What Do People Spend Money on That You Think Is Stupid and Extravagant?

Hard one to word correctly in the title…

I have seen a few examples lately of silly and over-the-top things that people pay loads of money for, and it honestly makes me a little angry that people waste money on such nonsense.

My list includes (they're mostly vanity related I notice):
- $1000 sneakers
- $20 pairs of socks
- Butler's pantries - so now you have a 'Good' kitchen, and an 'Actual' kitchen… (mod: language)
- $2000 iphones

I'm certainly guilty of wasting money from time to time, on clothes or booze or furniture etc, and I make a decent living so this isn't a whinge about "Why do people have money and not me??". I am just absolutely gobsmacked sometimes at the stuff people spend their money on….and yes it is their money to waste obviously

What's on your list of "WTF Expenses"?


  • +22 votes


    but really;
    new cars

  • +18 votes

    Glasses. I don't understand how someone can fork out $200+ for a pair of raybans. They look like every other style.

    • +1 vote

      Geez you'd really hate me. Pair of regular Raybans for driving when I have contact lenses in. And a pair of $700 prescription Oakleys for driving when I'm wearing glasses.

      • +6 votes

        I call my contact lenses "HDR lenses" coz the world does seem brighter, with deeper blacks and saturated colours with them on

        • +1 vote

          I can't see why they would increase colour. Do you normally wear glasses? I'd be more inclined to believe your glasses are cutting light a little bit.

          • +4 votes

            @AdosHouse: I'm short sighted, but cant be bothered with glasses as they slide down my nose, the lens gets dust on them (requiring cleaning/sprays few times per day)
            With contacts its just cleaning once a day. My vision seems a tad duller (colour wise) without them


              @payton: I know what you mean. I think the contact lenses make a difference being actually on your eye and not ~1cm away from it. Clarity and definition seems better which can make individual colours stand out more rather than morphing with all of the other coloured blobs that make up what we see.

          • +6 votes


            I can't see why they would increase colour.

            then you probably need glasses

        • +1 vote

          I am waiting for Ray Trace lenses


        I really don't. I just don't get why people would spend that much on glasses.

        I wear 6 month contacts, have prescription glasses and polarised sunglasses. I bought them each for ~$20-25 whenever I or family goes overseas. They work fine so I can't imagine forking out that amount of money for designer glasses.

        • +7 votes

          Just a joke, and I can gladly say I did not pay full price.

          Raybans I got from Otticanet for about $140.

          The Oakleys I was proud of how I got them. So I got sucker punched at work and it bent my regular glasses $600 for strong Oakley frames, and transition lenses. So work paid for them. Now OPSM had a buy one get one 50% off deal. So I got an invoice for my replacement glasses for work. Now the replacements were the cheaper of the 2 pairs, so I got 50% off them as credit for the Sunglasses. So it is $200 for the Oakley frame and $500 for the genuine Oakley lenses. So $700 minus $300 credit. Then I am with Navy Health so I get 20% off lenses at OPSM, so another $100 off, now $300. I had $150 left in private health optical, so down to $150 left to pay. And that is how I got $700 of genuine Oakley prescription sunglasses for $150.

        • +2 votes

          I didn’t understand why people spent money on sunglasses either.. that until I decided to have LASIK surgery.

          The day after my surgery, my eyes were so sensitive and I needed a new pair of sunglasses(my old pair has prescription).

          Bought a pair of Rayban and still couldn’t open my eyes outdoor, walked in the day later and exchanged them for a pair of Maui Jim, the difference was day and night. Never gone back to cheap polarised sunnies again. I only have 1 pairs of eyes, got to protect it as much as I can :-)


          I previously just used cheap sunnies, but my $200 pair that I wear now is so worth it IMHO. Colours are very noticably more vivid plus it has a higher safety factor as I wear them while riding a motorcycle with the visor up. They did break but I sent them back for warranty. Was so pleased to get them back repaired after wearing the cheap ones for a month.

          Sunnies are also a fashion thing. It's absolutely fine to have some nice things during our short time in this world. It's like the difference between a nice hotel or a cheapo backwater hotel that's not nice at all.

    • +2 votes

      I keep either losing or sitting on mine by accident, so i tend to just buy polarised chemist glasses

      • +1 vote

        a couple brands that do stylish cheap polarised sunnies are the cancer council and glarefoil. no idea why someone would buy raybans when these exist


        Same here - $5-10 pair of tinted safety glasses.

