Posted on 09/07/2009 3:37:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
The Washington Post recently hypothesized that you can gage the state of the economy by the state of men’s underwear drawers. That’s because we’re supposed to assume that men will purchase underwear at a relative steady and stable rate. The theory, as quoted in the Post article: “Sales of men's underwear typically are stable because they rank as a necessity. But during times of severe financial strain, men will try to stretch the time between buying new pairs, causing underwear sales to dip.”
So apparently we are to believe that we got into this recession at the consumer level because people were splurging on homes, cars, and vacations they couldn’t afford. However, when it’s time to cut back, American men will cling to that old pair of underwear for as long as they can. Alright – that actually does pass my sniff test (I mean the theory, not the underwear). When men see $45 underwear on a male model in a Hugo Boss ad, what he’s likely thinking (besides “he looks gay”) is that the guy’s wearing the fiscal equivalent of his next beer keg. This is why the underwear purchase loses out.
Women would never do this – perhaps with the exception of women who make their own soap and take home the shampoo from a stay at a Motel 6. There’s no way women’s underwear – or any other items made exclusively for women – could ever be used as a reliable economic indicator. Women will remortgage the house to fit a few more lingerie purchases onto their various perpetually-juggled credit cards. I know of a few who have personally done so.
Women’s purchases are also difficult to gage because – and I know it’s not politically correct to say this, but it’s the truth – they aren’t always paying for the things they buy. They may be living “Vegas style”. And by that, I mean they’re blowing some other guy’s money like pretty girls do at the Blackjack table. Some women live like every day is a lottery jackpot spending day. Men don’t have the luxury of doing this -- unless they were once married to Britney Spears.
So women’s underwear are unreliable, and the Underwear Index is therefore highly sexist. Fair enough. But women can rest assured that we do manage to work our way into the equation and muck it all up: Underwear Index keeps a running tally of how many billions of dollars in total are spent on men’s undies. It doesn’t necessarily mean that men are buying LESS underwear, though, because as a British Verdict Research Report points out, grocers are putting cheap underwear under our noses alongside the plums and bananas. This also increases the likelihood that it’s not even a man buying the underwear for himself, but rather a woman doing the grocery shopping. She could potentially pick up five 3-packs for less than the price of a single pair of Hugo Boss briefs. This would mean that the number of total underwear purchases increase while overall total spent remains the same or even decreases. So as the underwear market diversifies and expands, the Underwear Index becomes increasingly unreliable.
There are better economic indicators in the consumer market. I have personally found that when times get tough, the first thing to go out the window for me and my friends is the health care plan. For $600 or more a month for a single person, many people feel that they’re better off taking their chances on getting slammed by a city taxi. The only time you’re really screwed is if you come down with cancer, but that’s a 1 in 3 shot. The choice then becomes: 33% chance of cancer vs 100% chance of having to pay $600 or more a month. I have found that most of my friends have chosen to take their chance on the cancer. And they weren’t even illegal immigrants.
Another thing to go out the window is expensive beverages. Why blow $10-$15 dollars a day on Starbucks coffee or specialized water when the stuff coming out of the tap isn’t even diseased.
Which brings us to perhaps the most reliable economic indicator: The McDonald’s Index. McDonald’s restaurant global profits have climbed every month during the recession. That’s because McDonald’s is offering more quality choices for cheaper prices. Starbucks has had to close 1,000 stores in America because McDonald’s has been drinking their Frappuccino.
Actually, maybe when the dust settles on this recession we’ll find that we haven’t become poorer, but rather just smarter.
Left to may own resources, I’d wear clear undwear until the holes are about an inch or more in diameter. My wife continually refreshes my underwear draw, to the point where I have about a month’s supply or hole free underwear.
PS: Women buy expensive underwear for their boyfriends, and in rare cases, husbands.
prisoner6 aka a proud kilt wearer.
It's a constant battle between my wife and me to keep her from throwing out my underwear and socks. One tiny hole and out they go if I don't protest. By contrast at the slightest fraying, out go her underclothes.
When the sales of beer (by the unit, not price) drop, there is serious cause for concern. Even if underwear sales skid to a stop, I do not think this is the indicator it is cracked up to be...
Ha Ha Ha, this from the WaPo, OK I'll start today believeing what they print. LOL
/sarc
I haven't worn underwear since I got out of the Navy back in '74. And then, I wore boxers only.
Underwear is diapers for adults. Training Depends. (think training bra)
I'm fully toilet-trained. Have been for some time.
Of course, this requires that I change my pants/shorts daily. But shouldn't one anyway?
A brief anecdote: In winter I wear a pullover calf-length wool nightgown around the house on mornings, evenings and weekends. Like Ebeneezer Scrooge's. It's dark green and rarely needs laundering. It's very comfy.
My mother-in-law once asked me how often do I launder my nightie. I answered, "when the top of my head smells like poop!"
AV
PS- It's been over 30 years since I wore drawers.
I wonder how many thousands of dollars I have saved by not wasting my money on diapers for adults?
So do you smell like atomic vomit?
Agreed. Thanks for the bare facts there. You were really on the ball. No ands if or buts about it.
Underwear helps keeps the drippings (at your/our age there are plenty) out of the pants. Do dogs, when they encounter you, spend an inordinate amount of time sniffing your crotch?
Underwear is diapers for adults
I am guessing you have no idea what diapers are for. I don't crap in my pants. Would you if you were wearing underwear?
I don’t think I have paid a thousand dollars for all the t-shirts and underwear I have worn my entire life (and I am 52), and I doubt that I am alone. I wear pants and dress shirts multiple times before sending to the cleaners.
If you are “fully toilet trained” why would you have to wash your pants after one wearing? A little “leakage”?
What the Hell are the journalism schools turning out these days?
These people are juggling credit cards to pay for lingerie, but then can’t spend $600/month of health care? Is that the real, semi-hidden point of this article?
What will they do when $600 is confiscated out of their paychecks by Big Gov’t to pay for “free” universal health care?
PS my husband has not bought ONE item of clothing since we met. Since we MET. It must be the women cutting back on their men’s underwear, since we all know men don’t actually purchase it themselves.
haven’t worn underwear since I got out of the Navy back in ‘74.....Underwear is diapers for adults.
Watch auto parts sales — Auto Zone, Advance Auto, A Line and O’Reilly’s. If times are really tough, more people will be learning to fix their own cars and do regular maintenance themselves.
I am guessing you have no idea what diapers are for. I don’t crap in my pants. Would you if you were wearing underwear?
....my old boxers get saved for gun cleaning swabs....same with my old tee shirts....they’re the best.
I think I sat next to you on a crowded bus once>
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.