[wara23arish]

Maybe Im missing out but Ive never felt the need to spend so much on shoes.

There’s countless of alternatives to boots/shows that aren’t name-brand Doc Martens with that aesthetic.

Personally, I just shop at the clearance sections or sales (ive never seen doc martens there ime)

I always feel like a fool if i drop money on something expensive.

From reading On The Road, I just remember that they were always broke, drunk, drugs and chasing experiences and not aesthetics. at least thats what I took out from the book

[armenarmen]

Ever hear of the Sam Vimes Boot Theory? Terry Pratchett in the Discworld novel Men at Arms has the Vimes say: "The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory

[floren]

> Ever hear of the Sam Vimes Boot Theory?

Generally at least once a week on this very website. And on reddit. And on something awful.

[armenarmen]

Hahaha totally fair

[Anthony-G]

For what it’s worth, I’d never heard of it until now – despite reading Hacker News for about nine years! Related: https://xkcd.com/1053/

[LarryMullins]

I've tried some other brands of boots, the quality is hit or miss but I've yet to find a brand that had a durability:price ratio better than Doc Martens. I'm sure such a brand exists, but I'd hate to find out how many pairs of boots I go through until I find that brand by trial and error.

I've sworn off sneakers entirely though. Unless you're buying sneakers for a specific athletic purpose, I think sneakers as a default footware is something of a scam. They're all built to fall apart after months, maybe a year or two max. They're usually made with fabric instead of leather, with thin and soft rubber soles. Even the ones made with leather still have thin soles that wear out fast. I've never had nor heard of a pair of sneakers that didn't disintegrate before two years of daily use.

As for the broke, drunk and drugs lifestyle, I think dependable boots are a great choice. Even if nothing else in your life is stable, at least you can rely on your boots.

[quickthrowman]

> Maybe Im missing out but Ive never felt the need to spend so much on shoes.

It’s something you can’t understand unless you actually buy and wear a pair of well-made boots or shoes.

A mall store pair of leather boots might weigh 1-1.5 lbs because it’s made of bad leather, EVA foam, and adhesives. A pair of well made boots, one boot will weigh almost 2 lbs because they use good leather uppers, real rubber or leather soles, a steel shank, and cork footbed.

A $300 pair of boots with last 5x longer than a $100 pair of boots if you take care of them and don’t wear them daily.

[qup]

Boots are a good thing to look for in thrift stores.

I got a $220 pair of redwings in good shape for $12.

[freemanofthewan]

Sir, please try a good pair of footwear, for your sake! If you need convincing, look up the Boots Theory. Personally, I live in my boots and have worn out many cheap pair. Sometimes 2 a year. Invested a little more, my body was never so happy, and I didn't need to replace them for 4 years. Easy math.

[yamtaddle]

My first pair of Redwing Heritage boots (and the only ones I've paid full retail for) have seen probably 800-900 wears over seven or so years. I expect they'll make it to at least 2,000, and maybe a lot more, though they may require a resoling somewhere in the 1200-1500 range.

I've worn them up mountains a couple times (OMG don't, they're so damn heavy, it was such a bad idea), while tiling floors or drywalling or doing other DIY housework, building a fence, moving house, working on cars, bicycling (not the best, but they're OK for a quick ride), around town in general, to the office, everywhere. Haven't babied them a bit. Snow, rain, I make sure they don't sit around totally soaked after I'm done, but I don't shy away from wearing them in those conditions.

They still look plenty presentable for slightly-fancy-casual, a hair below smart-casual, which is about the "highest" wear they were suited for to begin with.

Meanwhile, the cloth sneakers I used to buy would look like shit after maybe 80 wears, and be trash no later than 200.

They're also my most comfortable shoes that aren't house-slippers. It's like they're part of my foot. After the ~2-week break-in period, anyway :-)

[wishinghand]

I've only dropped $200+ on footwear a few times because those pairs of shoes or boots have not yet worn out. And they're very comfy and look sharp.