Fidelity AMEX Platinum - I WIN!

Saar,

How would you define this card? Maybe not a Debit card, true...but then what? Most clearly it is NOT a "regular" Amex card, do we agree? AMEX clearly seems to define the upper "limit" on this card to be what you have in your account. That is NOT true for any of the regular AMEX cards. For the most part, the regular cards will give you more and more "room to spend" as each month goes by. Look at Dogman's experience with high AMEX charges over time...

Just wanted to ask....

 

I don't know if anyone has noticed or not, but this thread isn't about investing OR annual fees. It's a quality of life issue. I know exactly where MP$40 is coming from. I feel what she's saying very close to my heart. People should plan for retirement and save and invest money, yes that is very important. But life is about balance. We need to live life while we have our health and ability to live it and share it with those that we love. Two months before I graduated from college (at the age of 30, with a 5 yr old child) I went to Europe. I went to the little town in East Germany where they make Haribo gummi bears. Me and my best friend from high school used to eat gummi bears all the time and drop them into glasses of Mountain Dew and watch them swell up. In that town was a little perfume store where they sold bottles of perfume in the shape of gummi bears. They were many different colors. I was so excited because I knew my best friend would love it. I never got the chance to give it to her. 2 days after I got off the plane I was placing the perfume in her casket to be buried with her. The day before I returned she was killed by a drunk driver while on her way to work at 7:30 in the morning. It was all over the news stations. She and her husband had been trying to have their first baby. Life is too short. I've learned to live life to it's fullest, but not to the point where I create a prison for myself in financial debt. Mediation is the key. I have lived both extremes. Spending money I didn't have and also, to compensate for that, sometimes barely having money for groceries and gas. Lessons are learned though, I've learned mine. No one sat me down and taught me about financial responsiblity, not even in college. The school of hard knocks taught me that. I have lived a few of my life's dreams though, and I have my memories. I've stood in Rockefeller Center at Christmas, ate at the Plaza hotel, and been to Europe. If I die tomorrow, I can honestly say my life has been happy. MP$40, you go girl. Be happy. That's what I'm trying to do.

 

Stupid is as stupid does. From expensive luxury goods to politically incorrect underwear, dumb money is everywhere.

CNN Money May 28, 2002: 11:54 AM EDT

Stupid and money go hand in hand, don't they?

For the last week or so, I've been playing with some outrageously expensive stuff. The Robb Report, a magazine for people with lots of money in their pockets, did an issue called "Best of the Best," reviewing the tops in various kinds of luxury goods. I got to play with some of them -- OK, this job has some high points.

But the more I played the more I wondered ... what's the purpose of all this excess?
Take the Porsche 911 Turbo. Very hot car. Lots of power -- more than $120,000 worth. Do I need this for commuting? No. Grocery shopping? No. I found the Mercedes SL 500 more comfortable but, once again, it's not the kind of vehicle (more than $89,000) I'd use for a fishing trip. That would be stupid. (Of course, if I lived in a German castle where the nearest 7-Eleven was 30 kilometers down the Autobahn, the decision might be different).

How about the Titleist golf clubs I got to swing at a swank Long Island golf course? Sweet DCI drivers at $500 a pop. Scotty Cameron putters (upwards of $300), and an assortment of very expensive irons and wedges. It's a shame I can't golf worth a damn. The money demanded by such a spectacular golf set would be better spent on lessons. Spending it on such fine equipment would be, well, stupid.

Same thing for the $200,000-plus home theater (old theater antiques and new technology) and the Ralph Lauren Purple Label sport jacket ($1,295). Both were fine and fun but totally out of the realm of my simple, bill-filled world. Spending money on such items would be ... well, you know.

That's not to say something is stupid just because I don't want it or can't afford it. There are some folks, I'm sure, who find a $200,000 home theater absolutely necessary.

And it's not true that I wouldn't want any of these items. Heck, I would have been happy with one lousy Titleist Pro VI ball ($54 for a dozen). Didn't get one (talk about stingy marketing flacks).

Some folks can actually afford this stuff. You kind of wonder if they can't get by with a Buick or Saturn or a regular set of Wilson golf clubs. But it's their money. And us "regular folks" can snicker at their foolish excess.

Of course, "regular folks" buy plenty of stuff they can ill afford or isn't really practical for their lives as well.

"Part of it may be underlying security," said Prof. Ken Sheldon of the University of Missouri-Columbia, who has studied the psychology of luxury purchases. "People ask 'Am I good enough?' ... and so they buy as a status symbol."

That can be dangerous, the professor adds, because such upward social comparisons never end. "There's always somebody better off," Sheldon noted. Another danger is that luxury can very quickly become the status quo ... and that too can become a budget twister.

Especially when there is some predation at work. While checking out the "Best of the Best" men's fashions I came face to face with a $1,100 shirt. Sure, it was fine leather, but, c'mon. For a shirt?

