NYT: "Wait a Minute. How Can They Afford That When I Can’t?"

[Bloop Bloop]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

[former player]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

Inherited watches are a pain in the arse.  You have to keep them safe, and get them valued and repaired, and try to work out the best way to sell them.  If you are not interested in watches the whole thing is just an added difficulty at the time you least want added difficulties.  If you are thinking that your kids will thank you for handing them an expensive watch when you die please think again.

[big_owl]

My wife got me a Breitling as an engagement gift a decade and a half ago.  I've worn that thing every day for almost 15yrs and I'll be damned if it doesn't still keep perfect time.  Just this past weekend I noticed some moisture in it so I have to go to Annapolis to get it sent out and fixed.  Life's too short for cheap ass watches.

Life is too expensive for fancy watches.

Scratches head and double checks what forum we're on...

If artisanal watches are your thing and worth spending thousands and thousands of dollars on, then cool, enjoy your watch. However if keeping time is your priority, countless nurses with cheap scrub watches would argue that you don't need an artisanal timepiece, even when keeping time is critical to keeping people alive.

Everyone has different financial priorities and means. I don't think it's anti-Mustachian to have a nice watch as long as it's well within your financial band. I mean when you look at the price of a nice watch and compare that to the price of say daycare or private school then it pales in comparison. And at least you get something tangible out of the watch.

One of the reasons I want to retire early is that I want to be able to spend a lot of quality time with kids. I think I could educate them a lot better than any school. So I guess that makes me a member of the aspirational class talked about in the article. I will never pay for private school (no value for money, plus I think having the diversity of a public school makes kids more well-rounded) nor private tuition, but I guess in paying my retirement time and devoting part of that to nurturing the kids, I'm spending a far more valuable and scarce resource.

Spending on anything isn't "anti Mustachian", each individual has their priorities; however, I take issue with sentiments like "life is too short for cheap watches", when watches are possibly the most obvious example where goibg cheap gets you just as much utility for thousanths of the price.

That said, I have no problem with people valuing artisanal time pieces, I just don't buy for a fucking second that they have any real life value above a dollar store watch.

I did some math and I've looked at my watch tens of thousands of times since it was gifted to me and I do get a little moment of joy because it reminds me of my wife when I use it. It also has a slide rule built into it which I use quite regularly for off the cuff math.

But aside from sentimental value it's proved much more reliable than shitty watches with plastic or cheap glass crystals.  I used to go through a watch per year because they get so scratched up.  But the sapphire does not scratch so the watch itself looks new though the band is getting beat up.

I also like nice calculators...

Bwahaa, I totally forgot... My wife also has a $10k Rolex that she wears daily. She loves that watch and was recently talking about upgrading it.  Frankly I much prefer the Breitling over the Rolex but it makes her happy so there's that.

[mm1970]

I find this discussion of the military to pay for school interesting, as it overlooks the HUGE opportunity cost of joining the military if it's not something you really want to do.

There is someone in my family who did ROTC to pay for college.  Her dream was to get a PhD in physics and become a professor, but her family refused to pay for any college, despite their EFC being $12k or so.  So she did ROTC and took the most academically oriented job she could find, which came with five years of service.  Yes, she was being paid while she was in the military, but it was not the life she wanted for herself, especially since she is LGBT and this was during don't ask don't tell.  She wasn't able to start her PhD until she was 28, and started her career in earnest at almost 34.  All over $48k, which is not very much compared to her career earnings.

Hmm...sounds like she may have worked where I worked, assuming she was in the Navy, that is.  Not many women for sure.

My parents were poor and divorced, my dad refused to even fill out forms, much less pay for anything.  The university assumed $1800/yr from him (it would have been 0...which is was for my mom).  This meant: more loans, even after the ROTC scholarship.

So, it's not necessarily ONLY about $48k (it was her parents' choice to not pay), but essentially may have been a much  bigger $$ value (my total tuition was more than that).  EFC doesn't mean she wouldn't have had to take out more loans without ROTC.  I am NOT explaining myself well, and I'm sorry.

I met my husband in the Navy, and he had the same flow as your friend.  ROTC, engineering job in the Navy, left after 5 years to get a PhD (on the 7 year plan), started earning real $ at 33.  But he was actually earning real $ while an officer in the Navy AND our experience in the military was a HUGE help for both work after and grad school.  More focused.

[Metalcat]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

[Bernard]

I've had quite a few nice classic cars, and a few nice classic watches. Funny thing is, I always make money when selling!

