6 ms·

A long time ago in one of the first properties I rented the washing machine stopped working. My flatmate called the agency and a day later, I think it was a Sat

A long time ago in one of the first properties I rented the washing machine stopped working. My flatmate called the agency and a day later, I think it was a Saturday morning, a rough looking man turned up to repair it. I remember he had a tattered pair of working jeans and a similarly tattered polo shirt on. He pulled the machine out, took it apart diagnosed the issue and popped out to his car get a part. While he was gone my flatmate clued me in to the fact that was the owner of the property, who also owned the agency, and in turn owned a awe-ful lot of property in the local area. The guy had popped out to his brand new land rover to dig out a part from the back. I was completely blown away at how humble and down to earth he was. Years later I worked with a guy, a multi-millionaire, the guy lives in one of the wealthiest neighbourhoods in London. Again dressed in a normal pair of jeans and t-shirt, nothing too noteworthy. I remember him telling me how dry and boring his neighbours are, too concerned with 'things'. When he wants to go for a pint rather than go to his local, he heads to the less well off area a few streets over to the pub there and enjoys the company of normal people. From these and other experiences I've come to think that the more you look, and act, like you've 'got money' the less you actually have.

karaterobot 4y ago
That guy sounds genuine, but it gets weird when the very wealthy decide that dressing like 'regular people' is the style they want to go for. That's when you create a market for $250 pocket t-shirts and $600 denim jeans. Talk about not getting it!
- mywittyname 4y ago
  Oh, they absolutely "get it." People quickly learn to dress for the occasion. When you go to a nephew's birthday party or something, you don't want to clue strangers in, so you take the Toyota and wear plain clothing. It's like a shibboleth, people who know what a $250 plain shirt looks like will get it, while everyone else is clueless.
  - 3y350n1y 4y ago
    Mmm, I'm not convinced. Generally speaking I think wealthy, business and even "custom-savvy" people - if you want to go that far - have enough business sense to realise paying $250 for a plain white shirt doesn't make any sense...
    - bombcar 4y ago
      What they do is get to the point where worrying about the price of a shirt isn't worth it - after all, how much can a banana cost, $10?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - ratww 4y ago
      It's not just a plain white shirt. It's a plain white shirt that looks plain for normals, but special for people in the know. With that said, not all wealthy people do it.
    - mywittyname 4y ago
      The shirt is expensive because A) they make them for a variety of body types, not just the generic S,M,L you'd find in most clothing stores and B) they are often sold at stores where a person is going to help you pick out something that looks good on your body and goes with your personal style. You're mostly paying for someone to do the thinking and work for you. It makes plenty of sense to spend money to look good when aesthetics aren't your strong suit, but are important to you. People hire landscapers to make their houses look nice and appealing. This is the same thing, but for your body.
- finfinfin 4y ago
  To be fair, some more expensive clothes have a much better fit. I have been buying $150 jeans most of my adult life and recently read a comment on Reddit that expressed disbelief that someone would pay more than $30 for a pair of jeans.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
    And many others are just more expensive. I'm one of those $30 jeans people. An old girlfriend once convinced me to try on a pair of $200 jeans ("you don't have to buy them, just try them on"). I did it just to shut her up and looked at myself wearing $200 jeans in the mirror. Fit exactly the same, material seemed better quality, stitching was the same, etc. Yes, better. But definitely not $170 better. Then again, I think Levi's are overpriced these days.
    - listenallyall 4y ago
      > I did it just to shut her up ...I assume you weren't surprised when she decided to change her status to your "old" girlfriend.
      - HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
        Interesting that you presume to know how that decision was arrived at.
- illwrks 4y ago
  He wasn't dressing like that for fun, but out of practicality anything to do with plumbing can be messy. If I remember correctly, the agencies usual handyman wasn't available so he took it upon himself to come around and sort the problem. There was no obligation for him to do that he just wanted to be a decent landlord and respectful to one of his tenants. It's good business really as we loved there for years and respected his property just as he respected us as tenants. In other places I've rented I've had absolute arseh*oles for landlords. They wouldn't give you the time of day, but I bet their tenants were quick to move out! (I was)
Aeolun 4y ago
I’m of the opinion that truly good clothes do not need to sport a logo at all. Unless you can see/feel the quality, why pay a premium just to show people you spent 500% more on your shirt?
- jaywalk 4y ago
  People pay way more than 500% more just to have a logo on their shirt. It has nothing to do with quality.
  - wollsmoth 4y ago
    nothing is lamer than a regular ass t-shirt with the logo of some luxury brand. To me this is just truly paying for the brand and not an actual quality product. A terrible waste of money in my opinion.
    - mc32 4y ago
      An interesting thing is people who buy knock-offs of those things for cheap. I'm not sure why, but I think there could be some kind of peer pressure-like phenomenon. I'm not talking about people who get donated clothing, as they have little choice. I mean people who go out of their way to get the knock off if they cannot afford the real one (which they may wish for).
      - hammyhavoc 4y ago
        If you were to spend just a few minutes browsing "hype beast"-like forums/communities around the internet, you would likely arrive very quickly at the conclusion that it isn't about looking put-together and wearing a genuinely fashionable outfit, it's about how many dollars worth of products you can comfortably wear at a time (to get "the drip"), even if that means layering it up in ways that absolutely do not work aesthetically. A truly bizarre offshoot of fast-fashion. Lots of folking out there going into major debt just to own designer goods. They definitely seem to believe in the "dress for the job you want, not the job you have" thing, but usually work in dead-end jobs without any chance of career progression. Judging by the interest in 'fashion reps', I would say it's very much a peer pressure issue, but one that extends far into adulthood for some folks.
rr888 4y ago
I'd like to agree, but the second multi millionaire you knew lived in one of the wealthiest neighbourhoods in London, and the first multi millionaire you dont know where he lived but has an expensive car and is likely the same. I've always lived in cheap arsed neighbourhoods, my recent place is above average and it makes a lot of things easier - even if I dont really enjoy the boring corporate neighbours.
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
  Mmm...yes it was an expensive car brand, but it is a common car in Africa because it's just so reliable, very rugged and also easy to repair. And it's not that expensive.
  - dewey 4y ago
    I don't really get that comparison. The current day Land Rover / Range Rovers are very different from "very rugged and easy to repair" ones of the past as they are basically SUVs now. This might have been true for the Defender but not any more.
    - petre 4y ago
      They're owned by Tata Motors now, the manufacturer of the Tata Nano, the world's cheapest car.
      - unmole 4y ago
        So, does that make JLR low status?
        throwaway0a5e 4y ago
        The association with the "cheap" brand is just a flimsy justification to be used by a bunch of Americans who drive 4Runners and Pilots (mostly, there's probably the odd Explorer in there) and have a desire to feel superior over people who "flaunt" their wealth or use it "irresponsibly". All these vehicles cost in the same ballpark (or at least have large overlapping ranges) so roughly all the same people have access to them. It's not about status. It's about tribe signaling.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
daniel-cussen 4y ago
That's cool, that's what my image of a cool landlord is, the one who is just an excellent handyman--a maintenance focus.
randomopining 4y ago
Stealth wealth. Nobody smart flauts value, they use subtle cues to let other valuable or simply well-studied people know. Nobody wants annoying low class (talking about having low class, not in a monetary sense) people trying to get something from them, talking, or worse -- mugging or following them. So many fools wearing expensive watches in cities getting their heads bashed. If you're not aggressively dating (even then who cares), why would you try to get a shallow ego stroke like that. High quality perfectly fitted t shirt and pants/shorts with zero logos, that's what I'll splurge on if I ever get rich. And super comfy and effective shoes.
taternuts 4y ago
People who have a lot of money don't want to let other people who can rob them know they have a lot of money. They've gone past the point where virtue-signaling is important to them, and where having someone say "Nice shoes!" is no longer fun for them. They can always have the best shoes and it's no longer an acknowledgement of peers but acknowledgement of 'poor people'. 90% of rich white guys wear plain T-Shirts and jeans with all bird shoes, and try to virtue-signal with things like yachts and other ridiculous things.

