Are Rolex Owners Foolish and Immoral?

[M45]

Eat my ass, Mancusi.

[AJMarcus]

He sounds like he’s wound too tight. ( Pun intended. ) Perhaps one too many macchiato soy lattes while waiting for the mustache stylist.

[pickettt]

"Never count another man's money."

[Bryant Park]

I assume most of us if faced with a choice between owning our Rolexes or feeding our families would choose to feed our families. In addition we are all aware that there are thousands of people who don't have enough food to eat.

Consequently we are making a decision to allow people to go hungry, placing a lesser value on strangers then family members and seeking gratification by owning material goods based on vanity.

Yep kind of immoral if we are honest. Can I live with it sure! Is the author a tool...definitely.

But let's at least be honest, the collective value of our timepieces could feed an awful lot of people. If we aren't as the author suggests foolish we must at least be able to recognize and acknowledge the trade off we have chosen and own our decision for its potential moral ambiguity.

[Pauln]

I’m convinced. I’m going to sell everything. And jump off a tall building.

[NateInBama]

Where does a mutual fund make its money? PROFIT!! OMG, how scandalous. What happens if the wealthy stopped buying? What a schmuck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jabbo84]

.......you can’t help people anymore. It backfires on you. Those days are over

[Pauln]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

I assume most of us if faced with a choice between owning our Rolexes or feeding our families would choose to feed our families. In addition we are all aware that there are thousands of people who don't have enough food to eat.

Consequently we are making a decision to allow people to go hungry, placing a lesser value on strangers then family members and seeking gratification by owning material goods based on vanity.

Yep kind of immoral if we are honest. Can I live with it sure! Is the author a tool...definitely.

But let's at least be honest, the collective value of our timepieces could feed an awful lot of people. If we aren't as the author suggests foolish we must at least be able to recognize and acknowledge the trade off we have chosen and own our decision for its potential moral ambiguity.

Im allowing people to go hungry? Didn’t really know it was my job to feed the world.

[BT1985]

Last I checked people work at luxury goods companies. So say we shun luxury goods and those workers now lose their jobs and are now in need of aid. See the problem here?

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Pauln

Im allowing people to go hungry? Didn’t really know it was my job to feed the world.

Who suggested it was your job? I suggested you had the capacity to feed someone at the expense of owning a Rolex if you were so inclined. You have made a decision not to. I have similarly made that decision. Doesn't make you a good or bad person.

Seemingly it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge you could do a lot of good with the money you spend on watches. Not your job or obligation to feed anyone nor is it your obligation to indulge yourself with a Rolex...it's a moral decision.

[dnpina]

Is this what they call virtue signalling?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by Pauln

I’m convinced. I’m going to sell everything. And jump off a tall building.

Prior to jumping please give a homeless person your watch...

[dori]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Who suggested it was your job? I suggested you had the capacity to feed someone at the expense of owning a Rolex if you were so inclined. You have made a decision not to. I have similarly made that decision. Doesn't make you a good or bad person.

Seemingly it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge you could do a lot of good with the money you spend on watches. Not your job or obligation to feed anyone nor is it your obligation to indulge yourself with a Rolex...it's a moral decision.

I’ll give ya a moral decision to make You condescending little boy....... what you doing on this forum then? Looking to give money to charity ? REDEEM the members? It’s a bit of a conflict of interest innit? Crack on you and your “moral” BS.
You can help other people, raise a family and at the same time buy yourself whatever the heck you want. Sheesh these people


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pauln]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Who suggested it was your job? I suggested you had the capacity to feed someone at the expense of owning a Rolex if you were so inclined. You have made a decision not to. I have similarly made that decision. Doesn't make you a good or bad person.

Seemingly it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge you could do a lot of good with the money you spend on watches. Not your job or obligation to feed anyone nor is it your obligation to indulge yourself with a Rolex...it's a moral decision.

No, not uncomfortable. I just disagree. I don’t think it’s a moral decision at all. The watch, after purchase, still has value and is an asset of mine. I mean, sure, I could just walk down the street handing out $100 bills to everyone until I was broke, but I do have responsibilities of my own.

[Pauln]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Prior to jumping please give a homeless person your watch...

Think I’ll just give it to my son.

[Cesium137]

If he wrote better articles he’d probably be able to buy one.

[FTX I]

Different strokes.

[dori]

Bryant just announced he’ll be helping out and funding all forum members who can’t stretch for a PM piece, and buy it for them as a Christmas present. He’s reaching out to the community and giving back, let’s all clap hands


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Muxi]

Originally Posted by Pauln

I’m convinced. I’m going to sell everything. And jump off a tall building.

