The Vimes Boots Theory: Further Reflections
December 31, 2018 1:17 AM Subscribe
"These boots," I said gesturing at what I was trying on, on my feet, "cost $200. Given that I typically buy a pair for $20 every year, that means these boots have to last 10 years to recoup the initial investment."
That was on January 17, 2005. They died earlier this month – that is in the first week of December, 2018. So: almost but not quite 14 years.
So, purely as an investment, they returned a bit under $80, which is a 40% ROI.
However, I would like to propose that this is not the only financial value that I realized from investing in more durable boots.
The author never notes the brand of boots. Many people have asked, no response. That is damn frustrating.
The points are good, although I think the article could have been edited to 50% or less of its length and been more effective. And I'd argue also that the "rich people just know which brands are quality" is not entirely accurate. Brands go south all the time (both Doc Martens and Fluevog have gone through periods of extreme poor quality when they tried to lower production costs). But if you're rich and make an error, you can afford to go back and try again.
posted by rednikki at 2:05 AM on December 31, 2018 [22 favorites]
The points are good, although I think the article could have been edited to 50% or less of its length and been more effective. And I'd argue also that the "rich people just know which brands are quality" is not entirely accurate. Brands go south all the time (both Doc Martens and Fluevog have gone through periods of extreme poor quality when they tried to lower production costs). But if you're rich and make an error, you can afford to go back and try again.
posted by rednikki at 2:05 AM on December 31, 2018 [22 favorites]
This article was amazing. I've been wanting to see a longer version of Vimes Boots theory since I'd first heard about it and this really fits the bill, pun intended.
The section in the article about inaccessibility of people to cross knowledge boundaries with respect to the mtba tickets, passes and cards was a fantastic example! And personally timely for me as well, as it has just crucially informed my future career direction (something I'm actively working on, so seeking out possibilities everywhere anyway).
I currently do User Experience Research and would love to head toward a Service Design role. Ideally, to more directly apply my powers for social good. This article made me realise that my dream job would involve identifying knowledge boundaries and helping people understand and cross them. Essentially, making things more accessible in ways that are effective and much needed for them.
I feel like I see examples of what this article is getting at everywhere, all the time. It's never just money that holds people back in these capitalist systems. It reminds me of the issues around eating well while poor … beyond the money for groceries, there's also knowledge about what to buy and where to buy it, how to get there and back, how to prepare the food, as well as all the ancillary needs for food storage, utensils, time required to cook and wash up, heating sources, methods and so much more. Being effective at all of that is a whole 'nother ballgame.
There are small wins to be had everywhere though. Getting people on the right paths is a huge part of that. Not inundating them with all the knowledge, but recognising the bit that they need to know at that moment and why and how best to get it to them.
posted by iamkimiam at 2:31 AM on December 31, 2018 [33 favorites]
The section in the article about inaccessibility of people to cross knowledge boundaries with respect to the mtba tickets, passes and cards was a fantastic example! And personally timely for me as well, as it has just crucially informed my future career direction (something I'm actively working on, so seeking out possibilities everywhere anyway).
I currently do User Experience Research and would love to head toward a Service Design role. Ideally, to more directly apply my powers for social good. This article made me realise that my dream job would involve identifying knowledge boundaries and helping people understand and cross them. Essentially, making things more accessible in ways that are effective and much needed for them.
I feel like I see examples of what this article is getting at everywhere, all the time. It's never just money that holds people back in these capitalist systems. It reminds me of the issues around eating well while poor … beyond the money for groceries, there's also knowledge about what to buy and where to buy it, how to get there and back, how to prepare the food, as well as all the ancillary needs for food storage, utensils, time required to cook and wash up, heating sources, methods and so much more. Being effective at all of that is a whole 'nother ballgame.
There are small wins to be had everywhere though. Getting people on the right paths is a huge part of that. Not inundating them with all the knowledge, but recognising the bit that they need to know at that moment and why and how best to get it to them.
posted by iamkimiam at 2:31 AM on December 31, 2018 [33 favorites]
Fun, although they name some fairly specific circumstances for their cost-benefit analysis.
I also agree the article could have been shrunk by 50% or so although there is something to be said for the authenticity of unedited writing.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 2:32 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
I also agree the article could have been shrunk by 50% or so although there is something to be said for the authenticity of unedited writing.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 2:32 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
It should also be noted that there is an opportunity cost associated with expensive boots. Vimes specifically prefers cheap boots because their soles allow him to "feel" the street.
A more modern example would be the ability to keep up with rapidly changing fashions and technology. Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
This isn’t to say that cheap is always better than expensive, but there is more to the story than just quality.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 2:42 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
A more modern example would be the ability to keep up with rapidly changing fashions and technology. Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
This isn’t to say that cheap is always better than expensive, but there is more to the story than just quality.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 2:42 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
Thinking on this a bit more, the end of the article fell a little flat for me. I think the author unintentionally undermined their own argument by finishing with 'So I just fired up my web browser, went to the manufacturer's site, and just bought another pair of the exact same boots.'
Essentially, they're hoping that they get lucky again, in the sense that they hope the conditions for those boots have stayed the same in 14 years since they got lucky with the last boots. This after making a cogent argument for several paragraphs about needing access to knowledge about which boots to buy.
Much like how the author's friend guided them to make the initial investment in $200 boots, in my ideal ending, the author would have guided us as to how to bridge knowledge gaps, e.g., how to go about gaining the info about quality. This would have helped nudge us onto that next rung of the ladder.
And the exact brand of the boots would have been irrelevant, as we could go find out for empowered selves. (slight hyperbole here)
Besides, the exact brand is already irrelevant to us in the same way that expecting to get lucky 14 years later on the same boots is unlikely to yield the same satisfactory outcome for them. Things change and part of understanding quality is knowing how to find current information that is a good fit for you and your specific needs.
posted by iamkimiam at 2:49 AM on December 31, 2018 [25 favorites]
Essentially, they're hoping that they get lucky again, in the sense that they hope the conditions for those boots have stayed the same in 14 years since they got lucky with the last boots. This after making a cogent argument for several paragraphs about needing access to knowledge about which boots to buy.
Much like how the author's friend guided them to make the initial investment in $200 boots, in my ideal ending, the author would have guided us as to how to bridge knowledge gaps, e.g., how to go about gaining the info about quality. This would have helped nudge us onto that next rung of the ladder.
And the exact brand of the boots would have been irrelevant, as we could go find out for empowered selves. (slight hyperbole here)
Besides, the exact brand is already irrelevant to us in the same way that expecting to get lucky 14 years later on the same boots is unlikely to yield the same satisfactory outcome for them. Things change and part of understanding quality is knowing how to find current information that is a good fit for you and your specific needs.
posted by iamkimiam at 2:49 AM on December 31, 2018 [25 favorites]
Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
Sign me up, particularly if you can separate software and hardware and update the soft side of things. I'm on year six on the one I'm typing on here.
posted by deadwax at 3:24 AM on December 31, 2018 [13 favorites]
Sign me up, particularly if you can separate software and hardware and update the soft side of things. I'm on year six on the one I'm typing on here.
posted by deadwax at 3:24 AM on December 31, 2018 [13 favorites]
Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
posted by iamkimiam at 3:44 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Sign me up, particularly if you can separate software and hardware and update the soft side of things. I'm on year six on the one I'm typing on here.I think this is a fantastic example of how value and quality isn't always straightforwardly quantifiable and is often highly contextual. You've saved money on six years of premium cell phone purchases and this is worthwhile because you clearly have knowledge (and/or time to invest) that others lack about leveraging the technology to make this functional and sustainable. This on par with those who may not have the knowledge but do have the purchasing power and so can benefit in other ways (staying current with the technology and the benefits that provides). Whereas somebody who has neither falls far behind both of you, e.g., stuck in the $20 boot loop.
posted by iamkimiam at 3:44 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
I was a bit surprised the author didn't seem to note that price isn't a constant, that is when the initial decision to purchase was being made, he was weighing the difference between his 20$ pair of boots, which he estimated he'd have to replace ten times, against the 200$ pair he was hoping would last ten years. Over those ten years the "20$" boots may not maintain price stability, requiring, perhaps 30$ or more to but the same pair of boots that he was using as his comparison.
In the same way, of course, a 200$ pair of boots may drop in price or rise depending on the future context the producers face.
Putting the argument in terms of price alone is sort of intrinsically problematic, as the author sort of notes, as price and durability aren't necessarily linked, but the underlying argument over the difficulties people who can't afford choice face is still a relevant one as I am all too aware.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:42 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
In the same way, of course, a 200$ pair of boots may drop in price or rise depending on the future context the producers face.
Putting the argument in terms of price alone is sort of intrinsically problematic, as the author sort of notes, as price and durability aren't necessarily linked, but the underlying argument over the difficulties people who can't afford choice face is still a relevant one as I am all too aware.
posted by gusottertrout at 5:42 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Saving this post so I can check back in a few days to see if these mythical long-lasting boots got named.
posted by sailoreagle at 5:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by sailoreagle at 5:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
All of her talk about not knowing what you don’t know, like where to buy good boots, and she clearly didn’t know that she could go to the Backpacker magazine website (or other outdoors sites) and read reviews of boots. When I was a kid, my folks had a Consumer Reports subscription and saved back issues to research bigger ticket purchases like appliances, but now I doubt there is anything you might want to buy that you couldn’t find online reviews of.
posted by hydropsyche at 5:59 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 5:59 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
I doubt there is anything you might want to buy that you couldn’t find online reviews of.
But how do you find the *good* reviews, not just paid shills?
posted by cats are weird at 6:02 AM on December 31, 2018 [20 favorites]
But how do you find the *good* reviews, not just paid shills?
posted by cats are weird at 6:02 AM on December 31, 2018 [20 favorites]
Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
Um...I'm still using a fifteen-year-old cell phone.
Anyway, re: the article. ROI on a $200 pair of boots is a pretty meaningless metric if one cannot afford to pony-up the $200 for a single-item purchase in the first place.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:07 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
Um...I'm still using a fifteen-year-old cell phone.
Anyway, re: the article. ROI on a $200 pair of boots is a pretty meaningless metric if one cannot afford to pony-up the $200 for a single-item purchase in the first place.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:07 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
You can certainly find reviews of anything online. Unfortunately, many of them appear to be breathless marketing gas. And presumably there is a continuum of reviews ranging from those to the brutally honest. Those can be further described along another dimension: the knowledge (or lack thereof) of the reviewers. So, what we really need is someone not motivated by profit and extremely knowledgeable to review those reviews. And the freshness of the review is a concern, too, since it is easy to find eight-year-old reviews without obvious signs of staleness.
Bottom line, it takes a long time to separate the wheat from the chaff even with the full faith and credit of the internet...
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 6:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
Bottom line, it takes a long time to separate the wheat from the chaff even with the full faith and credit of the internet...
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 6:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
It's expensive to be poor.
> both Doc Martens and Fluevog have gone through periods of extreme poor quality
Did Doc Martens come back from that? After the soles (plural) of the last pair of their shoes I bought basically fell off a few months after I bought them I never went back (this would have been circa mid-2000s).
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:12 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
> both Doc Martens and Fluevog have gone through periods of extreme poor quality
Did Doc Martens come back from that? After the soles (plural) of the last pair of their shoes I bought basically fell off a few months after I bought them I never went back (this would have been circa mid-2000s).
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:12 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
Poor people have economic class-based knowledge too. Like buy cheap individual-small packets of shampoo because large bottles might be cheaper but they'll increase the risk of theft and small ones are portable and light. Share meals with neighbour informally as backups for food security, put all your resources into the most likely child to provide for the rest of the family, etc.
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 6:14 AM on December 31, 2018 [15 favorites]
posted by dorothyisunderwood at 6:14 AM on December 31, 2018 [15 favorites]
Did Doc Martens come back from that? After the soles (plural) of the last pair of their shoes I bought basically fell off a few months after I bought them I never went back (this would have been circa mid-2000s).
These days I seem to only get about a years wear out of a new pair of Docs before the soles start ripping away - they were more expensive in the 90s-00s but lasted much longer.
posted by porn in the woods at 6:19 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
These days I seem to only get about a years wear out of a new pair of Docs before the soles start ripping away - they were more expensive in the 90s-00s but lasted much longer.
posted by porn in the woods at 6:19 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
> Essentially, they're hoping that they get lucky again, in the sense that they hope the conditions for those boots have stayed the same in 14 years since they got lucky with the last boots
I've got two pairs of Timberland deck shoes here, separated by about the same time period. Put side-by-side, you can see the massive drop in quality. Same with a few other brands (eg a clothing manufacturer that started out 80/20 wool/acrylic and ended up 20/80 wool/acrylic). As long as we're in mass-production-land (hand-made is a different ball game), I'm going with rednikki's "try again" theory.
posted by Leon at 6:20 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
I've got two pairs of Timberland deck shoes here, separated by about the same time period. Put side-by-side, you can see the massive drop in quality. Same with a few other brands (eg a clothing manufacturer that started out 80/20 wool/acrylic and ended up 20/80 wool/acrylic). As long as we're in mass-production-land (hand-made is a different ball game), I'm going with rednikki's "try again" theory.
posted by Leon at 6:20 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Reddit’s /r/BuyItForLife is a great resource.
posted by JoeZydeco at 6:32 AM on December 31, 2018 [16 favorites]
posted by JoeZydeco at 6:32 AM on December 31, 2018 [16 favorites]
I was glad to see the bit about a poor person making the rational choice to buy cheap shoes, because you know there's a good chance that they'll get ruined in the medium-run anyway. People aren't stupid.
posted by turkeybrain at 7:03 AM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
posted by turkeybrain at 7:03 AM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
On the subject of brands going south, I think Muffy Aldrich has a good framework for thinking about how it usually goes (she's talking about preppy brands, but the general principles seem to be more broadly applicable): everyone wants to build something iconic, but, once you have it, the temptation is overwhelming to build new markets and make a cash grab, leaving only a company shell.
posted by box at 7:06 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by box at 7:06 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
And near the Top of that Reddit sub
https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/comments/ab1ss2/request_looking_for_weather_proofresistant_boots/
I find if I don't **know** a trusted review site for something, user forums with relevant discussions are great, have learned how to sort the wheat / chaff pretty quickly.