My Breitling Navitimer Cosmonaute I bought for $1,600 and sold it a couple years later for $3,450, if memory serves me. Would be worth over $5K now.
I sold various Rolexes, including the one I inherited from my dad, and made money. Sold an early Heuer (pre-Tag), and made money. Still have a Tudor Homeplate Chrono that I'll be selling soon, and a couple of old Panerais, which I will probably keep. None of these watches will get cheaper as time passes by.

Is a fancy watch needed? Of course not! Neither is a Tesla or even Nissan Leaf. It's just that we all have things we like, value, and enjoy.

[big_owl]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

[Metalcat]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

Lol, you obviously don't know me.

ETA: "Life is too short for cheap cats" is now my DH's favourite phrase of all time. He literally hasn't stopped laughing since I quoted it to him.

[jeroly]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

Lol, you obviously don't know me.

ETA: "Life is too short for cheap cats" is now my DH's favourite phrase of all time. He literally hasn't stopped laughing since I quoted it to him.

[SimpleCycle]

I find this discussion of the military to pay for school interesting, as it overlooks the HUGE opportunity cost of joining the military if it's not something you really want to do.

There is someone in my family who did ROTC to pay for college.  Her dream was to get a PhD in physics and become a professor, but her family refused to pay for any college, despite their EFC being $12k or so.  So she did ROTC and took the most academically oriented job she could find, which came with five years of service.  Yes, she was being paid while she was in the military, but it was not the life she wanted for herself, especially since she is LGBT and this was during don't ask don't tell.  She wasn't able to start her PhD until she was 28, and started her career in earnest at almost 34.  All over $48k, which is not very much compared to her career earnings.

Hmm...sounds like she may have worked where I worked, assuming she was in the Navy, that is.  Not many women for sure.

My parents were poor and divorced, my dad refused to even fill out forms, much less pay for anything.  The university assumed $1800/yr from him (it would have been 0...which is was for my mom).  This meant: more loans, even after the ROTC scholarship.

So, it's not necessarily ONLY about $48k (it was her parents' choice to not pay), but essentially may have been a much  bigger $$ value (my total tuition was more than that).  EFC doesn't mean she wouldn't have had to take out more loans without ROTC.  I am NOT explaining myself well, and I'm sorry.

I met my husband in the Navy, and he had the same flow as your friend.  ROTC, engineering job in the Navy, left after 5 years to get a PhD (on the 7 year plan), started earning real $ at 33.  But he was actually earning real $ while an officer in the Navy AND our experience in the military was a HUGE help for both work after and grad school.  More focused.

Oh, you are right that a $12k EFC would mean $12k for her parents and probably more loans for her.  And I'm sure the time in the military has benefited her quite a bit, but it was a bitter pill to swallow given all the restrictions it put on her life.

And yes, you likely worked the same place and possibly were contemporaries!  Small world.

[big_owl]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

Lol, you obviously don't know me.

ETA: "Life is too short for cheap cats" is now my DH's favourite phrase of all time. He literally hasn't stopped laughing since I quoted it to him.

Idk, you've quoted it in three posts already. Makes me wonder if I struck a nerve. 

But in any case you'll spend more on your cat than I'll spend on my Breitling so whatever.  I have spent about $6k on my turtle's aquarium so I know the feeling. 

[Luck12]

Just because not everyone can do it does not mean that most can’t. I’ve yet to see these swathes of people who can’t work full-time while going to school.

Heck, my wife was a terrible student but managed to work full time and pay her way through 3/4 years. Student teaching took away that opportunity in her last year, but one year’s worth of student loans were a lot easier to manage than the large amount that others choose to take out.

Again that's great, but do you care at all that people lose out on opportunities because they have to work full time through college?   Working full time = less chance to attain a certain GPA and many companies have GPA cutoffs.   You are truncated and won't even get the chance to explain why your GPA isn't 3.9 or explain why you're so awesome for the job.   Do you care at all about trying to ameliorate the economic injustice in our society?   

Thanks to the many people who agree with me.    People who actually want to improve upon our existing system of inequality of opportunity, wow, the insanity of that. 

[KBecks]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

Lol, you obviously don't know me.

ETA: "Life is too short for cheap cats" is now my DH's favourite phrase of all time. He literally hasn't stopped laughing since I quoted it to him.

I get all my cats for free.

[dandarc]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

100%

If you value watches as jewelry, then they have whatever value you choose to assign to them. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to value.

However, I do take issue with people trying to justify personal taste and satisfaction with some kind of utility or inherent value.

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

Again, I have no problem with people assigning value to what they value, I literally just spent nearly $2000 on a fucking cat, we all have our priorities. I'm not about to say shit like "life is too short for cheap cats" just because I personally find value in my preferred cat breed.

