ebay sales and what not so we try our best not to touch our income....I know too many who work 40K/year jobs who buy 60K cars and other items and then kick their own asses for it later on.


You could be a millionaire in 10 years making 40K a year. Seriously, read millionaire next door. Great book, I think my dad wrote it. 😛 he never made much money while we were growing up but always managed to buy real estate, stocks, and even start a very sucessful business late in life with lots of "capitalization". How? He drove a 74' olds station wagon until 1989. Drives an old 94 buick roadmaster to this day. Always doing his own repairs. Bought his clothes at catholic charities. Basically what many would call cheap! His motto is "assets not liabilites" with every purchase he makes. And today hes what many would call wealthy..lots of assets.

 
Originally posted by: Zebo

You could be a millionaire in 10 years making 40K a year. Seriously, read millionaire next door. Great book, I think my dad wrote it. 😛 he never made much money while we were growing up but always managed to buy real estate, stocks, and even start a very sucessful business late in life with lots of "capitalization". How? He drove a 74' olds station wagon until 1989. Drives an old 94 buick roadmaster to this day. Always doing his own repairs. Bought his clothes at catholic charities. Basically what many would call cheap! His motto is "assets not liabilites" with every purchase he makes. And today hes what many would call wealthy..lots of assets.

Hey Zebo,

I have tried reading that book, or I should say going out to buy it...but honestly while I respect those who can live like that, I personally cannot bank that far into the future....I have some stocks, and we are working on realestate with our new place and I drive a somwhat older car that unfortunately I bought new after getting my first job, and I repair anything that I can....but I can only be frugal to a degree, which is why I said this article somewhat hit home to me, as I enjoy having nice stuff and shopping at nice places (as does my wife) but often wonder if it is ultimately "worth it" and or what does it mean for those who are even more absorbed than we are? I know some real status mongers out there who only buy name brand whatever and their wallets suffer...I have too much of a "well I could die tommorow" complex which gets me to purchase sometimes on a whim that which I might not.
 
Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: Zebo

You could be a millionaire in 10 years making 40K a year. Seriously, read millionaire next door. Great book, I think my dad wrote it. 😛 he never made much money while we were growing up but always managed to buy real estate, stocks, and even start a very sucessful business late in life with lots of "capitalization". How? He drove a 74' olds station wagon until 1989. Drives an old 94 buick roadmaster to this day. Always doing his own repairs. Bought his clothes at catholic charities. Basically what many would call cheap! His motto is "assets not liabilites" with every purchase he makes. And today hes what many would call wealthy..lots of assets.

Hey Zebo,

I have tried reading that book, or I should say going out to buy it...but honestly while I respect those who can live like that, I personally cannot bank that far into the future....I have some stocks, and we are working on realestate with our new place and I drive a somwhat older car that unfortunately I bought new after getting my first job, and I repair anything that I can....but I can only be frugal to a degree, which is why I said this article somewhat hit home to me, as I enjoy having nice stuff and shopping at nice places (as does my wife) but often wonder if it is ultimately "worth it" and or what does it mean for those who are even more absorbed than we are? I know some real status mongers out there who only buy name brand whatever and their wallets suffer...I have too much of a "well I could die tommorow" complex which gets me to purchase sometimes on a whim that which I might not.


Hehe I think it's generational... My parents grew up in war torn europe... depression babies are the same way... Sam Walden a multi billionaire drove a 73 pickup and lived in a middle class subdivsion day he died.
My wife is like that too growing up in poor rural PA.. I'm sorta like you all with only my spouse to temper my waste..have a "another" bank account for my toys and shipments from newegg which get sent to my office🙂 For example i have two omegas and like fine scotch..😛 But I'm still pretty cheap and understand the basics.
 
Visa
MasterCard
Discover
American Express

Huge average consumer debt loads and tons of easy credit = splurge!
 