The ur-skill is google-fu
posted by goinWhereTheClimateSuitsMyClothes at 7:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [12 favorites]
https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/comments/ab1ss2/request_looking_for_weather_proofresistant_boots/
I find if I don't **know** a trusted review site for something, user forums with relevant discussions are great, have learned how to sort the wheat / chaff pretty quickly.
The ur-skill is google-fu
posted by goinWhereTheClimateSuitsMyClothes at 7:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [12 favorites]
A more modern example would be the ability to keep up with rapidly changing fashions and technology. Who wants a ten year old cell phone?
Some things are classic, durable goods, and others are (generally treated as) valuable if current. Clothing can be both, in that good materials should last a long time, yet if you try to keep up with trends, you're talking about seasonal cycles. There are some "classic" items of a wardrobe that can be used year after year, like shoes.
Technology, on the other hand, is generally treated as cyclical, if not seasonal. Except as some have noted in this thread, tech has gotten to the point that the advances are not as critical as they used to be. Ten years ago is 2008/9, and the first iPhone would have been a year and a half old at that time, replaced by the iPhone 3G. Ten year old tech at that time and you might have bought a Nokia 9000i Communicator, called the best "wireless communications product" of 1998 by CNN:
For another example, if you're keeping up with video games, you'll need the newest system to play the newest games. But if you're happy with your old games, a game system might last decades. My wife and I are still playing games on our Nintendo Wii, and that's a 12 year old platform now, though there have only been 2 platform upgrades (Wii U and Switch) since then. Going back 20 years, the Game Boy Color and Nintendo 64 are newest from Nintendo, alongside the original Playstation, Sega Saturn and Dreamcast. In comparison to cell phones, game systems may be more durable, but are also very cyclical in terms of modern features and capacity.
But I'm also breaking down the concept of durability beyond the point of reason. In other words, 10 years isn't the magical "perfect lifespan" for all things. As JoeyZydeco linked, there are durable goods that you can buy once and have for life. On the other end are disposable goods, either by general design, or because they're cheap and sold to people with limited budgets. In the middle are items that last 5-20 years, depending on what they are, how they're maintained, and what you need.
For example, if you don't want to access the internet and use apps, a "dumb" flip-phone could still be fine, and the only reason to update a computer now may be to be able to run a current operating system, to ensure you are still getting patches and aren't susceptible to new viruses or malware that targets older systems. "Planned obsolescence" only works if you really want those new features (assuming the obsolescence doesn't come about from structural or system failures, because the company made the product to last a short amount of time).
posted by filthy light thief at 7:20 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Some things are classic, durable goods, and others are (generally treated as) valuable if current. Clothing can be both, in that good materials should last a long time, yet if you try to keep up with trends, you're talking about seasonal cycles. There are some "classic" items of a wardrobe that can be used year after year, like shoes.
Technology, on the other hand, is generally treated as cyclical, if not seasonal. Except as some have noted in this thread, tech has gotten to the point that the advances are not as critical as they used to be. Ten years ago is 2008/9, and the first iPhone would have been a year and a half old at that time, replaced by the iPhone 3G. Ten year old tech at that time and you might have bought a Nokia 9000i Communicator, called the best "wireless communications product" of 1998 by CNN:
It's a cell phone, a fax machine, and a handheld computer--all three in one device. Flip open the $999 Nokia Communicator, and you'll find an 8MB PDA complete with a regulation-style QWERTY keyboard, a 640 by 200 LCD screen, and a Web browser. It's pricey, but definitely a road warrior's dream.In other words, cell phones were on a pretty sharp improvement curve for the past few decades, but they're plateauing in terms of new value-added features.
For another example, if you're keeping up with video games, you'll need the newest system to play the newest games. But if you're happy with your old games, a game system might last decades. My wife and I are still playing games on our Nintendo Wii, and that's a 12 year old platform now, though there have only been 2 platform upgrades (Wii U and Switch) since then. Going back 20 years, the Game Boy Color and Nintendo 64 are newest from Nintendo, alongside the original Playstation, Sega Saturn and Dreamcast. In comparison to cell phones, game systems may be more durable, but are also very cyclical in terms of modern features and capacity.
But I'm also breaking down the concept of durability beyond the point of reason. In other words, 10 years isn't the magical "perfect lifespan" for all things. As JoeyZydeco linked, there are durable goods that you can buy once and have for life. On the other end are disposable goods, either by general design, or because they're cheap and sold to people with limited budgets. In the middle are items that last 5-20 years, depending on what they are, how they're maintained, and what you need.
For example, if you don't want to access the internet and use apps, a "dumb" flip-phone could still be fine, and the only reason to update a computer now may be to be able to run a current operating system, to ensure you are still getting patches and aren't susceptible to new viruses or malware that targets older systems. "Planned obsolescence" only works if you really want those new features (assuming the obsolescence doesn't come about from structural or system failures, because the company made the product to last a short amount of time).
posted by filthy light thief at 7:20 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Here's the thing: the attrition rate of junior therapists is terrible. At my grad school, which doesn't place interns, you can wash out due to being unable to secure your required internship. For graduates of all grad schools, you have to be able to land a job and then manage to see enough patients not to starve to death, and accrue enough hours of doing so to qualify for a license. I know multiple people who went through grad school – at tens of thousands of dollars of cost – and then washed out before licensure because they couldn't get enough patients. I breezily assured the owner of the clinic I interview at after graduation that I was happy to do housecalls on foot – I maybe even quipped that I had a great pair of boots for it – and got a job at a place with all the patients I could stand. I completed the patient-seeing part of my licensure requirements in almost the minimal time allowed by statute.
We can't know the effect of my having reliable boots on my getting licensed as a medical professional, because we can't know the alternative reality in which I didn't have them. But it does seem like there was some positive benefit. And there was nothing inevitable about my making it to licensure. Other therapists fail to make it all the time. Every little bit helps.
And here's the other thing: Not having a car, and not driving, I had to get my internships and licensure-qualifying jobs in the places the public transit is. This meant I had to compete in the worst labor markets. The graduate schools, themselves, are all right in the urban core, and of course everyone wants internships close to school; the job sites within Route 128 are way more popular with applicants, not least because they can guarantee more hours. It is not at all clear that if I hadn't been able to take the internships I did take and the entry-level job I took, that there would ever have been alternatives. That's why I took them, sucky commutes and all.
But by being able to secure jobs I could – with sufficient fortitude, patience, and really good winter boots – get to via the services of the MBTA, I didn't have to get a car.
I do not believe that this essay is meant to be a personal review of a particular pair of boots. I believe it is an exploration of the Vimes Boots Theory as it apparently applied to the writer. I grew up poor; I remember a mindset of automatically buying the cheapest model of whatever I needed because my mom and I were living on welfare. There was not extra money for nicer things. The author is aware that poor people do not have unlimited choices and cannot buy the higher quality and more expensive boots. That is the entire fucking point.
Pratchett's whimsically expressed Vimes' Boots Theory proposes that rich people are rich because they spend less because they can buy better things. But of course one of the consequences of being able to buy better things is that one can then capitalize – quite literally – on the better thing, securing paying work that would otherwise be unavailable to one. This is, in an important sense, what capitalism is. If you have a sufficient chunk of money – a lump of capital – you can buy something – a liquor license, a whaling ship, a robot for putting CDs into CD sleeves, a farm, a hotel on Boardwalk, a share in a business – with which you can make more money, and/or you can hire people to do labor for you by which you can make more money. This is why it is called capital-ism. Poor people are poor – in our society, and in many societies – because they don't have much capital with which to participate in capitalism.
I don't begrudge her, as the author appears to be female, a single word nor syllable. I love this essay, which notes that "Trying to buy women's clothing – including footgear – for durability is a mug's game: I bought 'men's' boots." Thanks for posting, OP!
posted by Bella Donna at 7:33 AM on December 31, 2018 [32 favorites]
We can't know the effect of my having reliable boots on my getting licensed as a medical professional, because we can't know the alternative reality in which I didn't have them. But it does seem like there was some positive benefit. And there was nothing inevitable about my making it to licensure. Other therapists fail to make it all the time. Every little bit helps.
And here's the other thing: Not having a car, and not driving, I had to get my internships and licensure-qualifying jobs in the places the public transit is. This meant I had to compete in the worst labor markets. The graduate schools, themselves, are all right in the urban core, and of course everyone wants internships close to school; the job sites within Route 128 are way more popular with applicants, not least because they can guarantee more hours. It is not at all clear that if I hadn't been able to take the internships I did take and the entry-level job I took, that there would ever have been alternatives. That's why I took them, sucky commutes and all.
But by being able to secure jobs I could – with sufficient fortitude, patience, and really good winter boots – get to via the services of the MBTA, I didn't have to get a car.
I do not believe that this essay is meant to be a personal review of a particular pair of boots. I believe it is an exploration of the Vimes Boots Theory as it apparently applied to the writer. I grew up poor; I remember a mindset of automatically buying the cheapest model of whatever I needed because my mom and I were living on welfare. There was not extra money for nicer things. The author is aware that poor people do not have unlimited choices and cannot buy the higher quality and more expensive boots. That is the entire fucking point.
Pratchett's whimsically expressed Vimes' Boots Theory proposes that rich people are rich because they spend less because they can buy better things. But of course one of the consequences of being able to buy better things is that one can then capitalize – quite literally – on the better thing, securing paying work that would otherwise be unavailable to one. This is, in an important sense, what capitalism is. If you have a sufficient chunk of money – a lump of capital – you can buy something – a liquor license, a whaling ship, a robot for putting CDs into CD sleeves, a farm, a hotel on Boardwalk, a share in a business – with which you can make more money, and/or you can hire people to do labor for you by which you can make more money. This is why it is called capital-ism. Poor people are poor – in our society, and in many societies – because they don't have much capital with which to participate in capitalism.
I don't begrudge her, as the author appears to be female, a single word nor syllable. I love this essay, which notes that "Trying to buy women's clothing – including footgear – for durability is a mug's game: I bought 'men's' boots." Thanks for posting, OP!
posted by Bella Donna at 7:33 AM on December 31, 2018 [32 favorites]
I was a bit surprised the author didn't seem to note that price isn't a constant, that is when the initial decision to purchase was being made, he was weighing the difference between his 20$ pair of boots, which he estimated he'd have to replace ten times, against the 200$ pair he was hoping would last ten years. Over those ten years the "20$" boots may not maintain price stability, requiring, perhaps 30$ or more to but the same pair of boots that he was using as his comparison.
In the same way, of course, a 200$ pair of boots may drop in price or rise depending on the future context the producers face.
As a runner I live on both sides of this argument of cheap vs expensive and low quality vs durable with a mixture of price instability. I'm not an extreme distance runner but I have been a regular runner for 10 years and in addition to all the lessons of running it has taught me some interesting lessons about consumerism, economics and decision making.
I've tried a few different shoes but have not extensively sampled the possibility space because I am not a youtube shoe reviewer getting free shoes and have a limited budget. Early on I settled on Sauconys because they had room in their toe box that I liked. I wore mid-range ones but gradually worked my way down to their bottom of line Saucony Grids (currently just $25!! but usually $25-40) and perversely this is still my favorite shoe despite their tendency to look filthy and start to disintegrate in about 2-3 months. I like the fit and feel and it is what I am most used to. I had plantar fasciitis for a while and now swap out the insoles for special ones that cost half as much as the new shoes ($12) but last for two pairs of shoes. During the plantar fasciitis trials I experimented with New Balance 880s that ran $100+. They were much nicer looking and had way better construction. So much better that the two pair I bought are still in my closet as walk around shoes with zero wear on their uppers and only minor treadwear. However, despite being measurably superior shoes and lasting more than three times as long as the Saucony Grids I don't like them. Their wear also overlapped with a severe calf strain. During the calf strain I also tried two pairs of Hoka One One Cliftons (~$150) and while they were great for helping relieve the calf strain they had sizing, fit and feel issues for me and while I still wear them in rotation once in a while it is only because I bought them so I am going to use them up. I won't buy them again.
I'm extremely averse to shoe marketing and don't give a shit about performance. Nike vapor fly 4%: Why would want to pay $250 to get 4% less exercise when I run? Racing? I'm not going to podium so why the hell would I care?. I also think the shoe debates are pointless and largely uninformed. I've looked at the "shoe science" and it just isn't even really at the level of remotely credible science yet. I've followed the evolutionary arguments and once again I think they are just wildly uninformed mostly faddish naturalist fallacy just-so story crap. The most telling thing to me is that the same shoe companies will sell both maximalist and minimalist shoes and swear that both are better for you. So they either don't know or don't care and you shouldn't trust them.
So what I have learned in 10 years of running with limited shoe experimentation on a limited budget?
Change is risk. Purchasing something new is an unpredictable leap into the unknown. I have incomplete and imperfect knowledge of my own needs and preferences and incomplete knowledge regarding available options to meet those needs. Others also have incomplete knowledge and often perverse malign incentives.
Lack of change is also risk. I will never decrease the incompleteness or imperfections of my knowledge without some change. Even negative results are positive contributions to this knowledge. Finding out a shoe doesn't work for me is still finding something out.
Whether the upside of change outweighs the downside of negative results is very contingent on your financial situation. A running shoe purchasing failure can either be a complete loss of money as you need to replace them right away (if you're rich) or a couple months of annoyance and pain during runs and even worse possible injury (if you are not rich). I still lean toward the latter category because I am not yet the point where I'll just toss $100+ in the garbage.
So where I am? I use a mixed strategy. I buy a different shoe now on about every third or fourth purchase because I do want to know if something better for me is out there and I can temper the change risks by using two or three pairs of shoes in rotation with my 'safe' shoe being at least 50% of my shoe wearing.
My stable shoes are much cheaper than my experimental shoes and my goal with the experimental shoes is also to find a cost effective solution.
I also use runrepeat.com and price alerts to get my shoes when they have price drops. Not being a believer in shoe "science" or caring about shoe fashion means I am totally comfortable with last year's models which is a major saving. However, due to the fickleness of shoe fashion shoes that I like often disappear and late model shoes can actually go up in price after much of the outdated stock clears out and the supply shrinks (If you love a shoe and are sufficiently liquid - buy several pairs and store them for later - if decide you don't want them they might have even gone up in value if you wait two years and resell them on amazon or ebay).