Did I trigger you with my "life is too short" comment?   Seems that way.

Lol, you obviously don't know me.

ETA: "Life is too short for cheap cats" is now my DH's favourite phrase of all time. He literally hasn't stopped laughing since I quoted it to him.

I get all my cats for free.

Still not cheap, in my experience anyway.

[Metalcat]

I get all my cats for free.

Free cats come with free fur

[Kris]

I get all my cats for free.

Free cats come with free fur

The paradox of cats:

They are total freeloaders, and yet totally earn their keep.

[Bloop Bloop]

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

They don't even keep time better when compared to a simple quartz watch!

Otherwise, if you are going to talk about 'inherent value', then other than things like food or shelter, nothing has inherent value. Each person creates his or her inherent value. And so I think the person who said "life is too short for cheap watches" really meant "life is too short to not spend reasonable amounts on things that you assign inherent value to", and that makes a lot of sense to me. After all nearly everything that is not food or water comes down to personal taste and satisfaction.

[Samuel]

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

It's actually the opposite, time keeping wise. A $10 Casio with a quartz movement  is orders of magnitude more accurate than any watch with a mechanical movement, which nearly all high end collectible watches have.

But of course it ain't about accuracy or utility, fancy watches are about appreciating high end design and craftsmanship, communicating status, specific sentimental attachments, etc. They're absolutely luxury items, and as such I agree mustachians are duty bound to question the value per dollar they bring.

I think most here would agree that if you aren't FI yet you should be putting that money into index funds rather than wearing it on your wrist, but perhaps not.

[Metalcat]

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

They don't even keep time better when compared to a simple quartz watch!

Otherwise, if you are going to talk about 'inherent value', then other than things like food or shelter, nothing has inherent value. Each person creates his or her inherent value. And so I think the person who said "life is too short for cheap watches" really meant "life is too short to not spend reasonable amounts on things that you assign inherent value to", and that makes a lot of sense to me. After all nearly everything that is not food or water comes down to personal taste and satisfaction.

...shows what I know about watches

I haven't owned one since undergrad

[big_owl]

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

They don't even keep time better when compared to a simple quartz watch!

Otherwise, if you are going to talk about 'inherent value', then other than things like food or shelter, nothing has inherent value. Each person creates his or her inherent value. And so I think the person who said "life is too short for cheap watches" really meant "life is too short to not spend reasonable amounts on things that you assign inherent value to", and that makes a lot of sense to me. After all nearly everything that is not food or water comes down to personal taste and satisfaction.

...shows what I know about watches

I haven't owned one since undergrad

That hasn't stopped you from having strong opinions about what value other people should place on their watches though.

[Metalcat]

If you don't give a fuck about watches, then very expensive watches hold little value beyond very marginally holding time better.

They don't even keep time better when compared to a simple quartz watch!

Otherwise, if you are going to talk about 'inherent value', then other than things like food or shelter, nothing has inherent value. Each person creates his or her inherent value. And so I think the person who said "life is too short for cheap watches" really meant "life is too short to not spend reasonable amounts on things that you assign inherent value to", and that makes a lot of sense to me. After all nearly everything that is not food or water comes down to personal taste and satisfaction.

...shows what I know about watches

I haven't owned one since undergrad

That hasn't stopped you from having strong opinions about what value other people should place on their watches though.

???

I specifically said that I have no opinion about the value that other people put on watches. That's why I jokingly brought up spending thousands on a cat. We all have our priorities.

I interpreted "life is too short for cheap watches" to mean a generalization that cheap watches are shit. However, I'm totally amenable to being corrected that the statement was actually meant as a personal preference.

If you love your watch, then great. I love my weird ass expensive cat.

As I said, you clearly don't know me. I don't judge anyone for what they choose to spend on. I *do* tend to be a pain in the ass about generalizations though.
Not just here, I drive people crazy with it IRL too.

[nancyfrank232]

I’ve spent money on CKC purebred dogs, flavor of the year watches, S550, M2M suits, and lots of junk. You might as well spend it because you won’t be able to take it with you. Besides, if I didn’t spend it, somebody else sure as hell will

[Cassie]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

[Bloop Bloop]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

What's ridiculous about having a cat?

[former player]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

What's ridiculous about having a cat?

It's not a dog?

[BussoV6]

I get all my cats for free.

Free cats come with free fur

The paradox of cats:

They are total freeloaders, and yet totally earn their keep.

+1  Our cats give far more than they take...

[jeroly]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

What's ridiculous about having a cat?

Nothing is ridiculous about having a cat.
Spending $2,000 to purchase a cat from a breeder (and by doing so, encouraging more breeding) when there are thousands if not millions of lovely shelter cats desperate for homes that are available for free, well.

