201–210 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're proving my point: that same film is $100 in the cinema. $100!! But the Overton window pushed you into thinking $30 is a bargain . You think that wasn't intentional?
How isn't it a bargain?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The reality is, the clothing industry decides what to produce at least 6-12 months in advance. It's more the mainstream you're referring to, late adopters basically. of course they can produce in advance as the styles are already validated on urban streets and within subcultures who really set the trends. There are inventors, early adopters and late adopters, quite similar to SaaS.
That's the party line, but it's just some sub-cultures, teens and troubled personalities that "express themselves" through fashion (the most shallow thing you can do, a juvenile thing in any case), the "early adopters", and then a huge industry copying them at various levels and with various delays. On top of that, there are also top-level mandates "this year let's push yellow strayjackets" or whatever. This results…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn’t say “paradise” of freedom. Definitely more flexibility without kids, but kids bring so much joy and meaning to life. For most people it’s a very worthwhile trade.
Yeah I fuggin hate the "just you wait" attitude about kids. I'm excited to have kids, even in spite of the tradeoff involved in my spare time. I don't need endless reminders of the tradeoff. That's just piling on.
Cheers and good luck when the time comes :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been wearing the exact same jeans cut for 30 years now. When they get holes, I just push a button on Amazon for more. My dress shirts are 20-30 years old. They're not out of style. Of course, I've never been cool, so there's that.
> My dress shirts are 20-30 years old. They're not out of style. They are, you just don't care. Which is OK.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because you've been tricked into thinking $30 isn't so bad compared to $100, when you should be demanding $20 for the cinema for all four of your family, instead of rolling over and saying, "Jeez, I sure got a deal." That's what the Overton Window is all about: making one option artificially bad so that you don't negotiate and take whatever other option they give you. But if everyone just shuffles along and opens the…
When I mentioned $100, that was for food and the movie. Second, we can all go to the movies for $20 and even less if we are willing to wait. There are "dollar" theaters where tickets are less than $5. But, if we want to see a new movie and want to go to the modern theater with a full menu, comfy seats, and a great sound system, then it costs more. $12 / ticket for 90+ minutes of entertainment doesn't seem out of line…
Which is what 1/2 of the article we are discussing is about: The way we are herded into spending our hard-earned money on the need for "the new thing" by marketing and manipulation.
Your position is "I need to entertain myself and my kids and they want the new shiny thing", my position is, "You're being conned out of your money for shit you don't need."
I'm being wildly judgemental because I look at people who need "the new thing" as suckers, aaaand I also think it brings us all down, because now all the money goes into paying Scarlet Johansen $50M to make the same movie five times and we miss out interesting/engaging cinematography.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The reality is, the clothing industry decides what to produce at least 6-12 months in advance. It's more the mainstream you're referring to, late adopters basically. of course they can produce in advance as the styles are already validated on urban streets and within subcultures who really set the trends. There are inventors, early adopters and late adopters, quite similar to SaaS.
That's the party line, but it's just some sub-cultures, teens and troubled personalities that "express themselves" through fashion (the most shallow thing you can do, a juvenile thing in any case), the "early adopters", and then a huge industry copying them at various levels and with various delays. On top of that, there are also top-level mandates "this year let's push yellow strayjackets" or whatever. This results…
Are you claiming that dressing to express yourself is shallow and juvenile?
Do you just...buy the first thing you see at Goodwill that fits you? I'm not sure how one could avoid dressing to express oneself, to at least some degree, unless you exclusively wear work uniforms or hand-me-downs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, why is short-term pleasure wrong? My life would not be improved by less money, by the way. More free time, yes, fewer purchases, not necessarily.
> Why is short-term pleasure wrong? This is a great question, and firmly in the realm of philosophy, so there will never be a definitive answer, only ones which you might find useful. I prefer the Stoic's attitude toward pleasure. To (very loosely) paraphrase Marcus Aurelius: For each evil characteristic a man can have, the gods gave also a counteracting virtue. For dishonesty, honesty. For fear, courage, etc. To cou…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no "fashion cabal" where designers get together for drinks and to anoint "cerulean blue" as the color of 2023 and then pull their customers by the nose ring into purchasing. "Twice a year Pantone hosts, in a European capital, a secret meeting of representatives from various nations' color standards groups. After two days of presentations and debate, they choose a color for the following year." "OVER 20 YEA…
Not that I'm paying much attention to these things, but I've not seen much to support that "ultimate grey" and "Illuminating" yellow are the dominating colors this year? ( https://www.pantone.com/color-of-the-year-2021 )
I was kind of wondering why that was suddenly a thing. I don't know if that was somehow directly or indirectly motivated by pantone, but it certainly has been a headscratcher for me for some time and this could answer why that is happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That made me pretty depressed, not just for me but for every overweight person who is being shamed about not exercising. FWIW most weight change is due to diet. If you're overweight, exercise is probably a much lower priority than finding a way to sustainably eat less. I'm not just sounding off here; I lost 20+ kg by tracking what I ate and eating less.
Weight change happens depending on whether calories consumed - calories burned is positive or negative. Diet tends to be more effective for weight loss because it's a lot easier to cut excess empty calories than it is to burn them off with exercise. Jogging a mile might burn 150 calories. Eating a Big Mac adds 600.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just wait till you have kids. You'll look back on this time as a paradise of freedom.
> till Let's replace "until" with "if". Otherwise that's a pretty ironic comment, given we are discussing an article titled "Your lifestyle has already been designed"