4 ms·
Anyone who wants to "belong" to a league of people who would waste 2500$ on a handbag IS stupid. Whether they are poor or not is immaterial. It is also a huge
by makerops 13y ago
Anyone who wants to "belong" to a league of people who would waste 2500$ on a handbag IS stupid. Whether they are poor or not is immaterial. It is also a huge leap to say that being "presentable" is the same as wasting money you do not have on status symbols. They aren't the same thing.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- ddoolin 13y agoYou're assuming there's no derived benefit from belonging to that league of people, but she makes the case that there is a benefit (or benefits) to it, despite admitting it's kind of lame. It's not the strongest argument, I'll give you that, but I wouldn't know.
- makerops 13y agoI am not making that assumption really; people that are able to really provide someone with benefits, whether it is knowledge, capital, power etc, would scoff at, and see right through the 2500$ handbag. My point being, either 1. you think you can access a level of person that will help you out by owning a 2500$ handbag (stupid) or 2. That there is a group of people that will allow you into their social sphere because you own a 2500$ hand bag, in the end people who think like this in that social sphere, will not be able to do anything for you.
- tghw 13y agoThe price of membership is not a $2500 hand bag. It's having a certain level of presentability. The author makes a poor choice by conflating these two. One can be presentable without blowing a limited budget. But spending 10-25% of your annual take home on a hand bag is, simply, poor decision making.