[deleted]
Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
51–60 of 94 posts
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#52A fine heuristic if you have enough money to make the choice in the first place. [1]Sam Vimes’s ‘Boots’ Theory of Socio-economic Unfairness, propounded in Men at Arms: "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 hun…
The Boots theory is funny because it's absurd. It's not actually applicable to life in powerty. There is no class of items where if you are poor you spend more on it than when you're wealthy. People in poverty spend more _time_ on things, yeah, but not more money or money per use. You can see some discussion on that from people who actually grew up poor in https://mastodon.social/@danluu/111068036776213383
All items are cheaper in bulk, so the class of items that are more expensive for poor people is actually pretty much everything.
Being poor means your friends and family and roommates and neighbors are also broke, so you can't buy in bulk because they gonna steal yo shit. So you're forced to buy singles, which are more expensive. Being able to store the bulk goods from a CostCo run without them walking off is a privilege that you're taking for granted.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Boots theory is funny because it's absurd. It's not actually applicable to life in powerty. There is no class of items where if you are poor you spend more on it than when you're wealthy. People in poverty spend more _time_ on things, yeah, but not more money or money per use. You can see some discussion on that from people who actually grew up poor in https://mastodon.social/@danluu/111068036776213383
All items are cheaper in bulk, so the class of items that are more expensive for poor people is actually pretty much everything. Being poor means your friends and family and roommates and neighbors are also broke, so you can't buy in bulk because they gonna steal yo shit. So you're forced to buy singles, which are more expensive. Being able to store the bulk goods from a CostCo run without them walking off is a privi…
I see somethign similar to this in poor countries I've visited. people who are very poor don't have enough money to maintain a bank account so they just store cash. they have a mindset of spending what they have and never saving. I thought it was stupid till I realized that having a bunch of cash at home just makes you a target for getting robbed. SO you end up with people who spend as soon as they have over a certain amount of money because they never have enough to open a bank account. if you try to save enough for a bank account, there's a good chance the money will be stolen before you even get that far.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I put a lot of games I’m not sure about on my Steam wishlist. Then when a game is “cheap enough” I buy it. If my hunch was right and the game is only “ok”, but I got a few hours of enjoyment out of it for only a few bucks, I don’t have any buyers remorse.
I pirate games, play them, and them buy them (some multiple times, sadly) if I'm still playing after an hour or so. Most games tend to not capture my interest and I only play an hour or two and leave them, and I don't want to be paying 60 currencies per time. I wish they had a free trial for an hour or two, that would be ideal.
on steam you can get your money back if you play less than two hours. i wish they'd make it 5 hours though. two hours is kind of tight to evaluate a large game. for some i can't even get through the tutorial in that time.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
I pirate games, play them, and them buy them (some multiple times, sadly) if I'm still playing after an hour or so. Most games tend to not capture my interest and I only play an hour or two and leave them, and I don't want to be paying 60 currencies per time. I wish they had a free trial for an hour or two, that would be ideal.
on steam you can get your money back if you play less than two hours. i wish they'd make it 5 hours though. two hours is kind of tight to evaluate a large game. for some i can't even get through the tutorial in that time.
I know they have a refund policy, but it's too much of a hassle to go through checkout, enter my card, check out, then play, make sure I don't go to 2:01, etc.
I'd much prefer to install the game, play, and get a dialog "your trial is over, would you like to buy to continue?" and I can pay at that point.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#56A fine heuristic if you have enough money to make the choice in the first place. [1]Sam Vimes’s ‘Boots’ Theory of Socio-economic Unfairness, propounded in Men at Arms: "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 hun…
"The poor man's dollar goes to market twice" is a saying where I grew up
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#57This really kicked in for me when I bought a grill. The first time I used it, that cost me "1500". The second, it was just 750 per bbq. By the time I cooked a hundred meals on it, it is a 15 bucks per meal. Etc. Longevity is obviously a big factor too
I spent $5000 on the fastest consumer computer available in 2011. It had a 6-core CPU which was pretty amazing at the time. I still use that same computer today as my main workstation. I've put a little bit of money into it over the years, expanding it. Most recently I bought the fastest CPU that would work in that motherboard, a 12-core/24-thread Xeon for $30 on ebay. So even with adding RAM, Hard drives, new video…
Years ago I bought a big monitor for work with my own money. Used it for YEARS. Best purchase ever.
Sometimes people have to let go of some stubborn ideas they have.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#58A fine heuristic if you have enough money to make the choice in the first place. [1]Sam Vimes’s ‘Boots’ Theory of Socio-economic Unfairness, propounded in Men at Arms: "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 hun…
The Boots theory is funny because it's absurd. It's not actually applicable to life in powerty. There is no class of items where if you are poor you spend more on it than when you're wealthy. People in poverty spend more _time_ on things, yeah, but not more money or money per use. You can see some discussion on that from people who actually grew up poor in https://mastodon.social/@danluu/111068036776213383
You should go to a Midwest Dollar General and buy a days worth of food for a family of 5 and report back on if you think the theory still doesn't apply.
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
All items are cheaper in bulk, so the class of items that are more expensive for poor people is actually pretty much everything. Being poor means your friends and family and roommates and neighbors are also broke, so you can't buy in bulk because they gonna steal yo shit. So you're forced to buy singles, which are more expensive. Being able to store the bulk goods from a CostCo run without them walking off is a privi…
I see somethign similar to this in poor countries I've visited. people who are very poor don't have enough money to maintain a bank account so they just store cash. they have a mindset of spending what they have and never saving. I thought it was stupid till I realized that having a bunch of cash at home just makes you a target for getting robbed. SO you end up with people who spend as soon as they have over a certai…
[deleted]
Re: Whenever I buy things I try to prioritize cost per use
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's expensive to be poor.
Money follows money, that's how it works. If someone invests 100€ and makes 1% of profit, they got an extra 1€. You can maybe buy a cup of coffee with it. But if a someone invests a million euros and gets 1% of profit, they get 1000€. That's a cup of coffee every day for almost 3 years. Exact same investment, very different outcomes.
More to the point: living expenses.
If someone starts out with $10k, invests at 5%/y, that's $500/y added.
If that person's rent + food + utility bills are $1000/month, that $500/y is 'peanuts', and other income (like regular job) is needed to make ends meet long-term.
(ignoring inflation for simplicity)
But if starting with $100k, 5% is $5k/y which would cover 5 months/year living expenses. And no worries about losing a job.
Starting with $1m, that's $50k/y interest, or all living expenses covered, no need to have a job, AND $38k/y left over to increase capital or do fun stuff.
That's apart from effect of increases in the cost of living.
So very different effect even if interest % and all else equal. Moving up the ladder from $1k -> $10k -> $100k etc as savings, can take a loooonng time (if possible at all).