Now it's a short hop from indulgence to greed. And predators, from overly-pumped fashion designers to outright con-artists, know that. But either way -- indulgence or greed -- there's a first step: Stupid.

And you can't get away from an essay on stupid and money without talking about Abercrombie & Fitch.

To some, the clothing chain is stupid incarnate. Already in controversial territory with risque catalogs featuring very young and undressed models, Abercrombie decided to produce a variety of T-shirts with ethnic slurs. "Two Wongs can make it White" with a Chinese laundry motif? That's magna cum stupid.

And now, the retailer is doing it again with thong underwear for kids. (The company claims its intent was to be cute.) Do they honestly think people will buy this stuff? Would people shop at such a sophomoric store? What are they ... stupid?

Well, people did buy. Maybe not the "eye-candy" panties or the racist T-shirts (which were pulled). But they bought. And Abercrombie got a lot of publicity -- without paying for it. The result? Earnings for the controversy filled first-quarter rose 15 percent per share from last year.

"Maybe it's a case where stupid is brilliant," said an analyst, who wanted his name separate from Abercrombie's.

Stupid ... money ... can't have one without the other, can you? Hey, it's working for Abercrombie. Maybe I should buy that $1,295 sport coat after all.

 

I think many people go for luxury items because they want to show their friends and family how rich they are. My uncles and aunts are like this and I don't like it at all. One of them bought a home gym, not to work out, but to compete with my other uncle because he's a surgeon and he inherited some money from his parents so he likes to buy expensive stuff.
That said, I feel it's ok to enjoy the finer things in life like an AMEX Platinum, a top of the line Mercedes, or an expensive home as long as you can afford it and you're not doing it to show off or compete with others. Personally, I would only buy a nice home gym if I planned to work out on a regular basis, otherwise it's a waste of hard earned money.

 

I think I won this morning - getting the AMEX Platinum Charge Card......

arrooooooo - platting along - dogman

 

Oh Luxury & MP40,

I wasn't picking on you or "raining on your parade". No need to defend yourself with me. I see people all the time set about to work hard, take control of their finances and begin that incredible journey that only success can bring. I'm proud of ya, I know you work hard and I hope you enjoy your card as I know you will - you deserve it. I merely saw an opportunity to make an important point for the benefit of those who may not realize the "future value of today's dollars".

I wanted to see some feedback on this topic. I'm glad to see a lot of people weighing in here. Every single point made so far is a valid one. Please lets all resist the impulse to go wildly to the other extreme where one concentrates only on making and saving money, living in your second hand underwear and going to the potty in a cardboard box. Under no circumstances did I even suggest that that should be under consideration.

What I DID suggest and will continue to suggest is that we be very aware of the delicate balance that needs to exist between enjoying the successes we have today and preparing for our own futures, for this is my profession.

Mp said: "Would you be questioning them on why they are paying an annual fee to be able to collect FF miles?"

"I'm" not questioning you. I only meant to post a friendly reminder so those who'd care to hear it won't forget to question themselves. And for those who DON'T want to hear it - keep reading.

Luxury Said: "The only problem is you how far do you think one should go with saving vs pleasure."


Anesthesia said: I don't know if anyone has noticed or not, but this thread isn't about investing OR annual fees. It's a quality of life issue.

Saving Vs. Pleasure IS about quality of life.

AFTER one has very carefully considered quality of life issues not just for today but for the rest of your life. Don't forget that today medical science is situated such that those who are about 25 will live to about age 100. That means you may spend as many years in retirement as you do working. People will be outliving their money and in that case their prospect for a "quality of life" is dismal at best.

Saar said: "As for the IRA suggestions: Read some statistics. Not everyone makes it to retirement; And even those who do, may want to have a taste of the good life before they're 67"

OK, lets read some statistics, shall we

According to the U S Department Of Health and Human Services Publication #SSN 13-1-1871, April 16, 1992.

49% will be dependent upon relatives, charity, or friends, or will have no choice but to continue working.
25% will have died.
22% will have annual incomes of LESS THAN $4,OOO.
BUT ONLY- 4% will be classified as "Financially Independently".
This means a whopping 96% will be DEAD or DEAD BROKE at age 65 with 20 or 30 MORE years to live. A frightening situation and I hope it scares everyone.

Well numbers don't lie. As such, all that I have said in this message is not a topic available for *argument* but the discussion is healthy. Everyone on this board is right because nobody needs to be wrong.
If I could sum up my entire purpose for writing my "expensive magazine" comment all in one word that word would be *BALANCE*. Mel rather eloquently commented:
"You are right it is absurd to expect to go through life without any luxury. But it IS a smart idea to take into account cost benefit analysis when we make decisions."

What's even more absurd is to arrive at a future full of regrets and poverty because we did not stop and consider the "future value of today's dollars" and the impact that may have at a time when we are no longer able to make decisions.

 

No harm, no foul! Good points all!

 

Why certainly.