Its all in a name?

Bandersnatch · Post by **Bandersnatch** » Tue May 02, 2006 10:34 pm

Since people got caught up on the plastic vs. glass example, here's another two:

Which is better, a pair of Levi's jeans, or a pair of jeans made by Levi's which is in almost every way identical to the first pair, the only difference being that it has a different name sewed on to it (A generic brand)?

When we look at it like that, it makes sense to say that they're the same. But society says that a name brand has more prestige than a generic brand (I see it all the time at work-- People will refuse a better product simply because they aren't familiar with the company, even if it is a notable company in its own right). So we pay extra money for nothing more than a name.

It's like, even if they have no opinion on the company's practices, some people refuse to shop at Wal-Mart because it's a "cheap" store. If you're in high school, you don't want to say, "I bought this shirt at Wal-Mart," because people will treat you like you're poor. If you're like, "I got this at Hollister," people will think more highly of the shirt itself. This is true even if the Wal-Mart shirt is great and the Hollister shirt is crap (And the Wal-Mart shirt was still a third of the price).

On topic... I admit I'm fairly casual about following politics, with only occassional spurts of interest. With that, somehow I've missed everything related to Hillary Clinton. Could someone do a quick summary of why she's so bad? I mean, I always hear (Especially from conservatives) that she'd be like, a nightmare if she got into office, but I never hear WHY.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Tue May 02, 2006 10:37 pm

Bandersnatch, but most stuff at Walmart IS crap. As in poorly made in some sweatshop. When the stereotype is correct 90 percent of the time, is it really a stereotype?

Bandersnatch · Post by **Bandersnatch** » Tue May 02, 2006 10:46 pm

Thank you for perfectly elaborating on my point, Bigity.

You didn't say 100%, after all. That 10% left still has the stigma from the rest of it.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Tue May 02, 2006 10:49 pm

I really don't see the problem. If you let the opinions of others influence you, and then complain about it, who really has the problem?

Bandersnatch · Post by **Bandersnatch** » Tue May 02, 2006 11:05 pm

I don't really see what you're trying to say there.

Are you saying that I'm complaining about it? I'm not. I'm using it as an example to show that names DO mean something. Hollister has less of a stigma than Wal-Mart. Hillary Rodham Clinton has less of a stigma for republicans than Hillary Clinton. That's just part of language.

HTRN · Post by **HTRN** » Wed May 03, 2006 12:43 am

[quote="Bigity";p="631190"]Bandersnatch, but most stuff at Walmart IS crap. As in poorly made in some sweatshop. When the stereotype is correct 90 percent of the time, is it really a stereotype?[/quote]

I'll do you both one better - I buy jeans exclusively at working gear, specifically their "house" brand. Their cheap($20 on sale, normally around 30 dollars), and last damn near forever I average a year and a half out of a pair of them, vs. 6 months out of Levi's/Lee's etc. They're much heavier jeans, with much bigger pockets.

HTRN

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Wed May 03, 2006 12:45 am

[quote="Bandersnatch";p="631200"]I don't really see what you're trying to say there.

Are you saying that I'm complaining about it? I'm not. I'm using it as an example to show that names DO mean something. Hollister has less of a stigma than Wal-Mart. Hillary Rodham Clinton has less of a stigma for republicans than Hillary Clinton. That's just part of language.[/quote]

It's a part of human wiring, I'd think. Sometimes your brain makes connections faster then your thoughts can keep up with.

Metzgirl · Post by **Metzgirl** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:16 pm

Hillary... Let's see. She moved to New York specifically to run for Senate, which she won. (posturing for candidacy) Ever since, she's basically been doing things to make herself look good so she can get in the running for President in '08.

Basically, I think she's playing the game quite well, but since she's a woman (married to a ex-president) it seems people take that kind of power play poorly.

As for her actual senate record, I have no clue, really. I don't have time to follow every senator's voting record.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:20 pm

Here's another example, Bigity, for the exact same thing, that should make the point clearer: take margerine. If you produce two batches with the exact same taste, one being white, the other being yellow, people will say that the yellow margerine tastes better than the white margerine, even if they taste the same.

Packaging and presentation do indeed influence our opinion of a product ... though you're right, it is a part of human wiring*.

*a veryvery unfortunate part, if you ask me... we're wired to underrate a thing's merit on its own ... lame.

Posted Wed May 03, 2006 11:23 am:

Meh, but that wasn't an example of names. If you took the same yellow margerine, and called one tub of it "Saturated Fat And Yellow Dye In A Cheap Plastic Tub!" and one tub of it "Better Than Butter!" ... I would bet "better than butter!" polls as consistantly tasting better than "Saturated Fat And Yellow Dye In A Cheap Plastic Tub!".

And they'd still be the same crappy butter substitute.

Post by **Martin Blank** » Mon May 08, 2006 12:28 am

[quote="Metzgirl";p="631481"]Basically, I think she's playing the game quite well, but since she's a woman (married to a ex-president) it seems people take that kind of power play poorly.[/quote]
People don't take to her well because she's a carpet-bagger. Over the last year, she's flipped on almost every issue brought to her, based on the direction of the political winds. In that, she's like her husband often was, except that she's hard on the eyes and ears, and if you can get past that, hard on the brain.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Mon May 08, 2006 12:49 am

Yeah, she's pretty much everything everyone hated about her husband with none of the things people loved.

SunTzu · Post by **SunTzu** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:24 pm

Not even a love for cigars, for gods sake!

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Thu May 11, 2006 9:38 pm

[quote="Bandersnatch";p="631188"]On topic... I admit I'm fairly casual about following politics, with only occassional spurts of interest. With that, somehow I've missed everything related to Hillary Clinton. Could someone do a quick summary of why she's so bad? I mean, I always hear (Especially from conservatives) that she'd be like, a nightmare if she got into office, but I never hear WHY.[/quote]

For some reason it popped in to my mind last night ... the worst thing about Hillary Clinton is that what she wants, it seems, is to be President. That's what's important to her and what she wants to do, and THAT is one of the absolutely worst qualities to have, going into the executive office... or any position of power.

Real Life Forums

Its all in a name?

Who is online