Yeah, the credit card companies have my number and know how to keep me hooked, but I am highly resistant to other forms of merchandising and advertising. I have almost no brand loyalty, little status consciousness and find the idea of my lifestyle being either enhanced or characterized to others by the beverage I drink or the shoe I wear to be absurd.
I suppose it is the status-consciousness that is most on my mind at the moment.
Yesterday's Parade Magazine (the Sunday newspaper supplement that is such drivel that it's more embarrassing to admit I look at it than to admit I'm $23,000 in debt), had an ad for a Chronograph watch for $6.95. It told time, the day of the week, had an alarm and a compass and a stopwatch and a light, was water-resistant and shock-resistant. Not only that, but if you ordered it by phone, you could get a second one free (plus shipping and handling of $2.95).
No, I did not get right on the phone and order myself a couple...my debt holds steady at $23,210.24. I have a couple inexpensive watches that have worked fine for years and need no more.
What I did do, however, is go online and do a little imaginary watch shopping. Perhaps a Patek Philippe Perpetual Calendar/Moonphase/Chronograph for $76,800? Or perhaps that is too extravagant, when I can get a Rolex Day/Date Masterpiece model for only $41,500. If I really wanted to be thrifty, I could get a pre-owned Rolex President model for a piddling $23,500. Why, that one would merely double my debt!
These are the things that make my blood boil. I am not envious...if you are wealthy enough to spend $76,800 on a watch, then kudos to you. But I have to ask: Why are you spending that much on something that is at best infinitesimally more functional than something that you can buy at two for seven bucks? Or, if you want to be fancy, can be had with Swiss movement and in precious metal with classic styling for a couple hundred bucks? The seven dollar watch will give you exactly the same information as the the $76,800 one when you glance at it on your wrist. If you believe that wearing an expensive watch gives you status, then your shallow arrogance shows you to be undeserving of any respect.
The act of buying a $76,800 watch serves absolutely no purpose in the world; it is an utter and complete waste of financial resources. OK. You want a new watch. You have $76,800 in spare cash. What kind of selfish, self-absorbed oafishness could lead you link those two facts into such a ridiculous expenditure? How could any thinking, caring human being not prefer to spend as much as even $800 on a watch, and then put the other $76,000 to some useful purpose: , making a contribution to charity, donating to a favorite political cause or helping out a friend?
How can anyone spend that kind of money on a watch and dare to show their face, much less their wrist, in public? How? HOW!?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment