Hacker News Reader

Comment by SilasX | Hacker News Reader

You're right -- if that were the issue, it would be a bad objection; let me try again.

The problem is that in real life, most such cases (of buying the more expensive item) don't result in a pure savings, but rather, leave you better off in some ways and worse off in others. The cheaper shoes, IOW, will not actually be so bad that you have to replace them entirely, and you will in fact end up with with more liquid savings. The temporary discomfort and greater savings are much harder to compare to the alternative than the example suggests, so wealthier people do not always have some obvious choice that leaves them better off in every way.

So, on top of that, it's not an issue that is fixable simply by pointing this out to the poorer person and loaning them the money.

View on HN

A classic one in the US would be the choice of visiting the doctors. The rich can afford to have regular checkups(or insurance) and get a sniffle checked out early. The poor can not afford to visit the doctor over minor ailments and because of this end up spending big in lost time at work and more expensive one off treatments for a serious illness they didn't nip in the bud.

But I'd have to concede that you'd be right to say it still doesn't fit the boots analogy with out some rather lax semantics around up front vs long term cost. You could also argue that any individual might get lucky/unlucky and so it's not clear cut there, but I think it would be fair to argue that in aggregate the outcome on cost is a reasonable example.

My most recent purchase is a 900$ Bosch dishwasher that is saving me so much time (and time is money) and saving money indirectly because I am cooking more often at home as I don't find washing dishes to be taxing any more. Home cooked, all natural food is healthy in the long run. The sink is empty and it makes me feel less cluttered and more efficient. So it is a chain reaction and the effects are compounded. One thing leads to another. There is a 10000$ difference between a 500$ dishwasher and a 900$ dishwasher.

I have seen plenty of cases that are really that clear cut, usually centered around item quality. For example, cheap tools vs. expensive ones. The "X Factor" that makes the more expensive item not strictly better is the question of use. I.E., I don't buy Snapon wrenches because I am not a professional mechanic, but neither do I buy cheapo pot-metal tools because I use them enough that the extra money spent on quality is well worth it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com