Culture At What Point is Too Much?



What you are about to see in this video is some of the most expensive luxury items in the world. While I do see the appeal of some of these items. others I'd argue is just sure stupidity. I don't get who things like golden toilet seats are supposed to appeal to or why. It seems to show an utter lack of self awareness on par of "let them eat cake." And I have to wonder not just how the people who buy these things manage to stay rich, but how these things continue to have appeal and demand. Wouldn't luxury items like these go out of style or even worse be looked at unfavorably when there is hardly any left to buy them? Can someone explain this to me?
 
Last edited:

Val the Moofia Boss

Well-known member
They can buy because... they're truly rich.

There is a difference between people who think they are rich, and people who are truly rich. People who think their rich do things that they think rich people do, ie go to barbecues or go golfing. But they're not truly rich. They don't have unlimited time and money. They might have one or the other, but not both.

People who are truly rich can do whatever they want. They have unlimited time and money. They can learn how to become a car mechanic as a hobby for no other reason that because they want to. Or they could lounge around in their house all day. Time and money is nothing to them. They can buy a golden toilet seat for no other reason because it was their whim.

If you have a golden toilet seat nobody sees... well, I'd imagine that would be quite reassuring to someone with so much money. That they can even waste their money on such a vanity item.

At least, that's how I see it.
 
They can buy because... they're truly rich.

There is a difference between people who think they are rich, and people who are truly rich. People who think their rich do things that they think rich people do, ie go to barbecues or go golfing. But they're not truly rich. They don't have unlimited time and money. They might have one or the other, but not both.

People who are truly rich can do whatever they want. They have unlimited time and money. They can learn how to become a car mechanic as a hobby for no other reason that because they want to. Or they could lounge around in their house all day. Time and money is nothing to them. They can buy a golden toilet seat for no other reason because it was their whim.

If you have a golden toilet seat nobody sees... well, I'd imagine that would be quite reassuring to someone with so much money. That they can even waste their money on such a vanity item.

At least, that's how I see it.


All the money in the world isn't going to save them from the angry less well off mob, the guillotine, or the hang man's noose though. Envy maybe a sin but shouldn't it be considered unwise to provoke us unwashed masses? It's like wearing a necklace of raw meat In front of a bunch of junkyard dogs, it may not be morally wrong but it's not wise and you're not going to garner sympathy when something bad happens to you as a result. Showing some form of humility can go a long way.... there is nothing humble about a gold toilet or a diamond studded countertop.
 
They can buy because... they're truly rich.

There is a difference between people who think they are rich, and people who are truly rich. People who think their rich do things that they think rich people do, ie go to barbecues or go golfing. But they're not truly rich. They don't have unlimited time and money. They might have one or the other, but not both.

People who are truly rich can do whatever they want. They have unlimited time and money. They can learn how to become a car mechanic as a hobby for no other reason that because they want to. Or they could lounge around in their house all day. Time and money is nothing to them. They can buy a golden toilet seat for no other reason because it was their whim.

If you have a golden toilet seat nobody sees... well, I'd imagine that would be quite reassuring to someone with so much money. That they can even waste their money on such a vanity item.

At least, that's how I see it.

I'd say that's more of a difference between rich and stupid rich. I have a friend who is very wealthy (at least I think so) but you can tell he works his butt off and he doesn't brag about how much he spends on stuff. Like I said I can see the appeal of some of this stuff (mainly the cheapest stuff on the list) but the other more expensive stuff just strikes me as rich people being clueless.

Keep in mind the person reacting to this stuff is MrBeast a very successful youtuber AND business owner whom buys houses and cars for people IN FULL because he likes doing stuff for people and it makes for good TV....the dude's networth is estimated to be anywhere from $8-$24 MILLION and even he is openly admitting having to fight off feelings of disbelief and jealousy because of how stupid rich you got to be to afford some of this gaudy crap.
 
Last edited:

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
A lot of these items are not being bought and sold at a massive value for foolish reasons but as a type of money laundering scheme. The super-rich move so much money around that they can't easily do it with mere cash, and trading in things like fine artwork, high-grade watches, and the like are a way of moving beyond the impossible amounts of wealth around without moving any actual money that would alert tax collectors or other people who watch the money, and allowing actual money to be laundered in the process.

Something similar happened in the Diablo II game where high-level people had so much money they didn't want to trade gold anymore, and the magic item Stone of Jordan was traded by players as currency instead, allowing them to move around more wealth than the original system was designed for by bypassing the currency system.

