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

Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 304 posts

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#151

Post by Veen »

gtsteve wrote: post #147
Veen wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you complain about something being broken, they might fix it or just evict you with 2 months notice. This is why you shouldn't agree to a rolling tenancy. When the initial tenancy period is over, negotiate for a year or two. Most landlords, in my experience, don't want their houses sitting empty so they're happy to have you on the hook for a year. Although, it depends where you live: I work remotely so I tend to…

Yes but often you have no choice but to agree. When I've tried to negotiate in the past the response was for them to say "thanks but no thanks" and wait for someone else. Given this is London it moves very quickly and another tenant will be along soon.

Yes, that's why I was enthusiastic about the Government's plans to introduce three-year minimum tenancies, but the idea was unfortunately scrapped.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/longer-tenancy-plans-to-g...

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#152

Post by mehrdadn »

dawhizkid wrote: post #38
mehrdadn wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but do you find this ends up being wasteful at all? I don't know how many of/how much these items can be reused, but it feels like it would promote far faster consumption than ownership.

How did you come to that conclusion? The effect is the complete opposite...instead of a lot of people that move frequently (i.e. younger people) and buy/toss a lot of cheap Ikea furniture every year, you rent high end, long-lasting furniture that is delivered/removed for reuse.

Well that's one reason why I said I'm not sure how many of/how much these items can be reused. For something like a wooden table/chair, and a TV/monitor/etc., sure, it might get reuse. But for a sofa or mattress? I don't know about you, but unlike with a desk or chair, I wouldn't just buy any random 2-year-old sofa or mattress a stranger throws out... whereas I'd keep using the ones I've had for the past couple years in a heartbeat.

The other reason is, if everyone just "updates" stuff for no other reason than "because they want to", then that's obviously going to tend to cycle through products more rapidly than if people didn't just "update" on a whim, even if the second-hand-ness wasn't an issue.

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#153

Post by [deleted] »

Xelbair wrote: post #145
chrisco255 wrote: post #26

Renting an apartment vs owning a house is not necessarily a bad financial move. Depends on a number of factors. For instance, if you anticipate moving within a certain time frame, between closing costs, mortgage fees, commission, etc...it can cost more to own in the first 3-5 years, especially if prices are stagnant. Also, there are hidden costs of home ownership not necessarily factored in for, like repairs, mainten…

I completly disagree. When you are owning a house or apartment - each payment of mortgage builds your own equity. This is not the case with renting, plus when you actually own it and have to move - you can also rent it. Also, rent over here costs almost as much as mortgage(or in some cases - even more) - the only issue is the down payment - so the investment bit is very off.

[deleted]

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#155

Post by jaabe »

ahje wrote: post #124
Bombthecat wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that the house would be 4 million. Thanks to reducing population, increased building and housing. Plus who knows how the weather will be, I'm not sure that owning a house is the right thing in 20 years.

When I lived on Amager about six years ago, the prices were definitely around the 3-4 million mark in the suburbs. Prices fell somewhat once you got out of Copenhagen, but it was still ludicrously expensive. Are you saying the prices droppped sharply the last 5-6 years?

No.

But I probably should have been more clear. I mean, first of all, there are more cities than Copenhagen. I have a 3 room 92m^2 apartment that is 15 minute walking distance from Aarhus H that cost us 2.2 million. Secondly, I’d personally call a place like Valby “downtown” Copenhagen even though it would probably be more correct to label it surburbia like you do.

