[ SECRET POST #5918 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5918 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 36 secrets from Secret Submission Post #847.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Hmm. I kind of agree with this principle, and kind of don't. When it comes to footwear specifically, I've had pairs of cheap boots (say $60) that I wore into the ground, and they've lasted me two to three years with heavy wear. We'll say they lasted two years; that would make them around $30 per year. I also have fairly expensive boots ($350), which are five years old at this point, and while the uppers are in excellent condition, I've had to replace the heel caps three times ($20 per time), and I will soon have to have the heel repaired more comprehensively ($75). I anticipate easily getting another ten years out of them, with three more heel-cap replacements over that time. So the total cost will work out to around $545 over ten years, coming in at around $55 per year. So, not cheaper per year than the cheapo boots that crapped out after two years.

However, the more expensive boots are unquestionably more comfortable, and they also unquestionably look nicer. When they're ten, they will most likely STILL be more comfortable and look nicer than the cheapos at six months old.

It's not that I disagree with this principle, exactly. I've been poor most of my life, and I have no desire to make it seem like having money doesn't make almost everything considerably easier, because it fucking does. But IDK, my personal experience has been that while buying the cheap version of most things DOES result in minor monetary saving over time, the cheaper versions almost inevitably look/feel/perform noticeably worse, plus there's the stress of worrying about how long cheap stuff is going to last, and the added time and energy that goes into replacing cheap stuff more frequently.

[(Anonymous)]

SA - It does however bear saying that there are other permutations of this principle--i.e. that being well-off saves you money--which are absolutely true. It's purely this one specific permutation of the principle that I'm quibbling with.

[(Anonymous)]

Sixty dollars are not cheap boots, people who are poor are buying the sub twenty dollar boots. Check your privilege.

[(Anonymous)]

Wow, where the hell are you shopping that you can find 20 dollar boots?! Pass me a link.

[(Anonymous)]

I can't guarantee the quality, but...


https://www.walmart.com/ip/Brahma-Men-s-Escott-Wide-Width-6-Soft-Toe-Work-Boots/50922587?fulfillmentIntent=In-store&athbdg=L1600

[(Anonymous)]

Right? Boots cost more than that even at the discount places like TJ Maxx.

[(Anonymous)]

For real! Wherever it is, I can almost guarantee it's in the US, and even then that seems like it must be some clearance-bin fast fashion pricing.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah I haven’t seen boots under $20 in 5-6 years and even those were rare fast fashion on steep clearance prices. Cheap shitty boots now are more like $30-40 on steep clearance where I live and 53% of my county lives below the poverty line. (Our state average is 13%)

[(Anonymous)]

DA, but if you need work boots, hit up a military surplus store in person or online. They are built to last.

Poke around and you can find $20 boots. https://militaryuniformsupply.com/products/military-uniform-supply-black-jungle-boots-mens-combat-boots?variant=11053478215716&srsltid=Ad5pg_FXT3I6zIGa1zP7NvwPvDMHYKTsQUStlBgGZOiotNOHIxIEqYnZ7is

[feotakahari]

Minimum wage is pretty good in my area. We did sell thirty-dollar shoes at times, but relatively low-level restaurant staff could spend sixty, sometimes even eighty on a good pair.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh the irony. Check your privilege; where I live, $60 is about as cheap as it gets. I'm talking fast fashion garbage; $50 is the absolute bottom of the barrel.

Very gross of you to tell someone who relied on foodbanks for two decades, and had to take sink baths when they couldn't afford the hot water bill to "check their privilege," by the way. I CURRENTLY live below the poverty line, and I am living large compared to the existence I eked out in the past. You are a nitwit.

[(Anonymous)]

Grosser of you to make assumptions about someone clearly struggling more.

[(Anonymous)]

NO U

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, you do seem like the type to double down, rather than just apologize for being an asshat.