        Functional, offers extra safety for mowing etc, less likely to break if I sit on them etc, and even if they do (or I lose them, etc) only $5-10 lost.

        I wouldn't mind a nice pair of sunnies, but given my history with them I'd be too worried about losing/breaking them.

    • +4 votes

      Resident tight arse here, so I can have a shot at this one. I haven't spent that much on my raybans but the reason I fork out for branded sunnies is because the lenses and styles. Shitty brand glasses can actually damage your eyes.


        Read my reply to fossilfuel a couple above this, I did not pay full price.

      • +3 votes

        Shitty brand glasses can actually damage your eyes.

        That's a bit of a false dichotomy though. You don't need to buy rayban/oakleys to get decent lenses, you just need to buy ones that comply to Australian standards - which you can get for $20 from the cancer council.

    • +1 vote

      I was having a discussion about glasses with a couple of friends. One of us, who isn't particularly rich, buys $1000 glasses every couple of years. He doesn't claim them on private health or anything. Needless to say, I was shocked. Mine are $25 from clearly and I got that back on my private health!


      My wife and i have 12 pairs of sunglasses. Aliexpress is very kind to our style. total cost for all 12 pairs is around $70AUD. i consider it enough for the next 10 years. I wouldnt dream of $200 on a single pair.

      • +5 votes

        You'll want to check these meet Australian Standards. Some "sun"glasses are actually just fashion glasses with no UV rating on the lens. They do more damage than good if worn outside as sunglasses.


          ive had sunglasses that fit your description before. you can definitely feel with a short amount of time that they are not protecting your eyes at all. anyone anywhere can put those rates and specs on a pair of sunglasses for sale. some are better/more compliant than others. i always read the reviews.

          • +1 vote

            @DarthAntz: Uv is invisible, wearing sunglasses thinking they block all wavelengths of UVA and UVB even when they are not can lead to a false sense of security. Then you will pay with your health 20 years later. I can't take this risk and at the same time if I get problem I don't want the public system to fix my issues… I only wear muai Jim's, makos and serengedis that have met with auz/nz standards

      • +2 votes

        12 pairs of sunglasses.

        -for driving alone
        -for driving with the mrs
        -walking the dog
        -mowing the lawn
        -making dinner
        -having a shower
        -taking a shit
        -at work
        -go shopping
        -get a haircut
        -using the computer
        -at the beach


      Totally agree. I bought a pair of Cancer Council for about $50 and they are very good glasses.

    • +2 votes

      They may look like every other style (more like every other style looks like them) but they don't feel the same. Cheap copies feel light, loose and plasticy. Ray Bans are solid and weighty. Nor do they last the same. Ray Bans last forever. I'll have the one pair of Ray Bans for years (only ever replaced them after being lost, I've never had a pair break or scratch) while my partner will go through three or four pairs of cheap ones a year.

      • +1 vote

        Lol 'last forever'. You may be the exception but I don't know anyone who doesn't lose / damage their sunnies after a year or so.


          My Ray Bans tend to see a lot of use and abuse and I have never been broken a single pair or ever had a lens get scratched. Been wearing Wayfarers for prob 25 years now. Only ever replaced a pair if they've gotten lost or stolen. I've maybe bought five or six pairs ever.

      • +1 vote

        I've had my prescription Ray-Ban glasses for over four years now. Wear them everyday and have put them through a bit of beating, they are still holding up strong.

    • +3 votes

      Must-watch for anyone interested in branded glasses


      • +1 vote

        Thank you for posting this.
        I now understand why the quality of the oakley eyeglasses I was buying every 1-2 years from OPSM was dropping but the prices were getting higher and higher.

        I now buy only from online (vision direct) and pay for a designer brand with thin/light lenses and try to stay in the rebate amount from NIB.
        So pair I got this year were $323 delivered vs the last pair I bought in store which were almost $900! <- ten years or so ago mind you…
        And I even sent back a pair after a year (oakley once again) as I was convinced they were knock-offs. Nope, just crap build quality. They gave me a discount on my next pair (not oakley btw)

        I think bricks&mortar glasses shops are a massive rip-off, happy to pay the optometrist for their work but always walk out with the script I paid for (including PD dimension)

    • +3 votes

      Besides from looks, you pay more for quality - RayBans won't rust or break as easy along with all the other benefits.
      I do agree with you, I have only ever bought one pair of expensive RayBans and that was an accident because I forgot about exchange rates haha.