karaterobot 4y ago

That guy sounds genuine, but it gets weird when the very wealthy decide that dressing like 'regular people' is the style they want to go for. That's when you create a market for $250 pocket t-shirts and $600 denim jeans. Talk about not getting it!

mywittyname 4y ago
Oh, they absolutely "get it." People quickly learn to dress for the occasion. When you go to a nephew's birthday party or something, you don't want to clue strangers in, so you take the Toyota and wear plain clothing. It's like a shibboleth, people who know what a $250 plain shirt looks like will get it, while everyone else is clueless.
- 3y350n1y 4y ago
  Mmm, I'm not convinced. Generally speaking I think wealthy, business and even "custom-savvy" people - if you want to go that far - have enough business sense to realise paying $250 for a plain white shirt doesn't make any sense...
  - bombcar 4y ago
    What they do is get to the point where worrying about the price of a shirt isn't worth it - after all, how much can a banana cost, $10?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - ratww 4y ago
    It's not just a plain white shirt. It's a plain white shirt that looks plain for normals, but special for people in the know. With that said, not all wealthy people do it.
  - mywittyname 4y ago
    The shirt is expensive because A) they make them for a variety of body types, not just the generic S,M,L you'd find in most clothing stores and B) they are often sold at stores where a person is going to help you pick out something that looks good on your body and goes with your personal style. You're mostly paying for someone to do the thinking and work for you. It makes plenty of sense to spend money to look good when aesthetics aren't your strong suit, but are important to you. People hire landscapers to make their houses look nice and appealing. This is the same thing, but for your body.
finfinfin 4y ago
To be fair, some more expensive clothes have a much better fit. I have been buying $150 jeans most of my adult life and recently read a comment on Reddit that expressed disbelief that someone would pay more than $30 for a pair of jeans.
- HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
  And many others are just more expensive. I'm one of those $30 jeans people. An old girlfriend once convinced me to try on a pair of $200 jeans ("you don't have to buy them, just try them on"). I did it just to shut her up and looked at myself wearing $200 jeans in the mirror. Fit exactly the same, material seemed better quality, stitching was the same, etc. Yes, better. But definitely not $170 better. Then again, I think Levi's are overpriced these days.
  - listenallyall 4y ago
    > I did it just to shut her up ...I assume you weren't surprised when she decided to change her status to your "old" girlfriend.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 4y ago
      Interesting that you presume to know how that decision was arrived at.
illwrks 4y ago
He wasn't dressing like that for fun, but out of practicality anything to do with plumbing can be messy. If I remember correctly, the agencies usual handyman wasn't available so he took it upon himself to come around and sort the problem. There was no obligation for him to do that he just wanted to be a decent landlord and respectful to one of his tenants. It's good business really as we loved there for years and respected his property just as he respected us as tenants. In other places I've rented I've had absolute arseh*oles for landlords. They wouldn't give you the time of day, but I bet their tenants were quick to move out! (I was)

