[shituonui]

>Im so bewildered I’ll just ask “what problem you can possibly have with luxury cars and jewelry?”

I don't believe you. It is pretty obvious someone would object to luxury cars and jewelry:

1. Luxury cars are often wasteful or dangerous to be around.

2. The resources for jewelry are scarce and often extracted with slave labor.

3. Both are often used as displays of wealth, intended to demean people who can't afford them.

I love fast cars and I wear jewelry. I hate the fact that these beautiful things are corrupted by their use as tools of oppression.

[djsbs]

1.“I don't believe you. It is pretty obvious someone would object to luxury cars and jewelry:”

Let me revise, since I have met ppl like OP:

Im so bewildered at this attitude that I’ll just ask “what problem do people like you possibly have with luxury cars and jewelry?”

2. Jewlery can be made with slave labor. There is nothing inherent in jewelry that it must be made with slave labor. Thus, you can object to a available jewelry or specific jewelry but your objection isn't valid for jewelry generally.

This is like objecting to running shoes. De facto they’re made in sweatshops, and available sneakers supports slavery. But nothing inherent in trainers requires slaves.

3. As to the scarcity of resources for jewelry, so what? Thats a moral judgement on your behalf that jewelry is inherently less worthy than, say, an Orthodox icon, or bullion as a hedge against inflation.

4. As to cars, most of your objection appear to be directed at their drivers. How is a VW golf more dangerous than an A3? Only if you assume nastier drivers drive luxury cars. Let me assure you I drive like an utter asshole on my $3000 assessed value car (mea culpa. But I live in the mountains, the car is stick…) Nor does the A3 consume more resources than the Golf to make.

5. As your third objection, I dont agree with your statement: “[…]often used as displays of wealth, intended to demean people who can't afford them”. Clearly some ppl buy expensive things to show off, but I dont think it follows that their intention is to demean. I think that says more about the feelings of inadequacy that we feel next to a fancy car. Feelings we rationalize by telling ourselves they’re doing it on purpose to spite us. They probably aren't giving you a second’s thought.

I think your use of the word “often” is telling. Myself, I’d love to have a luxury car but one criteria would have to be that it is not obvious that it is a luxury car. It follows that luxury cars are not purchased solely to show off (and therefore immoral?)

6. Look, if the OP had objected to cars I wouldn't have bothered to object. Maybe I’d disagree (on the fence on cars), but I can see that an argument can be made that cars, electric or otherwise, are inherently immoral.

The statement was just self-righteous

EDIT: typos. Writing this on my 5 year old SE

[shituonui]

I don't really believe that luxury cars or jewelry are inherently evil and won't defend those claims. I gave those as examples of (obvious) reasons people might object to those things.

>Clearly some ppl buy expensive things to show off, but I dont think it follows that their intention is to demean.

I don't think it matters what the intention is. Our society universally denigrates the poor and elevates wealth to a virtue. Anything that contributes to that has got to go.