So what have I really learned?
Life is a really complicated constraint satisfaction problem that you can iterate on forever if you let yourself and it is probably best if you don't let yourself iterate too much unless you actually really enjoy the iterating.
posted by srboisvert at 8:05 AM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
In the same way, of course, a 200$ pair of boots may drop in price or rise depending on the future context the producers face.
As a runner I live on both sides of this argument of cheap vs expensive and low quality vs durable with a mixture of price instability. I'm not an extreme distance runner but I have been a regular runner for 10 years and in addition to all the lessons of running it has taught me some interesting lessons about consumerism, economics and decision making.
I've tried a few different shoes but have not extensively sampled the possibility space because I am not a youtube shoe reviewer getting free shoes and have a limited budget. Early on I settled on Sauconys because they had room in their toe box that I liked. I wore mid-range ones but gradually worked my way down to their bottom of line Saucony Grids (currently just $25!! but usually $25-40) and perversely this is still my favorite shoe despite their tendency to look filthy and start to disintegrate in about 2-3 months. I like the fit and feel and it is what I am most used to. I had plantar fasciitis for a while and now swap out the insoles for special ones that cost half as much as the new shoes ($12) but last for two pairs of shoes. During the plantar fasciitis trials I experimented with New Balance 880s that ran $100+. They were much nicer looking and had way better construction. So much better that the two pair I bought are still in my closet as walk around shoes with zero wear on their uppers and only minor treadwear. However, despite being measurably superior shoes and lasting more than three times as long as the Saucony Grids I don't like them. Their wear also overlapped with a severe calf strain. During the calf strain I also tried two pairs of Hoka One One Cliftons (~$150) and while they were great for helping relieve the calf strain they had sizing, fit and feel issues for me and while I still wear them in rotation once in a while it is only because I bought them so I am going to use them up. I won't buy them again.
I'm extremely averse to shoe marketing and don't give a shit about performance. Nike vapor fly 4%: Why would want to pay $250 to get 4% less exercise when I run? Racing? I'm not going to podium so why the hell would I care?. I also think the shoe debates are pointless and largely uninformed. I've looked at the "shoe science" and it just isn't even really at the level of remotely credible science yet. I've followed the evolutionary arguments and once again I think they are just wildly uninformed mostly faddish naturalist fallacy just-so story crap. The most telling thing to me is that the same shoe companies will sell both maximalist and minimalist shoes and swear that both are better for you. So they either don't know or don't care and you shouldn't trust them.
So what I have learned in 10 years of running with limited shoe experimentation on a limited budget?
Change is risk. Purchasing something new is an unpredictable leap into the unknown. I have incomplete and imperfect knowledge of my own needs and preferences and incomplete knowledge regarding available options to meet those needs. Others also have incomplete knowledge and often perverse malign incentives.
Lack of change is also risk. I will never decrease the incompleteness or imperfections of my knowledge without some change. Even negative results are positive contributions to this knowledge. Finding out a shoe doesn't work for me is still finding something out.
Whether the upside of change outweighs the downside of negative results is very contingent on your financial situation. A running shoe purchasing failure can either be a complete loss of money as you need to replace them right away (if you're rich) or a couple months of annoyance and pain during runs and even worse possible injury (if you are not rich). I still lean toward the latter category because I am not yet the point where I'll just toss $100+ in the garbage.
So where I am? I use a mixed strategy. I buy a different shoe now on about every third or fourth purchase because I do want to know if something better for me is out there and I can temper the change risks by using two or three pairs of shoes in rotation with my 'safe' shoe being at least 50% of my shoe wearing.
My stable shoes are much cheaper than my experimental shoes and my goal with the experimental shoes is also to find a cost effective solution.
I also use runrepeat.com and price alerts to get my shoes when they have price drops. Not being a believer in shoe "science" or caring about shoe fashion means I am totally comfortable with last year's models which is a major saving. However, due to the fickleness of shoe fashion shoes that I like often disappear and late model shoes can actually go up in price after much of the outdated stock clears out and the supply shrinks (If you love a shoe and are sufficiently liquid - buy several pairs and store them for later - if decide you don't want them they might have even gone up in value if you wait two years and resell them on amazon or ebay).
So what have I really learned?
Life is a really complicated constraint satisfaction problem that you can iterate on forever if you let yourself and it is probably best if you don't let yourself iterate too much unless you actually really enjoy the iterating.
posted by srboisvert at 8:05 AM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
All of her talk about not knowing what you don’t know, like where to buy good boots, and she clearly didn’t know that she could go to the Backpacker magazine website (or other outdoors sites) and read reviews of boots.
Truly high-end goods are difficult to find reliable reviews for because a) they cost more than all the other reviewed items combined, b) they are just curiosities for most readers, and c) often they have virtually no competition to compare them against.
For example Ghurkha luggage is something that stays in a family for generations but barely exists from a reviewer (or internet search engine) perspective.
I think there are a lot of items out there that may be advertised, but the reviews are all word of mouth.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:29 AM on December 31, 2018
Truly high-end goods are difficult to find reliable reviews for because a) they cost more than all the other reviewed items combined, b) they are just curiosities for most readers, and c) often they have virtually no competition to compare them against.
For example Ghurkha luggage is something that stays in a family for generations but barely exists from a reviewer (or internet search engine) perspective.
I think there are a lot of items out there that may be advertised, but the reviews are all word of mouth.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:29 AM on December 31, 2018
I like the VBT, but there's more to those boots as well. For one thing, the cheap thin-soled boots are (literally and figuratively) a connection to the streets he grew up on... maybe a little on the nose but pretty cute as these symbol thingies go I've always thought.
Less generously, I'd also say the cheap boots allow Vimes to stay in denial about his social ascent, joining the enemy etc. - he gets to enjoy the benefits of being rich while holding on to his (justified) grievances.
It's also worth noting that the character is not at all constant over the course of the Vimes books... he basically turns from a scruffy, booze-soaked anti-hero into an actual (and much less fun and complex) hero, while at the same time rising through the Discworld's social class system... go figure (by which I mean, the old Lessing thing, the one about not all who mock their chains being free, seems to apply to both Vimes and Pratchett... heh).
posted by kleinsteradikaleminderheit at 8:41 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
Less generously, I'd also say the cheap boots allow Vimes to stay in denial about his social ascent, joining the enemy etc. - he gets to enjoy the benefits of being rich while holding on to his (justified) grievances.
It's also worth noting that the character is not at all constant over the course of the Vimes books... he basically turns from a scruffy, booze-soaked anti-hero into an actual (and much less fun and complex) hero, while at the same time rising through the Discworld's social class system... go figure (by which I mean, the old Lessing thing, the one about not all who mock their chains being free, seems to apply to both Vimes and Pratchett... heh).
posted by kleinsteradikaleminderheit at 8:41 AM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
I was most strongly impressed by how tough it is to become a psychotherapist in the Boston area.
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:41 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 8:41 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
A couple of years ago I scored a new pair of Wolverine "1000 Mile" boots for $200. Made in Michigan of leather tanned in Chicago, I expect they will last a very long time.
posted by exogenous at 8:49 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by exogenous at 8:49 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
Red Wing and Danner boots, especially the resolable models, are usually more than $200, but they regularly appear on buy-it-for-life-type lists.
posted by box at 8:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by box at 8:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
Really, my point was that another kind of class knowledge, pretty middle class knowledge, I guess, is knowing how to find good reviews. Knowing that Consumer Reports doesn’t take corporate money for exactly that reason or that Backpacker has a pretty good review reputation or how to read a lot of reviews to read between the lines and throw out those who clearly are basically being paid to offer a positive review. We don’t know what brand of boots she got, but $200 boots are not some exclusive high end brand no one has heard of—they’re just quality gear of the kind that a lot of middle class people invest in for outdoors stuff. Knowing how to find out when it’s worth it to invest in something is middle class knowledge that other folks don’t necessarily know how to access.
posted by hydropsyche at 8:55 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 8:55 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I had the best pair of winter boots from Merrell and we had a long and beautiful relationship and then I left one in Japan. Thus passes the glory of the world.
The mystery remains: which boots did she buy? Around $200 in 2005 and available in a mall shoe store. MeFi's Internet Detectives need to get on the case!
posted by betweenthebars at 9:01 AM on December 31, 2018
The mystery remains: which boots did she buy? Around $200 in 2005 and available in a mall shoe store. MeFi's Internet Detectives need to get on the case!
posted by betweenthebars at 9:01 AM on December 31, 2018
Not wanting to sound old fashioned, but I have a few books published in the early 1800’s and they work just as well as they did 200 years ago.
posted by njohnson23 at 9:17 AM on December 31, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 9:17 AM on December 31, 2018 [10 favorites]
I loved this overlong, meandering article which is clearly NOT about a specific pair of boots.
I grew up in a middle class household raised by parents who prided themselves on being smart with their money. They had - still have - a subscription to Consumer Reports for my entire life. In theory, I should somewhat innately have whatever those skills are to suss out quality from garbage.
But hampered especially by the fact that I'm usually looking for women's footwear/clothing/etc (as pointed out in the article, this is frequently a mug's game), I will spend HOURS reading recommendations and reviews. Most people who know me make fun of me for how hard it is for me to actually buy anything. I often spend days/weeks/months hemming and hawing and reading reviews and changing my mind back and forth about what is actually the "best" purchase.
And still, I end up with duds. Maybe just everything is duds now. Maybe my budget isn't as high as it needs to be to really get to the good stuff. idk. The worst is when I take so long trying to make the right decision that I end up in desperation just buying what's available immediately, because the falling-apart thing I was wearing while I researched a purchase to death finally fell truly apart.
Heaven forbid you need to buy things that serve several functions (e.g., look nice enough to wear at work but waterproof and comfortable enough to wear walking to/from the train). The alternative seems to be owning dozens and dozens of pairs of shoes? Or multiple coats for each season? This feels excessive and certainly unattainable if each of these items is to be of good quality and priced accordingly. But how do you balance buying quality investment pieces with also your budget with also the societal expectation (and internal desire) to not look like a doofus wearing the wrong thing for the wrong occasion, like clompy winter boots around the office, or a ridiculous puffy winter coat to a fancy dinner, or brown shoes with a black dress, or whatever. Say what you will, that stuff matters professionally.
Honestly my coworkers who mostly buy fast fashion look more pulled together than I do because they're not trying to make 10-year-old clothes still work and they can buy entire outfits rather than restricting themselves with "each piece needs to match at least 3 other things in my wardrobe" practicality and there's a part of me that is jealous of that.
posted by misskaz at 9:28 AM on December 31, 2018 [30 favorites]
I grew up in a middle class household raised by parents who prided themselves on being smart with their money. They had - still have - a subscription to Consumer Reports for my entire life. In theory, I should somewhat innately have whatever those skills are to suss out quality from garbage.
But hampered especially by the fact that I'm usually looking for women's footwear/clothing/etc (as pointed out in the article, this is frequently a mug's game), I will spend HOURS reading recommendations and reviews. Most people who know me make fun of me for how hard it is for me to actually buy anything. I often spend days/weeks/months hemming and hawing and reading reviews and changing my mind back and forth about what is actually the "best" purchase.
And still, I end up with duds. Maybe just everything is duds now. Maybe my budget isn't as high as it needs to be to really get to the good stuff. idk. The worst is when I take so long trying to make the right decision that I end up in desperation just buying what's available immediately, because the falling-apart thing I was wearing while I researched a purchase to death finally fell truly apart.
Heaven forbid you need to buy things that serve several functions (e.g., look nice enough to wear at work but waterproof and comfortable enough to wear walking to/from the train). The alternative seems to be owning dozens and dozens of pairs of shoes? Or multiple coats for each season? This feels excessive and certainly unattainable if each of these items is to be of good quality and priced accordingly. But how do you balance buying quality investment pieces with also your budget with also the societal expectation (and internal desire) to not look like a doofus wearing the wrong thing for the wrong occasion, like clompy winter boots around the office, or a ridiculous puffy winter coat to a fancy dinner, or brown shoes with a black dress, or whatever. Say what you will, that stuff matters professionally.
Honestly my coworkers who mostly buy fast fashion look more pulled together than I do because they're not trying to make 10-year-old clothes still work and they can buy entire outfits rather than restricting themselves with "each piece needs to match at least 3 other things in my wardrobe" practicality and there's a part of me that is jealous of that.
posted by misskaz at 9:28 AM on December 31, 2018 [30 favorites]
I think it was Goethe who wrote, "A book is not good because it is good; it is good because we read it when we needed to read it." (I'm probably badly butchering the quote and/or the attribution, because Google was of no help to me.)
So section 6 of this essay, about "class knowledge" and "knowledge boundaries", stood out to me as the strongest section; because it's something I've been thinking about a lot lately and struggling to articulate, and this essay puts it into words.
I was a nerdy, bullied kid with negligent, lower-middle-class parents. This is to say: I had essentially no social connections and only picked up weird bits and pieces of our socio-economic class knowledge. On the strength of academics, I went to a top-tier research university, and since I didn't have any of the social tells to socialize effectively (or the money, for restaurants or gaming computers or whatever; or the time, since I was working full-time during the period so I could pay rent), and I didn't really pick much up class knowledge. After college, I started a company which succeeded on the basis of engineering strength (rather than social connections, of which I have almost none) and I now find myself swimming in this utterly bizarre world of the top few percenters while knowing absolutely none of the social assumptions that underlie anything when I talk to them. (Weirdly, this plays to my advantage, since they have a need to box everything into a stereotype, so they tend to assume I'm some kind of eccentric genius rather than the dopey confused kid I am.)
The above is all stated with the benefit of hindsight; I have long had difficulty in relating to the people around me, or understanding why they act the way they do. This article helped fill in some of the missing pieces, so many thanks for posting it, Cozybee. It references another article on economic class vs social class that I am pretty interested to read as time permits.
