Gifts are a Waste of Money!

Malls are weird places. Every time I’m in one, I’m always perplexed at the sheer quantity of pointless trinkets and other useless products. The reality is that if a product or genre doesn’t move, it’s taken off the shelves and liquidated in a junk bin and discontinued. I noticed one kiosk selling something that looked like painted, pig wood carvings wearing hula skirts. Why? I don’t know either, but it follows that enough people want them in their home, business, trailer, or van down by the river to necessitate a business for them.

I guess if your favorite yard gnome is suddenly struck by lightning, and you collapse into a frenzied, emotional breakdown, you may impulsively buy one if the product placement is crafty enough. However, for shoppers not treading the mall following a devastating catastrophe wrought with distress, I fail to understand the pressing urge these buyers must feel when first laying sight on a poorly-made, wooden pig cut-out. That’s okay, though. Who’s decorative taste am I to judge? Just as long as they have a good warranty, I suppose, and are made with lead-free paint.

The Bond by Margarita Surnaite

Speaking of lead paint, then I went into Sharper Image. The store looks like the interior of a riced-out, import spaceship. In fact, China could probably even build a spaceship out of Sharper Image molds and a handful of Suzuki parts. Honestly though, is a water-proof alarm clock that plays lo-fi bird calls really worth $40? How did Radioshack miss the memo that bulky grey plastic warrants a 400% price mark-up? In all fairness to Sharper Image shoppers, though, I think most of their stuff is purchased as gifts.. which begs the question, “why?”

Think long and hard next time you’re thinking about giving a natural, wake-to-parrot alarm clock as a gift. Do you own one? Chances are, you don’t. Is it because you wouldn’t pay $40 for one when you could have put that cash towards something useful? Well, what makes you think your gift recipient would be willing to spend $40 on one?

Let’s say your gift recipient is walking around the mall and he sees this block of shiny, grey plastic which exclaims, “brighten your day with a morning dose of a heartwarming parrot call!” How much would he pay for it? $5, $10, $40, $100, -$3? If he might pay $10 for it, that’s all it’s worth to him. But you spent $40 on the gift! That’s $40 for $10 of value. You just vaporized $30 which neither you nor your recipient can now enjoy. Of course, the scammers at Sharper Image get to pocket $30 above marginal utility and are consequently encouraged to manufacture more parrot alarm clocks to fill more landfills with mercury and lead alongside the ever-present mounds of old AOL disks. Bummer.

If your recipient is a minimalist, he may even be willing to pay someone a few dollars to take it off his hands. You could have just burdened your recipient with a $3 loss and yourself $40, for a net loss of $43 dollars. Perhaps you’d be better off just giving a $40 bill (it’s the one with President Taft).

What about sentimental value? Indeed, this is really what gift-giving is all about. My high-school economics professor took this logic literally and gave his wife a wad of cash in a small, decorative box one Christmas. He explained that he was perplexed that his wife didn’t find utility theory romantic, and was sure to first run gift ideas past his daughter afterwards.

Let’s be honest, though, a parrot alarm clock has no more sentimental value than a small charm, book, or origami whooping crane covered in glitter and rhinestones (assuming you’re not an adult, heterosexual male.. then again, I may have just had a brilliant gift epiphany.) If you really want to give $40 of value, the best gift tactic may not be grabbing the first shiny thing you see, but $39 along with a card.. or, if nothing else, $40 of canned beans should do.