To highlight this it can be useful to look at the rare and famous diamonds. The Deepdene is an important chunk of history, and hasn't been seen in about 20 years. The Akbhar Shah's been missing since around 1988. The Deal Sweetener hasn't been seen in public in about sixty years. Actually if you go through the list of famous diamonds, a clear pattern emerges. All the big diamonds are either publically displayed in a museum/crown jewel set, or go missing, usually for decades at a time only to suddenly reappear at auction, then vanish again for decades more, being quietly traded for millions out of sight of the plebians or stored, a repository of wealth immune to inflation. Most of these purchases are just listed as "Anonymous buyer" and "Anonymous seller" so there's no way to figure out who has it now or how many times it's been traded since.

The world of fine art is also heavily associated with money laundering and schemes to move large amounts of money around. One of the reasons artists axiomatically become famous and valuable only after their deaths is because after they're dead, the art is entirely in the hands of the elite and the art can be safely increased in value at that point with all the artificially generated value going into the pockets of the elite who own it. It can then be traded around letting them swap millions of dollars without a cent being visible to the authorities. When Mexico passed laws putting limits on how much fine art could be traded and requiring that information on the buyers and sellers be recorded for taxation and law enforcement purposes, sales of fine art dropped by 70% in a single year.

The reason for using these items is that they're immune to inflation and currency manipulation by authorities, keeping their value for centuries easily and dramatically inflating in value if a few rich people agree and sell them at raised prices, increasing the price of all similar items so that the collectors can gain large amounts of value without spending on it. This allows them to be stored without losing value, and at inflated prices they can be donated to museums, generating a tax break well in excess of what was originally paid for them. This is beyond the value they provide in laundering cash and being tradable while avoiding taxes on enormous amounts of wealth swapped around in a briefcase.
 
A lot of these items are not being bought and sold at a massive value for foolish reasons but as a type of money laundering scheme. The super-rich move so much money around that they can't easily do it with mere cash, and trading in things like fine artwork, high-grade watches, and the like are a way of moving beyond the impossible amounts of wealth around without moving any actual money that would alert tax collectors or other people who watch the money, and allowing actual money to be laundered in the process.

Something similar happened in the Diablo II game where high-level people had so much money they didn't want to trade gold anymore, and the magic item Stone of Jordan was traded by players as currency instead, allowing them to move around more wealth than the original system was designed for by bypassing the currency system.

To highlight this it can be useful to look at the rare and famous diamonds. The Deepdene is an important chunk of history, and hasn't been seen in about 20 years. The Akbhar Shah's been missing since around 1988. The Deal Sweetener hasn't been seen in public in about sixty years. Actually if you go through the list of famous diamonds, a clear pattern emerges. All the big diamonds are either publically displayed in a museum/crown jewel set, or go missing, usually for decades at a time only to suddenly reappear at auction, then vanish again for decades more, being quietly traded for millions out of sight of the plebians or stored, a repository of wealth immune to inflation. Most of these purchases are just listed as "Anonymous buyer" and "Anonymous seller" so there's no way to figure out who has it now or how many times it's been traded since.

The world of fine art is also heavily associated with money laundering and schemes to move large amounts of money around. One of the reasons artists axiomatically become famous and valuable only after their deaths is because after they're dead, the art is entirely in the hands of the elite and the art can be safely increased in value at that point with all the artificially generated value going into the pockets of the elite who own it. It can then be traded around letting them swap millions of dollars without a cent being visible to the authorities. When Mexico passed laws putting limits on how much fine art could be traded and requiring that information on the buyers and sellers be recorded for taxation and law enforcement purposes, sales of fine art dropped by 70% in a single year.

The reason for using these items is that they're immune to inflation and currency manipulation by authorities, keeping their value for centuries easily and dramatically inflating in value if a few rich people agree and sell them at raised prices, increasing the price of all similar items so that the collectors can gain large amounts of value without spending on it. This allows them to be stored without losing value, and at inflated prices they can be donated to museums, generating a tax break well in excess of what was originally paid for them. This is beyond the value they provide in laundering cash and being tradable while avoiding taxes on enormous amounts of wealth swapped around in a briefcase.


aw but if these elites were forced to be transparent how could they avoid paying THEIR share of the taxes while gouging the rest of us while virtue signaling about needing to make the rich people "PAY THEIR FAIR SHAREtm"



Carlin was right on so many things. Too bad he fully drank the leftist kool-aid
 
Last edited:

bintananth

behind a desk
We've always liked shiny status symbols which display our ability to waste resources with nary a care.

I recently did a quick search to see about when various technologies were developed. Here goes:

2.6-3.3mya stone tools
1.7-2.0mya fire
780kya clothing (Homo antecessor)
500kya stone tipped spears
300kya cooked food

(anatomically modern humans appear here ~250kya)

100kya jewelry
90kya string/rope
75kya paint
64kya bows and arrows
61kya needles
42kya fish hooks
40kya cave paintings
32kya domesticated dogs
25kya ceramics
20kya pottery
12kya agriculture
11kya stone structures
10kya calenders
9.5kya bricks
7.5kya copper smithing
7.3kya writing
6.5kya potters wheel
5.5kya shoes, glass

According to archeological evidence jewelry is one of the first things modern humans invented.

