September 7, 2009
The Underwear Index and Other Signs You’re Going Broke
The Washington Post
recently hypothesized that you can gauge the
state of the economy by the state of men’s
underwear drawers. That’s because we’re
supposed to assume that men will purchase
underwear at a relative steady and stable
rate. The theory, as quoted in the Post
article: “Sales of men's underwear typically
are stable because they rank as a necessity.
But during times of severe financial strain,
men will try to stretch the time between
buying new pairs, causing underwear sales to
dip.”
So apparently we are to
believe that we got into this recession at
the consumer level because people were
splurging on homes, cars and vacations they
couldn’t afford. But when it’s time to cut
back, American men will cling to that old
pair of underwear for as long as they can.
All right – that actually does pass my sniff
test (I mean the theory, not the underwear).
When men see $45 underwear on a male model
in a Hugo Boss ad, what he’s likely thinking
(besides “he looks gay”) is that the guy’s
wearing the fiscal equivalent of his next
beer keg. This is why the underwear purchase
loses out.
Women would never do
this – perhaps with the exception of women
who make their own soap and take home the
shampoo from a stay at a Motel 6. There’s no
way women’s underwear – or any other items
made exclusively for women – could ever be
used as a reliable economic indicator. Women
will remortgage the house to fit a few more
lingerie purchases onto their various
perpetually juggled credit cards. I know of
a few who have personally done so.
Women’s purchases are
also difficult to gauge because – and I know
it’s not politically correct to say this,
but it’s the truth – they aren’t always
paying for the things they buy. They may be
living “Vegas style”. And by that, I mean
they’re blowing some other guy’s money like
pretty girls do at the Blackjack table. Some
women live like every day is a lottery
jackpot spending day. Men don’t have the
luxury of doing this – unless they were once
married to Britney Spears.
So women’s underwear
are unreliable, and the Underwear Index is
therefore highly sexist. Fair enough. But
women can rest assured that we do manage to
work our way into the equation and muck it
all up: Underwear Index keeps a running
tally of how many billions of dollars in
total are spent on men’s undies.
It doesn’t necessarily
mean that men are buying less
underwear, though, because as a British
Verdict Research Report points out, grocers
are putting cheap underwear under our noses
alongside the plums and bananas. This also
increases the likelihood that it’s not even
a man buying the underwear for himself, but
rather a woman doing the grocery shopping.
She could potentially pick up five
three-packs for less than the price of a
single pair of Hugo Boss briefs. This would
mean that the number of total underwear
purchases increase while overall total spent
remains the same or even decreases. So as
the underwear market diversifies and
expands, the Underwear Index becomes
increasingly unreliable.
There are better
economic indicators in the consumer market.
I have personally found that when times get
tough, the first thing to go out the window
for me and my friends is the health care
plan. For $600 or more a month for a single
person, many people feel that they’re better
off taking their chances on getting slammed
by a city taxi. The only time you’re really
screwed is if you come down with cancer, but
that’s a one-in-three shot. The choice then
becomes: 33 percent chance of cancer vs. 100
percent chance of having to pay $600 or more
a month. I have found that most of my
friends have chosen to take their chance on
the cancer. And they weren’t even illegal
immigrants.
Another thing to go out
the window is expensive beverages. Why blow
$10-$15 a day on Starbucks coffee or
specialized water when the stuff coming out
of the tap isn’t even diseased?
Which brings us to
perhaps the most reliable economic
indicator: The McDonald’s Index. McDonald’s
restaurant global profits have climbed every
month during the recession. That’s because
McDonald’s is offering more quality choices
for cheaper prices. Starbucks has had to
close 1,000 stores in America because
McDonald’s has been drinking their
Frappuccino.
Actually, maybe when
the dust settles on this recession, we’ll
find that we haven’t become poorer, but
rather just smarter.