I would rather have a gun that fills my need, whatever the price, and if I cannot yet afford it I do not buy it. I would rather have 2 $200 guns that worked than 2 $1000 guns that filled the exact same role.
For example, I recently purchased a Mossberg 500 for HD. It cost $250. Would I be any better served by purchasing a more expensive shotgun? Would a winchester throw buckshot into and intruder any better? How about a Bennelli? I certainly do not think so.
If you want to spend more on a pretty gun, great, have fun with it, but do not act as though a cheaper gun can't get the same job done.
That said, I would prefer a smaller numbers of guns which meet my needs/wants. I am not and never will "hoard" lots of guns. Right now, I have one custom rebuilt Mauser rifle for hunting and one shotgun for HD. Next I want a compact pistol for carry.
I guess I would sum it up by saying that what I want the most is the cheapest reasonable option and the best deal. The whole reason I have yet to purchase that carry pistol is that I don't feel I can afford one that's good enough. What I really want is an HK because I like the way the UPS45C fits my hand and the way it feels to shoot it. My instinct is to avoid the "low-end" brands like Hi-point/Taurus as poor quality and therefore a waste of money, and to avoid the "high-end" brands that I wouldn't feel able to use and enjoy, I don't want to have to "shoot on eggshells" if you get my drift. Another knock against the high end brands to me is that they accomplish essentially the same task, but they cost you more. Will a Sako be more accurate than my 70 year old rebuild Mauser? Yes. Do I care? No, my target for that gun is Deer, the qualitative difference is not worth the extra price. Therefore, buying something more expensive than necessary is also wasting money.
What it comes down to is that it is about what you need/want the gun to do not what it costs. Find the best deal for what you need.