Aside: Capuchin Monkeys - they're smaller than a housecat - have been observed making stone flakes with characteristics very similar to the ones found at an archeological site dated 2.6mya with evidence indicating they were used to carve up prey. They don't realize they're making stone knives ... yet. Great Apes which have been taught the technique and given the right types of rock don't produce flakes with similar characteristics.
 

Whitestrake Pelinal

Like a dream without a dreamer
All the money in the world isn't going to save them from the angry less well off mob, the guillotine, or the hang man's noose though. Envy maybe a sin but shouldn't it be considered unwise to provoke us unwashed masses? It's like wearing a necklace of raw meat In front of a bunch of junkyard dogs, it may not be morally wrong but it's not wise and you're not going to garner sympathy when something bad happens to you as a result. Showing some form of humility can go a long way.... there is nothing humble about a gold toilet or a diamond studded countertop.
All the money in the world can hire a lot of armed thugs. Better than that, it can influence various authorities to fill the role of armed thugs. I suspect that very, very few among those who are "truly rich" think in terms of morals or showing humility. I suspect that due to various influences, they mostly operate on the assumption that people are out to get them whatever they do, so showing humility would to them have no utility. Better by their thinking to indulge as they see fit, and arrange for their assets to be defended by force in whatever form they choose to keep them.

As a side note, a gold toilet seat is still gold, a fine way to store some fraction of a fortune as a hedge against fluctuations in fiat currency worth. It is traditional to use jewelry for this purpose (small, portable, doubles as a status symbol) but if someone already has more jewelry than they could ever use...
 

bintananth

behind a desk
@Alathon

There is a difference between new money and old money. New money is trying to impress you. Old money just is.

New money will buy something ridiculous so other people will look at it and be impressed. When old money buys something ridiculous they probably bought it because they liked it and can afford it.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
All the money in the world can hire a lot of armed thugs. Better than that, it can influence various authorities to fill the role of armed thugs. I suspect that very, very few among those who are "truly rich" think in terms of morals or showing humility. I suspect that due to various influences, they mostly operate on the assumption that people are out to get them whatever they do, so showing humility would to them have no utility. Better by their thinking to indulge as they see fit, and arrange for their assets to be defended by force in whatever form they choose to keep them.

As a side note, a gold toilet seat is still gold, a fine way to store some fraction of a fortune as a hedge against fluctuations in fiat currency worth. It is traditional to use jewelry for this purpose (small, portable, doubles as a status symbol) but if someone already has more jewelry than they could ever use...
If you look at the price of gold historically, basically a chunk of gold bought in the 30s will have kept its value rather closely to what the Stock Market has done over the last near-century. It holds its value remarkably well and unless you can beat the market, just buying gold is probably as good a bet as an index fund, and not many beat the index funds, Mr. Goxx excluded.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
The time has long since passed because you can currently buy Manufactured precious gems. MiaDonna

The whole Gem market is one big racket used to dupe stupid people.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
The time has long since passed because you can currently buy Manufactured precious gems. MiaDonna

The whole Gem market is one big racket used to dupe stupid people.
... We were making synthetic but still chemically and optically identical rubies in 1873. The time passed two centuries ago. People don't care, it's a Veblen good.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
... We were making synthetic but still chemically and optically identical rubies in 1873. The time passed two centuries ago. People don't care, it's a Veblen good.
Whelp I think the Great Ancient Prophet Forest Gump said it best.

 

Largo

Well-known member
If you look at the price of gold historically, basically a chunk of gold bought in the 30s will have kept its value rather closely to what the Stock Market has done over the last near-century. It holds its value remarkably well and unless you can beat the market, just buying gold is probably as good a bet as an index fund, and not many beat the index funds, Mr. Goxx excluded.
What are you talking about?

In October 1921, the inflation-adjusted price of gold was $323.43. Today, gold is $1767.40. So in 100 years, the price of gold has increased by about 550%.

By comparison, the Dow Jones has increased about 30fold over that time period. The S&P500 if you use a 50-year interval dwarfs even that before the post-COVID gains.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
What are you talking about?

In October 1921, the inflation-adjusted price of gold was $323.43. Today, gold is $1767.40. So in 100 years, the price of gold has increased by about 550%.

By comparison, the Dow Jones has increased about 30fold over that time period. The S&P500 if you use a 50-year interval dwarfs even that before the post-COVID gains.
The price of gold in 1921 averaged $20.67. I think you misplaced a decimal point there or possibly found a completely anomalous temporary spot price, it wasn't even that high in 2001 where gold traded for an average of $276.50.
 

