7 ms·

> We pay premiums for Swiss watches, Hermès bags and old properties precisely because of the time embedded in them Lost me in paragraph three. We pay for those

> We pay premiums for Swiss watches, Hermès bags and old properties precisely because of the time embedded in them Lost me in paragraph three. We pay for those things because they're recognizable status symbols, not because they took a long time to make. It took my grandmother a long time to knit the sweater I'm wearing, but its market value is probably close to zero.

agumonkey 7mo ago
Maybe the analogy was wrong but more and more, I believe that some of a value was implicitly about how many organs/industries did it touch.
- ghywertelling 7mo ago
  [dead]
simonw 7mo ago
I would say that wearing a sweater knitted by one's grandmother is its own kind of status symbol. I'm more impressed by that (someone having a grandmother willing to invest that much effort in a gift for them) than someone spending $1000 on an item of clothing. The fact that those items took a long time to make is part of what makes them status symbols though, because if you pay a lot of money for something that took no time to make at all (see most NFTs) you look like an idiot to a lot of people.
- titanomachy 7mo ago
  I like the sweater, and some people like you might recognize it as special, but it doesn't have the universal cachet of a Rolex or something. It's also a bit chunky and funny-looking (but I guess so are some Rolexes).
  - daveguy 7mo ago
    "universal" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
- ghurtado 7mo ago
  > status symbol. This sort of thing was done at a time when everybody did it, and now that it's not done, nobody does it No kid ever said "did you see the sweater that Timmy's grandma knitted for him? That kid is so cool! " Mostly because they all had grams sweaters as well. I don't know what term you were looking for, but a handmade present for someone dear is about the furthest thing from a "status symbol" that I can think of: - it can't be bought - it can't be transferred without losing almost all value (ie: it's only valuable to you, or at most your family, eBay doesn't want it) - it provides no improvement whatsoever in one's social standing
  - simonw 7mo ago
    I don't care about the opinion of kids. I'm also completely unimpressed by someone wearing a Rolex though, so different mileage for different people.
    - ghurtado 7mo ago
      You should be able to understand the definition of a common term such as "status symbol" though. Understanding words does not require being impressed by anything, nor caring about the opinion of kids.
      - daveguy 7mo ago
        If most people are thinking "whoopdedoo... you clearly have more money than sense" when they see your status symbol, is it still a status symbol?
        Avicebron 7mo ago
        It depends, if someone fundamentally believes that having more money than someone else means that person is of higher status, then it is. If people don't consider that someone with more money is of a higher status then symbols of that wealth aren't meaningful. I think a lot of people have an ingrained belief that "more money == more status"
        7mo ago
- cineticdaffodil 7mo ago
  To be worthy that much time is the statussymbol of love. Its a rare thing, money can't buy. Somebody gifts part of his finite time on the planet to you bundled in an artifact.
satvikpendem 7mo ago
Yes, Veblen goods, and there are examples of cloning Hermès bags for example (still by hand) where they're much cheaper yet took the same amount of time to create. https://youtu.be/02CjWIkTy-M https://youtu.be/02CjWIkTy-M
airstrike 7mo ago
Reads like a feel good article to signal virtue and feel validated in the wake of the Delve scandal. But ultimately obvious, opportunistic, and mid.
doe88 7mo ago
I feel you, I guess i succeeded in not being lost and keep reading by solving the conendrum in telling myself: it certainly should take time to grow the cows for the bags. Nonetheless I'm glad i finished reading it, it was a good essay.
cambrianentropy 7mo ago
I clicked the back button exactly when I got to that line haha.
bigstrat2003 7mo ago
It would be more accurate to say "we value these things highly". Most people don't give a damn about your sweater, but it's probably extremely valuable to you precisely because of the time your grandmother put into it.
vessenes 7mo ago
The point of the essay is good. You called out exactly my reaction; we value those things because of the marketing dollars that went in to them. As a wealthy friend from Geneva said to me once, “Look around this dinner party - the Swiss here have either an Apple watch or nothing on their wrist.” Swiss watches are an export good, and Hermes is a luxury brand. Both of generally good quality. And much, much better marketing.
- johnnyanmac 7mo ago
  Not really. Some items naturally have value due to utility. Natural resources only lose their value if we somehow move on from all its utilities (like coal is, day by day). Some are indeed via marketing, but any itema have intrinsic or at least, emotional value.
silisili 7mo ago
I agree there, but there are plenty of examples of time cost being baked into an item, regardless of status symbols. The sweater is with whatever value a single person values it as or would pay for it. Said another way, would you sell it to me for $10? 50? 100? If you said no to all three, it's worth at least $100.
- titanomachy 7mo ago
  Well, I did say "market value". Of course it has value to me.
marcta 7mo ago
Maybe their point is that the brands themselves have a lot of time embedded in them. Generally, status symbols (whatever they are) aren't things that are recently established.

