• Deebster
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    9 months ago

    I like this idea of thinking about purchases in terms of per-use cost - this means you should spend more on mattresses and bed linen, underwear, office chairs and computer peripherals, etc.

    I’m also a fan of working out how much a price-tag is in terms of how long you need to work to get the equivalent cash. Would I be willing to work for an extra two hours to get this thing?

    • takeheart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The official term for this is COPS (cost per service) and it helps you greatly in making smart economic decisions. I calculated this for many household products about a decade ago and came to the conclusion that for many products it’s barely worth worrying about the cost while for others there’s hidden cost that should really warrant closer inspection. For instance dish soap has such low COPS that it almost doesn’t matter which brand you buy. Electric gadgets like fridges, washing machines or printers definitely warrant deliberation though because in the long run energy, refill, maintenance and repair costs will approach if not outstrip the initial purchase cost.

      And yeah, spending a big chunk on a good bed or chair hurts initially but you will spend literally thousands of hours in them. Something like a greeting card or fireworks on the other hand are cheaper in the moment but only yield limited utility in comparison.

      • Deebster
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Thank you for the term - I thought it was something like amortised cost but when I looked that up it describes something completely different.

    • Clent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sure just don’t allow it to justify over spending.

      The idea that one “should spend more” is not the correct way to think of what is actually an ROI decision, return on investment.

    • delirious_owl@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Eh, that suggests rich people can do more harm. I think about thr people who made it and where it will go after it breaks.

      Can I justify the exploitation of the worker and the land by this purchase?

      Usually I just buy used to avoid that externality, if possible.