But the handbag enthusiast is overspending by $19900. The car enthusiast is overspending by $65k. Both are doing it primarily for a feeling rather than utility. Both are making manageable payments. Would both be equally rational then?
First of all, learn what "utility" means when it comes to economics/utility functions.
Second, when did I say it was rational for someone to buy a car that is beyond their means?
Third, my definition of a "non-wealthy housewife" does not include one that can afford a $20,000 purse.
Fourth, learn how much "nicer cars" really cost (i.e., mine starts at about $36,900 and goes up to about $59,550).
Fifth, learn how percentages work. What is the price for an average handbag? What is the price for an average car? Divide $20,000 by the first and $XX,XXX by the second, and you'll find that the first is far more expensive on a percentage basis over the average of its kind than the second. Assuming the average car is ~$20,000, the "nicer car" I'm looking at is 2x-3x times that amount. Assuming the average handbag is even $1,000 (which is likely a
gross overestimation -- you used a $100 handbag, for your example [which is probably much closer to reality]), the "nicer purse" is 20x that amount. That would be like buying, at minimum, a $400,000 car (with extremely forgiving assumptions -- under your assumption, that would be like buying a $4,000,000 car [of which extremely few, if any, even exist, and which none of us are really considering buying]). I can't believe you even tried to compare the two, let alone even think that this comparison would somehow worthwhile, considering, as I've been saying this whole time, it all comes down to whether the purchasers are being rational (i.e., living within their means [i.e., utility functions]).
Sixth, you didn't even state the income/wealth levels of the hypothetical car buyer. Assuming they are the same as the hypothetical purse buyer (which would be the most rational way to construct this hypothetical [although, by this point, I've learned to not assume that you are very adept with reason]), then my math above would be highly relevant to their utility functions (although, additionally, the % of their income the average person spends on handbags vs. automobiles would also be a worthwhile metric to consider [and would almost certainly point in my favor as well]).
Seventh, how many handbags does the average woman own? I guarantee you it's far higher than the average number of cars a person owns.
I could probably come up with more problems with your construction, but I'm certain that will do.
Are you really this dense? Nice "trap" you just sprung there...
Are you really even an INTJ? (from the reps I've received, most the INTJs here don't seem to think so.)
You know, Marm, considering how you mentioned that you often feel you share the same opinions as this guy, that may well have to do with him actually being an NF...
And it costs a lot less than the car.
I am not a staunch defender of handbags, I just think Not_me makes an excellent point.
Honestly Marm, your positioning on this matter has really made me start to wonder whether, when you guys score low on T, it really does mean that you guys just suck at looking at things objectively. Your F-logic seems to work fine when it comes to personal (Fi) or interpersonal (Fe) emotions/ethics, but, when it comes to more T-based, apersonal matters, often times, you guys really seem to be fucking clueless...