I've also been wondering about this phenomenon more broadly: studies indicate that many Americans have no close social connections at all (or the time and space to form them), and that the problem is worsening; what'll happen when that reaches a critical mass? I have a lot of difficulty functioning in our system since I lack the knowledge necessary to, for example, navigate a bureaucracy—do other people, too? What will that mean for said bureaucracy? Is that why so many people are trying to kill it?
posted by ragtag at 9:40 AM on December 31, 2018 [14 favorites]
So section 6 of this essay, about "class knowledge" and "knowledge boundaries", stood out to me as the strongest section; because it's something I've been thinking about a lot lately and struggling to articulate, and this essay puts it into words.
I was a nerdy, bullied kid with negligent, lower-middle-class parents. This is to say: I had essentially no social connections and only picked up weird bits and pieces of our socio-economic class knowledge. On the strength of academics, I went to a top-tier research university, and since I didn't have any of the social tells to socialize effectively (or the money, for restaurants or gaming computers or whatever; or the time, since I was working full-time during the period so I could pay rent), and I didn't really pick much up class knowledge. After college, I started a company which succeeded on the basis of engineering strength (rather than social connections, of which I have almost none) and I now find myself swimming in this utterly bizarre world of the top few percenters while knowing absolutely none of the social assumptions that underlie anything when I talk to them. (Weirdly, this plays to my advantage, since they have a need to box everything into a stereotype, so they tend to assume I'm some kind of eccentric genius rather than the dopey confused kid I am.)
The above is all stated with the benefit of hindsight; I have long had difficulty in relating to the people around me, or understanding why they act the way they do. This article helped fill in some of the missing pieces, so many thanks for posting it, Cozybee. It references another article on economic class vs social class that I am pretty interested to read as time permits.
I've also been wondering about this phenomenon more broadly: studies indicate that many Americans have no close social connections at all (or the time and space to form them), and that the problem is worsening; what'll happen when that reaches a critical mass? I have a lot of difficulty functioning in our system since I lack the knowledge necessary to, for example, navigate a bureaucracy—do other people, too? What will that mean for said bureaucracy? Is that why so many people are trying to kill it?
posted by ragtag at 9:40 AM on December 31, 2018 [14 favorites]
Yes, knowing that it's well worth the money to subscribe to Consumer Reports is one of the most valuable pieces of middle-class knowledge I can think of. I'm moving into a house right now and it's already saved me hundreds of dollars by telling me that I can safely go ahead and get the $800 washing machine instead of springing for the $1600 one. I know that they're independent and that their reviews are based on real, thorough, science-based testing and research the likes of which basically no other reviewer out there bothers to perform. I know that they have a decades-long reputation and that they've steered my parents well time after time. So I'm not worried that buying the cheaper option will come back to bite me.
I also know, because I grew up middle class with parents who also grew up middle class, that a washing machine is one of those times when it's actually worth it to drop the extra bucks on a service contract because there's a solid chance that this thing will break in the next few years and if it does the contract will pay for itself first time. And I know that when it comes to electric dryers, you can just go ahead and grab a free used one that someone is giving away and make do with that until it breaks down. For a washer it's worth it to get something new and ultra-efficient (the water and electricity savings alone will pay for that) but for a dryer it's not nearly such a big deal—electric dryers tend not to break, and if they do you can hang dry your clothes while you get it together to find a new one.
That's thousands of dollars' worth of middle-class social capital right there, on just one appliance purchase. If I'd grown up in a family that didn't already know this stuff because they never owned their own appliances or only ever owned shitty used ones because that's what they could afford, how would I ever have learned that?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 9:43 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I also know, because I grew up middle class with parents who also grew up middle class, that a washing machine is one of those times when it's actually worth it to drop the extra bucks on a service contract because there's a solid chance that this thing will break in the next few years and if it does the contract will pay for itself first time. And I know that when it comes to electric dryers, you can just go ahead and grab a free used one that someone is giving away and make do with that until it breaks down. For a washer it's worth it to get something new and ultra-efficient (the water and electricity savings alone will pay for that) but for a dryer it's not nearly such a big deal—electric dryers tend not to break, and if they do you can hang dry your clothes while you get it together to find a new one.
That's thousands of dollars' worth of middle-class social capital right there, on just one appliance purchase. If I'd grown up in a family that didn't already know this stuff because they never owned their own appliances or only ever owned shitty used ones because that's what they could afford, how would I ever have learned that?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 9:43 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I thought this article was going to be about boots. Which would have been highly relevant to my interests.
But, for what it’s worth, as my income rose enough to afford quality, it took my about 2 years of having to re-buy the requisite quiver of shoes every year before I realized I could spend a little more ($20 for boots? I was paying like $80 for boots, $80 for cheap dress shoes) and get many years’ of wear out of them. I have not spent any significant money on shoes in 15 years.
Alden dress shoes, $350, required a $30 resole a couple years ago.
Wolverine 1000 mile boots, $300, new heels a couple years ago, $20.
Blundstones, $100, have required nothing more than mink oil ever year for the past 20 years. Their quality may have slipped over the years but I’m not sure.
Red Wing Iron Rangers $350. People say the quality has slipped but they look like the day I bought them 15 years ago.
Here’s where I put in a plug for my LL Bean duck boots which were given to me as a present 30(!) years ago by my parents which I still wear all the time.
Zamberlain heavy hiking boots, 30 years old, $350 at time of purchase, annual mink oil treatment, no other maintenance.
With these shoes to rotate through for work and travel and hiking and what not, a pair of $50 sneakers and $5 flip flops last at least 5 years and counting.
If I was going to go for one pair of boots for everything and get the most for my money, no question about Blundstones, assuming I was able to buy the ones I got 20 years ago.
That’s the Bartfast theory of boots. I guess I like boots.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 9:47 AM on December 31, 2018 [14 favorites]
But, for what it’s worth, as my income rose enough to afford quality, it took my about 2 years of having to re-buy the requisite quiver of shoes every year before I realized I could spend a little more ($20 for boots? I was paying like $80 for boots, $80 for cheap dress shoes) and get many years’ of wear out of them. I have not spent any significant money on shoes in 15 years.
Alden dress shoes, $350, required a $30 resole a couple years ago.
Wolverine 1000 mile boots, $300, new heels a couple years ago, $20.
Blundstones, $100, have required nothing more than mink oil ever year for the past 20 years. Their quality may have slipped over the years but I’m not sure.
Red Wing Iron Rangers $350. People say the quality has slipped but they look like the day I bought them 15 years ago.
Here’s where I put in a plug for my LL Bean duck boots which were given to me as a present 30(!) years ago by my parents which I still wear all the time.
Zamberlain heavy hiking boots, 30 years old, $350 at time of purchase, annual mink oil treatment, no other maintenance.
With these shoes to rotate through for work and travel and hiking and what not, a pair of $50 sneakers and $5 flip flops last at least 5 years and counting.
If I was going to go for one pair of boots for everything and get the most for my money, no question about Blundstones, assuming I was able to buy the ones I got 20 years ago.
That’s the Bartfast theory of boots. I guess I like boots.
posted by Slarty Bartfast at 9:47 AM on December 31, 2018 [14 favorites]
Wolverine "1000 Mile" boots ... I expect they will last a very long time.
I was wondering how people could possibly have boots that last a decade given my experiences with (even quite pricey) hiking boots. But maybe this is my answer... a 3 mile round trip walking commute every day puts 1000 miles on a pair of boots in a little less than a year.
posted by heatherlogan at 9:50 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
I was wondering how people could possibly have boots that last a decade given my experiences with (even quite pricey) hiking boots. But maybe this is my answer... a 3 mile round trip walking commute every day puts 1000 miles on a pair of boots in a little less than a year.
posted by heatherlogan at 9:50 AM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
please post what brand of boot he bought
was weighing the difference between his 20$ pair of boots
Psst--guys, the author is female. (This is standing out weirdly to me because I've been having a bunch of cool conversations with her on Dreamwidth over the past month or so.)
posted by sciatrix at 9:56 AM on December 31, 2018 [23 favorites]
was weighing the difference between his 20$ pair of boots
Psst--guys, the author is female. (This is standing out weirdly to me because I've been having a bunch of cool conversations with her on Dreamwidth over the past month or so.)
posted by sciatrix at 9:56 AM on December 31, 2018 [23 favorites]
This is interesting:
posted by migurski at 10:03 AM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
One of the fascinating things about the experiments in aiding the poor by giving direct unconditional cash grants instead of in-kind aid is that the reports that come out of them – and, admittedly, these are likely to be cherry-picked to some extent – are of people using the money to invest. "We went and bought a cow, so now we can sell milk at the market". … These are not what we usually think of as capitalism, because we strangely do not consider the activities of the domestic household as particularly economic in nature, but of course they are. Every family is also a firm.…because the etymology of the word comes from household management (Greek oikonomia). Maybe it’s just obvious to me because the Polish word for economics is visibly the same as that for domestic stewardship.
posted by migurski at 10:03 AM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
I'm feeling a little regretful that I didn't do a good enough job framing the post so as to make it clear that the point is not, in fact, boots. Wondering if I should have chosen a different pull-quote.
The post starts with the vimes theory of saving money on boots that last, and uses that as a launchpad to discuss other things. Like opportunity cost, and knowledge boundaries, and the difference it makes to have reliable means of transportation.
The point was not just "invest in high quality lasting goods to save money".
posted by Cozybee at 10:09 AM on December 31, 2018 [17 favorites]
The post starts with the vimes theory of saving money on boots that last, and uses that as a launchpad to discuss other things. Like opportunity cost, and knowledge boundaries, and the difference it makes to have reliable means of transportation.
The point was not just "invest in high quality lasting goods to save money".
posted by Cozybee at 10:09 AM on December 31, 2018 [17 favorites]
Yes, agreed, but we all still need to know where to find good damn boots.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [11 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:11 AM on December 31, 2018 [11 favorites]
Importantly, as a side note, let's appreciate that that gamble isn't just in the quality of the boots. It's the gamble that nothing randomly bad will happen to the boots in the next 11 years. That the Longfellow bridge will not collapse under the train I am in and I have to kick my boots off to swim for the shore; that when I take them off to enter the yoga studio where I'm attending a continuing ed event, somebody doesn't nick them and run off; that when I take them off at a friend's, their dog doesn't gnaw holes in them [...] Sometimes poor people prudently don't invest in the good stuff because they realize they don't have great odds of realizing the full vaule of the investment. In which case, you might as well buy the cheap boots.
It occurs to me that buying the cheap boots for this reason is closely analogous to buying insurance. Insurance costs more than the risks it insures against, on average; that's how the insurance companies make their money. But the predictability they offer has value in itself, and the less the buyer can afford an unexpected mishap, the more valuable the insurance is. (Hence the advice to insurance shoppers to choose a plan with the highest deductible that wouldn't pose a hardship if they had to pay it out of pocket.)
Buying $20 boots once a year is like paying an insurance premium.
On the subject of brands going south, I think Muffy Aldrich has a good framework for thinking about how it usually goes (she's talking about preppy brands, but the general principles seem to be more broadly applicable): everyone wants to build something iconic, but, once you have it, the temptation is overwhelming to build new markets and make a cash grab, leaving only a company shell.
This is my personal reason for buying a lot of my durable goods on the cheap (though usually in the form of used, not crap-from-the-get-go), even when I could afford better. I've seen too many companies abuse their brands' goodwill this way and it has left me with a chronic distrust of "quality" brands. I like what the author says about the rational benefits of risk-aversion but, to be honest, I am at least as motivated by aversion to being in a position where I might feel like I got screwed. Thrift store shoes can't betray me because I never had high expectations for them (and sometimes they overperform, which is a delight).
posted by aws17576 at 10:14 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
It occurs to me that buying the cheap boots for this reason is closely analogous to buying insurance. Insurance costs more than the risks it insures against, on average; that's how the insurance companies make their money. But the predictability they offer has value in itself, and the less the buyer can afford an unexpected mishap, the more valuable the insurance is. (Hence the advice to insurance shoppers to choose a plan with the highest deductible that wouldn't pose a hardship if they had to pay it out of pocket.)
Buying $20 boots once a year is like paying an insurance premium.
On the subject of brands going south, I think Muffy Aldrich has a good framework for thinking about how it usually goes (she's talking about preppy brands, but the general principles seem to be more broadly applicable): everyone wants to build something iconic, but, once you have it, the temptation is overwhelming to build new markets and make a cash grab, leaving only a company shell.
This is my personal reason for buying a lot of my durable goods on the cheap (though usually in the form of used, not crap-from-the-get-go), even when I could afford better. I've seen too many companies abuse their brands' goodwill this way and it has left me with a chronic distrust of "quality" brands. I like what the author says about the rational benefits of risk-aversion but, to be honest, I am at least as motivated by aversion to being in a position where I might feel like I got screwed. Thrift store shoes can't betray me because I never had high expectations for them (and sometimes they overperform, which is a delight).
posted by aws17576 at 10:14 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
I think the point about knowing where and how to buy the $200 boots is related to the reason so many lottery winners get into financial trouble - they lack that background knowledge for their new wealth level, so they make a series of bad decisions.
I had that kind of eye-opening experience once while suit shopping. A friend, who is no wealthier than me but deals professionally with some very wealthy people, started looking amused while watching a salesman trying to get me into a variety of boring and poorly fitting $400 suits. He took my arm and quietly said, "look, I could take you down to [other place] and get that suit for $40 - we need to go to the back of the store, where the suits don't have price tags, and then you'll see what a real suit is." He was right - I left with a $2000 Armani which is remarkably comfortable, fit like a dream (um...several years and 20 pounds ago, anyway), and looks like a million bucks. I've worn it to every formal occasion since and expect to keep wearing it for many years to come.
Before that moment I would never in my life have considered spending that much on a suit - even though I could - because I did not know what the difference was, and it wouldn't have occurred to me to try one on and find out.
posted by allegedly at 10:53 AM on December 31, 2018 [8 favorites]
I had that kind of eye-opening experience once while suit shopping. A friend, who is no wealthier than me but deals professionally with some very wealthy people, started looking amused while watching a salesman trying to get me into a variety of boring and poorly fitting $400 suits. He took my arm and quietly said, "look, I could take you down to [other place] and get that suit for $40 - we need to go to the back of the store, where the suits don't have price tags, and then you'll see what a real suit is." He was right - I left with a $2000 Armani which is remarkably comfortable, fit like a dream (um...several years and 20 pounds ago, anyway), and looks like a million bucks. I've worn it to every formal occasion since and expect to keep wearing it for many years to come.
