The act of not buying another subscription just feels good, monetary value is negligible.
And people always forget to account for taxes. Purchase prices are in after-tax dollars and hourly wages aren't. Between sales tax, state and federal income tax and government benefits phase outs from earning more money, the wage-equivalent value of saving a buck can be around double the nominal hourly wage.
In New Zealand the marginal tax rate for the median earner takes more than 1/3rd of your wages. The top marginal rate is 39%. It isn't motivating!
All else equal, even if it takes you twice as long to do something (compared to employing someone), you are often better off doing it yourself.
Many don't have time to price shop. However any pressure such as this, rewards competitive pricing, and damages gougers.
It does matter.
At the risk of stating the obvious, the reasoning for that sort of self-destructive lifestyle doesn't make sense on 2 fronts. First, living an extremely unhealthy lifestyle will of course shorten your life, exacerbating the tragedy that life is short / YOLO. Second, it will significantly degrade your quality of life during that time.
Can't enjoy a meal because it is overpriced. Or similarly, won't pay $3 for a cold drink in the sun at the beach, since it is $1 in town.
In a completely different direction...
I played skyrim and noticed that I had lots of upgrades, and great equipment and was kind of overpowered.
So, I would go back and play the game naked. (not a new game, just start with the character I had built up)
I would start out with no equipment and just make do with whatever I found. Use the first sword or pants I found and go from there. Kind of fun.
It's especially necessary when one's circumstances change a lot. It's true for pretty much everyone that the opportunity cost of not using your assets increases as you age - but increasing financial security also changes the calculus in a way which is difficult to unlearn.
Yes, you've hit the nail on the head. I've noticed how people hate paying £9 for what ought to be a £7 lunch. Doesn't seem to matter much if they're fresh out of university, or half way through a high-income career.
I suppose it shifts from being an immediate financial concern, to an old habit, or perhaps a matter of principle.
My theory is that a large amount of 'luxury' commerce is simply giving the customer an excuse not to feel shame, because no longer do they feel a fool, but now they are a special customer with discerning tastes.
I've fallen for that fallacy many times. Only in very few cases does luxury imply higher quality; usually the illusion is formed by the addition of almost worthless decoration (such as folded napkins in a posh restaurant, bought wholesale for literally two a penny).
This is my problem precisely with food
Folks who grew up always having plenty don't usually worry much about keeping food reserves or waste.
It's clear why this happens: circumstances change but people don't often stop and re-think attitudes which they've incorporated.
Using 2 hours of precious time to save $2.
Investments with a time frame that is longer than their expected remaining life.
Driving across town to get a couple of percent off a tank of gas - actually wasting petrol and time.
Hoarding stuff that they will never use - often stuff that would be useful to their kids or friends.
Then again I see the opposite in some people: drawing down a reverse mortgage like they'll be dead in 5 years and ruining their finances. Smoking and boozing and otherwise ruining their health because they "haven't got long to live".