Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stuff

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 144 posts

Re: Stuff

#101

Post by redcap »

zasz wrote: post #98
fnid2 wrote: post #76

I have too much stuff. Most people in America do. In fact, the poorer people are, the more stuff they seem to have. Hardly anyone is so poor that they can't afford a front yard full of old cars. Wow, Paul, you really don't understand what it is like to be poor. The poor people don't have a lot of cars in their yard because they can afford lots of cars. They have lots of cars because they never throw them away. Rich p…

That is true. My parents were reduced to selling all their crockery for food during the Cultural Revolution, and we were certainly poor after we came to the US. However, we are not poor anymore, are unlikely to be poor again, and there is no longer a reason for my mother to save our used Kleenexes. I wish I were kidding.

My grandfather lived through the great depression. When it came time for my grandparents to move to a smaller house that suited them better my Mum had to throw away so much stuff that he'd accumulated out of not wanting to waste anything.

Re: Stuff

#102

Post by potatolicious »

philwelch wrote: post #80
fnid2 wrote: post #76

I have too much stuff. Most people in America do. In fact, the poorer people are, the more stuff they seem to have. Hardly anyone is so poor that they can't afford a front yard full of old cars. Wow, Paul, you really don't understand what it is like to be poor. The poor people don't have a lot of cars in their yard because they can afford lots of cars. They have lots of cars because they never throw them away. Rich p…

Or maybe people with marginal incomes spend themselves into sustained poverty through wasteful consumption. If they saved money instead of buying minimally useful possessions and saving the possessions, maybe they wouldn't have to worry about being able to afford stuff they need. You and I have probably known different sets of poor people, but I've seen cases of this. That doesn't justify throwing things away once yo…

Wow, that's possibly the most arrogant, yet typically upper-middle class thing I've seen all week on HN.

Unfortunately, the "poor people are poor 'cos they're dumb!" sentiment is way too prevalent just about anywhere you go.

I had the (unexpected and unintended) opportunity to live on the wrong side of the tracks, in an incredibly poor industrial neighbourhood - the reality is far more complex than "poor people have poor impulse spending control". To reduce it to such is incredibly out of touch with reality.

Re: Stuff

#103

Post by jackowayed »

potatolicious wrote: post #102
philwelch wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe people with marginal incomes spend themselves into sustained poverty through wasteful consumption. If they saved money instead of buying minimally useful possessions and saving the possessions, maybe they wouldn't have to worry about being able to afford stuff they need. You and I have probably known different sets of poor people, but I've seen cases of this. That doesn't justify throwing things away once yo…

Wow, that's possibly the most arrogant, yet typically upper-middle class thing I've seen all week on HN. Unfortunately, the "poor people are poor 'cos they're dumb!" sentiment is way too prevalent just about anywhere you go. I had the (unexpected and unintended) opportunity to live on the wrong side of the tracks, in an incredibly poor industrial neighbourhood - the reality is far more complex than "poor people have…

I don't think that was his point.

His point wasn't "poor people are poor because they spend too much", his point was, "maybe spending too much is part of what keeps them poor." Obviously there's a lot of factors reducing economic mobility anyway, but poor spending choices certain don't help.

The best example of this would be addiction. A lot of poor people are addicted to tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs, etc. This puts a huge damper on any ability to save they might have.

But I'm sure he knows that sub-optimal spending decisions are just one of many reasons that poor people stay poor.

Re: Stuff

#104

Post by ebun »

jasonkester wrote: post #13

I can relate to the point about how traveling realigns your ideas about stuff. I've been traveling around South America for the last 5 months with exactly one change of clothes. The general rule for long trips like this is that if you haven't used one of your possessions in 3 days, then you shouldn't have it along. I find that I take this concept with me back to civilization. I'll get back to my storage locker and no…

I second the bit about traveling.

I relocated from Austin to San Francisco to Japan and with each move, I drastically reduced my lifestlye. It's just as PG said: you don't really miss anything.

And I dealt with books by getting an e-reader so I could carry my library in my backpack.

Re: Stuff

#105

Post by mike463 »

I think the way to get a handle on all your stuff is to turn your life inside out (or more accurately, turn it rightside out).

From an engineering standpoint, you have to design your life. You know - architect how you want to live.

From that, it's easy to deal with your stuff -- does it support your design? If it doesn't, it should go.