Largo

Well-known member
The price of gold in 1921 averaged $20.67. I think you misplaced a decimal point there or possibly found a completely anomalous temporary spot price, it wasn't even that high in 2001 where gold traded for an average of $276.50.
You're not adjusting for inflation.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
You're not adjusting for inflation.
Ah, my mistake. But since your results are quite wrong you're making an error somewhere. I think you're taking the entire value of the indexes, rather than payoff for money invested, which will give you quite anomalous results because money has been added to the markets steadily. If one compares investment value, then, as I said, gold performs quite well.

vGQILZb.png


Source: Stocks vs. Gold - 124 Year Chart | Longtermtrends

One of the problems you're going to have if you try to go to 1921 is the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 where Roosevelt basically seized the entire gold supply and made trading or owning more than $100.00 worth of gold a Federal Offense. This had a bit of effect on the market and changed things dramatically compared to 2021. That's why I specified "30s" in my first post, it's not possible to reasonably compare gold before that as it was a currency, not a traded item in the 20s.
 

Largo

Well-known member
Ah, my mistake. But since your results are quite wrong you're making an error somewhere. I think you're taking the entire value of the indexes, rather than payoff for money invested, which will give you quite anomalous results because money has been added to the markets steadily. If one compares investment value, then, as I said, gold performs quite well.

vGQILZb.png


Source: Stocks vs. Gold - 124 Year Chart | Longtermtrends

One of the problems you're going to have if you try to go to 1921 is the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 where Roosevelt basically seized the entire gold supply and made trading or owning more than $100.00 worth of gold a Federal Offense. This had a bit of effect on the market and changed things dramatically compared to 2021. That's why I specified "30s" in my first post, it's not possible to reasonably compare gold before that as it was a currency, not a traded item in the 20s.

That chart of yours? Gold delivers a comparable return to the S&P500 when your starting date is only in two periods: from about 1964 to 1972, and from about 2004 to 2006. At any other time, including the 1930s period which you tried to use, the S&P gives substantially higher returns.

I'm curious about what happened in those two periods to make things so strange, but it doesn't refute what I argued at all, and if anything makes your point weaker.
 

Bear Ribs

Well-known member
That chart of yours? Gold delivers a comparable return to the S&P500 when your starting date is only in two periods: from about 1964 to 1972, and from about 2004 to 2006. At any other time, including the 1930s period which you tried to use, the S&P gives substantially higher returns.

I'm curious about what happened in those two periods to make things so strange, but it doesn't refute what I argued at all, and if anything makes your point weaker.
Naw, you get pretty standard returns from the 30s. The answer to what you're seeing as weirdness is that Gold and the S&P 500 crisscross constantly in who's ahead. Because you're looking at very substantial amounts of growth and inflation over very long periods of time, even slight changes in initial conditions can yield dramatically different apparent results. The end results also give you some odd shifts, the S&P 500 has had a major, major rally since September 2020 on the back of Amazon, Pfizer, and a few other major winners, and when that stutters and inevitably corrects and the current end position reverses, you'll see the results change and broad swaths of the timeline put gold ahead again.

As for 1964-1972, the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 was repealed in that time period and it became legal to own more than 100 dollars of gold, which had some slight effect on trading. Gold also tends to lose during major industry booms when people are investing a lot in actually making stuff, and stomp all over the stock market during periods where the financial industry is dominant and money comes from moving around numbers, and especially during times of crisis.

Your definitions of time are a bit too narrow as well, I would guess you're just swishing the slider back and forth and missing those details. Gold lost hard during the 80s when American companies were blitzing on manufacturing computers, and gold's price surged massively due to speculation, so any timeframe that starts in the 80s will show gold as a sure loser because initial investment was so high. Around '97 prices dropped and gold is a winner if you invested then. It's actually beaten or tied the market most years since then. Look at just the prices since COVID hit in 2019 and gold's also still stomping, and has since 2015. However gold hit stupid high prices during the housing meltdown so it looks like a loser if you start your prices then. Correct for the brief period of massive growth we've had since the end of 2020 and things look very different.
 

Bassoe

Well-known member
As a side note, a gold toilet seat is still gold, a fine way to store some fraction of a fortune as a hedge against fluctuations in fiat currency worth. It is traditional to use jewelry for this purpose (small, portable, doubles as a status symbol) but if someone already has more jewelry than they could ever use...
Thing is, if I'm making a living as a farmer in a post-apocalyptic wasteland and some billionaire pops out of their bunker after the canned food ran out to trade their golden toilet seats, my basic train of thought is going to be "if they had the gold to waste on something like this, they probably have a lot more and they're the people responsible for destroying civilization and hiding away while we suffered, get them". Showing up with trade goods that motivate angry mobs to come after you is a bad stratagy.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top