Before that moment I would never in my life have considered spending that much on a suit - even though I could - because I did not know what the difference was, and it wouldn't have occurred to me to try one on and find out.
posted by allegedly at 10:53 AM on December 31, 2018 [8 favorites]
I'm feeling a little regretful that I didn't do a good enough job framing the post so as to make it clear that the point is not, in fact, boots. Wondering if I should have chosen a different pull-quote.
It's obvious that the main point is not the boots, but boots are what interest me and tbh the rest of it isn't stuff I feel like discussing with internet strangers.
posted by betweenthebars at 10:53 AM on December 31, 2018
It's obvious that the main point is not the boots, but boots are what interest me and tbh the rest of it isn't stuff I feel like discussing with internet strangers.
posted by betweenthebars at 10:53 AM on December 31, 2018
Decades before the Internet was available, when I was young my mom taught me (and thank the Cosmos, because school sure as hell didn't) how to use a library and how to research topics, including using the sometimes surprisingly comprehensive materials in the Reference section. I also had a fairly analytical aptitude and a lot of intellectual curiosity, though I can't say for sure how much of that was innate and how much was developed through my library experiences. A positive knock-on effect of that experience is having learned how to separate the good-review wheat from the fake-review chaff on the Internet, which despite said drawback has allowed me to exponentially increase my general knowledge over the last 20 years or so.
This skill has helped me in innumerable ways, not least of which was to help me pull myself out of poverty into more or less middle-class circumstances - a seemingly modest economic leap but one that most of my extended family was never able to make. Or, to relate this back to TFA, how to find durable comfortable shoes, and where to buy them, for way less than the typical retail cost (which for the sake of this argument could be $200 at a high-end shoe store like the one the author mentions), or how to find a good cheap used car that won't be a lemon and will be reliable and low maintenance for years.
My point is that this is a learnable skill, that should be but isn't taught to children starting in grade school..."The ur-skill is google-fu", as goinWhereTheClimateSuitsMyClothes succinctly put it. I guess that sort of powerful information can't be entrusted to the proles; they might start Getting Ideas Above Their Station.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
This skill has helped me in innumerable ways, not least of which was to help me pull myself out of poverty into more or less middle-class circumstances - a seemingly modest economic leap but one that most of my extended family was never able to make. Or, to relate this back to TFA, how to find durable comfortable shoes, and where to buy them, for way less than the typical retail cost (which for the sake of this argument could be $200 at a high-end shoe store like the one the author mentions), or how to find a good cheap used car that won't be a lemon and will be reliable and low maintenance for years.
My point is that this is a learnable skill, that should be but isn't taught to children starting in grade school..."The ur-skill is google-fu", as goinWhereTheClimateSuitsMyClothes succinctly put it. I guess that sort of powerful information can't be entrusted to the proles; they might start Getting Ideas Above Their Station.
posted by Greg_Ace at 10:54 AM on December 31, 2018 [7 favorites]
If we're talking middle-class boots, I've never bought anything from Merrell that wasn't great. And yes, I learned that from my (upper) middle-class parents—I was in a store with them one time, looking at some sandals that looked pretty pricey to me, and they said "Those are Merrells, they'll be worth it."
It's been ten years. I still have those sandals and they're still in great shape. I wear them almost daily, they're my around-the-house slip-ons now.
I've also bought hiking boots, work boots, flip-flops, town boots, and trail runners from them and they've been excellent every time. Durable, no manufacturing defects, no design flaws, comfortable from the moment I put them on. I don't buy only Merrells, but at this point they're the first and often last place that I look for footwear because they're the only brand that I've never bought a pair from and been dissatisfied or had them sit in the back of the closet. I have a pair of Vasque winter hiking boots that eat laces and have needed their lugs repaired because they tore out. I have a pair of Salomons that I've had to re-glue the soles on because they delaminated. I have a pair of Le Chameaus that don't fit quite right. But Merrells? Nails it first time every time.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 10:55 AM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
It's been ten years. I still have those sandals and they're still in great shape. I wear them almost daily, they're my around-the-house slip-ons now.
I've also bought hiking boots, work boots, flip-flops, town boots, and trail runners from them and they've been excellent every time. Durable, no manufacturing defects, no design flaws, comfortable from the moment I put them on. I don't buy only Merrells, but at this point they're the first and often last place that I look for footwear because they're the only brand that I've never bought a pair from and been dissatisfied or had them sit in the back of the closet. I have a pair of Vasque winter hiking boots that eat laces and have needed their lugs repaired because they tore out. I have a pair of Salomons that I've had to re-glue the soles on because they delaminated. I have a pair of Le Chameaus that don't fit quite right. But Merrells? Nails it first time every time.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 10:55 AM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
And you know what, all those other shoes I mentioned? The ones with design flaws, manufacturing defects, fit issues? They were all well-researched purchases that were extremely highly rated by reviewers who I generally trust. And I can get why the reviewers liked them—if I only had to wear them for a week, or if I had slightly different feet, they'd be great. They perform extremely well—they grip, they flex, they keep water out and heat in, they do the things that reviewers are looking for or can look for. But live with them for a full season, and the flaws start to show.
Research isn't everything. Some of this knowledge is hard-earned through generational trial and error and through class-segregated social networks.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:04 AM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
Research isn't everything. Some of this knowledge is hard-earned through generational trial and error and through class-segregated social networks.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:04 AM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
I'm feeling a little regretful that I didn't do a good enough job framing the post so as to make it clear that the point is not, in fact, boots. Wondering if I should have chosen a different pull-quote.
I doubt it would have mattered. The article is entirely centered around using boots (if not a particular brand) to illustrate a point. The resulting thread was going to be boot heavy regardless.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 11:06 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
I doubt it would have mattered. The article is entirely centered around using boots (if not a particular brand) to illustrate a point. The resulting thread was going to be boot heavy regardless.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 11:06 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
Outdoor Gear Lab has not failed me for legitimate reviews of cold weather gear. I didn't use them when I bought new winter hiking boots last year, because I have wide feet, and I went with a Lowa Tibet GTX in Wide, which I discovered through reviews on REI's site (which also has a no questions asked return policy). OGL is cool because they offer a range options for a specific topic (best hiking boots, winter boots, hardshell jacket, etc...) and rate them by specific criteria (warmth, weight, ease of lacing, etc...) and then offer an overall best and a best value option.
posted by youthenrage at 11:13 AM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by youthenrage at 11:13 AM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
Personally I'm irritated that L.L. Bean dropped their unconditional lifetime guarantee about a year ago, because I'm just sure that it means the quality is soon to follow. Where will I buy my flannel shirts from now? Those things are built like goddamn medieval armor and they never go out of style. At least not here in New England, where flannel shirts on men are appropriate about 75% of the year in about 90% of social settings.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:19 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:19 AM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
OGL is great but I have bought boots based on their recommendations and had them let me down, more than once. Granted they did call out the lacing on the Vasques and the durability on the Salomons as negatives. And I've bought tons of other stuff from them and been satisfied. They're no Consumer Reports, though.
Digital Photography Review still does the best and most thorough reviews of camera gear out there. Most of the site is a bit questionable but the actual full reviews of actual cameras are generally very thorough and accurate. They give you enough information that you even can decide whether a particular camera might be right for you even if they dinged it for stuff that you don't personally care about.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:24 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
Digital Photography Review still does the best and most thorough reviews of camera gear out there. Most of the site is a bit questionable but the actual full reviews of actual cameras are generally very thorough and accurate. They give you enough information that you even can decide whether a particular camera might be right for you even if they dinged it for stuff that you don't personally care about.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:24 AM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
Buying $20 boots once a year is like paying an insurance premium.
Yeah, the point about not being able to replace that investment piece should something happen to it unrelated to its durability resonates too. I found a high quality long puffy winter coat on The Real Real this season. Retail is likely around $650 and I got it for under $200 all told. I LOVE it, the quality and heft is leaps and bounds above the 12+ year old Lands' End coat it replaced, but I'm also TERRIFIED of something happening to it. I could catch a sleeve on a tree branch or fence post, an overexcited dog could jump on me and tear the fabric with its claws (which is what killed my old coat), or it could get stolen. And I'm not likely to find another $650 coat for that price, so that will be it. It's actually kind of stressful, even (or especially) when you get a deal, to own investment items.
posted by misskaz at 11:40 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
Yeah, the point about not being able to replace that investment piece should something happen to it unrelated to its durability resonates too. I found a high quality long puffy winter coat on The Real Real this season. Retail is likely around $650 and I got it for under $200 all told. I LOVE it, the quality and heft is leaps and bounds above the 12+ year old Lands' End coat it replaced, but I'm also TERRIFIED of something happening to it. I could catch a sleeve on a tree branch or fence post, an overexcited dog could jump on me and tear the fabric with its claws (which is what killed my old coat), or it could get stolen. And I'm not likely to find another $650 coat for that price, so that will be it. It's actually kind of stressful, even (or especially) when you get a deal, to own investment items.
posted by misskaz at 11:40 AM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I bought an amazing, gorgeous, fantastic, warm Pendleton x Opening Ceremony wool coat that would have cost over $600 had I paid retail but i can't wear it very often because I've gotten fatter and global warming has made it so that it's too warm to wear this beautiful coat. But I suspect I'll have this coat for at least another 10 years, maybe 20.
But I paid less than retail because I know that the factory store in near me and I had the time, money and transportation to drive the 20 miles to the store. And the $ to buy the coat (along with 3 dresses and a pair of pants - these all get regular wear except the stuff I've outgrown.)
(The Pendleton outlet in Washougal, WA can have some amazing deals if you hit the 40% off friends and family sales.)
posted by vespabelle at 12:04 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
But I paid less than retail because I know that the factory store in near me and I had the time, money and transportation to drive the 20 miles to the store. And the $ to buy the coat (along with 3 dresses and a pair of pants - these all get regular wear except the stuff I've outgrown.)
(The Pendleton outlet in Washougal, WA can have some amazing deals if you hit the 40% off friends and family sales.)
posted by vespabelle at 12:04 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
in my ideal ending, the author would have guided us as to how to bridge knowledge gaps, e.g., how to go about gaining the info about quality.
Well, then the author would have to cope with the idea that the rich weren't born into this knowledge, and had to spend some kind of capital to acquire it. Either through intergenerational means -- the kind subject to entropy -- or through spending meticulus time and money analyzing and experimenting.
Also, Vimes' theory doesn't really mesh with the concept of consumer credit. I don't recommend carrying debt as a default, but if you know what $200 boots you want to buy but just don't have the cash, a credit card is pretty much the perfect vehicle for this. It's a tough rec though, the fear of CC debt is high. Even my colleagues at work -- objectively high income folks -- skip out on ESPP because they "can't afford it". Our plan, with a 15 percent discount and 6 month look back, produces a return of like 60 percent APY. You can't afford not to participate, even if you have to carry CC debt in the short term.
Which is to say, I buy cheap Vans every year because despite having access to capital, I don't know how to determine what more durable shoe would be.
posted by pwnguin at 12:07 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
Well, then the author would have to cope with the idea that the rich weren't born into this knowledge, and had to spend some kind of capital to acquire it. Either through intergenerational means -- the kind subject to entropy -- or through spending meticulus time and money analyzing and experimenting.
Also, Vimes' theory doesn't really mesh with the concept of consumer credit. I don't recommend carrying debt as a default, but if you know what $200 boots you want to buy but just don't have the cash, a credit card is pretty much the perfect vehicle for this. It's a tough rec though, the fear of CC debt is high. Even my colleagues at work -- objectively high income folks -- skip out on ESPP because they "can't afford it". Our plan, with a 15 percent discount and 6 month look back, produces a return of like 60 percent APY. You can't afford not to participate, even if you have to carry CC debt in the short term.
Which is to say, I buy cheap Vans every year because despite having access to capital, I don't know how to determine what more durable shoe would be.
posted by pwnguin at 12:07 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
if you know what $200 boots you want to buy but just don't have the cash, a credit card is pretty much the perfect vehicle for this.
This does assume that you will have the cash eventually, at least before the interest on the credit cards hunts you down. It also assumes that the only Vimes-applicable purchase you need to make in the near future is your boots, that everything in your life will proceed as predicted, and that you will not need to unexpectedly replace any metaphorical boots as you pay off your literal boots.
Also, what in the hell is ESPP? Dude. In a thread all about class-mediated access to different concepts that can be useful, dropping acronyms without spelling them out like that feels pretty fucking tone deaf.
posted by sciatrix at 12:16 PM on December 31, 2018 [17 favorites]
This does assume that you will have the cash eventually, at least before the interest on the credit cards hunts you down. It also assumes that the only Vimes-applicable purchase you need to make in the near future is your boots, that everything in your life will proceed as predicted, and that you will not need to unexpectedly replace any metaphorical boots as you pay off your literal boots.
Also, what in the hell is ESPP? Dude. In a thread all about class-mediated access to different concepts that can be useful, dropping acronyms without spelling them out like that feels pretty fucking tone deaf.
posted by sciatrix at 12:16 PM on December 31, 2018 [17 favorites]
Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Not something most workers have access to. The likelihood of your ever having access to one has to do with things like whether you consider yourself to have a "career" or a "job." Also your industry and how progressive your employer is. But if you do have access to one, you should strongly consider buying into it.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 12:24 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 12:24 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
CW: Self harm, below.
I grew up poor, so it was amazing to me just after college when one of my housemates knew all kinds of things that were total news to me. She knew that shoes could be resoled, for example–but of course, that only worked with shoes that were high quality enough that they were designed to support/survive resoling. She knew that you could swap out the heels on your high heels for a different style, even.
