It is hard to do, and it is harder for these folks to understand that paying for quality is cheaper than going for the lowest price. A $500 washing machine that lasts 50 years "costs" $10/year (after 50 years you'll have to replace it with another one). A $300 Washing Machine that lasts 10 years costs $30/year. Or conversely a $300 machine that lasts 10 years will be re-bought 5 times over a 50 year period ($1,500), but a $500 machine that lasts 50 years will be bought once ($500) over a 50 year period.
So buying the "quality" machine actually stretches your paycheck further because you won't be re-buying a machine in 10 years.
Of course it is really hard to help people understand that math, but once they do they can find a whole lot of cost savings in their lives.
You have to have a savings in order to amortize. Most people might have a few-hundred dollars that they need to feed a family and drive to work on until their next paycheck. This is the demographic that will pay $300 every ten years instead of $500 every 50, because they would have to choose not to eat for two weeks.
I agree with you that is the choice they would make, but stand by my point that it hurts them rather than helps.
I think you would find the book "Scarcity: Why having to little means so much" by Sendhil Mullainathan an interesting read.
What I got out of that book was that this behavior is built in at a much deeper level of our brains than you might expect and to counter it, and to get out of its grip, requires thoughtful action. In my case I find myself falling into these patterns with respect to spending time poorly when I don't have enough of it.
So buying the "quality" machine actually stretches your paycheck further because you won't be re-buying a machine in 10 years.
Of course it is really hard to help people understand that math, but once they do they can find a whole lot of cost savings in their lives.