4 ms·

The term we're looking for here is "poverty trap." A poverty trap is a circumstance where people are forced to take a more costly short term move. The canonica

The term we're looking for here is "poverty trap." A poverty trap is a circumstance where people are forced to take a more costly short term move. The canonical example is buying a $35 pair of shoes twice a year instead of a $50 pair that might last two years.

Vendan 8y ago
Obligatory Terry Pratchett quote: “The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  It's a fun quote that has some truth to it, but not much more than that.
  - Aeolun 8y ago
    I think it pretty well encompasses all the criticism that I could levy at this artie.
  - yial 8y ago
    The truth of it applies to a lot of things though; if money is tight and you have to buy some quantities it means you pay more for Toilet paper. Paper towels. You can’t stock up when soup is on sale. Or tuna. Or other x canned item. Shoes, do you buy lightly used, or do you buy whatever is on clearance ? Clothing: nothing from Walmart ever seems to fit right. Used shirts and pants always seem to fit just a little off. Is there a Burlington coat factory, or a Gabe’s, or similar near you? Maybe you can grab something cheap. If not, you may have to spend entirely too much of your paycheck to replace some pieces of clothing you probably have to have for work. (Example of this, I used to know people making barely more then minimum wage, who didn’t have a car, and had to pay way too much to keep buying cheap pants when they got holes in them so they wouldn’t lose their job ).
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      Yes, that is why I said it has some truth to it. Perhaps I could have been more clear in my criticism. It is simply a very incomplete description for why some people have more wealth and income than others. It is one piece of a large and complex puzzle.
      - Vendan 8y ago
        Yeap. I mainly meant it as a fun alternative to the rather more standard "Obligatory xkcd" posts :D. Also, I'm a huge fan of Terry Pratchett.
Dylan16807 8y ago
Poverty traps are relevant, but they're usually more than a day's pay. The temptation to cheap out is always there, but being stuck with the bad route is mostly relevant to big-ticket items. Bigger than a cell phone, which you can get used or with a zero-interest payment plan among other options.
- woodpanel 8y ago
  Well I agree but would add: If you’re stuck in the short game poverty trap, it’s harder to even realize what your (underlying) big ticket items are. Or to put it from another perspective: you have to be able to afford to minimalize. In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos. Like the boiling frog, that's an attractive illustration that is literally untrue.
    - woodpanel 8y ago
      That was a metaphor… New Age Zen Buddhists are usually not poor, culturally not related to Asia at all and often don't realize how their practice is a refurbishment of puritan cultural origins.

Vendan 8y ago

Obligatory Terry Pratchett quote: “The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”

dwaltrip 8y ago
It's a fun quote that has some truth to it, but not much more than that.
- Aeolun 8y ago
  I think it pretty well encompasses all the criticism that I could levy at this artie.
- yial 8y ago
  The truth of it applies to a lot of things though; if money is tight and you have to buy some quantities it means you pay more for Toilet paper. Paper towels. You can’t stock up when soup is on sale. Or tuna. Or other x canned item. Shoes, do you buy lightly used, or do you buy whatever is on clearance ? Clothing: nothing from Walmart ever seems to fit right. Used shirts and pants always seem to fit just a little off. Is there a Burlington coat factory, or a Gabe’s, or similar near you? Maybe you can grab something cheap. If not, you may have to spend entirely too much of your paycheck to replace some pieces of clothing you probably have to have for work. (Example of this, I used to know people making barely more then minimum wage, who didn’t have a car, and had to pay way too much to keep buying cheap pants when they got holes in them so they wouldn’t lose their job ).
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    Yes, that is why I said it has some truth to it. Perhaps I could have been more clear in my criticism. It is simply a very incomplete description for why some people have more wealth and income than others. It is one piece of a large and complex puzzle.
    - Vendan 8y ago
      Yeap. I mainly meant it as a fun alternative to the rather more standard "Obligatory xkcd" posts :D. Also, I'm a huge fan of Terry Pratchett.

Dylan16807 8y ago

Poverty traps are relevant, but they're usually more than a day's pay. The temptation to cheap out is always there, but being stuck with the bad route is mostly relevant to big-ticket items. Bigger than a cell phone, which you can get used or with a zero-interest payment plan among other options.

woodpanel 8y ago
Well I agree but would add: If you’re stuck in the short game poverty trap, it’s harder to even realize what your (underlying) big ticket items are. Or to put it from another perspective: you have to be able to afford to minimalize. In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > In the West, there are no Buddhist temples in the ghettos. Like the boiling frog, that's an attractive illustration that is literally untrue.
  - woodpanel 8y ago
    That was a metaphor… New Age Zen Buddhists are usually not poor, culturally not related to Asia at all and often don't realize how their practice is a refurbishment of puritan cultural origins.