LogFAQs > #979736316

adjl posted...

Bear in mind that that tradition dates from a time when an entire house only cost 1-2 years' household income, so it was considerably more attainable.

This is sort of the significant consideration. People assume inflation is the only thing that changes over time, and inflation of salary (mostly) parallels inflation of costs, so the net effect is purchasing stays in relative parity. But there's more to it than that.

The "recommended" value went from one month's salary originally, to 2 months, and has really only started to push up on 3 months recently. But over the same timeframe buying power has probably weakened by an even greater amount, so a one-month salary ring in 1940 would theoretically be "worth" more than a three-month salary ring today.

To use the house comparison, it's like comparing 1/8th of a house to 1/100th of a house. Or buying a car for the price of 1 ring then versus the price of 4-5 rings today.

One month's salary went much father than three months salary does today for most people.



agesboy posted...

to be fair, society as a whole. we're still pretty weird about worshipping ""natural"" gems as being better

I can see immediate family being weird about it if they ever found out

It's because the same diamond industry (along with other gemstone markets) has spent decades constantly trying to hammer that idea into people's heads, because the alternative is the total collapse of most of their profit.

We could make pretty much perfect synthetic diamonds relatively cheaply 30+ years ago. But the diamond industry pushed really had to have laws passed that said they couldn't be used for jewelry (which is why most diamond-creation for years was used for things like making diamond sandpaper or diamond-tipped tools). At the same time, they've spent tons and tons of money to try and influence the public to see natural diamonds as being the only ones worth owing.

But there's been a slow erosion of the legal restrictions over the years, and public opinion is sort of starting to turn on it (and on the entire concept of engagement rings as a whole). So it's entirely possible that people 100 years in the future will have a much different view of what is and isn't appropriate for marriage (just like people 100 years ago had a much different view than we do now).