[RetiredAt63]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

What's ridiculous about having a cat?

Nothing is ridiculous about having a cat.
Spending $2,000 to purchase a cat from a breeder (and by doing so, encouraging more breeding) when there are thousands if not millions of lovely shelter cats desperate for homes that are available for free, well.

There is a huge difference between a dedicated breeder of a particular breed and a backyard breeder, just as the same difference exists for dogs. I don't know the finances for cats, but a good dog breeder is not likely to make much, if any, money on the puppies.  They are doing it for love of the breed.  Backyard breeders, on the other hand . . .  Can't say enough bad things about them, would never buy from them.

And my beloved dogs were all from breeders, all the same breed, because I just love that breed.  And all healthy, my maintenance costs were low until they got really old, because health is something that a good breeder is selecting for.

[Cranky]

That depends on what you consider "fair" or "right." Some people might consider it fair that people have to earn their own way without being subsidized by others

Ah. Well I agree with that point, but I actually think the US does that. We have community colleges and lower tier state universities with cheap tuition and plenty of out of state universities offer in state tuition to neighboring states.

Taken to its extreme, that gets a society back to where universities are very elite institutions with no state funding, attended only by the very wealthy.  Isn't a society better served by making education more accessible, not less?

The university system in the US, as far as I understand it, functions a lot like the medical system, great for those who can afford it, 2 tiered, and horrible if you are poor.

Canadian universities generally have 3 levels of tuition, in-Province students, out-of-province students, and international students.  McGill University is a world-class university (¹ #33), and look at its tuition fees.

https://www.mcgill.ca/undergraduate-admissions/yearly-costs

I suppose Quebec is a special case, high taxes and high support for post-secondary education.  CEGEP (= community college) has a 2 year pre-university program and a 3-year professional (technical) program - tuition is free for Quebec residents.


So I suppose I should look at Ontario, where Community Colleges charge fees.

University of Toronto, another world-class University (¹, #28)
https://utsc.utoronto.ca/admissions/tuition-fees

Algonquin College - I chose Vet tech because that has a lot of fairly expensive labs
https://www.algonquincollege.com/ro/pay/fee-estimator/?campus=ALL&startterm=2019F&residency=canadian&programFees=6320X01FWO#programDetail


¹ https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2019

(Just to show those are not fluke results, we also have University of British Columbia, #47, University of Alberta, # 109, McMaster University # 146, Université de Montréal # 149, University of Waterloo #163, etc. etc.)

Those all seem crazy expensive to me.

There are plenty of state universities in the US with better tuition than that - as ever, just as from your example, it’s living expenses that exclude people.

There are homeless students living in their cars at dh’s (very cheap) university.

Given Canada's climate living in your car as a student is not a good idea.
Pretty much every major Canadian city has at least one major university so students can live at home if they can manage the commute. It's small town and rural students who really get hit.

NE Ohio is not all that conducive to living in your car, either, as far as I’m concerned, but not everyone has a family who will let them live at home. I have actually known several high school students so spent a year or two coach surfing to finish high school.

We have strayed far from the point I was trying to make, which was that if a society decides to subsidize education it can.  If tuition is reasonable (I know, define "reasonable") then summer jobs and part time jobs can carry a lot of the costs.  Student loans can be used for housing if necessary.  And I have personally known lots of students who lived in what would be considered sub-standard housing while in school.  The "McGill ghetto" was named that for a reason.

One of the benefits of a strong community college system is that it provides training for a lot of jobs.
This is an interesting overview of the end result of the Canadian system.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/171129/dq171129a-eng.htm

Of course some people will have more of life's crap thrown at them, and their lives will be harder.  As others have discussed, life isn't fair.  But we can make it generally fairer than it is now.

I dunno what happened to the rest of my post. That's what happens when I tap away on my phone in the dark. I'm not disagreeing with you, really. I think that there is a lot of outrage about college costs in the US right now, but I think that there are plenty of ways around them. I just don't think those ways are accessible to everyone. College doesn't have to be more expensive in the US than in Canada.

I just am uneasy with a system that increasingly lets some families buy better SAT scores, while telling others that their kids should join the military if they want to go to college. (And the student vets at dh's college don't seem like they are having an easy financial time of it, either - they all seem to have jobs, too.)

[Metalcat]

Some of you are definitely on the wrong forum. Before spending money on ridiculous crap I would donate it to a cause I care about.

What's ridiculous about having a cat?

Nothing is ridiculous about having a cat.
Spending $2,000 to purchase a cat from a breeder (and by doing so, encouraging more breeding) when there are thousands if not millions of lovely shelter cats desperate for homes that are available for free, well.

