Originally Posted by
ajs26
Don't argue the value and reliability of a LHT vs. the Atlantis. They both work great and both do there job well, but they are different.
Why not argue that?
People often argue that the extra expense of something has a rational/practical purpose. When a particular example of ths argument is shown to be false, people argue that people are free to spend whatever they want. The rational/practical purpose of a thing is an interesting discussion. The fact that people have enough money to be foolish/irrational about what they spend it on is
not an interesting discussion.
Originally Posted by
mtclifford
If you want your cycling to be inexpensive then yeah it can be, if you don't then the sky is the limit. To each his own....
But what if you are interested in what things have a practical purpose? "To each his own" provides no knowledge!
Originally Posted by
HardyWeinberg
We got some additional exposure to the discrepancy between the commodity price of something, the cost of getting the job done, vs the cost of value added, when we had to justify the dollar difference between xmart bike for $80 and a $1000 LBS bike to an insurance adjuster.
???
What happened to the bike? I don't think BMW owners are required to make a similar justification!