541–550 of 774 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was gobsmacked when I heard that people borrow money to have a wedding. I have never heard of that happening in New Zealand. How common is this? Or am I just mixing in the wrong circles?
It's quite common to be $30,000+ in debt for a wedding where my family is from (Turkey).
Ah, another thread full of bitter men who do not want to buy a diamond because they are "worthless." I bought the girl a diamond because she wanted a diamond. It makes her happy. She says it makes her smile every day. That's "worthless", huh? If that is worthless then find me something that makes her so happy that isn't worthless and I would have bought that instead. But there is no such thing, for her. For some girl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.
If you devalued the diamond, something else would just step into the void, whether it was another gem, something synthetic, whatever. It would just have to be shiny, small, expensive, and easily seen. The need for displays of status are common to many animals, humans included. There is a fundamental need there that will be filled if you devalue the predecessor. Why pick on diamonds anyway? The fashion industry is jus…
Ah, another thread full of bitter men who do not want to buy a diamond because they are "worthless." I bought the girl a diamond because she wanted a diamond. It makes her happy. She says it makes her smile every day. That's "worthless", huh? If that is worthless then find me something that makes her so happy that isn't worthless and I would have bought that instead. But there is no such thing, for her. For some girl…
You could try with true feelings, they don't cost much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so they just leave De Beers to run around gouging consumers That's kind of missing the point. If diamonds were 5 bucks a piece, women would no longer be interested in receiving rings bejeweled by them. A woman wants a man who is financially secure. If you can't afford a shiny rock, you can't afford what's coming after it either, so there's no point.
If you devalued the diamond, something else would just step into the void, whether it was another gem, something synthetic, whatever. It would just have to be shiny, small, expensive, and easily seen. The need for displays of status are common to many animals, humans included. There is a fundamental need there that will be filled if you devalue the predecessor. Why pick on diamonds anyway? The fashion industry is jus…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Diamonds aren't popular because they have any real value. No one actually believes they do. They cost a lot and are an easily worn, thus making them perfect for their favorite hobby: making other women feel inadequate. Even women who are positively liberal on such matters are drawn to the idea of forcing their husbands to show such monetary devotion. The issue here isn't the scarcity of diamonds. It's the scarcity if…
What makes you think women, as a whole entire gender of people, enjoy making other people feel inadequate? Perhaps if she's going to wear a ring for the rest of her life, she wants it to be a nice ring that is color neutral. Perhaps she doesn't want something cheap and easily replaceable acting as a symbol for your marriage.
i.e. she cares more about symbols than about the real thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Diamonds aren't popular because they have any real value. No one actually believes they do. They cost a lot and are an easily worn, thus making them perfect for their favorite hobby: making other women feel inadequate. Even women who are positively liberal on such matters are drawn to the idea of forcing their husbands to show such monetary devotion. The issue here isn't the scarcity of diamonds. It's the scarcity if…
There are a great many couples in my social circle who eschewed the diamond ring. They have meaningful, and expensive alternative rings, but not diamonds. We don't have diamonds either. My only point is that not ALL women are about making other women feel inadequate. Or showing off their diamonds. Many are actually just as disgusted as men are about it. And they prefer men who have that conscious, and will put some t…
How is that any different?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but they used trained wine experts. No statistically valid correlation between price and quality.
jag - see above reply. So the markets are such that some wines are heavily underpriced and others overpriced, often because of extrinsic social variables! Absolutely! I'd be very surprised if the correlation was zero, however! Show me the data! I'm interested to see how they did it. I'm open to new data and changing my mind (I have done several times already, and used to be insufferable!) but I want to see several st…
Correct! Price correlates with rarity and place of origin and all sorts of other neat stuff, but as far as 'will I like this wine?', ain't no there there.
That said, individual people should buy based on their tastes - but a $20 bottle of Burgundy wine has even odds to be better than a $40 bottle of Burgundy. The only way is to try it!
I see people talking about various things like the (1) (2) (3) arguments for a women to evaluate a man : (1) is the ability to provide; 2) is the willingness to forgo other things (opportunity costs to talk economics) (3) "is demonstrating to the woman's peers her husband's social standing." (signalling) Raynier posted this deep down in a reply which might be lost to you if you don't read all the comments. It would b…