I mean, I did specifically share it as an example of ridiculous spending...that was kind of the point.

Granted, I do have my reasons, but those would take away from my example being ridiculous.

[mm1970]

I find this discussion of the military to pay for school interesting, as it overlooks the HUGE opportunity cost of joining the military if it's not something you really want to do.

There is someone in my family who did ROTC to pay for college.  Her dream was to get a PhD in physics and become a professor, but her family refused to pay for any college, despite their EFC being $12k or so.  So she did ROTC and took the most academically oriented job she could find, which came with five years of service.  Yes, she was being paid while she was in the military, but it was not the life she wanted for herself, especially since she is LGBT and this was during don't ask don't tell.  She wasn't able to start her PhD until she was 28, and started her career in earnest at almost 34.  All over $48k, which is not very much compared to her career earnings.

Hmm...sounds like she may have worked where I worked, assuming she was in the Navy, that is.  Not many women for sure.

My parents were poor and divorced, my dad refused to even fill out forms, much less pay for anything.  The university assumed $1800/yr from him (it would have been 0...which is was for my mom).  This meant: more loans, even after the ROTC scholarship.

So, it's not necessarily ONLY about $48k (it was her parents' choice to not pay), but essentially may have been a much  bigger $$ value (my total tuition was more than that).  EFC doesn't mean she wouldn't have had to take out more loans without ROTC.  I am NOT explaining myself well, and I'm sorry.

I met my husband in the Navy, and he had the same flow as your friend.  ROTC, engineering job in the Navy, left after 5 years to get a PhD (on the 7 year plan), started earning real $ at 33.  But he was actually earning real $ while an officer in the Navy AND our experience in the military was a HUGE help for both work after and grad school.  More focused.

Oh, you are right that a $12k EFC would mean $12k for her parents and probably more loans for her.  And I'm sure the time in the military has benefited her quite a bit, but it was a bitter pill to swallow given all the restrictions it put on her life.

And yes, you likely worked the same place and possibly were contemporaries!  Small world.

I can imagine.  I was in ROTC when DADT passed.  I saw it as a step up, but always thought that people should be able to serve openly - so I was thrilled (but long out of the military) when that finally changed.  I did get to see at least one college ROTC classmate who was still in the Navy actually get to marry his now husband.  So that was nice.

[mm1970]

Just because not everyone can do it does not mean that most can’t. I’ve yet to see these swathes of people who can’t work full-time while going to school.

Heck, my wife was a terrible student but managed to work full time and pay her way through 3/4 years. Student teaching took away that opportunity in her last year, but one year’s worth of student loans were a lot easier to manage than the large amount that others choose to take out.

Again that's great, but do you care at all that people lose out on opportunities because they have to work full time through college?   Working full time = less chance to attain a certain GPA and many companies have GPA cutoffs.   You are truncated and won't even get the chance to explain why your GPA isn't 3.9 or explain why you're so awesome for the job.   Do you care at all about trying to ameliorate the economic injustice in our society?   

Thanks to the many people who agree with me.    People who actually want to improve upon our existing system of inequality of opportunity, wow, the insanity of that.

My biggest complaint was the assertion at the beginning that "anyone can do it" - later back-tracked to "most".  That's a huge pet peeve for me - people who see things in black and white and state "anyone", "everyone", "always", "never", etc.  I will always argue...

I'm also not a fan of any kind of thought process that states that 60-80 hr weeks are expected.  Whether it be actual paid work or work  + school, it is draining and not at all healthy for many, if not most, people.

[BTDretire]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

  If your buying an expensive watch, it's to put your wealth/status on display.
However, it could be fake news. No way to know without knowing what their debt is.

[charis]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

  If your buying an expensive watch, it's to put your wealth/status on display.
However, it could be fake news. No way to know without knowing what their debt is.

Yes, like anything else, including jewelry/rug/sofa, there is clearly a wide middle ground between dollar store quality and luxury class.  Most people who acquire and/or display expensive luxury items convince themselves that the quality is better, but that's true only up to a certain point.  Personally, when I see someone wearing an obviously expensive watch, I see it as a red flag (that they make poor financial decisions in general). 

[RetiredAt63]

I dunno what happened to the rest of my post. That's what happens when I tap away on my phone in the dark. I'm not disagreeing with you, really. I think that there is a lot of outrage about college costs in the US right now, but I think that there are plenty of ways around them. I just don't think those ways are accessible to everyone. College doesn't have to be more expensive in the US than in Canada.

