Sunday, November 2, 2008

Am I Missing a Chic Gene?



I got this interesting email Halloween morning and it got me to wondering.

I really do like shoes, bags, and other accessories (oddly, not jewelry) as much as the next woman, but c'mon!

Are these bags really that attractive to anyone for the mere price of $2450 (the Jimmy Choo, top center)?

Does anyone actually consider the purchase of these grossly overpriced practical items as an investment?

Are handbags the new real estate?
Am I just missing the point because I don't have that kind of cash to fling around?

Is this an urban vs. suburban vs. exurban priority thing?

Am I just a cranky old witch?

Just wondering.

3 comments:

Fiddler said...

I'm missing the same gene (in spades), and I think it was replaced by the fleece-loving, comfortable-shoes-wearing gene.

greenchickadee said...

Everything you said could have come out of my mouth. This quote came from a more recent post link of yours:
"when young people can all go to college, when everybody’s got decent health care, when everybody’s got a little more money at the end of the month – then guess what? Everybody starts spending that money, they decide maybe I can afford a new car, maybe I can afford a computer for my child. They can buy the products and services that businesses are selling and everybody is better off."

So, are trendy handbags part of that American dream? Because in front of me in the line today a lady pulled out her foodstamp card from her real Coach handbag (like $450) to pay for her cartload of food, then I followed her out to her '07 Yukon where I watched her clean out the back seat onto the parking lot before loading her groceries in. Nice. Very nice. Keep dreaming Americans!

LB said...

Good point, GreenChickadee.

Perhaps that's our next "right" - the right to trendy handbags. It makes about as much sense in principal as the other much-touted "rights" that are actually goods and services produced by others.