I have a lot of difficulty functioning in our system since I lack the knowledge necessary to, for example, navigate a bureaucracy—do other people, too?
ragtag, I have a lot of difficulty functioning in certain situations that are totally new, but usually one can research one's way to some reasonable approach. During one horrific period of my life, someone close to me demonstrated through their behaviour that they were a danger to themselves. I was unemployed at the time and had zero experience managing such situations and did not know what to do. I had maybe three days to figure out what to do because that is how long they would be in a safe place before being sent home.
I panicked for awhile and then, sitting in front of my computer, I asked myself this key question: What would a wealthy person do? I decided to pretend I had all the financial resources I needed to help this person. If that were true, what would I do? I also asked people I knew who seemed like potential sources of helpful information. In that way I discovered that there is a profession devoted to helping adults find mental health treatment for minors in cases where said minors appear to need treatment.
There are a lot of problems with everything about the teen treatment center industry, etc., so this is not meant to be a derail nor an endorsement. What I am saying is that by pretending that I had money when I did not have money, I was able to calm down my panicky brain and find resources that I had no idea existed. That helped me make more informed decisions about what appeared to be a life or death matter. That was an instructive experience.
I used this approach long before I had heard of or read the book Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much by Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir. I have recommended this book before on MF. It was validating for me to read because I understood, as someone who grew up poor, that poor people make choices for reasons that made sense in context, even if those reasons are a mystery to all the critics hating on people like me because we are too stupid to stop being poor. And that reminds me of something else in TFA, with which I also identify:
Social class boundaries are generally knowledge boundaries. They're not hard boundaries – they have some permeability. Or perhaps the better metaphor is translucency. As I wrote previously, one tends to only have contact with adjacent classes, so that limits one's ability to pick up another class' knowledge to the classes closest to one's current class. One can see into the next class as through a slightly hazy window. But try to see through – across – multiple windows at once, and things quickly become impenetrably opaque.
Here's a weird little example. A number of my poorest patients in East Boston couldn't get together enough money at once to buy a monthly T (public transit) pass, so instead they bought four (or occasionally five) week-long passes each month, at, yes, a slightly greater over-all cost. From 2012 to 2016, a month pass cost $75 while a week pass cost $19 - so if you bought weekly, every three months you had to pay an extra $19.
But the week-long passes only came in the ticket format. The MBTA has this weird dual-format system with tickets and with cards. You can't (or at least couldn't) get a week-long pass on a card. Only on a ticket. Note there are three things here, all different – tickets, cards, and passes – and the passes come in two varieties, week and month.
My patients, who were getting week-passes on tickets? They often didn't know the first thing about cards. In fact they often:
• Didn't even know the difference between a card and a pass;
• Didn't know that for some of the subset of things that you can put on a card – which doesn't include week-passes, but does include a la carte fares – the cards get you a discount;
• Didn't know that empty cards are free, though you have to go to special locations to get them.
Why would they know such a thing? It doesn't have occasion to come up. If the only product you can afford – the week-pass – only comes on tickets, why would you know anything about cards?
Many people who read those words will still think those patients are simply stupid. They are not. It breaks my heart that some of her patients may possibly think of themselves as stupid, too. I hope not. There is a special shame when one feels out of place, like the time my shoe-savvy housemate told me the new dress I had sewn to wear to a party at my first job looked like it was made out of quilting fabric (it wasn't but sure, it was cheap fabric and apparently screamed that fact to the more sophisticated fashion eye). So yeah, that was fun.
posted by Bella Donna at 12:25 PM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I grew up poor, so it was amazing to me just after college when one of my housemates knew all kinds of things that were total news to me. She knew that shoes could be resoled, for example–but of course, that only worked with shoes that were high quality enough that they were designed to support/survive resoling. She knew that you could swap out the heels on your high heels for a different style, even.
I have a lot of difficulty functioning in our system since I lack the knowledge necessary to, for example, navigate a bureaucracy—do other people, too?
ragtag, I have a lot of difficulty functioning in certain situations that are totally new, but usually one can research one's way to some reasonable approach. During one horrific period of my life, someone close to me demonstrated through their behaviour that they were a danger to themselves. I was unemployed at the time and had zero experience managing such situations and did not know what to do. I had maybe three days to figure out what to do because that is how long they would be in a safe place before being sent home.
I panicked for awhile and then, sitting in front of my computer, I asked myself this key question: What would a wealthy person do? I decided to pretend I had all the financial resources I needed to help this person. If that were true, what would I do? I also asked people I knew who seemed like potential sources of helpful information. In that way I discovered that there is a profession devoted to helping adults find mental health treatment for minors in cases where said minors appear to need treatment.
There are a lot of problems with everything about the teen treatment center industry, etc., so this is not meant to be a derail nor an endorsement. What I am saying is that by pretending that I had money when I did not have money, I was able to calm down my panicky brain and find resources that I had no idea existed. That helped me make more informed decisions about what appeared to be a life or death matter. That was an instructive experience.
I used this approach long before I had heard of or read the book Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much by Sendhil Mullainathan and Eldar Shafir. I have recommended this book before on MF. It was validating for me to read because I understood, as someone who grew up poor, that poor people make choices for reasons that made sense in context, even if those reasons are a mystery to all the critics hating on people like me because we are too stupid to stop being poor. And that reminds me of something else in TFA, with which I also identify:
Social class boundaries are generally knowledge boundaries. They're not hard boundaries – they have some permeability. Or perhaps the better metaphor is translucency. As I wrote previously, one tends to only have contact with adjacent classes, so that limits one's ability to pick up another class' knowledge to the classes closest to one's current class. One can see into the next class as through a slightly hazy window. But try to see through – across – multiple windows at once, and things quickly become impenetrably opaque.
Here's a weird little example. A number of my poorest patients in East Boston couldn't get together enough money at once to buy a monthly T (public transit) pass, so instead they bought four (or occasionally five) week-long passes each month, at, yes, a slightly greater over-all cost. From 2012 to 2016, a month pass cost $75 while a week pass cost $19 - so if you bought weekly, every three months you had to pay an extra $19.
But the week-long passes only came in the ticket format. The MBTA has this weird dual-format system with tickets and with cards. You can't (or at least couldn't) get a week-long pass on a card. Only on a ticket. Note there are three things here, all different – tickets, cards, and passes – and the passes come in two varieties, week and month.
My patients, who were getting week-passes on tickets? They often didn't know the first thing about cards. In fact they often:
• Didn't even know the difference between a card and a pass;
• Didn't know that for some of the subset of things that you can put on a card – which doesn't include week-passes, but does include a la carte fares – the cards get you a discount;
• Didn't know that empty cards are free, though you have to go to special locations to get them.
Why would they know such a thing? It doesn't have occasion to come up. If the only product you can afford – the week-pass – only comes on tickets, why would you know anything about cards?
Many people who read those words will still think those patients are simply stupid. They are not. It breaks my heart that some of her patients may possibly think of themselves as stupid, too. I hope not. There is a special shame when one feels out of place, like the time my shoe-savvy housemate told me the new dress I had sewn to wear to a party at my first job looked like it was made out of quilting fabric (it wasn't but sure, it was cheap fabric and apparently screamed that fact to the more sophisticated fashion eye). So yeah, that was fun.
posted by Bella Donna at 12:25 PM on December 31, 2018 [18 favorites]
I mean, not to rub it in, but what you've just described is literally the exact rationale people use to talk themselves into significant credit card debt. Especially people who have the class background to identify quality items but not commiserate income.
Ask me how I know.
posted by sciatrix at 12:25 PM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
Ask me how I know.
posted by sciatrix at 12:25 PM on December 31, 2018 [9 favorites]
Anecdote time: I bought a pair of Adidas high-tops about 3 years ago now. They were $50 on sale, end of season. When I tried them on I was like - these are so light and flexible, the soles so thin, they must be counterfeit. For $50 tho, i was willing to accept that. Well fast forward 3 years - I wore these shoes all day, every day for the first two years. I wore them on construction sites, I wore them hiking, I wore them to flop houses and parties and everywhere in between. I got wet concrete on them more than once. Weird thing is: the sole has not separated from the shoe, no stitches have come out, and there are still no holes in the soles. Best shoes I ever wore.
posted by some loser at 12:26 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by some loser at 12:26 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
The article only kinda touches on this, but you know what one of the biggest things middle-class and especially upper-middle-class people buy with their money is?
Peace of mind.
Upper-middle-class people have the extra $150 to drop on the washing machine so that when it breaks down in four years it's no big deal. They have nicer houses and cars that aren't unreliable, falling-apart firetraps. They have better health insurance that lets them actually go to the doctor when they need to and then actually get the treatment that the doctor recommends. They have better auto insurance, so that when something happens to their car like a tree falling on it or another motorist backing into it in the parking lot, they're covered. They have better credit cards that let them return things that can't otherwise be returned, or that will sort out their financial lives for them and make them whole if their identity gets stolen. They have access to lawyers who can help them if they have a legal problem, and financial advisors who can help them make a realistic plan for their retirement. The list goes on and on, but all of that shit counts as buying peace of mind—if you have the money, many of the everyday crises that poorer people have to deal with just don't exist anymore, or are resolved with a simple phone call at worst.
That's the real shit. It's mostly invisible, but that's some of the best shit there is. That's what I want.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 12:38 PM on December 31, 2018 [44 favorites]
Peace of mind.
Upper-middle-class people have the extra $150 to drop on the washing machine so that when it breaks down in four years it's no big deal. They have nicer houses and cars that aren't unreliable, falling-apart firetraps. They have better health insurance that lets them actually go to the doctor when they need to and then actually get the treatment that the doctor recommends. They have better auto insurance, so that when something happens to their car like a tree falling on it or another motorist backing into it in the parking lot, they're covered. They have better credit cards that let them return things that can't otherwise be returned, or that will sort out their financial lives for them and make them whole if their identity gets stolen. They have access to lawyers who can help them if they have a legal problem, and financial advisors who can help them make a realistic plan for their retirement. The list goes on and on, but all of that shit counts as buying peace of mind—if you have the money, many of the everyday crises that poorer people have to deal with just don't exist anymore, or are resolved with a simple phone call at worst.
That's the real shit. It's mostly invisible, but that's some of the best shit there is. That's what I want.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 12:38 PM on December 31, 2018 [44 favorites]
Danner Quarry composite-toe boots for the win. Made in the USA, ~$250-300 pair, one pair lasts me in what I would call Good Shape for about 3 years, then another maybe 3 years of what I would call Worn Condition. Can be resoled, but generally I get a new pair because resoling is, itself, not a cheap thing to have done.
I learned long ago to get the better boots. Not the $500 custom-made jobs, but not the $100 pairs, either. I wear them literally every day (my other pair of shoes are fuzzy slippers), and having found a brand and style I like I can just re-order online without even really thinking about it.
Also, someone upthread said something about wearing cheap boots so you can feel the ground... I find I can feel that I've tread on a dime wearing my Quarries. Very good sensation transfer with those soles. I think it may be more what the soles are made of than anything else.
Anyway, buy good boots if you can afford them. Buy them from Goodwill if you can't get them new. Life is too short for shitty shoes you have to buy over and over.
posted by hippybear at 1:31 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
I learned long ago to get the better boots. Not the $500 custom-made jobs, but not the $100 pairs, either. I wear them literally every day (my other pair of shoes are fuzzy slippers), and having found a brand and style I like I can just re-order online without even really thinking about it.
Also, someone upthread said something about wearing cheap boots so you can feel the ground... I find I can feel that I've tread on a dime wearing my Quarries. Very good sensation transfer with those soles. I think it may be more what the soles are made of than anything else.
Anyway, buy good boots if you can afford them. Buy them from Goodwill if you can't get them new. Life is too short for shitty shoes you have to buy over and over.
posted by hippybear at 1:31 PM on December 31, 2018 [2 favorites]
One of the points I was surprised the author of the article didn't touch on is that footwear in itself can be a powerful class signifier. The particular boots that she bought may not have been so for her, in her circumstances, but I can easily imagine that wearing solid middle-class shoes to a middle-class job interview (for instance) helps project the image "I belong here. I'm not out of my depth, I'm one of you."
[And since this apparently has become The Boot Thread: After working my way through a couple different kinds of boots, I'm currently wearing Haix Black Eagle Athletic boots, which would be perfect if they were waterproof. I rate boots and shoes by how many miles a day I can walk in them before my feet hurt. Chuck Taylors are 2-mile shoes, if I'm being generous. My Haix boots are 10+ mile boots.]
posted by adamrice at 1:33 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
[And since this apparently has become The Boot Thread: After working my way through a couple different kinds of boots, I'm currently wearing Haix Black Eagle Athletic boots, which would be perfect if they were waterproof. I rate boots and shoes by how many miles a day I can walk in them before my feet hurt. Chuck Taylors are 2-mile shoes, if I'm being generous. My Haix boots are 10+ mile boots.]
posted by adamrice at 1:33 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
I don't wear them as much anymore now that I mostly work on roofs, but I have two pairs of these Thorogood 804-4210 leather workboots and they are stunningly good. Electrical rated, oil resistant soles, waterproof, with composite safety toes, they have every feature you could want in a heavy-duty workboot.
They're made of thick, tough leather in a classic style that has the minimum number of possible points of failure. The stitching is heavy and solid. They are comfortable. I've demolished living rooms, poured concrete, gotten stuck in knee-deep mud, and built decks in those boots—sometimes using the boots themselves as a tool to nudge and tap things into place, or kick and bash them apart. I've even taken them up mountains and onto roofs, although they don't really have quite the level of dexterity and grip that I'm looking for in a roof shoe. Now that I've changed jobs they don't see quite as much action, but I keep them in the van for muddy fields and commercial construction sites—right now they've got about an inch of caked-on mud on them. They are indestructible.
Union made in the USA, too.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:45 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
They're made of thick, tough leather in a classic style that has the minimum number of possible points of failure. The stitching is heavy and solid. They are comfortable. I've demolished living rooms, poured concrete, gotten stuck in knee-deep mud, and built decks in those boots—sometimes using the boots themselves as a tool to nudge and tap things into place, or kick and bash them apart. I've even taken them up mountains and onto roofs, although they don't really have quite the level of dexterity and grip that I'm looking for in a roof shoe. Now that I've changed jobs they don't see quite as much action, but I keep them in the van for muddy fields and commercial construction sites—right now they've got about an inch of caked-on mud on them. They are indestructible.
