I'm not rich enough to afford cheap things.

I made a recent comment using the above quotation, and in it I requested people to provide comment: Mostly, people understood the concept when I related it back to things they could understand.

It was the hallmark of a quote that an uncle of mine used constantly: ”Buy cheap, buy twice.” All of us want that ever elusive bargain, but few of us understand what that may mean. We all love the notion of ‘saving money’, but none of us enjoy the idea of spending it over and over on something that isn’t enduring, thereby negating that bargain proposition. It’s cheap to do something that is a stop-gap; it’s far more costly in the long run to do something meaningful.

Put another way, people of my age and generation remember “The Yugo”: A cheap, sub-$4000 car in 1986 dollars that looked like a no-frills box on 4 wheels, was essentially gutless, its little 1.1 liter engine consumed gas and spewed exhaust like there would be no tomorrow, and it had a reputation for reliability so spotty that it made a Land Rover seem downright unbreakable. However, it was ‘cheap’, and in more ways than one. Find one on the road today, and it’s likely to be more reviled than considered a near-antique.

The quality proposition is one that spreads to our daily lives.

Not that I am against the globalization of the economy, but the quality we once expected from products has given way to what has become a “throw-away” society. It’s something that has continued impact on our planet and eats away at our natural resources for the sake of economic growth and keeping our economic engine running. In reality, it’s also a ‘cheap short-term fix’ to the issue of what people won’t normally say: quality matters.

Suppose you had the choice of purchasing a $100 product that you would know had a very limited life, was not well manufactured, more prone to breakage, and so difficult to repair that you’d be more likely to throw it away than even make the attempt; or you had the choice of a $175 product that had much better reliability, was warranted for a longer period, and would be more likely to be of service for more years without the headaches. Framed that way, most intelligent people would spend a little more and avoid the hassles both now and later. Without that context, we purchase the bargain that really isn’t.

And I’ve been guilty of it also. We see a bargain, and all things being equal (which they typically aren’t), we head for the bargain priced good or service hoping we haven’t made the wrong choice.

Now some of this will simply seem to be stating the obvious; other elements are ones that you’ve probably seen written before. The pictorial assets i’ve placed into this post represent one segment of the market devoted to what we commonly consider as “luxury”. Those in the know will dispute that, and I’ll count myself among those numbers; in future articles, I’ll explain that stance in greater detail, along with why “necessity” and “frugality” become simply equated with ‘luxury’ based on one simple but incorrect parallel: cost. Quality has a price.

Now I could regale the stories of “why a shell-cordovan shoe that will last for 20 years is far superior to something made to last for two”, or “why does a classic become a classic”, but I won’t state that here. The bottom-line is for you to decide and determine your own value-based judgments. However, I’ll offer this observation: We can all choose more wisely and based on our needs.

For instance, do we need five pairs of shoes, or one good one? Do we know the difference between merchandise offered at a “manufacturer’s outlet” and that offered in regular retail?

I wanted to offer some examples to begin a meaningful foundation for how I’ll reposition this website in the coming weeks, Those who follow me on Facebook may understand the references, but as I change the content and focus on this site, I want to put that into the following perspective:

Certain of the economic experts have predicted that our slow growth and the debt situation in other economies place us in jeopardy of the dreaded “double-dip recession”: The phenomenon of never really emerging from an initial recession before experiencing a downturn into economic contraction.

We can expect belt-tightening, job losses, and further downgrade of our standards of living. We should expect this to mean that we can no longer afford “everything”, but rather begin to make tougher choices about where we invest consumer dollars. If you were always of a mindset to purchase ink refills for pens versus buying cheap disposable ones, or sticking with quality-manufactured clothes, you probably won’t notice any difference. If you were one who thrived on “cheap, disposable, consumerist” economic conditions, perhaps this provokes thought to reconsider that stance.

In the coming installments, I’ll make an effort to depict and review. Your comments — here and syndicated — are welcomed, even if they disagree.

Happy reading! And get ready for the ride!