3 ms·

I use the Fun Factor rationalization too, but I find it can be problematic in many cases. Mainly with bigger purchases. When you amortize that $2000 bike out

I use the Fun Factor rationalization too, but I find it can be problematic in many cases. Mainly with bigger purchases. When you amortize that $2000 bike out per use, the difference between it and the $1500 bike can seem rather insignificant. "$1.5 v. $2 per use? Hell, I might as well get the better one." But, it's still $500. That's real money that could be used to earn more money somewhere else. Ratchet that up if we're talking about cars or boats or houses. So, I like the Fun Factor rationalization, but it can be dangerous. As to the "lasting forever bit", I don't think it's necessary that things last literally forever; the point is more that making very long term purchases is a worthy goal. 15-20 years maybe. That said, I do try to buy things that literally will last me forever, though the list isn't very long, yet: I try to buy tools that will last forever, or close to. With things like digital cameras (or any consumer electronics), it's silly to expect anything to last more than 10 years, on the very long end. But, with power tools, I buy things expecting them to last forever (with routine maintenance and not heavy duty use). I more or less expect my nice knives to last forever. I expect most of my furniture to last forever. I expect my weight set to last forever.

yread 15y ago
> But, it's still $500. That's real money that could be used to earn more money somewhere else. On the other hand the 2000$ bike is perhaps so much nicer that you ride it more often and have more fun doing it. It might last longer as well lowering the fun factor even more. > With things like digital cameras (or any consumer electronics), it's silly to expect anything to last more than 10 years, on the very long end. I think that's an unreasonable assumption. I had a Kyocera camera (designed in 1999) but even though I would call myself frugal (some people would call me cheap) and I didn't have much money I basically had to replace it around 2006 because of technology progress and lack of batteries, replacement parts.
gaustin 15y ago
I just bought a 260 lb. high quality anvil. It will be an excellent anvil for at least 200 years (if not 300 or 400 years). How's that for longevity?
- barefoot 15y ago
  Did you buy new or used?
- billswift 15y ago
  Only if it is taken care of. I have seen anvils with broken horns, chipped edges, and deep rust pits that were no more than a hundred years old. I even saw one anvil (don't know its age) that had been broken almost in half AND was seriously rust damaged.

yread 15y ago

> But, it's still $500. That's real money that could be used to earn more money somewhere else. On the other hand the 2000$ bike is perhaps so much nicer that you ride it more often and have more fun doing it. It might last longer as well lowering the fun factor even more. > With things like digital cameras (or any consumer electronics), it's silly to expect anything to last more than 10 years, on the very long end. I think that's an unreasonable assumption. I had a Kyocera camera (designed in 1999) but even though I would call myself frugal (some people would call me cheap) and I didn't have much money I basically had to replace it around 2006 because of technology progress and lack of batteries, replacement parts.

gaustin 15y ago

I just bought a 260 lb. high quality anvil. It will be an excellent anvil for at least 200 years (if not 300 or 400 years). How's that for longevity?

barefoot 15y ago
Did you buy new or used?
billswift 15y ago
Only if it is taken care of. I have seen anvils with broken horns, chipped edges, and deep rust pits that were no more than a hundred years old. I even saw one anvil (don't know its age) that had been broken almost in half AND was seriously rust damaged.