I agree your analysis is more precise. But then again, people over-estimate the value of watching TV

People like to compare time spend saving money to their working-hour rate of pay. For example, someone who earns $20 an hour likes to say an hour-long task to save $15 isn t worth his time. But that s only true if during that time the person could have and would have worked to get the $20. Otherwise, the comparison should properly be a $15 savings versus zero dollars in earnings [plus, income earnings are taxed which further deflates the argument].
Furthermore, Karp points fm radio stations in los angeles out that comparison shopping can yield big savings in little fm radio stations in los angeles time. He cites a 2002 study at Virginia Tech where students comparison shopped fm radio stations in los angeles for selected items. Here are the results, quoted from the Consumer Federation of America .
You used the wrong metric for comparison. You re comparing pure money, not quality of life. Is cutting from 3 hours of free time to 2 hours of free time worth $100. How is that additional $100 going to improve your life compared to the loss of an hour of free time?
I agree your analysis is more precise. But then again, people over-estimate the value of watching TV all the time. Few of us are too busy to comparison shop. The people who are truly busy, yes, it makes sense they should catch up on sleep or enjoy some free time.