I just am uneasy with a system that increasingly lets some families buy better SAT scores, while telling others that their kids should join the military if they want to go to college. (And the student vets at dh's college don't seem like they are having an easy financial time of it, either - they all seem to have jobs, too.)

I agree, better to subsidize at source (i.e. the college or university) than provide huge student loans that are hard to repay, and encourage institutions to increase tuition because they are not getting other financial support.

Re the Canadian tuition costs, multiply by about .75 to convert to US dollars.  Yes, the exchange rate sucks.

I have no idea what is happening re "buying" SAT scores - I don't think DD even did that, she went to CEGEP in Quebec and then transferred to University in Ontario.  Waaaay back when I was in HS, we did PSATs the year before graduation (sort of a practice run) and then SATs the graduation year.  I remember doing some prep for them, practice tests to see how they set things out, but nothing major.  But that was too long ago to be relevant.

I have zero military experience, but I could see that it would be good experience for someone who was young and undisciplined, to get some time to mature and learn self-discipline.  And possibly be exposed to career paths that were not even imagined before.  But solely as a way to afford education?  No.

[Bloop Bloop]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

  If your buying an expensive watch, it's to put your wealth/status on display.
However, it could be fake news. No way to know without knowing what their debt is.

You might just like certain nice things. Unless everything in your life comes from Goodwill, there is a degree of 'niceness' to most people's spending. True, you'd have to look at surrounding circumstances to see if the spending is proportionate to the earning.

Someone who spends $10k on a watch might be said to have made a bad financial decision...but what if she really loves watches? Or what if she is good enough at being a surgeon or investment banker that she earned $400k that year? I'd say she overall would have made a good financial decision - if the watch brings her a lot of joy - as long as her overall finances meet whatever savings/retirement goals she has.

[charis]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

  If your buying an expensive watch, it's to put your wealth/status on display.
However, it could be fake news. No way to know without knowing what their debt is.

You might just like certain nice things. Unless everything in your life comes from Goodwill, there is a degree of 'niceness' to most people's spending. True, you'd have to look at surrounding circumstances to see if the spending is proportionate to the earning.

Someone who spends $10k on a watch might be said to have made a bad financial decision...but what if she really loves watches? Or what if she is good enough at being a surgeon or investment banker that she earned $400k that year? I'd say she overall would have made a good financial decision - if the watch brings her a lot of joy - as long as her overall finances meet whatever savings/retirement goals she has.

Well I'd argue that her love in particular doesn't have any bearing on whether it was a good financial decision.  Neither really does her retirement goal.  I have lots of friends whose retirement goals of saving 10% of their income and retirement at 67 are on track despite the fact that they are usually in debt and paying interest. 

And why does she really love watches?  It strikes me that someone who "loves" expensive objects tends to be so enamored because of the high price tag and how wearing/displaying it makes them feel about themselves (ie, better).  Isn't that all there really is to a 10K watch? 

[Bloop Bloop]

"Well I'd argue that her love in particular doesn't have any bearing on whether it was a good financial decision.  "

That only makes sense if you are going to judge everyone by your standards. Which doesn't make much sense. For example imagine if the surgeon on 400k a year started judging others for not being able to save as much has her - "Why didn't they just get 1600 on their SATs and get into medical school like me? They should've made a good financial decision which would allow them to maximise their earnings."

"And why does she really love watches?  It strikes me that someone who "loves" expensive objects tends to be so enamored because of the high price tag and how wearing/displaying it makes them feel about themselves (ie, better).  Isn't that all there really is to a 10K watch? "

You are making presumptions about other people's values.

And let's say for example that you're right. But the surgeon still saves $200k a year and funnels it into her retirement. Can you criticise her for that - for self-indulgence?

[Davnasty]

It depends on whether you view the utility of a watch as only its timekeeping function or whether you see it as a piece of jewellery or even an heirloom, like a nice rug or sofa. If the latter, then the "real value" is far greater than a dollar store watch.

  If your buying an expensive watch, it's to put your wealth/status on display.
However, it could be fake news. No way to know without knowing what their debt is.

You might just like certain nice things. Unless everything in your life comes from Goodwill, there is a degree of 'niceness' to most people's spending. True, you'd have to look at surrounding circumstances to see if the spending is proportionate to the earning.

Someone who spends $10k on a watch might be said to have made a bad financial decision...but what if she really loves watches? Or what if she is good enough at being a surgeon or investment banker that she earned $400k that year? I'd say she overall would have made a good financial decision - if the watch brings her a lot of joy - as long as her overall finances meet whatever savings/retirement goals she has.

Well I'd argue that her love in particular doesn't have any bearing on whether it was a good financial decision.  Neither really does her retirement goal.  I have lots of friends whose retirement goals of saving 10% of their income and retirement at 67 are on track despite the fact that they are usually in debt and paying interest. 