Union made in the USA, too.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:45 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
Timberlands suck ever since they sold out to Wal-Mart and Hollywood simultaneously. That's a brand that is entirely coasting on its reputation, and will one day crash into the ground unless it starts putting money back into quality workmanship.
There are things that working-class people know are good value and worth the money. There's a reason that Carhartt clothing is so revered in the trades—they make good shit! Same with Duluth Trading Post. They're not the cheapest, but they make stuff that working-class people can afford and that working-class people know is worth scraping up the extra bucks for because it'll work well and it'll last. You don't see much of their gear on white-collar people, but you see it on jobsites and in warehouses all across the country because they make tough, comfortable, effective gear that the people who work in those places can afford. My canvas Carhartt jacket may weigh about ten times as much as my down-filled Patagonia one, but it's just as warm, way more durable, and half the price.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:57 PM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
There are things that working-class people know are good value and worth the money. There's a reason that Carhartt clothing is so revered in the trades—they make good shit! Same with Duluth Trading Post. They're not the cheapest, but they make stuff that working-class people can afford and that working-class people know is worth scraping up the extra bucks for because it'll work well and it'll last. You don't see much of their gear on white-collar people, but you see it on jobsites and in warehouses all across the country because they make tough, comfortable, effective gear that the people who work in those places can afford. My canvas Carhartt jacket may weigh about ten times as much as my down-filled Patagonia one, but it's just as warm, way more durable, and half the price.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:57 PM on December 31, 2018 [6 favorites]
Blundstones, $100, have required nothing more than mink oil ever year for the past 20 years. Their quality may have slipped over the years but I’m not sure.
If you got them 20 years ago I know what you are wearing, I used to wear them in a factory. Unfortunately they are gone, the Tasmanian plant is shut and I'd suggest that buying another pair may not be the investment it was. I have moved onto Redbacks, still made in Australia and they take a beating.
posted by deadwax at 1:58 PM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
If you got them 20 years ago I know what you are wearing, I used to wear them in a factory. Unfortunately they are gone, the Tasmanian plant is shut and I'd suggest that buying another pair may not be the investment it was. I have moved onto Redbacks, still made in Australia and they take a beating.
posted by deadwax at 1:58 PM on December 31, 2018 [3 favorites]
Weighing in with @hippiebear above, Danner. I have a $250 set of military-spec goretex boots from them that I've now had for nearly a decade, with daily wear six months of the year, ever year. (I ride motorcycles through all four seasons, and love waterproof boots that are comfy for all-day wear.) The only problem I've got is the tread is still deep, but the rubber no longer grips well on snow and ice.
Wouldn't spend more than they charge. Wouldn't buy anything cheaper, either. There's a price point far above rock-bottom that justifies the expense, and these are the boots that taught me that lesson. I just wish I could find the sneaker equivalent!
posted by talldean at 2:27 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
Wouldn't spend more than they charge. Wouldn't buy anything cheaper, either. There's a price point far above rock-bottom that justifies the expense, and these are the boots that taught me that lesson. I just wish I could find the sneaker equivalent!
posted by talldean at 2:27 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
I just wish I could find the sneaker equivalent!
I just found these which seem to be Danner sneakers? On sale, even? I don't wear sneakers, but if I did I'd try these out!
Also, I've been in contact with Danner with questions about my boots many times across the decades I've been wearing them, and I've found them to always be responsive and helpful. Sending them an email explaining what is going on with the soles of your boots might yield a solution. Back in the Quarry II days (when they were made overseas and were much worse boots), I complained to them so many times about how the metal rings in the eyelets were coming undone and turning into razors that were slicing my laces, sometimes as many as 3 times in a week, that they did a free full eyelet replacement for me (had to be without my boots for a week! aaaaaaah!), and by the time Quarry 3 came out (now made in US with much better everything), the eyelets have been redesigned and are now totally awesome.
posted by hippybear at 2:44 PM on December 31, 2018
I just found these which seem to be Danner sneakers? On sale, even? I don't wear sneakers, but if I did I'd try these out!
Also, I've been in contact with Danner with questions about my boots many times across the decades I've been wearing them, and I've found them to always be responsive and helpful. Sending them an email explaining what is going on with the soles of your boots might yield a solution. Back in the Quarry II days (when they were made overseas and were much worse boots), I complained to them so many times about how the metal rings in the eyelets were coming undone and turning into razors that were slicing my laces, sometimes as many as 3 times in a week, that they did a free full eyelet replacement for me (had to be without my boots for a week! aaaaaaah!), and by the time Quarry 3 came out (now made in US with much better everything), the eyelets have been redesigned and are now totally awesome.
posted by hippybear at 2:44 PM on December 31, 2018
Another hell yes for Danner. They've been on my wishlist for years but I couldn't really afford them, and then two pairs in my size and like new condition (Acadia and Striker Torrents) showed up at my local Goodwill a few months ago, $10 per pair. I bought both pairs very selfishly and of course (so this is a major hell yes for Goodwill, too). I'm hellishly hard on shoes and boots, but I can see these lasting years with nearly daily wear. I feel like a total badass in them, and they're super supportive, too.
And... I'm very, very grateful that places like Goodwill exist.
posted by vers at 2:52 PM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
And... I'm very, very grateful that places like Goodwill exist.
posted by vers at 2:52 PM on December 31, 2018 [4 favorites]
And... I'm very, very grateful that places like Goodwill exist.
Me too. It's where I get 90% of my stuff from, like the old school Hunter wellies and Sorel winter boots I got at two different ones; the Sorels were $25 and the Hunters were $15. And because I got "the good stuff", I don't need to do that much shopping anymore, and don't anticipate to for a while, so bonus time and money for life experiences that aren't shopping. The first time I read Vimes Boots Theory in Men At Arms, I chuckled in recognizance.
I'm looking at my stuff as I type this, and imagining that if I'd paid full retail price for it, I wouldn't have been able to afford the travelling I did last year, or the classes and certifications this past year that I needed to have that will enable me to look for a new job.
But I've spoken about this before. I'm lucky I figured this out young, because I came up in an environment that the late Paul Fussell would've called "low prole". Because of the schools I went to, I had to learn how to get the good stuff cheap so those rich kids would stop making fun of me every day. It's a skill I've been able to put to good use ever since, though I'm still far from rich.
posted by droplet at 4:02 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
Me too. It's where I get 90% of my stuff from, like the old school Hunter wellies and Sorel winter boots I got at two different ones; the Sorels were $25 and the Hunters were $15. And because I got "the good stuff", I don't need to do that much shopping anymore, and don't anticipate to for a while, so bonus time and money for life experiences that aren't shopping. The first time I read Vimes Boots Theory in Men At Arms, I chuckled in recognizance.
I'm looking at my stuff as I type this, and imagining that if I'd paid full retail price for it, I wouldn't have been able to afford the travelling I did last year, or the classes and certifications this past year that I needed to have that will enable me to look for a new job.
But I've spoken about this before. I'm lucky I figured this out young, because I came up in an environment that the late Paul Fussell would've called "low prole". Because of the schools I went to, I had to learn how to get the good stuff cheap so those rich kids would stop making fun of me every day. It's a skill I've been able to put to good use ever since, though I'm still far from rich.
posted by droplet at 4:02 PM on December 31, 2018 [5 favorites]
I just bought some Sorel winter boots because the winter boots I kept in Sweden for visits finally cracked. (They were sparkly purple heavy vinyl boots with fuzzy stuff inside that were easy to pull on and off and intended for girls as opposed to women.) I really loved those boots and they lasted for many years. I was bummed when they died maybe three weeks ago. As luck would have it, the sporting goods store was closing at a nearby mall and I could pick up another pair of youth boots, also purple, for half price. I was bummed about needing to buy new boots because I had other plans for that money. Then it snowed the next day and I was thrilled I had new boots. My kid informed me that it was a good brand, but I had no idea. I just found a pair of boots that seemed to fit, happened to be purple, and appeared to be well-made. I hope it's true.
posted by Bella Donna at 4:21 PM on December 31, 2018
posted by Bella Donna at 4:21 PM on December 31, 2018
When it comes to buying unfamiliar boots, we all hope it's true!
posted by hippybear at 4:24 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by hippybear at 4:24 PM on December 31, 2018 [1 favorite]
I haven't had occasion to try them myself, but I've heard good things about Sorel from people who should know.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:32 PM on December 31, 2018
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:32 PM on December 31, 2018
I was about to bring up their "Guaranteed For Life" range, but it looks like they just shut it down this year.
Apparently, they're still making the same boots, though without the guarantee. Which suggests either that they were less robust than they accounted for, or they're reserving the right to cut costs in manufacturing.
I bought some Docs For Life a few years ago, and they're still going strong. A while later I bought some Clarks 1845 boots (the ones with the felt lining), but now can't wear them in wet weather as they let water in. I'm guessing that Clarks fall closer to the $20 end of the Vimes theory.
posted by acb at 5:08 AM on January 1, 2019
Apparently, they're still making the same boots, though without the guarantee. Which suggests either that they were less robust than they accounted for, or they're reserving the right to cut costs in manufacturing.
I bought some Docs For Life a few years ago, and they're still going strong. A while later I bought some Clarks 1845 boots (the ones with the felt lining), but now can't wear them in wet weather as they let water in. I'm guessing that Clarks fall closer to the $20 end of the Vimes theory.
posted by acb at 5:08 AM on January 1, 2019
So I'm on a plane with terrible movies but working internet and I'm bored, so here's how I choose and buy good boots:
First, I have a pretty good idea of what I need out of boots: waterproof (I hate getting my feet wet), ankle support (some people say this is a myth but I am clumsy and prone to twisted ankles without this), and grippy soles. And I want either blue-y or brown-y boots. Everyone's criteria is a little different, what's important is to know what yours is. Then I go a place like REI that will measure my feet, ask me questions about what I'm going to use the boots for (plus what I want out of them, which is why knowing all of that is helpful), and bring me the ones I think look nice plus suggestions from their experience that fit the bill.
Then I try on a few pairs. I bring my own socks with me so I can get a proper test run.
When I first put them on I'm looking at things to disqualify boots outright, like if they're uncomfortable or pinch when I put them on, that's a no for the model, that will never improve no matter what the sales person says (they might even believe it, it's untrue). If they're just too big or too small in all dimensions then I ask for a different size.
Then I stand up and walk around a bit on level ground. At this point I'm thinking about how heavy they are (which matters for walking long distances) and how the ground feels underfoot (for me stiffer boots are better for uneven ground but some people trail run in barefoot shoes, ymmv). I walk around on a variety of surfaces, outdoor places sometimes have a fake trail setup for this or I just step on the edge of the seat or display or whatever. If at any point I don't like how it feels then I don't go ahead with them. If I can I try to deliberately slip off some surface so I can see how grippy the boots are.
If I'm still happy with the fit and performance, then I have a look at the quality of the boots themselves: if there's stitching is it all even and staying in place (sometimes there's a stitch loose and I'll ask for another pair of the same boots), does the material feel solid and nice, do I like how the boots look on my feet. I do this last because otherwise I can kind of convince myself that nicer looking boots fit better than they do, which has come back to bite me before.
And then I ask about the stores return policy so if I later discover I missed something I'm not stuck with a pair of awkward umbrella holders.
(In practice all of this usually means I get goretex boots with vibram soles, but not always.)
posted by Xany at 6:28 AM on January 1, 2019 [5 favorites]
First, I have a pretty good idea of what I need out of boots: waterproof (I hate getting my feet wet), ankle support (some people say this is a myth but I am clumsy and prone to twisted ankles without this), and grippy soles. And I want either blue-y or brown-y boots. Everyone's criteria is a little different, what's important is to know what yours is. Then I go a place like REI that will measure my feet, ask me questions about what I'm going to use the boots for (plus what I want out of them, which is why knowing all of that is helpful), and bring me the ones I think look nice plus suggestions from their experience that fit the bill.
Then I try on a few pairs. I bring my own socks with me so I can get a proper test run.
When I first put them on I'm looking at things to disqualify boots outright, like if they're uncomfortable or pinch when I put them on, that's a no for the model, that will never improve no matter what the sales person says (they might even believe it, it's untrue). If they're just too big or too small in all dimensions then I ask for a different size.
Then I stand up and walk around a bit on level ground. At this point I'm thinking about how heavy they are (which matters for walking long distances) and how the ground feels underfoot (for me stiffer boots are better for uneven ground but some people trail run in barefoot shoes, ymmv). I walk around on a variety of surfaces, outdoor places sometimes have a fake trail setup for this or I just step on the edge of the seat or display or whatever. If at any point I don't like how it feels then I don't go ahead with them. If I can I try to deliberately slip off some surface so I can see how grippy the boots are.
If I'm still happy with the fit and performance, then I have a look at the quality of the boots themselves: if there's stitching is it all even and staying in place (sometimes there's a stitch loose and I'll ask for another pair of the same boots), does the material feel solid and nice, do I like how the boots look on my feet. I do this last because otherwise I can kind of convince myself that nicer looking boots fit better than they do, which has come back to bite me before.
And then I ask about the stores return policy so if I later discover I missed something I'm not stuck with a pair of awkward umbrella holders.
(In practice all of this usually means I get goretex boots with vibram soles, but not always.)
posted by Xany at 6:28 AM on January 1, 2019 [5 favorites]
The list goes on and on, but all of that shit counts as buying peace of mind
This is a great point, and a great point. I feel like it ties into my belief that career-guidance material are pretty much useful only to people who are already from, at least, a white-collar background. It's like they're all intended to tell people how to move up the latter, with none of them acknowledging that many/most people need to know how to get on the ladder to begin with.
posted by mattwan at 7:00 AM on January 1, 2019 [6 favorites]
This is a great point, and a great point. I feel like it ties into my belief that career-guidance material are pretty much useful only to people who are already from, at least, a white-collar background. It's like they're all intended to tell people how to move up the latter, with none of them acknowledging that many/most people need to know how to get on the ladder to begin with.
posted by mattwan at 7:00 AM on January 1, 2019 [6 favorites]
Women’s shoe reviews from customers are littered with commentary on how the shoe was a little pinchy or slightly too large or too small or rubbed a bit on the ankle or was janky in some other way...but the reviewer will keep them anyway because they are “just so cute” or “a great price!” I can’t help but get so pissed at these customers. I hate shopping because I’m frugal, hate hunting for “deals” and want quality that lasts (because I hate shopping) but trying to chase quality in the women’s section at any middle class price point is near impossible.
