5 ms·
> But if you’re working hard for your money, you don’t want to spend it on stupid stuff. And so, the reasoning goes, you want to spend it on less stupid stuff,
by bambax 5y ago
> But if you’re working hard for your money, you don’t want to spend it on stupid stuff.
And so, the reasoning goes, you want to spend it on less stupid stuff, such as fakes, because, for the same amount of money, you can own 10x more fakes than the real thing.
But why do you need 10 fake Birkins?
There is something profoundly sad about people who spend time buying stuff; it's even sadder when they argue that they're being clever because they buy cheap stuff, so they can buy more of it. They are, in effect, hoarders.
- hnbad 5y ago> for the same amount of money, you can own 10x more fakes than the real thing Or other things. Unless I missed the memo where they are paid in fake Birkin scrip that can only be exchanged for other fake Birkins.
- _uy6i 5y agoI think there is another element involved - there is the desire not to ripped off. Many luxury goods are aesthetically pleasing, but total rip offs. Take the ridiculous fad of designer shower sandals/slides, an adidas one costs $25-$35 [1] a Gucci one ~$400 [2] but both probably cost about $5. The point I’m making is if you want Gucci slides (for whatever reasons), and you’re galled by the markup, replicas would seem to “solve” your problem (putting aside all other problems it creates). [1]https://www.adidas.com/us/adilette-comfort-slides/GZ5892.html?pr=product_rr&slot=13&rec=mt https://www.adidas.com/us/adilette-comfort-slides/GZ5892.htm... [2]https://www.gucci.com/us/en/pr/men/shoes-for-men/slides-sandals-for-men/slides-for-men/mens-gg-slide-sandal-p-681880UKU001000 https://www.gucci.com/us/en/pr/men/shoes-for-men/slides-sand...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- blfr 5y agoThe thing I don't understand about luxury goods is why people outsource their taste to these massive corporations like LVMH for so much money. For the price of an off the rack Armani or Prada suit you can have one custom tailored from a really good tailor. For the price of a LV purse, you can have five or more from a solid local artisan. Higher quality (or exactly the same because this is where these large manufacturers often order stuff), full customization, an actual professional to advise you but people choose a soulless megacorp logo instead.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- whatshisface 5y agoThe status conferred through clothing is not determined by anything so objective as fit or so friendly as self-expression. It is determined entirely by the people who see you. If your peers/coworkers/friends happen to think Armani is cooler, anything else would be an eccentricity. (This is why anyone with sense eventually converges on casual clothing.)
- swearwolf 5y agoI think that’s the difference between fashionable and stylish. There are a lot of fashionable people, and it’s relatively easy to become one. You need to have some aesthetic sense, but 90% of that can be outsourced if you have the money. You simply buy entire outfits from high fashion companies, and make sure they fit you well enough to look good. Do that often enough that your clothes are always up to date, and you’re fashionable. Stylish, though, is much harder to attain. A truly stylish person can look incredible in clothes they bought at the Goodwill, because they have an aesthetic sense potent enough to create visually pleasing combinations that are actually novel. A good example of someone like this is Tavi Gevinson. If you’re not familiar, she started a fashion blog called The Fashion Rookie at age 11, and she caught the attention of the fashion world by styling inexpensive clothing in novel and interesting ways.
- anonu 5y agoSignaling. If you buy LV therefore you're rich.
- partomniscient 4y agoThe signalling works differently depending on who you are. In my case, if someone has a LV (or similar) bag/purse etc. I have no interest in interacting with them. Interestingly, this 'signal' applies whether the bag is real or a cheap knockoff - I don't need to check whether the item is genuine, I assume I want to avoid interaction in both cases.
