Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

fullstackeconomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 500 posts

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#361

Post by dahfizz »

twox2 wrote: post #344
goodpoint wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When all sellers and customers haggle it creates a zero-sum game where nothing useful is achieved and everybody is wasting their time. Fun when you do it once, not so fun when is expected every day. A similar zero-sum game is advertising. Yet, some cultures look down on haggling and embrace advertising with open arms...

If you look at dollar and time amounts, all financial interactions are pretty much zero-sum.

The transaction itself is not zero sum. The existence of the transaction itself is proof that both parties value what they received more than what they gave away (otherwise they would not have transacted).

The waste of time is having to haggle to arrive at the price, when the price could have been published. It benefits nobody, because that's the price the transaction would have happened at anyway. But we have to do a whole song and dance beforehand anyway, every single time.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#362

Post by dahfizz »

malwarebytess wrote: post #338
dahfizz wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if haggling is fun for you, it is still a big expenditure of time and effort that accomplishes nothing. There's simply no reason for it to exist.

Builds relationships, can arrive at an optimal price, involves human contact. It doesn't take that long either. There are positives even to things you deem useless.

I can't imagine how someone trying to overcharge me would help build a relationship between me and the seller.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#363

Post by Loughla »

saiya-jin wrote: post #223
elcritch wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I found shop vendors from some Arabic cultures would almost become offended if you _didn't_ barter with them -- at least if they knew you weren't just a tourist. For the (American) tourists wandering through they'd suck it up and just charge them 10x the price. ;)

Very true in India too. You stick out as backpacker very clearly, the prices are set accordingly. I found it extremely hard to haggle with my european mentality, and ended up agreeing on still too high prices. It took some time to get better. Then you come back to western world (or anywhere else for that matter) after 6 months of such training and you find out you haggle harder than any locals, sometimes to the point…

That was my least favorite thing about traveling/living overseas as a stereotypical looking American. I hate haggling. I hate it more than anything. It's needlessly antagonistic and completely unnecessary. I understand it's a cultural thing, but I hate it more than birds.

It was exhausting to buy anything, the entire time. It never got better, even when the shops learned who I was after an extended period of time. Food, water, everything was an argument. I just wanted to exist and check out what was going on around me, not argue with some random shop that my groceries shouldn't be so expensive.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#364

Post by alistairSH »

igorkraw wrote: post #221
fxtentacle wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

50 years ago, Germany also still had a popular saying "Eigentum verpflichtet" which I would translate as "ownership creates a duty". In short, people who owned companies, large plots of land, or other infrastructure were expected to spread their wealth by creating jobs. Nowadays, the spirit still lives on somewhat in the fact that we have free public scenic hiking trails through what looks like very expensive private…

"private property is subordinate to the common good" is even in our "Constitution" (grundgesetz, literally foundational law), although it has been neutered by precedent and other laws. The right of way is a concept which is still strong in a bunch of countries, including England and famously Norway where "Allemansretten" allows "all men" the right to camp in public spaces. I personally find these habitual rights an i…

Scotland is a much better example of "right to roam" than England.

Very generally, England allows a right to cross property on foot. But, that doesn't include camping, cycling, etc. The list of allowances is relatively short and exceptions relatively long.

Scotland allows all a lot more freedom to roam, including cycling and camping. I don't recall exactly how it's codified, but it's approximately a default right to access, with limited exceptions (close proximity to homes, farms with active lambing, estates during hunting season, stuff like that).

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#365

Post by Loughla »

malwarebytess wrote: post #338
dahfizz wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if haggling is fun for you, it is still a big expenditure of time and effort that accomplishes nothing. There's simply no reason for it to exist.

Builds relationships, can arrive at an optimal price, involves human contact. It doesn't take that long either. There are positives even to things you deem useless.

>Builds relationships

I don't get this one.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#366

Post by emteycz »

cowl wrote: post #349
emteycz wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same in EU - e.g. in Italy, if you want to see a church from the inside, tourists pay a lot while the locals don't.

I can't speak for Rome because I have not been in churches there but for the rest of Italy, 99% of churches are Free Entry and the few very famous touristic attractions have a single fee no matter who you are. Maybe you are confusing paying for a guide as tourist with paying to visit the church.