Aeolun 4y ago

I’m of the opinion that truly good clothes do not need to sport a logo at all. Unless you can see/feel the quality, why pay a premium just to show people you spent 500% more on your shirt?

jaywalk 4y ago
People pay way more than 500% more just to have a logo on their shirt. It has nothing to do with quality.
- wollsmoth 4y ago
  nothing is lamer than a regular ass t-shirt with the logo of some luxury brand. To me this is just truly paying for the brand and not an actual quality product. A terrible waste of money in my opinion.
  - mc32 4y ago
    An interesting thing is people who buy knock-offs of those things for cheap. I'm not sure why, but I think there could be some kind of peer pressure-like phenomenon. I'm not talking about people who get donated clothing, as they have little choice. I mean people who go out of their way to get the knock off if they cannot afford the real one (which they may wish for).
    - hammyhavoc 4y ago
      If you were to spend just a few minutes browsing "hype beast"-like forums/communities around the internet, you would likely arrive very quickly at the conclusion that it isn't about looking put-together and wearing a genuinely fashionable outfit, it's about how many dollars worth of products you can comfortably wear at a time (to get "the drip"), even if that means layering it up in ways that absolutely do not work aesthetically. A truly bizarre offshoot of fast-fashion. Lots of folking out there going into major debt just to own designer goods. They definitely seem to believe in the "dress for the job you want, not the job you have" thing, but usually work in dead-end jobs without any chance of career progression. Judging by the interest in 'fashion reps', I would say it's very much a peer pressure issue, but one that extends far into adulthood for some folks.

rr888 4y ago

I'd like to agree, but the second multi millionaire you knew lived in one of the wealthiest neighbourhoods in London, and the first multi millionaire you dont know where he lived but has an expensive car and is likely the same. I've always lived in cheap arsed neighbourhoods, my recent place is above average and it makes a lot of things easier - even if I dont really enjoy the boring corporate neighbours.

daniel-cussen 4y ago
Mmm...yes it was an expensive car brand, but it is a common car in Africa because it's just so reliable, very rugged and also easy to repair. And it's not that expensive.
- dewey 4y ago
  I don't really get that comparison. The current day Land Rover / Range Rovers are very different from "very rugged and easy to repair" ones of the past as they are basically SUVs now. This might have been true for the Defender but not any more.
  - petre 4y ago
    They're owned by Tata Motors now, the manufacturer of the Tata Nano, the world's cheapest car.
    - unmole 4y ago
      So, does that make JLR low status?
      - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
        The association with the "cheap" brand is just a flimsy justification to be used by a bunch of Americans who drive 4Runners and Pilots (mostly, there's probably the odd Explorer in there) and have a desire to feel superior over people who "flaunt" their wealth or use it "irresponsibly". All these vehicles cost in the same ballpark (or at least have large overlapping ranges) so roughly all the same people have access to them. It's not about status. It's about tribe signaling.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

daniel-cussen 4y ago

That's cool, that's what my image of a cool landlord is, the one who is just an excellent handyman--a maintenance focus.

randomopining 4y ago

Stealth wealth. Nobody smart flauts value, they use subtle cues to let other valuable or simply well-studied people know. Nobody wants annoying low class (talking about having low class, not in a monetary sense) people trying to get something from them, talking, or worse -- mugging or following them. So many fools wearing expensive watches in cities getting their heads bashed. If you're not aggressively dating (even then who cares), why would you try to get a shallow ego stroke like that. High quality perfectly fitted t shirt and pants/shorts with zero logos, that's what I'll splurge on if I ever get rich. And super comfy and effective shoes.

taternuts 4y ago

People who have a lot of money don't want to let other people who can rob them know they have a lot of money. They've gone past the point where virtue-signaling is important to them, and where having someone say "Nice shoes!" is no longer fun for them. They can always have the best shoes and it's no longer an acknowledgement of peers but acknowledgement of 'poor people'. 90% of rich white guys wear plain T-Shirts and jeans with all bird shoes, and try to virtue-signal with things like yachts and other ridiculous things.