And why does she really love watches?  It strikes me that someone who "loves" expensive objects tends to be so enamored because of the high price tag and how wearing/displaying it makes them feel about themselves (ie, better).  Isn't that all there really is to a 10K watch?

This is how I often feel about the "personal value" argument. I'm open to the idea that nice things that don't offer utility can still provide value if they truly bring someone joy, but that leaves the question of why does the item bring joy?

Is it an inherent attraction to a thing? Or is it because other people within your community or society at large have decided that the thing is valuable? Even the people participating in conspicuous consumption can make that argument, as in, "it makes me happy when other people think I'm very wealthy". Where does the justification end?

Then again, does it matter why something brings joy? Is the joy of conspicuous consumption real joy? perhaps. But generally speaking I suspect that this kind of joy is much more fleeting and susceptible to the hedonic treadmill than the kind of joy we get from other sources.

[Bloop Bloop]

I'm not sure that anyone has to justify personal value/joy to anyone but himself or herself. You're right to say that it's important to examine whether you're buying something because you genuinely like it or because you think you have to as part of herd mentality. But once that's examined, there's no more doubting to be done. I spent a fair sum on a car that I really like which sits in my garage when I'm not driving it and which almost none of my colleagues or anyone outside my family knows about (I think the car is great but I understand not everyone's a gear-head and I make no effort to convert people). Beyond justifying the purchase to myself (and justifying it financially), as you say, why does it matter why it brings me joy?

Sure, others might see it and wonder how much debt  I went into to purchase it (which is none of their business, really) but that's a matter for them and not me.

[Psychstache]

My biggest complaint was the assertion at the beginning that "anyone can do it" - later back-tracked to "most".  That's a huge pet peeve for me - people who see things in black and white and state "anyone", "everyone", "always", "never", etc.  I will always argue...

I'm also not a fan of any kind of thought process that states that 60-80 hr weeks are expected.  Whether it be actual paid work or work  + school, it is draining and not at all healthy for many, if not most, people.

I will always argue...

Pot, meet kettle  :)

[Just Joe]

I find this discussion of the military to pay for school interesting, as it overlooks the HUGE opportunity cost of joining the military if it's not something you really want to do.

There is someone in my family who did ROTC to pay for college.  Her dream was to get a PhD in physics and become a professor, but her family refused to pay for any college, despite their EFC being $12k or so.  So she did ROTC and took the most academically oriented job she could find, which came with five years of service.  Yes, she was being paid while she was in the military, but it was not the life she wanted for herself, especially since she is LGBT and this was during don't ask don't tell.  She wasn't able to start her PhD until she was 28, and started her career in earnest at almost 34.  All over $48k, which is not very much compared to her career earnings.

Hmm...sounds like she may have worked where I worked, assuming she was in the Navy, that is.  Not many women for sure.

My parents were poor and divorced, my dad refused to even fill out forms, much less pay for anything.  The university assumed $1800/yr from him (it would have been 0...which is was for my mom).  This meant: more loans, even after the ROTC scholarship.

So, it's not necessarily ONLY about $48k (it was her parents' choice to not pay), but essentially may have been a much  bigger $$ value (my total tuition was more than that).  EFC doesn't mean she wouldn't have had to take out more loans without ROTC.  I am NOT explaining myself well, and I'm sorry.

I met my husband in the Navy, and he had the same flow as your friend.  ROTC, engineering job in the Navy, left after 5 years to get a PhD (on the 7 year plan), started earning real $ at 33.  But he was actually earning real $ while an officer in the Navy AND our experience in the military was a HUGE help for both work after and grad school.  More focused.

The relative who went the ROTC route may have delayed their best salary by their time in the military but without the military they might never achieved their best salary otherwise.

I can say with much confidence that without my Navy enlistment, I would be a much less accomplished adult. The Navy helped me get my life/self/shit in order and be a better human being than I would have been without the Navy. They also paid for my college after the fact (GI Bill) b/c I did not have it together enough to push myself through university beforehand and thus do my time in service as a better paid officer. Had I been an officer I might have stayed in the Navy but part of my life-education was realizing after the fact (always after the fact) the opportunities I had available to me in the Navy. However, I was homesick or thought I was.

Not to say life hasn't been wonderful after the Navy b/c it has been. Met my wife, raised our kids, friends, good jobs, nice home, etc. I returned to a messy extended family in typical ways and had to establish boundaries for them. Once that was done, life got easier.

[Just Joe]

I've had quite a few nice classic cars, and a few nice classic watches. Funny thing is, I always make money when selling!