And all you men here who splurged on military hiking boots or one suit that you wear to every event for ten years....well, it’s maddening. And it’s not lost on me that she bought men’s boots! Let’s add a few more systemic, capitalist forces to the theory about who can get ahead.
posted by amanda at 7:43 AM on January 1, 2019 [16 favorites]
And all you men here who splurged on military hiking boots or one suit that you wear to every event for ten years....well, it’s maddening. And it’s not lost on me that she bought men’s boots! Let’s add a few more systemic, capitalist forces to the theory about who can get ahead.
posted by amanda at 7:43 AM on January 1, 2019 [16 favorites]
Just popping back in to say that the article on economic class vs. social class linked from the Vimes Boots Theory article is excellent. (It has an entire section—VI—on higher education and it's role in social mobility, which basically states the point I was trying to make above, but in a much better way.)
It also links to a whole bunch of other fascinating articles.
I have so many open tabs
send help
posted by ragtag at 7:45 AM on January 1, 2019 [10 favorites]
It also links to a whole bunch of other fascinating articles.
I have so many open tabs
send help
posted by ragtag at 7:45 AM on January 1, 2019 [10 favorites]
MetaFilter: it is probably best if you don't let yourself iterate too much unless you actually really enjoy the iterating
posted by Spathe Cadet at 8:13 AM on January 1, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Spathe Cadet at 8:13 AM on January 1, 2019 [3 favorites]
Just popping back in to say that the article on economic class vs. social class linked from the Vimes Boots Theory article is excellent.
It really is, especially when it reaches the final section where, after describing the construction and importance of social class, the author then admits:
I feel the need for a disclaimer of sorts. I am writing about class and some of the injustices of classism, but I do not particularly pretend to position myself as an enemy of classism: I'm pretty classist.
And by "pretty classist", I don't mean in the sense of "Everybody's a Little Bit Racist" or "gee, internalized misogyny is hard to totally eradicate". No, I mean closer to Segregation and PUAs.
Which, for me, is something really difficult to deal with given how I seem no longer to be able to fit with my earlier social class in no small part due to my economic class which has become magnified via aging in ways I didn't expect. I've grown to think the importance of class and perception of it changes over time as we lose "potential" and have to rely more on proof of accomplishment to determine our place.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:28 AM on January 1, 2019 [7 favorites]
It really is, especially when it reaches the final section where, after describing the construction and importance of social class, the author then admits:
I feel the need for a disclaimer of sorts. I am writing about class and some of the injustices of classism, but I do not particularly pretend to position myself as an enemy of classism: I'm pretty classist.
And by "pretty classist", I don't mean in the sense of "Everybody's a Little Bit Racist" or "gee, internalized misogyny is hard to totally eradicate". No, I mean closer to Segregation and PUAs.
Which, for me, is something really difficult to deal with given how I seem no longer to be able to fit with my earlier social class in no small part due to my economic class which has become magnified via aging in ways I didn't expect. I've grown to think the importance of class and perception of it changes over time as we lose "potential" and have to rely more on proof of accomplishment to determine our place.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:28 AM on January 1, 2019 [7 favorites]
Just popping back in to say that the article on economic class vs. social class linked from the Vimes Boots Theory article is excellent.
Oh my, yes.
Which, for me, is something really difficult to deal with given how I seem no longer to be able to fit with my earlier social class in no small part due to my economic class which has become magnified via aging in ways I didn't expect.
Oh my, yes. The weird thing about changing your social class is that you will never totally feel like you fit in with either your original class or your new one. Or maybe that's just me; I've probably never totally fit in anywhere ever, so it's hard to say.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:10 AM on January 1, 2019 [7 favorites]
Oh my, yes.
Which, for me, is something really difficult to deal with given how I seem no longer to be able to fit with my earlier social class in no small part due to my economic class which has become magnified via aging in ways I didn't expect.
Oh my, yes. The weird thing about changing your social class is that you will never totally feel like you fit in with either your original class or your new one. Or maybe that's just me; I've probably never totally fit in anywhere ever, so it's hard to say.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:10 AM on January 1, 2019 [7 favorites]
This does assume that you will have the cash eventually, at least before the interest on the credit cards hunts you down. It also assumes that the only Vimes-applicable purchase you need to make in the near future is your boots, that everything in your life will proceed as predicted, and that you will not need to unexpectedly replace any metaphorical boots as you pay off your literal boots.
Setting aside whether you would be equally screwed, if not moreso, in the absence of credit, the more practical concern here is interest. Siderea posits an ROI of 40 percent, and I figured that was pretty good. It sounded impressive, considering usury laws limit credit cards to 30 percent, but this is realized over 14 years. As I sit and do the math now, it's clear it represents an Annual Percentage Yield (APY) of around 4 percent.
So these boots fall into that grey area of a few percent better what you could get putting $200 into a bank savings account, but less valuable than you could borrow from that same bank for. On the one hand, acquiring financial knowledge like this is not free, and non-trivial to apply; but on the other hand do we really think class is about spending time and effort to harness an extra 2 percent APY on personal durable goods?
I think not.It's people with things like dollar for dollar 401k matching; stock purchase plans with APY's in the 60 percent range, and whatever the hell Mitt Romney did to get $100 million into a Individual Retirement Account (IRA) while the rest of us can only put in $5.5k a year at best. It's about the baggage with do or do not bring with us into adulthood, like the morality of briefly carrying debt or accepting food stamps even when it's in the best interest of you and your children. Or the morality of investing your IRA into private equity carried interest with your employer.
posted by pwnguin at 1:07 PM on January 1, 2019
Setting aside whether you would be equally screwed, if not moreso, in the absence of credit, the more practical concern here is interest. Siderea posits an ROI of 40 percent, and I figured that was pretty good. It sounded impressive, considering usury laws limit credit cards to 30 percent, but this is realized over 14 years. As I sit and do the math now, it's clear it represents an Annual Percentage Yield (APY) of around 4 percent.
So these boots fall into that grey area of a few percent better what you could get putting $200 into a bank savings account, but less valuable than you could borrow from that same bank for. On the one hand, acquiring financial knowledge like this is not free, and non-trivial to apply; but on the other hand do we really think class is about spending time and effort to harness an extra 2 percent APY on personal durable goods?
I think not.It's people with things like dollar for dollar 401k matching; stock purchase plans with APY's in the 60 percent range, and whatever the hell Mitt Romney did to get $100 million into a Individual Retirement Account (IRA) while the rest of us can only put in $5.5k a year at best. It's about the baggage with do or do not bring with us into adulthood, like the morality of briefly carrying debt or accepting food stamps even when it's in the best interest of you and your children. Or the morality of investing your IRA into private equity carried interest with your employer.
posted by pwnguin at 1:07 PM on January 1, 2019
I too wish she would have talked about what boots she bought. I thought it was actually a really interesting article because she used Vimes Boot Theory to move down the social and economic ladder rather than up.
The middle section about opportunity cost and missed opportunities I thought was a miss because she used opportunity cost in the same way that 'economists' do to evaluate the value of a new highway interchange or how many billions that office workers discussing the Super Bowl costs companies - ie, it approximated the concept of 'opportunity cost' but was total nonsense. Also the difficulty of getting a therapist job in Boston was way overstated, but I guess everyone thinks their job market and job search is the most difficult.
I also find it interesting she can find good-enough boots at Goodwill, but doesn't consider what that means. I mean, the idea that people give good stuff to Goodwill in the first place basically requires a huge amount of social and economic inequity to exist. If you go to Goodwill in even a middle class place, it's where you find the stuff that doesn't sell even at garage and estate sales.
I also think the distinctions between social and economic class are way overstated, and she does it (unknowingly perhaps). In her original software job, she probably could have gotten away with Payless Shoes because it's a high economic job where the social cues matter much less, and because high economic class jobs don't produce nearly as much wear and tear on clothes. My co-workers and I discuss this a lot - holding a constant weight matters way more than clothing quality in our middle class profession. I have plenty of shirts I regularly wear that were bought cheap and are old enough to vote because I haven't gained that much weight.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:13 PM on January 1, 2019
The middle section about opportunity cost and missed opportunities I thought was a miss because she used opportunity cost in the same way that 'economists' do to evaluate the value of a new highway interchange or how many billions that office workers discussing the Super Bowl costs companies - ie, it approximated the concept of 'opportunity cost' but was total nonsense. Also the difficulty of getting a therapist job in Boston was way overstated, but I guess everyone thinks their job market and job search is the most difficult.
I also find it interesting she can find good-enough boots at Goodwill, but doesn't consider what that means. I mean, the idea that people give good stuff to Goodwill in the first place basically requires a huge amount of social and economic inequity to exist. If you go to Goodwill in even a middle class place, it's where you find the stuff that doesn't sell even at garage and estate sales.
I also think the distinctions between social and economic class are way overstated, and she does it (unknowingly perhaps). In her original software job, she probably could have gotten away with Payless Shoes because it's a high economic job where the social cues matter much less, and because high economic class jobs don't produce nearly as much wear and tear on clothes. My co-workers and I discuss this a lot - holding a constant weight matters way more than clothing quality in our middle class profession. I have plenty of shirts I regularly wear that were bought cheap and are old enough to vote because I haven't gained that much weight.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:13 PM on January 1, 2019
If you go to Goodwill in even a middle class place, it's where you find the stuff that doesn't sell even at garage and estate sales.
No, there are people who give directly to Goodwill because they want to help out that particular charity and not because it's the donation-of-last-resort destination.
posted by hippybear at 8:23 PM on January 1, 2019 [3 favorites]
No, there are people who give directly to Goodwill because they want to help out that particular charity and not because it's the donation-of-last-resort destination.
posted by hippybear at 8:23 PM on January 1, 2019 [3 favorites]
My co-workers and I discuss this a lot - holding a constant weight matters way more than clothing quality in our middle class profession.
Wait, what?
posted by hippybear at 8:24 PM on January 1, 2019 [2 favorites]
Wait, what?
posted by hippybear at 8:24 PM on January 1, 2019 [2 favorites]
If you go to Goodwill in even a middle class place, it's where you find the stuff that doesn't sell even at garage and estate sales.
I take stuff to my preferred charity-run shops all the time without ever trying to sell it via a garage sale or Craigslist—selling something takes a certain amount of time and effort, and the value I expect to realize from the sale needs to exceed that.
In fact (just to bring this full circle) my wife came into a pair of unworn, very sturdy, very expensive boots via a clothing swap, which it turns out she can't use. She's been trying to sell them on Craigslist, and even at a fraction of their retail price, she's had almost no nibbles.
posted by adamrice at 11:08 AM on January 2, 2019 [1 favorite]
I take stuff to my preferred charity-run shops all the time without ever trying to sell it via a garage sale or Craigslist—selling something takes a certain amount of time and effort, and the value I expect to realize from the sale needs to exceed that.
In fact (just to bring this full circle) my wife came into a pair of unworn, very sturdy, very expensive boots via a clothing swap, which it turns out she can't use. She's been trying to sell them on Craigslist, and even at a fraction of their retail price, she's had almost no nibbles.
posted by adamrice at 11:08 AM on January 2, 2019 [1 favorite]
If I have any extra stuff my first option is to see if I know anyone who might want it and if not then it goes to the Diabetes Association or one of those donation boxes. It isn't worth it for me to try to re-sell it because my stuff wasn't that valuable to begin with. My wife and her friends do a group garage sale every year and every year I think they'd be better off just donating everything and spending the day of the garage sale doing something else.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 12:23 PM on January 3, 2019
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 12:23 PM on January 3, 2019
My mom and her friend used to do a group yard sale and donate the proceeds to brain cancer research, for several years after the friend's husband died of a glioblastoma.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:54 PM on January 3, 2019
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:54 PM on January 3, 2019
My co-workers and I discuss this a lot - holding a constant weight matters way more than clothing quality in our middle class profession.
Wait, what?
I believe the idea here is that, in a white collar job, the thing most likely to render your clothes unusable would be changes to your body rather than wear and tear, because there's just not a lot to wear or tear your clothes sitting at a desk all day.
posted by gideonfrog at 5:04 PM on January 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
Wait, what?
I believe the idea here is that, in a white collar job, the thing most likely to render your clothes unusable would be changes to your body rather than wear and tear, because there's just not a lot to wear or tear your clothes sitting at a desk all day.
posted by gideonfrog at 5:04 PM on January 3, 2019 [2 favorites]
I just found these which seem to be Danner sneakers?
As a follow-up to my previous comment, mr hippybear bought a pair of these and he has them now and they are light as air and look like they're super durable and comfortable like one would expect from Danner. I don't even wear sneakers, and I'm thinking of getting a pair for myself!
posted by hippybear at 11:30 PM on January 7, 2019
As a follow-up to my previous comment, mr hippybear bought a pair of these and he has them now and they are light as air and look like they're super durable and comfortable like one would expect from Danner. I don't even wear sneakers, and I'm thinking of getting a pair for myself!
posted by hippybear at 11:30 PM on January 7, 2019
Agree with gideonfrog. I have perfectly acceptable business casual clothing I can't wear due to weight fluctuation, so I have to buy more. It's far more rare for my work clothing - even though I buy it cheaply - to actually wear out or tear.
There's no point on spending hundreds on classic professional clothing only to have it become unwearable when I gain or lose 5-15 pounds due to depression, changes in medication, etc. Thus, I shop the sales and thrift stores.
posted by bunderful at 5:58 AM on January 8, 2019
There's no point on spending hundreds on classic professional clothing only to have it become unwearable when I gain or lose 5-15 pounds due to depression, changes in medication, etc. Thus, I shop the sales and thrift stores.
posted by bunderful at 5:58 AM on January 8, 2019
« Older Knife, Paper, Octopus | What lady would take mathematics instead of Latin? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ryanrs at 1:40 AM on December 31, 2018 [11 favorites]