4 ms·

I too also grew up poor, but find myself in a position where I have a very nice job, and I also have a hard time articulating to other's how warped I feel about

by dsp1234 12y ago

I too also grew up poor, but find myself in a position where I have a very nice job, and I also have a hard time articulating to other's how warped I feel about money/status/etc. The best I've ever found is John Cheese's Cracked articles on the topic which I felt were almost like he was writing from inside of my head. http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-stupidest-habits-you-develop-growing-up-poor/ http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-stupidest-habits-you-devel... http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-stupidest-habits-you-develop-growing-up-poor-part-2/ http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-5-stupidest-habits-you-devel... If someone reads these, please understand that this is how I actually feel/act to this day, even though I make 100k+ a year. For example, I only own two pairs of shoes. My work sneakers, and my "nice" shoes. And I replace my sneakers only when they are completely busted, and I get the cheapest ones on sale I can find. Three pairs of shoes is literally crazy to me, and I feel bad about having 2 pairs of shoes since I never wear the "nice" ones.

spiritplumber 12y ago
"The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness." Good shoes will save you money if you can put in the initial investment :)
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- dsp1234 12y ago
  Obviously a side note, but I did a test on a topic similar to this. My SO convinced me to try out a custom shoe place (highly reviewed, and recommended) on the theory that if I was only going to buy one pair of shoes, that I should at least have a quality pair to wear around. The results from that (sole) experiment were that the shoes lasted longer but not so much so that they beat out multiple pairs of cheaper shoes on price. The quality shoes lasted about 4 years, and I buy a pair of sneakers about every 1.5 years. However, the quality shoes were at about a 10x markup from the sneakers. So I'd need those quality shoes to last 15 years or so. So for my money, it sounds like great fiction, but not great reality.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    That's why most people don't take their economic advice from works of fiction.
    - kelukelugames 12y ago
      Chris Rock had a character on SNL. He was a militant black panther giving stock advice. It was great. Does anyone have the name or any clips?
  - gmarx 12y ago
    If you're talking about dress shoes you don't expect the soles to last especially longer than those on cheap dress shoes. With the higher quality ones you can, and it is worth it to, resole and remanufacture them multiple times. My best dress shoes are ten years old, have been redone once, and are likely to last another 20 years. That said, I don't think this accounts for rich people having more money
  - scottbruin 12y ago
    What kind of quality shoes? Good dress-y shoes can be resoled so they should last more than 4 years.
    - spiritplumber 12y ago
      I own two pairs of sneaker-y leather shoes that look like Timberlands from the 1980s, both made by a cobbler back in Italy who has since retired. They are 6 and 8 years old respectively, and only needed resoling twice.
- beamatronic 12y ago
  When I was in my 20's, and I first started making "good money", I splurged on some $170 dress shoes. Those shoes lasted a good 15 years and they were the best shoes I ever owned.
jacquesm 12y ago
I only own two pairs of shoes, my construction boots and a pair of representable shoes for visiting customers. I'll let you guess which ones I'm more comfortable in ;) Nothing to be ashamed of, think about it this way: what you don't have you don't need to maintain or carry with you, stuff is vastly over-rated, having more doesn't equate automatically to feeling better.

by dsp1234 12y ago

spiritplumber 12y ago

"The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness." Good shoes will save you money if you can put in the initial investment :)

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
dsp1234 12y ago
Obviously a side note, but I did a test on a topic similar to this. My SO convinced me to try out a custom shoe place (highly reviewed, and recommended) on the theory that if I was only going to buy one pair of shoes, that I should at least have a quality pair to wear around. The results from that (sole) experiment were that the shoes lasted longer but not so much so that they beat out multiple pairs of cheaper shoes on price. The quality shoes lasted about 4 years, and I buy a pair of sneakers about every 1.5 years. However, the quality shoes were at about a 10x markup from the sneakers. So I'd need those quality shoes to last 15 years or so. So for my money, it sounds like great fiction, but not great reality.
- jacquesm 12y ago
  That's why most people don't take their economic advice from works of fiction.
  - kelukelugames 12y ago
    Chris Rock had a character on SNL. He was a militant black panther giving stock advice. It was great. Does anyone have the name or any clips?
- gmarx 12y ago
  If you're talking about dress shoes you don't expect the soles to last especially longer than those on cheap dress shoes. With the higher quality ones you can, and it is worth it to, resole and remanufacture them multiple times. My best dress shoes are ten years old, have been redone once, and are likely to last another 20 years. That said, I don't think this accounts for rich people having more money
- scottbruin 12y ago
  What kind of quality shoes? Good dress-y shoes can be resoled so they should last more than 4 years.
  - spiritplumber 12y ago
    I own two pairs of sneaker-y leather shoes that look like Timberlands from the 1980s, both made by a cobbler back in Italy who has since retired. They are 6 and 8 years old respectively, and only needed resoling twice.
beamatronic 12y ago
When I was in my 20's, and I first started making "good money", I splurged on some $170 dress shoes. Those shoes lasted a good 15 years and they were the best shoes I ever owned.

jacquesm 12y ago

I only own two pairs of shoes, my construction boots and a pair of representable shoes for visiting customers. I'll let you guess which ones I'm more comfortable in ;) Nothing to be ashamed of, think about it this way: what you don't have you don't need to maintain or carry with you, stuff is vastly over-rated, having more doesn't equate automatically to feeling better.