I always have a hard understanding these people who have to have fancy stuff for the sake of having fancy stuff. When I was growing up, a lot of people around me all got expensive toys and many more of them while I was given a modest amount of toys and hardly any of the expensive ones. Other families got new cars every couple of years, mine usually waited until the cheap econobox we got was 7+ years old before a new one was purchased. We bought cheap clothes that were on sale and ate affordable food while other kid's parents bought their sons $80 rebock pumps that they would grow out of in one year. They didn't buy me a car when I turned 16.

Because of this, I always thought my family was poor. My parents always explained that they "couldn't afford all that stuff". I never really thought less of them for it, because my parents always worked hard and I never lacked something when I actually needed it. I just thought we weren't that well off, but my parents were doing their best.

My family isn't poor though. While both my parents grew up fairly poor, my parents are actually very successful small business owners. Again, I always had everything I needed. When it came time to go to college, I wasn't eligible for any kind of aide besides loans. But my parents had saved up money to pay for my school and my siblings. Most of those other kids got to take out loans or didn't even go...it was their parents who were now saying "we can't afford that stuff"

It wasn't until I was older that I realized that my parents weren't poor...they just weren't idiots. They had their priorities straight, and they wanted better for me than they had gotten. They knew I'd be much better off with a college education and a clean slate when I started out than I with a pair of $80 sneakers or a sports car when I turned 16. I also learned a valueable lesson about the importance of being very careful with your money.

That's why this trend of borrow yourself into a hole, and keeping up with the Jonses even if it ruins you sort of bothers me. Are these people really doing their kids any favors? It took years for my parents values to sink into me, probably made harder by the fact that everyone else around me seemed to have unlimited money. It sort of troubles me they're probably raising a generation of kids with no ability to save and an entitlement complex.

Of course, most people are sheep...so what can I expect? If the flock is walking off a cliff...they'll follow the flock because its the thing to do.
 
Originally posted by: Infohawk
...meanwhile.... a woman dies because she didn't get a flu shot...

And 3,000 babies are discarded (aborted) today.

try to keep your eye on the ball.
 
Originally posted by: bozack
Originally posted by: Todd33
What kills me are the people that are low-middle class, maybe making $40k a year driving new $35k SUVs. Talk about bad investments. People are in general, stupid.

Todd, this also hits home, especially where I live....I often times see those who one wouldn't expect to see driving a nice vechicle are carting around in a new A4, M3 or what not....I know alot of younger kids who wouldn't expect anything less...heck when I was growing up any car was better than no car, and many of my friends loved that which was affordable and fast....

The car analogy is good as those are horrible investments and also dreadfully expensive and also are along the same lines as this article hints at (even BMW 3 series was mentioned) but rather is it good that companies like BMW make lower (yet still higher than average) cost offerings for people to aspire to and waste their money on (Heck they target that market) and is it good that people are buying into this supposed image? or would society as a whole be better off following in their parents footsteps putting more weight on necessity and far less on image and supposed luxury??

speaking from my personal experience I don't make a ton of money and neither does my wife, but I have an affinity for nicer things (Watches, Cufflinks, Pens, Cars, Homegoods...etc) and she enjoys Coach purses along with other items...however our logical sides have a really hard time with such purchases as we know that from a truly functional standpoint they are a waste..

is society taking this desire for high end too far? I understand having a few nice things is good...but are we as a whole focusing too much on materialism and the image of luxury?

Thanks

Every time I drive by the trailer park...the really crappy trailer park (there are a few nice ones around here) with about 6 feet in between trailers I'm always dumbfounded when I see a huge brand new Ford F-150 or a Mustang or even some luxury car in the driveway. What are these people thinking?

You can't blame the auto makers for this though. All they're doing, is giving people the product they ask for. If people want to spend crazy amounts of money on a luxury car...you can keep making economy car that they actually should be buying and go out of business/watch sales go down...or you can get on the bandwagon. Its only good business to do what they do.
 
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Every time I drive by the trailer park...the really crappy trailer park (there are a few nice ones around here) with about 6 feet in between trailers I'm always dumbfounded when I see a huge brand new Ford F-150 or a Mustang or even some luxury car in the driveway. What are these people thinking?
Living in Trailer Parks can be so exciting. Haven't you ever watched "Cops"?
 
Back
Top