    • +2 votes


      The $200+ sunglasses I have bought have improved my vision, especially at 500 metres plus where the increased contrast/reduced glare makes object discrimination easier. They improve my eyesight, not limit it.


      My $200+ sunnies resist scratches unlike my $10-$50 sunnies.


      At a guess I would have used my latest pare of $200+ sunnies for more than 100,000km, compared to less than 1000km for every cheap pair I have ever bought. This is due to clarity and resistance to lens damage.

      Don't get me wrong, I haven't paid $200+ for sunnies. I doubt most $200+ sunnies will be as good as the pairs I have bought due to 'industry treads.' And if cheap glasses work for you, I agree that buying expensive glasses would be silly.


      Unfortunately some people don’t have a lot of choice with glasses. My lenses are usually about $250 each, then add frames. They are a special order from Zeiss in Germany and take weeks to get here. The joys of bad vision!


      What alternative brands would you recommend at lower costs?


      Knock around glasses. $5 USD a pair and good quality, get the premiums for 15 or even less on sale. As good quality as any brand name.

  • +96 votes

    “I spent half my money on gambling, alcohol and wild women. The other half I wasted.” - WC Fields

    My view is that people should spend their money on what they want and others should mind their own business.

    • +21 votes

      Not when they're falling victim to scams or addiction and at risk of having to mooch off taxpayers… or already there.

      Blowing welfare payments on drugs, gambling and alcohol is not OK!


        Added to that that this is not “their” money…

        • +9 votes

          I have to disagree with you on that one.
          Provided they meet the eligibility criteria; once somebody receives a centerlink payment, the money belongs to them. They can go and spend it drinking and gambling at the pub if they choose to, or they can save it, invest it, whatever. None of our business.

          • +11 votes

            @idonotknowwhy: It is our business since we finance it. In the case of Newstart, that's to provide them with the means to get back on their feet. Not to be squandered and depended upon indefinitely.

            • +5 votes

              @Scrooge McDuck: It all goes back in to the economy gets taxed and goes round and round again. Then some more is printed and the money you have is worth less anyway. You think gambling and alcohol isn't taxed?

            • +3 votes

              @Scrooge McDuck:

              Newstart (is) to provide (Austalian's) with the means to get back on their feet

              Yes, that is how it is sold to Johny Taxpayer.

              Newstart was easy to cheat as welfare payments are an order of magnitude cheaper than incarceration.

              Cheating welfare can have far fewer social issues than theft or sale of illegal products and/or services.

              Newstart is not designed to get people back on their feet or give them a fair go. Newstart is designed to antagonise tax payers to stop them from drawing it when needed with silly rules and social stigma.

              I would much rather pay my share of $8,200 per year per unemployed person ($10 billion cash payments across 1.2 million unemployed Australians), than the average $390/day just for a cell and the social issues of people using serious crime to fund their lifestyle instead.

              • +2 votes

                @This Guy:

                Newstart is designed to antagonise tax payers to stop them from drawing it when needed with silly rules and social stigma.

                I didn't feel any stigma at all when I was literally broke with $50 to my name, and needed Newstart. Its not like the Centrelink officer blew a trumpet (and shouted "another dole bludger!") when they approved my payment every fortnight.

                I used it to get back on my feet and got a job. Not because I feel bad about using Newstart, but because I like being paid more money more often.

                Most taxpayers would have contributed more to Newstart (taxes) compared to amount drawn, so why would anyone feel guilty if they genuinely needed help.

                • +2 votes

                  @payton: Good!

                  I am sorry if I offended you. My argument was an extreme to counter the "mooch off taxpayers" mindset.

                  I know my reply was extremely cynical. I used it as I have never seen 'welfare helps people' influence a person who wrote, 'Blowing welfare payments on drugs, gambling and alcohol is not OK!'

            • -1 vote

              @Scrooge McDuck: I bought a TV at Harvey Norman. Does that mean I'm entitled to instruct Gerry Harvey on how to spend his money?

  • Top