The computer should have a place. Kitchen stuff should live in the kitchen.

The bedroom closet is for the clothes you do use and maybe seasonal stuff at the top. It isn't for 6 boxes of cat5 and all those extra USB cables you end up with. You should not have a closet or garage full of "misc".

My personal test is the "might" test. Stuff you "might" need is not stuff you do need. It goes.

Re: Stuff

#106

Post by gcb »

wyclif wrote: post #24
abstractbill wrote: post #12

Except books—but books are different. I suspect most people have their own personal caveat to this essay. Mine isn't books (I usually give good books to friends after reading them, and bad books to ebay). My own caveat would be raw materials for building or repairing things (electrical components, nuts and bolts, tools, etc).

It's not especially inconvenient to own several thousand books Until you find yourself having to move.

i'm moving to another country in the next weeks. plan was to leave everything behind but the (academic) wife's some thousand books.

I was going to spend some little money on the shipping. Then i found out that the company would pay a ship container and give me hardly any financial support to settle there. So now i'm on full pack rat mode!

...and i can't tell you how nice and easy it was to ship only the some thousand books. Everything else by comparisson is hell. You have to fill some isurance forms on everything. Packaging is a pain. You can't separate a bed into smaller boxes like a shelf of books. Etc

Re: Stuff

#107

Post by gcb »

cracki wrote: post #15
kgp wrote: post #9

"I think humans constantly scan their environment to build a mental model of what's around them. And the harder a scene is to parse, the less energy you have left for conscious thoughts. A cluttered room is literally exhausting." On a related note , Steve Jobs has no furniture.

what does he have? walls and a floor?

he has a pretty good PR image.

Have you ever interviewed a politician? With jobs et all its probably the same. He will always be using that perfect entrepreneur mask and wont waste a single word not to sell you that image.

It's like reading a piece about a politician honesty and his worries about the people.

Only that with the business people the interviewer is not even trying to expose him. And if it's wired, then it's even the other way around. They will try hard to godfy ...is that a word?

Re: Stuff

#108

Post by ecuzzillo »

philwelch wrote: post #80
fnid2 wrote: post #76

I have too much stuff. Most people in America do. In fact, the poorer people are, the more stuff they seem to have. Hardly anyone is so poor that they can't afford a front yard full of old cars. Wow, Paul, you really don't understand what it is like to be poor. The poor people don't have a lot of cars in their yard because they can afford lots of cars. They have lots of cars because they never throw them away. Rich p…

Or maybe people with marginal incomes spend themselves into sustained poverty through wasteful consumption. If they saved money instead of buying minimally useful possessions and saving the possessions, maybe they wouldn't have to worry about being able to afford stuff they need. You and I have probably known different sets of poor people, but I've seen cases of this. That doesn't justify throwing things away once yo…

The poor and lower-middle-class people I know don't do that. They just don't have the education or expertise that offers a job that pays more than 30k a year. There isn't much to save on 30k a year after mortgage/rent/car/insurance/kid-college-loan-payments/food, even if you're very thrifty. And God help you if you end up in that situation with an outstanding credit card balance or two.

Yeah, you can say they should have gotten the education or the expertise, and I or they or both might agree with you, but spending isn't usually the main issue.

Re: Stuff

#109

Post by gcb »

marshallp wrote: post #62

Kids don't builder a coarser model of the evironment, adults do. Once again pg doesn't do his resaarch before espousing his amateur psychology.

amateur psychologist to amateur psycologist, kids do not attach so much meaning to stuff as adults.

Kid sees a red car. It's a red car. And has two dices hanging on the mirror.

Adult sees a red car. It's a red car that cost X, was probably financed. Or does he had the money? Is that some custom paint job? When did he bought it? Is he still working at the same place?

You see, the adult didn't even noticed the dices.

Re: Stuff

#110

Post by gcb »

eelco wrote: post #95
rbreve wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am from Honduras one of the poorest countries in Latin America, and if you go to poor neighborhoods you will see very cheap and small houses, but in their garage you will see very good cars, they rather have a nice car than live in a nice house or decent neighborhood. It's strange.

You can live in your car, but you can't drive in your house ;)

you missed the point completely. It's all about status.

Cant tell if it was a joke. I blame insomnia.

Post reply on HN