Hacker News Reader

Comment by drdec | Hacker News Reader

Most of the people on this board are upper middle to lower upper class (thinking American, apologies to my non US friends). Such people can afford products outside the grasp of most Americans.

What naturally happens to such products is that the manufacturers find a way to broaden their customer base. They find ways to bring the price point down so they can sell more.

For most people this is a boon. They can afford a luxury or convenience they otherwise wouldn't be able to. Overall most people are better off when this happens.

For the first group of people however, they are worse off. They cannot get the same product as before. Such is life.

View on HN

Your parents, lower middle class in the 80s, could afford a washing machine that lasts 40 years.

You, lower middle class in the 2020s, can afford with the same resources a washing machine that lasts 5 years and is no more effective than your parents' (but has an app).

In the sense of the parent comment, you are fortunate that the magic of capitalism currently produces such cheap washing machines that even people as poor as you can afford them. But from another angle, the purchasing power of the lower middle class has sunk over time, and quality has degraded to match because durable products have now become "outside the grasp of most Americans".

It lasted 40 years because when it broke they called the repairman. Now when stuff breaks people just buy a new one and complain that it doesn’t last as long.

The repairman charges $150 labor and offers to fix it by replacing a single part that costs half the purchase price of the machine. Seems likely you'd be better off buying the new machine.

Bought Speed Queen TC5 9 years ago - ugly, no app or buttons, but runs as a tank, cleans much better and faster, no detergent residue.

When I asked movers to replace existing LG with my speed queen, they asked why - LG looks so much better.

It's what consumer wants, others go a-11.

My parents have no washing machine in 80s, because it cost 1/4 of yearly salary(USSR)

The parable of boots seems apt here. In the extreme, expensive pair can last for a decade while people who can only afford the cheap pair will have to keep buying a new one every year.

Yes, the fact that any family can afford a new shelving unit is great! But the fact that it’ll last them just a few years is not good; they’ll spend more in the long run

Except it's getting so difficult to find the companies producing the more durable alternative, so everyone is forced to buy the flimsy piece that falls apart

It is not that hard, if you do the minimum effort to educate yourself. For example 20 years ago I struggled to find motorcycle gear in Eastern Europe, it was very hard and stuff was extremely expensive for the salaries in this region. I bought initially cheap stuff that broke fast, then the next generation I knew what to buy and I have now equipment that is over 10 years old that I am using with great pleasure. It is similar in most cases I have to buy something, but it takes some effort to look for options.

Only the parable does not work. Objectively. The fact that the poor are forced to spend more because they cannot afford something is complete bs. I can't imagine any area (maybe except perhaps interaction with government bureaucracy) where the parable would be relevant.

Shoes that last a decade are cost a lot more than five pairs of cheap shoes that last two years. And the same with furniture and everything else.

"Pay less in the long run" is a pure marketing ploy for dumb pompous people with money to make them pay more.

$35 for the cheapest thinnest plastic shelving you can buy. The entire HDX line is the lowest quality stuff known to man.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/HDX-4-Tier-Easy-Assembly-Scratch...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com