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#156

Post by mehrdadn »

Veen wrote: post #148
mehrdadn wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you're careful, you can find well-made furniture at low prices in charity stores. My house is furnished with a mix of crappy Ikea stuff and very nice second-hand furniture; I much prefer the latter. But this illustrates exactly the problem. "If you're careful" -- meaning you wouldn't want the average one you see. Meaning there's going to be considerably more waste when people have to buy second-hand than if they…

I wouldn't want the "average" new sofa either, especially not in a price bracket I consider reasonable. I agree that it would be more efficient if people kept their sofas for a decade, but they don't, and me buying the sofas they don't want is a better option than them ending up on a trash heap. Plus, I'll probably keep them for ten years. I buy high-end furniture second-hand so I can do exactly that, rather than get…

I think you misunderstood the point of my comment. I wasn't criticizing your approach or debating buying first- vs. second-hand. That's not what the discussion was about at all. The question was about renting and "updating" every couple years "because you want to" vs. actually owning your stuff, and how much additional waste that generates. I was pointing out that even if people like you exist who buy second-hand, they (naturally) won't necessarily be interested in doing that for most items, so that still results in a ton of waste instead of increasing re-use as someone else claimed. That's what this discussion was about.

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#157

Post by mark_l_watson »

I have thought about this lately because my wife and I moved to Illinois so I could accept a job managing a machine learning team. I retired and now we are just now moving back to Arizona. I spent five hours yesterday watching our stuff being wrapped and put on a truck. Lots of possessions.

The thing is, I have some stuff that I really like. A teak bookcase I bought in the 1970s when I got my first real job after finishing school. A huge teak desk my wife bought me 20 years ago. My wife has some furniture her grandmother had and that she grew up with. We also have art and things we have bought while traveling around the world.

I see the advantages of not being encumbered by ‘stuff’ but some possessions help define our personal history and are simply a pleasure to own.

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#158

Post by martin_a »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #132
QuadrupleA wrote: post #43

Not sure about furniture and clothing, but Joymode sounds interesting - kitchen gadgets, game consoles, VR headsets etc. Things someone might want to try, but could just sit around unused once the initial excitement is over. REI also, for outdoor gear - I've got backpacking stuff that sits in the basement doing nothing most of the year. It's much easier to acquire things than unacquire them - selling on craigslist, c…

> It's much easier to acquire things than unacquire them That's a good point. I wish it was easier. I have a lot of things in my home I'd like to get rid of and which still could be of use to someone else. I'd gladly sell them for a dollar or two each, but at that price point it isn't even worth the time I'm spending writing this HN comment, much less putting it up on an auction, paying the processing fee, and mailin…

> I wish it was easier. I have a lot of things in my home I'd like to get rid of and which still could be of use to someone else.

But wasn't it like this some years ago? I think I sold so much stuff I didn't need anymore on eBay and sometimes made good money from it. Nowadays eBay is not very user-friendly for private people and therefore unusable for this.

"eBay Kleinanzeigen" (not sure if this exists outside of Germany) is there, but it's lacking the auction features which made selling stuff so much fun...

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#159

Post by vinceguidry »

nnone wrote: post #154

Capitalist Utopia: Work your whole life, to own nothing. So you will continue to work for us because of the fear of losing everything (we rented to you).

Capitalism can't work without consumers, and consumerism can't work unless you can convince consumers they're better off as a cog in a machine. What capitalism degrades into when this doesn't happen isn't communism but rather mercantilism, or, if there isn't enough economic activity for even that, feudalism. And no one wants that.

I didn't realize how this could work until I looked at my own life and realized I would rather be an IC than a manager.

I still want to own my own means of production and earn economic freedom, but on my own terms. If I can't get it on my own terms, being a cog in someone else's machine isn't really all that bad.

Reframed this way, it's less a battle of haves vs have nots and more a cooperative project to make more for all. Ultimately capitalism has to find a way to incorporate the best parts of communism.

Re: Owning nothing is now a luxury, thanks to a number of subscription startups

#160

Post by scottlocklin »

CPLX wrote: post #136

When I was a kid in the 80’s renting home furnishings, driving a taxi on the side, and renting out spare rooms in your house were all very common activities too. They were generally things people did because they didn’t have stable well paying jobs. That’s still the reason. All this disruptive new economy rebranding notwithstanding.

I'm waiting for rentacenter to rebrand itself as "appliances and furniture as a service."
Post reply on HN