My Breitling Navitimer Cosmonaute I bought for $1,600 and sold it a couple years later for $3,450, if memory serves me. Would be worth over $5K now.
I sold various Rolexes, including the one I inherited from my dad, and made money. Sold an early Heuer (pre-Tag), and made money. Still have a Tudor Homeplate Chrono that I'll be selling soon, and a couple of old Panerais, which I will probably keep. None of these watches will get cheaper as time passes by.

Is a fancy watch needed? Of course not! Neither is a Tesla or even Nissan Leaf. It's just that we all have things we like, value, and enjoy.

Ever worry about watches being old fashioned and falling in resale value?

When I was a kid there was a whole category of old cars (Ford Model 'A' for example) that were hot topics. Now, not so much. Their values seem to be topped out or falling slightly. My kids' generation aren't nearly as interested in owning or driving a car as my generation was let alone owning antique cars with points ignition, mechanical brakes and six volt electrics.

I'd love to own a little Model 'A' and a gold pocket watch. ;)

[nancyfrank232]

Material things lose their luster shortly after purchase. Hedonic treadmill and all. Once I realized this, it became harder to covet material things

I was especially dumb and bought a lot of stupid stuff. Most people learn quicker

[nancyfrank232]

Personally, when I see someone wearing an obviously expensive watch, I see it as a red flag (that they make poor financial decisions in general).

This may be true generally but it may not

As a wealthy person once told me, “If you have stupid money, you can buy stupid things. Problems happen when you don’t have stupid money and you buy stupid things”

[Morning Glory]

I would not know an expensive watch if it bit me on the face. I did hear about the inherited furniture thing from an episode of Downton Abbey.

[dandarc]

If a watch bites you in the face, check if it is in fact an alligator wearing a watch.

[charis]

Personally, when I see someone wearing an obviously expensive watch, I see it as a red flag (that they make poor financial decisions in general).

This may be true generally but it may not

As a wealthy person once told me, “If you have stupid money, you can buy stupid things. Problems happen when you don’t have stupid money and you buy stupid things”

True, I can only go on my personal experience, which is that the person with the fanciest watch is usually one paycheck away from a crisis.  And the actual wealthy folks are much less flashy (the aspirational class I guess).

Most of our furniture is "inherited," as in I got it from a deceased relative or other family member.  Most of it probably isn't worth much but it's good quality and looks nice.  So, I may not always buy things second hand, but when I don't, they are usually free.

[Dave1442397]

Personally, when I see someone wearing an obviously expensive watch, I see it as a red flag (that they make poor financial decisions in general).

This may be true generally but it may not

As a wealthy person once told me, “If you have stupid money, you can buy stupid things. Problems happen when you don’t have stupid money and you buy stupid things”

I know a guy who has a lot of expensive watches. Last time I saw him, he was wearing a Rolex Skydweller, an 18k gold model that goes for at least $40,000.

The thing is, he makes so much money that spending $40k on a watch is meaningless. And yes, he has donated millions to charity, etc, so it's not like he spends it all on himself.

He would tell you that the financial decisions he made when he was young are what allow him to do and buy whatever he wants at this point in his life.

[Bloop Bloop]

Personally, when I see someone wearing an obviously expensive watch, I see it as a red flag (that they make poor financial decisions in general).

This may be true generally but it may not

As a wealthy person once told me, “If you have stupid money, you can buy stupid things. Problems happen when you don’t have stupid money and you buy stupid things”

I know a guy who has a lot of expensive watches. Last time I saw him, he was wearing a Rolex Skydweller, an 18k gold model that goes for at least $40,000.

The thing is, he makes so much money that spending $40k on a watch is meaningless. And yes, he has donated millions to charity, etc, so it's not like he spends it all on himself.

He would tell you that the financial decisions he made when he was young are what allow him to do and buy whatever he wants at this point in his life.

I think that the "if someone's wearing a nice watch/driving a nice car, he's probably one pay cheque away from being broke" assumption is an example of wishful thinking. Maybe if the nice car is just a typical brand new Honda you might be onto something. If the guy's wearing an IWC or driving a Bentley I'm fairly sure he's not one pay cheque away from being broke. That doesn't mean the car or watch was a good financial decision, but as you say, some people earn enough that they can get away with making "bad" financial decisions.

My own car is not a Bentley, but it is a lot more than what most here would consider reasonable, but once you take into account the low depreciation, the tax advantages of having a "business" vehicle which means I get to write off most of the running costs [even though it's only very nominally a work vehicle], and the joy it gives me, I think it was a great purchase. Everyone can make his or her own decisions.