Please don’t.

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by dori

I’ll give ya a moral decision to make You condescending little boy....... what you doing on this forum then? Looking to give money to charity ? REDEEM the members? It’s a bit of a conflict of interest innit? Crack on you and your “moral” BS.
You can help other people, raise a family and at the same time buy yourself whatever the heck you want. Sheesh these people


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First off I am on this forum because I own more watches than the vast majority of people who are on this forum (including you I suspect) and have been collecting or years.

Second I didn't condescend or judge having openly acknowledged my having made the same decision as those posting.

I did however express my opinion that deciding to spend money on a luxury item is inherently wasteful and consequently a moral decision. I am comfortable to have made that decision and don't begrudge anyone the right to as you put it "buy yourself whatever the hapeck you want".

Let me guess nuance isn't your strong suit...

[Bizcut1]

Oh, well. Can't please everyone...he's entitled to his opinion...like most here, I've worked hard, paid my dues (and taxes) and feel completely entitled to acquiring most anything (legal) I enjoy (and can afford).

Ben

[Muxi]

Originally Posted by dori

Bryant just announced he’ll be helping out and funding all forum members who can’t stretch for a PM piece, and buy it for them as a Christmas present. He’s reaching out to the community and giving back, let’s all clap hands


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

C’mon, that’s uncalled for. Bryant is a good guy.

[Notsoprobro]

Wonder how he feels about Patek, RM, or J&Co...

[dori]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

First off I am on this forum because I own more watches than the vast majority of people who are on this forum (including you I suspect) and have been collecting or years.



Second I didn't condescend or judge having openly acknowledged my having made the same decision as those posting.



I did however express my opinion that deciding to spend money on a luxury item is inherently wasteful and consequently a moral decision. I am comfortable to have made that decision and don't begrudge anyone the right to as you put it "buy yourself whatever the hapeck you want".



Let me guess nuance isn't your strong suit...

Haha never assume what you don’t know buddy. But you can keep on living in your little world. English might not be my first language, but I know for sure when I read total rubbish written, as your comment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by dori

Haha never assume what you don’t know buddy. But you can keep on living in your little world. English might not be my first language, but I know for sure when I read total rubbish written, as your comment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dori I am actually giving you the benefit of the doubt. I never said it is immoral to own a Rolex. I said the decision to own one (particularly when framed by the author vs helping the poor) is a decision involving morals.

Again nuance. Now to your personal attacks...they are unwarranted. In terms of questioning why I am on this forum what criteria do you suggest for being on TRF... please enlighten me?

FYI that thread you started titled "Best Microfiber Gloves" that asked "Can anyone recommend a good brand/type that make high quality microfiber gloves to handle jewelry/watch", great stuff. Total baller material! Goes well with the thread you titled "Best soap to watch your wash". Pretty funny yet also sad envisioning those long nights "shampooing" watches with gloves on.

[inadeje]

I must be the most immoral person out there in that case

[Johnnie K]

I kind of feel this doesn't even belong in this forum. I would think the majority of the members own at lest one Rolex and probably more plus plenty of other nice watches. So, why should we hear from someone who might want to own one, but thinks it's immoral. Complete poppycock.

[dori]

Originally Posted by Bryant Park

Dori I am actually giving you the benefit of the doubt. I never said it is immoral to own a Rolex. I said the decision to own one (particularly when framed by the author vs helping the poor) is a decision involving morals.



Again nuance. Now to your personal attacks they are unwarranted. In terms of questioning why I am on this forum what criteria do you suggest for being on TRF... please enlighten me?

Dear Bryant, this is not a personal attack. I apologize if you think it is. I just get upset when I see someone commenting in such a manner. Life isn’t only white and black, moral decisions and whatever you read in your makaveli philosophy book. People don’t need to be told that choosing between buying a Rolex or giving money to someone is a moral choice. And even if you think it is, it’s your right to state your opinion, but don’t go and try to preach it to others. Just makes you come out as I mentioned above. Besides that we cool mate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bryant Park]

Originally Posted by dori

Dear Bryant, this is not a personal attack. I apologize if you think it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually calling someone a "condescending little boy" is a personal attack. Yet again nuance. So I will ask again you suggested I shouldn't be TRF, what is your criteria?

Also so you don't sound uneducated... be aware you spelled Machiavelli (the philosopher) as Makaveli which was how Tupac Shakur spelt it...nuance my friend.

[Calatrava r]

Originally Posted by Notsoprobro

Wonder how he feels about Patek, RM, or J&Co...

He has never heard of them.