Why don't poor people understand that spending more money in the moment can be cheaper in the long run?

Why didn't you ask them, OP? They're literally family, not like some rando on the street.

Plus, your family members can actually wear their boots when the weather is bad. Not to mention, that one can only imagine what the insides of a pair of ten year old shoes or boots smells like.

Only came hear to say that Aldens will last you an adult life time, with just a little bit of care. I have Aldens older than most people on this board. I've never done a cost benefit analysis, I just prefer the look of high quality shoes / boots with patina.

*here

Gordon Gekko wrote:

STEVE THE ADDICT^^^^^^""""-""""--'-"--^' wrote:

Can't expect to get out of broke if you don't work hard and make no moves. Some of these lazy bums expect things to magically get better. I do have immense respect for any broke person who's working hard and seeking improvement though.

Yeah, yeah, the old Republican myth. If the poor just worked a little harder they would get what I already got from my parents.

That's a twist I hadn't thought of. That's like the opposite of what my assumption about the OP was. I thought all the rich, wonderful, $500 boot wearing people were Democrats and Republicans are us simpletons in flyover country who are clinging to our guns and bibles because we're bitter about not being rich and wonderful.

roller coaster wrote:

Why try? wrote:

People buy $50 shoes because they only have $50. They don't have $600 to spend on Aldens, even if the long-term costs are lower.

You've obviously never been broke.

Then why does every "broke" person I've ever met have a tattoo? Did they spend their stimmy check on that before shopping for boots?

You're right I've never been broke and don't understand why you would make a series of choices that would lead to being broke.

Middling boomers like you always say the same stupid crap.

1-time purchases like tattoos are not the cause of continued poverty. Low hourly wages are.

2-time stimulus checks of 1200 did not allow people to permanently leave the work force and eat lobster.

not poor, but... wrote:

Gordon Gekko wrote:

Yeah, yeah, the old Republican myth. If the poor just worked a little harder they would get what I already got from my parents.

That's a twist I hadn't thought of. That's like the opposite of what my assumption about the OP was. I thought all the rich, wonderful, $500 boot wearing people were Democrats and Republicans are us simpletons in flyover country who are clinging to our guns and bibles because we're bitter about not being rich and wonderful.

Or maybe a person can have a thought about a subject without it being political at all.

OP seems like kind of a dick. Being kinda a dick isn't limited to one political party.

Gordon Gekko wrote:

STEVE THE ADDICT^^^^^^""""-""""--'-"--^' wrote:

Can't expect to get out of broke if you don't work hard and make no moves. Some of these lazy bums expect things to magically get better. I do have immense respect for any broke person who's working hard and seeking improvement though.

Yeah, yeah, the old Republican myth. If the poor just worked a little harder they would get what I already got from my parents.

"The old Republican myth" has been appropriated by the Democrats these days in the form of 'Let them eat cake':

"Maybe Christmas Shortages are a Gift."

"Even though millions of Americans lost their jobs, enhanced unemployment benefits and stimulus payments left many of them better off, not worse,"

"Look at this amazing, overflowing abundance,"

"The dirty little secret here, Willie, while nobody likes to pay more, on average, we have the money to do so,"

etc

Well. You have $470 left over to invest. Which would grow more than the $30/year cost of cheap boots.

Not an eco friendly option though

anti-work guys and girls cannot buy expensive shoes because the man won't let them get enough money to buy them in the first place.

not poor, but... wrote:

my Aldens are cheaper than your Target brand wrote:

Can someone explain the logic that a $500 pair of boots that will likely last two decades (and can be resoled and repaired as needed) is "more expensive" than buying a new cheap glued together pair of $30 boots every year over the same time period?

I don't get the appeal of all the "poor people are stupid" threads on letsrun. Does that really make you feel superior?

College kids wanting to feel better about spending some of the little money they have or fantasizing about a good paying job right after graduation to take them out of their current situation.

It's not just the money over time. The entire time, the OP is wearing more comfortable better performing boots. I bought a highly rated pair of hiking boots for around $200 and the comfort and traction was incredible. I don't care how much I could have saved by wearing flip flops.

Why don't poor people realize they can stop paying high gas prices if they just buy a new Tesla.

I just looked up what Aldens boots looked like, and I wouldn't wear them if you gave them to me free.

You can't withdraw earnings from a Roth IRA until 59 though, although I guess he could just take out his contribution. I don't know what would possess someone to pay $500 for boots though,