Free entry - but for those going for the religious service. That's not me. At least that's how it was all around northern Italy few years ago when I visited.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#367

Post by curiousllama »

alisonatwork wrote: post #312
AussieWog93 wrote: post #244

Interesting that he brings up "a robot to automatically brew Starbucks-caliber coffee". Here in Australia, you can get a really high-quality coffee from just about any petrol station for $1 (in AUD; around 70c in USD). Yet in spite of this, we have a thriving cafe scene where people will gladly pay $4-$5 for a take-away latte. What's equally "irrational" is that Starbucks, despite the high amount of effort put into e…

I remember when Starbucks first arrived in Australia there were several articles talking about exactly this topic. Because cheap espresso coffee is ubiquitous in Australia, Starbucks doesn't provide the same value-add that it did in the US where most coffee was weak drip coffee to begin with. I think it took years of careful marketing till Starbucks was able to "train" Australians to pay double for their mixed drinks…

To be fair, this is largely how Starbucks operates in the US too. I used to drink garbage drip coffee all the time, but when I went to Starbucks it was a "skim flat white with cinnamon, please."

It's not a coffee shop, it's fast food for rich folk.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#368

Post by dghf »

fxtentacle wrote: post #205
mcorning wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised to hear that it is impolite to not have a housekeeper if you are an expat. To which places are you referring?

50 years ago, Germany also still had a popular saying "Eigentum verpflichtet" which I would translate as "ownership creates a duty". In short, people who owned companies, large plots of land, or other infrastructure were expected to spread their wealth by creating jobs. Nowadays, the spirit still lives on somewhat in the fact that we have free public scenic hiking trails through what looks like very expensive private…

> 50 years ago, Germany also still had a popular saying "Eigentum verpflichtet" which I would translate as "ownership creates a duty". In short, people who owned companies, large plots of land, or other infrastructure were expected to spread their wealth by creating jobs.

Lord Finchley tried to mend the Electric Light

Himself. It struck him dead: And serve him right!

It is the business of the wealthy man

To give employment to the artisan.

-- Hilaire Belloc

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#369

Post by curiousllama »

amscanne wrote: post #65
notfbi wrote: post #51

" The couple’s annual income was around around £700 ($50,000 in today’s dollars)—£500 ($36,000) from his salary and another £200 ($14,000) in passive income. They rented a fourth-floor walk-up apartment in London with four bedrooms, two sitting rooms, and a “nice outlook on green.” The rent was £90 for a year ($530 per month in today’s dollars). To keep it tidy, they hired a live-in maid for £36 ($2,600) per year, wh…

They didn’t suggest that, it said: > Still, Christie didn’t consider herself wealthy Almost no one considers themselves wealthy. Even people that are very well-off typically consider themselves some variation of middle class, because they can so obviously and clearly see the next rung up the ladder, and how they are not on it. This point is made perfectly by her quote about how only the rich have cars.

I remember the first time I got a chipotle burrito with double-meat and guac. I'd just gotten my first big paycheck. I turned to my friend and went "dude I'm so f***g rich now." He kinda chuckled, and when he realized I wasn't really joking, looked uncomfortable; he made more than me.

It is weird how uncomfortable rich people are acknowledging how rich they are.

Re: Agatha Christie could afford a maid and a nanny but not a car

#370

Post by Blamvitoads »

joe_the_user wrote: post #41
freddie_mercury wrote: post #16

Agatha Christie's quote is well-known but the exact same situation still holds today in many countries. Here in Viet Nam it is extremely common for middle income families to have a maid or nanny (or both) but not a car. The cars themselves are quite expensive. A Honda Civic is $33,000 by itself whereas a nanny (6-days a week, 10 hours a day) is $400-500/month and a maid who works 9 hours a week, i.e. 3 days a week, 3…

I had a fellow American friend who lived in Bali for a year in the mid-70s. When he arrived, he shopped for his own food and cooked it. But he found that, since the merchants charged people by their social class, he could hire a housekeeper and have them buy and cook his food for the same price as buying his own found. And people expect him to do this.

Same is true in India. Those who do not have servants are charged higher prices when you go to buy grocery and pantry items.
Post reply on HN