agumonkey 7mo ago

Maybe the analogy was wrong but more and more, I believe that some of a value was implicitly about how many organs/industries did it touch.

ghywertelling 7mo ago
[dead]

simonw 7mo ago

I would say that wearing a sweater knitted by one's grandmother is its own kind of status symbol. I'm more impressed by that (someone having a grandmother willing to invest that much effort in a gift for them) than someone spending $1000 on an item of clothing. The fact that those items took a long time to make is part of what makes them status symbols though, because if you pay a lot of money for something that took no time to make at all (see most NFTs) you look like an idiot to a lot of people.

titanomachy 7mo ago
I like the sweater, and some people like you might recognize it as special, but it doesn't have the universal cachet of a Rolex or something. It's also a bit chunky and funny-looking (but I guess so are some Rolexes).
- daveguy 7mo ago
  "universal" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
ghurtado 7mo ago
> status symbol. This sort of thing was done at a time when everybody did it, and now that it's not done, nobody does it No kid ever said "did you see the sweater that Timmy's grandma knitted for him? That kid is so cool! " Mostly because they all had grams sweaters as well. I don't know what term you were looking for, but a handmade present for someone dear is about the furthest thing from a "status symbol" that I can think of: - it can't be bought - it can't be transferred without losing almost all value (ie: it's only valuable to you, or at most your family, eBay doesn't want it) - it provides no improvement whatsoever in one's social standing
- simonw 7mo ago
  I don't care about the opinion of kids. I'm also completely unimpressed by someone wearing a Rolex though, so different mileage for different people.
  - ghurtado 7mo ago
    You should be able to understand the definition of a common term such as "status symbol" though. Understanding words does not require being impressed by anything, nor caring about the opinion of kids.
    - daveguy 7mo ago
      If most people are thinking "whoopdedoo... you clearly have more money than sense" when they see your status symbol, is it still a status symbol?
      - Avicebron 7mo ago
        It depends, if someone fundamentally believes that having more money than someone else means that person is of higher status, then it is. If people don't consider that someone with more money is of a higher status then symbols of that wealth aren't meaningful. I think a lot of people have an ingrained belief that "more money == more status"
      - 7mo ago
cineticdaffodil 7mo ago
To be worthy that much time is the statussymbol of love. Its a rare thing, money can't buy. Somebody gifts part of his finite time on the planet to you bundled in an artifact.

satvikpendem 7mo ago

Yes, Veblen goods, and there are examples of cloning Hermès bags for example (still by hand) where they're much cheaper yet took the same amount of time to create. https://youtu.be/02CjWIkTy-M https://youtu.be/02CjWIkTy-M

airstrike 7mo ago

Reads like a feel good article to signal virtue and feel validated in the wake of the Delve scandal. But ultimately obvious, opportunistic, and mid.

doe88 7mo ago

I feel you, I guess i succeeded in not being lost and keep reading by solving the conendrum in telling myself: it certainly should take time to grow the cows for the bags. Nonetheless I'm glad i finished reading it, it was a good essay.

cambrianentropy 7mo ago

I clicked the back button exactly when I got to that line haha.

bigstrat2003 7mo ago

It would be more accurate to say "we value these things highly". Most people don't give a damn about your sweater, but it's probably extremely valuable to you precisely because of the time your grandmother put into it.

vessenes 7mo ago

The point of the essay is good. You called out exactly my reaction; we value those things because of the marketing dollars that went in to them. As a wealthy friend from Geneva said to me once, “Look around this dinner party - the Swiss here have either an Apple watch or nothing on their wrist.” Swiss watches are an export good, and Hermes is a luxury brand. Both of generally good quality. And much, much better marketing.

johnnyanmac 7mo ago
Not really. Some items naturally have value due to utility. Natural resources only lose their value if we somehow move on from all its utilities (like coal is, day by day). Some are indeed via marketing, but any itema have intrinsic or at least, emotional value.

silisili 7mo ago

I agree there, but there are plenty of examples of time cost being baked into an item, regardless of status symbols. The sweater is with whatever value a single person values it as or would pay for it. Said another way, would you sell it to me for $10? 50? 100? If you said no to all three, it's worth at least $100.

titanomachy 7mo ago
Well, I did say "market value". Of course it has value to me.

marcta 7mo ago

Maybe their point is that the brands themselves have a lot of time embedded in them. Generally, status symbols (whatever they are) aren't things that are recently established.