|
solomonsprayer -> RE: The Wal-Mart Diet (9/15/2008 6:40:53 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HisCovenant
That's very interesting, but where does the theory that the difference saved will be spent on higher priced, quality foods (either in Walmart or in another store?) In my experience, those that are going to Walmart for the express purpose of saving a buck spend the savings in another area of life, not health foods. Granted, some spend it on some form of exercise (sports fees, equipment, gym membership) which could contribute to the findings... but most that I know are saving the difference, spending it on needs (clothing, automobiles, housing) or buying luxuries unassociated with health (Starbucks, lunches out, dates.)
Maybe I'm just skeptical, but I don't know a single person saying "I think I will buy Walmart's lower quality produce, mass produced products, and toxic cleaners so I can afford ____________(insert any expensive, high quality item) from a health food store." Frankly, the people I know who are into the higher quality items are into it as an all around lifestyle. They don't choose low quality in some areas and high quality in others... I mean, even when those who would mostly buy at Walmart choose a higher priced product, they aren't choosing a really high quality product. For example, they may choose Olive Oil in place of other cooking oils, but they are still buying the cheapest ones and at times choosing the lower quality pressings of the olive (not EVOO.) I am aware of some arguments against this: every step counts and is helpful; EVOO vs OO won't make a difference in weight loss; etc.
I can see that weight gain and cheap foods may not be equal, but I just don't buy that the savings are going into higher quality foods. Maybe I just don't know the right people... maybe my definition of "high quality" exceeds the writer's definition... but I don't buy it.
That's a good critique of the study. I think that there's truth to what you say in my personal observationns, as well, and there is a lot of logic to what you say.
On the other hand, I also do have friends who are exactly the type that you are asking about - those who buy both low quality and very high quality products and goods. They are indeed rare, but they do exist and share highly similar characteristics.
I think if we look JUST at that bracket of people and assume that it is significant enough (in numbers I mean), then the Wal-Mart diet argument still holds up. Even if it is true that many of the people who shop at Wal-Mart do so for the savings, and they use those savings on non-high quality/non-health food products and goods, there may still be enough of the "high-low quality spender" to make this a statistically viable argument.
The four people I know who are the "high-low quality spenders" (we need to give them a better nickname...like bi-polar spender? lol...) are in fact elitists. They are very fasionable and trendy (even if in their own minds) and desire high quality products, such as Coach or Louis Vuitton bags...clothing from high end fasion stores like YSL, Club Monaco, Armani...luxury cars, etc. .. The problem, however, is that they are not very rich, but want to live that way or in that style. ....When I went to dinner with one of the girls from church like that, she said:
"I don't understand why people can't have nice things? Everyone can have nice things if they just buy cheaper things that are essentials and save enough to buy quality clothes or technology gadgets. My sister is so stupid. She wastes all her part-time job money on dumb things and complains that I have all these nice things as if I have more money than her. We both had similar jobs in school and I never made more than her. I just know how to budget my money better and I buy what I like. I don't buy a lot of useless stuff."
Another friend of mine who is an art major and kind of a metro-sexual guy said in a convo before:
"I guess I would rather have a couple of really nice outfits and clothes and then buy a bunch of essentials that don't matter like t-shirts, socks, etc. than have a bunch of mediocre quality clothes. I can mix and match with jeans and t-shirt that are cheap essentials and wear my better outfits to places that are nice. I just wouldn't buy something from GAP or J.C. Penney's...That's what I did when I didn't have any money."
My other two friends have similar frames of mind and are super shoppers. Even the cheap stuff they buy seems pretty good sometimes. They can find better looking, better bargain stuff at like the Dollar Store than I can get elsewhere and they know exactly what they want in terms of the "quality" and "high-end and fasionable" stuff and then budget to get the other life essentials. ...That's their way of managing their finances. If they were rich...well, one of them is now, but not the other three yet, then they'd just get all quality products. But since they are early career and student stypes, then they just use this high-low quality spending strategy to get by.
In terms of food selection, they are also health freaks. They want to be in super shape and look good and mind what they eat and the same concepts apply....They can buy cheap foods that are decent quality, not necessarily bad quality andn then buy better foods as well. I don't know how they do it with food so much, but I know they use the high-low spending technique with otehr stuff. Everytime I go out to eat with these four they always order the most healthy and/or trendy items and don't mind spending a lot for good food (to them). [sm=aside.gif] All of them love sushi and salads. [sm=chef.gif] ..I should ask them about the Wal-Mart Diet for their input. I know oneo f the church girls shops super cheap for essentials at a local Big Box Store and always eats expensive when she goes out.
One final detail to this puzzle is that none of these four are considered poor. ..They aren't rich, but they are not poor either, so they are not so bad off that they cannot practically use this strategy without some other part of their finances or life suffering. They also seem to have some parental help in terms of money allowances every onw and then.
|
|
|
|