Reverse pay-for-post: pay-for-no-post

[Brad]

$2,000 would set me up in a nice 2 bedroom house for 4 months where I live.

[Tralala]

Originally Posted by Boofo

That's called being "phony" I think.

Perhaps. But sometimes, for some people, that works for them. Why judge?

[Boofo]

Originally Posted by Tralala

Perhaps. But sometimes, for some people, that works for them. Why judge?

Think about that statement. You think you're not judged by the designer clothes you where? (which is why you wear them as you say) They can judge you but I can't? Now I'm hurt.

Well, I'm over that now.

[Freesteyelz]

Originally Posted by MPDev

It's a choice of lifestyle, that's all. Do you still shop at WalMart when you can afford Target? Does doing so make you spoiled or undisciplined when you buy Polo instead of the Kate Jaskson you were used to? Do you still buy $20 Vans when you can afford a decent pair of Nike's? I love Tommy Bahamma shirts at $130 a pop; nothing wrong with buying a good shirt.

It doesn't mean they are spoiled, it's just that their scale of what makes them think twice before spending it is different than others.

It's an undisciplined and spoiled lifestyle.

I understand the Ralph Lauren/Polo lifestyle first-hand. Yet, I would not consider spending money to get rid of someone in a forum. If money becomes the answer to problems outside the economics and necessaties it is a matter of being spoiled and undisciplined.

[Tralala]

Originally Posted by Boofo

You think you're not judged by the designer clothes you where? (which is why you wear them as you say) They can judge you but I can't? Now I'm hurt.

I don't think you read closely what I wrote; I think you're expressing a knee-jerk reaction.

I never said I wear designer clothes.

I simply said that such "status symbols" (as phony as they may be) do have an effect in our society. And some people decide that's a price they are willing to pay, in order to get the results they desire.

That doesn't make them bad people. Just means their priorities are different than yours.

[Freesteyelz]

I don't know Boofo but I doubt that he took anything personally, Tralala.

BTW...Wearing designer clothing does not equate to being "phony". Does it have an affect how you feel? Sure. Does it necessarily improve your self-worth or status? No. What you wear is an extention of yourself but it does not nor should it define you. Only your actions do.

[Logikos]

Excellent point Freesteyelz.

I would spend my money on Mountain Dew

[Boofo]

Originally Posted by Freesteyelz

I don't know Boofo but I doubt that he took anything personally, Tralala.

BTW...Wearing designer clothing does not equate to being "phony". Does it have an affect how you feel? Sure. Does it necessarily improve your self-worth or status? No. What you wear is an extention of yourself but it does not nor should it define you. Only your actions do.

I didn't take anything personally. This is just a conversation among friends.

In affecting how it makes you feel, doesn't that really constitute a form of phoniness, to have to depend on something like designer clothers to make yourself feel better? Phoniness to yourself, if no one else. How you feel does affect your ideas and actions, too.

[Freesteyelz]

Originally Posted by LiveWire

I would spend my money on Mountain Dew

Mmm. I haven't had Mountain Dew, let alone soda, for years now. I do miss it at times.

Originally Posted by Boofo

I didn't take anything personally. This is just a conversation among friends.

I know. I was speaking on your behalf. :classic:

Originally Posted by Boofo

In affecting how it makes you feel, doesn't that really constitute a form of phoniness, to have to depend on something like designer clothers to make yourself feel better? Phoniness to yourself, if no one else. How you feel does affect your ideas and actions, too.

Not necessarily. Phony by definition is being untrue to yourself and to others. Wearing something that makes you feel good is actually a positive, not only emotionally but chemically too (endorphines). What makes us feel good is not always clear and it is different for each person. What is clear is that it's conditional based. If it's something managable it becomes tangible and as a result it becomes true.

Now your choice of wording "depend" will not hold true for everyone that wears designer clothing. For example, I only wear Ralph Lauren/Polo. There are times when I'm just not up to par and nothing I wear would change that fact. I don't depend on the brand of clothing to make me something that I'm not.

For my well-being I need a balance, so does everyone else. However you get to that stage is irrelavent. If it's legal and it doesn't harm anyone it's all good. If clothing is one factor then so be it.

[MPDev]

How you dress and the image you project has as much to do with your success as ability, confidence and opportunity. I wouldn't be caught dead walking into a meeting with potential investors wearing a shirt from an off the shelf retailer; and you can bet if I did that multi-million dollar investment I was looking for wouldn't happen either.

Sure, Sam Walton could get away with it; but there are always exceptions to the rule.