- secretsatan 5y agoI am just utterly baffled by it all, let’s just say i have a family member who is an out and out snob and very vocal to me about my choice of clothing. This person also considers themselves a fantastic money saver. I myself, am of an unusual size, just slightly too tall and skinny for off the peg designer stuff in most shops, none of it fits me properly and looks terrible. But i do know shops with off brand stuff that actually fits. So whenever i buy stuff i like and feel comfortable in, i’m “wasting my money”, but is happy when i pay three times the price for something that doesn’t fit me, is uncomfortable, and can’t actually clean without taking to a dry cleaner so i end up wearing once they seem happy. It drives me up the wall. I do buy brands i like, eg, converse shoes are oversized compared to all other shoes so i can pick up the largest size in most shops and they fit me, but they aren’t the “right” brand and therefore “a waste of money”. I once spent an entire day trying to find some dress shoes that fit, they cost a fortune, are, tbh, dangerous to wear in real world conditions, and i’ve worn them three times, this, apparently is a good investment. I can’t bloody resell them, wtf?
- digisign 5y agoNot sure what to say besides clothing isn't an investment, but a depreciating asset. Maybe if you're a very public person a good wardrobe would be a business expense. As long as you are buying reasonable quality and comfortable, I don't think an adult has to explain their choices. ;-)
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoYou sound like all the snobs who tell me my $10 (well, they're $15 now) harbor freight angle grinders are crap compared to their $100 Milwaukee You know who never has to swap between wheels because he always has a grinder that already has what he wants on it? This guy. Ditto for basic socket sets placed at typical work areas, tape measures all over the fuckin place, etc, etc. Quantity has a quality all its own.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bambax 5y agoI like that you're comparing Birkins to angle grinders. But do you scrape the stickers and replace them with ones that say "Milwaukee", just to pretend you can afford the expensive brand? Because that's what we're talking about here.
- pkulak 5y agoI feel like there's a pretty hard line between professional purchases and all other. The calculus of "spending" totally changes when it can directly impact "earning".
- stickfigure 5y agoAvE does a lot of teardowns of power tools. Here's a comparison of a HF vs Milwaukee item: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSiI9MB9MA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cSiI9MB9MA I've watched a few of these and the upshot is that there's definitely a quality difference between HF and name brands. I've burnt out a HF angle grinder (which they replaced under warranty). For the most part, HF tools work fine for hobby use and sure they're cheap. But when this angle grinder dies again I'll buy a name brand one (for probably $50) - it gets a lot of use and driving to HF is annoying.
- Arrath 5y agoThis is the way. If you're not sure how often you might use something: Buy the budget Harbor Freight equivalent tools, if you use it enough to wear it out/burn it up, upgrade to a better brand. If you never push it so hard it dies, you're perfectly fine with the HF version.
- vmception 5y agoMy takeaway was that the community for fakes had wound up being stronger than the community for authentics, where the authentics are just an isolation from society while the fakes are comraderie and international currency
- alephnan 5y ago> There is something profoundly sad about people who spend time buying stuff It's their time and money.
- dismantlethesun 5y agoYes and they earned it through gainful employment thereby theoretically contributing the same or more to society…
- alephnan 5y agoFirst, you're assuming all employment is unilaterally contributing to society. Second, you're assuming people whose income isn't from employment aren't subject to taxes. Third, you're assuming consumption is not contributing to society. Fourth, how do you propose wealthy people redistribute to the masses ? Five, you're assuming wealth is unproductive. Should wealthy people just hoard their wealth in cash and gold instead of income generating assets?
- RugnirViking 5y agoWhat a bizzare and combatative comment. Chill out. You seem to be arguing against something the GP didnt actually say.
- dismantlethesun 5y agoI think you may be assuming that I am arguing against people buying handbags. I am not. If it’s your money, spend it as you wish. Morally speaking society should only make sure that you didn’t earn money through harmful activities (e.g mafia dons), but it shouldn’t regulate regular spending on luxury goods.
- nicoburns 5y agoI agree that society shouldn't regulate what people spend their money on, but I'd argue it ought to limit the amount of money that any one individual can accrue.
- 88 5y ago> But why do you need 10 fake Birkins? Different colours?
- gadders 5y agoI can understand a bag collection better than I can buying Pokemon or Magic the Gathering cards.
- Cthulhu_ 5y agoI guess the goal is to own things. It probably has overlaps with sneakerheads or other streetwear fans. There's another one where being seen wearing the same thing twice is a faux pas - you know the gossip magazines (and people into those) would be all over that.
- eternityforest 5y agoThe article is paywalled, but maybe it's an act of protest against the general idea of status symbols?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]