Agree with lots of the things said, but for me it's not considering the sodding 'Sam Vines boots theory' as the epitome of financial wisdom.
An aphorism written for a faux-medieval fantasy novel in the 1980s isn't directly applicable to the real world consumerism of the 2020s but people still quote it like it's a directive sent down from on high.
I fully accept there may be some, occasional examples where the overall premise - which boils down to it's better to spend more and buy something of really good quality, once, than to buy cheap and have to replace it repeatedly, which ends up costing more in the long term, still applies.
But, generally, in 2026 UK, firstly spending more often doesn't result in significantly improved quality, but just means the extra money goes towards branding, advertising, shareholder profits, etc. I have £5 tops from primark/asda that are going strong after 20 years, and £50 ones that went bobbly after a wear or two. Same with electricals, or household items, or even cars. Even if it means slightly better quality, it doesn't mean 10, 20 or 50 times better, which is what it would have to work out as for the cost/benefit to be worth it.
Secondly, most people don't have just one pair of footwear, so the analogy doesn't work. In real life, how many people hold on to the same capsule item (whether boots, coat, white shirt) for 5, 10, 20 years, and don't lose it/stain it/lose or put on weight, change their circumstances (if I followed MN advice and bought an expensive 'capsule wardrobe' of timeless work classics in 2019 they'd still be languishing almost completely unworn 5 years later now I wfh), or just, heaven forbid, want to look vaguely fashionable given even 'classic' items such as jeans and boots can look out of date within a fairly short space of time.