i heard this just yesterday during some commercial, "buy more to save more".
now i probably have heard that claim a zillion times before but i finally stopped to take it in and think about it—given the current economic climate and all.
and after much consideration, i've concluded that may be just about the stupidest thing i've ever heard.
more dumb than those wild scientology claims (as if that's possible).
i went through the steps over and over again and i kept landing on the idea that to buy something, i have to spend something.
i'm pretty sure that something i need to spend is money.
and where does the money come from?
assuming it doesn't come from trees (or what we in the states fondly call credit cards),
that money must come from the savings side of the house.
so in a simple example, i have one dollar in my savings.
i grab it and i run over to buy whatever it is they are selling.
i hand over the buck and run back as fast as my little feet can carry me to see my savings account, which was empty when i left it.
and when i get back, low and behold, there are two dollars in the account.
that's what they are claiming.
and if by some stroke of luck, i'm able to buy two, i'll find four dollars in my savings.
the last time i heard logic like this, it had something to do with the more mortgage interest you pay, the less taxes you pay.
it just seems to me that if i want to save more i need to buy less.
oh well, what do i know?
i'm one of the five people who voted for george mcgovern.