CATEGORYPurse (or Wallet):
A pair of (knee-high) boots:
Formal dress (or suit):
Pants (inc. jeans):
Apparently, I'm willing to pay quite a bit more for these items than J. Money and (mostly) the other PF bloggers he polled. This is because, to me, most of these items are long-term purchases. For instance, the $550 purse was bought in 2004, it's still in nice condition, and I still use it. The $150 jacket was a fox fur jacket bought on ebay in 2003 and last worn three weeks ago. The $800 suit was bought in 2001 and used for interviews until I lost 30 pounds last year and couldn't wear it anymore.
It's not a typo that I'm willing to pay less now than my previous high price on boots. It reflects my high level of disappointment with the Irish Setter Snake Boots I bought for farm work at that price and how happy I am with my MuckBoots . Often price does not indicate quality, and I'm not hot to buy stuff just because it is more expensive.
The items that I don't consider long-term are computers and tennis shoes, but as a gamer and a runner, I've bought bargain-basement stuff and lived to regret it. I bet Krystal does something that requires good shoes as well. If I wore tennis shoes for less vigorous activity, I wouldn't be willing to pay nearly as much. As for computers, my non-gaming activities could easily be accomplished on a $500 machine. And actually, the numbers there are deceptive, as a generally upgrade my rig one part at a time - the 3K computer was a Mac for Mr. Goat to use for work.
I also haven't put my money where my mouth is on several of these items - I can imagine a situation where I would pay that much, but it hasn't occurred yet. And it's not like I don't like a bargain as much as the next person (see my last winter coat and pants purchases). So maybe this exercise doesn't show anything except that I like making tables with lots of numbers.