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

Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 566 posts

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#421

Post by jonknee »

cableshaft wrote: post #417
supernovae wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the value of "owning" something? I've owned VHS's, they're worthless I've owned houses - that I had to short sell I've owned DVD's - they're worthless I've owned Books - they're worthless What is the value of owning over just paying to enjoy access? I like spotify because i can sync music to my phone to play offline - but "owning" all this music is worthless... I had a HUGE cd collection growing up but they w…

I do have Netflix, and other subscription services, but by the nature of licensing, they're very limited. Do you only watch/read/etc the most common, most popular, current movies/music/etc? If you seek out anything a little off the beaten path, you pretty much have to own it or you won't be able to consume it, or get access to it later. For example, I recently went through several lists of underrated (i.e. not the me…

> Is that what you want the future to be like? Where these movies might as well have disappeared off the face of the earth because no one can get ahold of them anymore? Because that's the direction we're starting to go in with more and more things going digital only and subscription only.

Pretty much. Most of the time I am more than happy to watch something on the current rotation of Netflix/Amazon/HBO. It doesn't work when you're trying to seek out something specific, but the streaming world works better when you let the content come to you. I certainly don't want to fill my home with plastic discs of movies and if I ever want to watch something specific I can almost always pay to stream it. If it's not available as a rental I can just watch another movie. There is more content than anyone can ever watch, if it's not accessible to me I feel no need to go out of my way.

It's sort of like having a very well done company cafeteria (a la Google) vs going out to a restaurant. I may not get exactly what I want every day, but it's good food without having to go anywhere and at an unbeatable price. I'll probably choose that over a restaurant 9/10 times.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#422

Post by Faark »

_louisr_ wrote: post #223
crazygringo wrote: post #167

This is beyond ridiculous. The crux of the article is: > Each of these changes is beneficial, yet I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. It set Americans apart from feudal peasants, taught us how property rights and incentives operate, and was a kind of…

>If we want to be nervous, let's investigate inequality of net worth And we should find ourselves completely at ease at the end of our investigation, for in every species success is distributed inequitably. Inequality of net worth is a natural law, and human society is no exception. And we need to keep very hard working people motivated to keep working very hard by ensuring them that they will always keep the lions s…

> we need to keep very hard working people motivated to keep working very hard by ensuring them that they will always keep the lions share of their labour's products

I'd love to agree with you and rewarding work is very important, but in our current society outcomes seem mostly determined by starting conditions. People born into poor household that cannot offer good parenting & education are expected to "work way harder" to achieve a similarly happy life than people who spawned lucky. That's fine to some degree, but should be kept under control. Once enough people feel the system isn't fair and rigged against them will they burn it to the ground.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#423

Post by marcosdumay »

burfog wrote: post #194
amelius wrote: post #6

It may be better for the environment to not own stuff, but instead use services. For example, take a fridge. If I buy a fridge, the company I buy it from has an incentive to make it break in N years, so they can sell me a new one, i.e. "planned obsolescence". However, if I subscribe to a service to keep my food and beverages at a certain temperature, then the company has the incentive to make the fridge last as long…

I got burned by "buying a product and not knowing when it will fail". Samsung made the largest fridge available. I got the $2500 model: stainless steel, no IoT but digital, double doors over drawer freezer. It looked really solid and durable. It failed in so many distinct and interesting ways! The door shelves constantly shattered, at $50 each. The structure had been compromised by artistic design, with two kinds of…

> I've learned my lesson: do not pay more in an attempt to get quality, because you'll just pay more for the same old junk.

Price does communicate some usable information. The problem is that most people naively assume that the more expensive item must be better, while the good items are actually fighting for an informed customer looking for a good cost/benefit. That means that most of the very low price stuff is crap, but also that if the value you can take from an item has a ceiling (limited comfort options, limited maintenance savings, limited "extra durability"), most of the very high price items are also crap.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#424

Post by owly »

Before Amazon Kindle, Netflix, Spotify, etc; I always was puzzled by people’s need to own things. Why? I used, and still do, this thing called... The Library! Why pile up stacks of books requiring many bookshelves when you can borrow anything your heart desires. Libraries are better than Amazon or Netflix actually. There have been several instances when I’ve borrowed European TV series which are not easily available on any streaming service. Seriously, how many of your DVDs have you watched more than twice? You can always borrow it again anyway.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#425

Post by bloaf »

Kalium wrote: post #331
qubex wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might add that Silicon Valley et al has not simply cleverly redefined the meaning of ’sharing’ to cover their rental practices, but even the meaning of community has been totally warped out of shape. A community used to be a group of geographically proximate people whose collective survival depended on getting over their sometimes conflicting mutual interests and opinions in order to survive; now we use the term ’c…

Personally, I view this as a distinct upgrade. Instead of being coerced into lots of interaction with people I may have nothing in common with except vague geographical proximity, I have the option of interacting with people who actually share my interests or concerns or hobbies. To me, this isn't isolated loners. It's the first real community I've ever known. The first one I've ever actually felt like I was a part o…

The issue is that the forced interactions via geographical proximity are a kind of moderating force.

Communities built around what they love are usually good, but what if what you love is terrible?

https://imgur.com/GripW3M

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#426

Post by taurath »

ithilglin909 wrote: post #318
taurath wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I make a deliberate effort to own instead of rent. In GENERAL, it seems like it takes a lot more money and resources nowadays to do this, relative to other benefits you can have. In Media, having a wall of $19.99 blue-rays and an apple music full of albums is going to cost you a lot more given how must people consume media (a lot, and constantly). The cost to get that permanence is like an order of magnitude over m…

> In GENERAL, it seems like it takes a lot more money and resources nowadays to do this, relative to other benefits you can have. If you're talking about small ticket items, this seems true, but it certainly doesn't hold for more consequential expenditures like real estate or even cars.

If cars had a delivery system as efficient as netflix, it would make far less sense to own a car. Longer-term "capital" goods are very different than disposable media consumption - some like cars (and media, and technology) deprecate but land is an investment in a commodity that is getting more in demand over time.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#427

Post by Kalium »

bloaf wrote: post #425
Kalium wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I view this as a distinct upgrade. Instead of being coerced into lots of interaction with people I may have nothing in common with except vague geographical proximity, I have the option of interacting with people who actually share my interests or concerns or hobbies. To me, this isn't isolated loners. It's the first real community I've ever known. The first one I've ever actually felt like I was a part o…

The issue is that the forced interactions via geographical proximity are a kind of moderating force. Communities built around what they love are usually good, but what if what you love is terrible? https://imgur.com/GripW3M

Bang on. Other people are definitely a moderating force towards what they collectively believe to be reasonable. Sometimes that's something like "no murder". Other times its "those with the wrong skin color are subhuman".

It's possible that this kind of conformity might be best treated as something other than a universally positive force.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#428

Post by kbenson »

Faark wrote: post #410
kbenson wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's always been the case. You can just as easily ignore all the people outside your religion, specific church, household, or even everyone other than yourself, and that's been the case since we've had those communities. This is just another case of something looking slightly different on the surface but actually being more of the same. The way to fight isolation is not to restrict choice of community, but to reach…

> This is just another case of something looking slightly different on the surface but actually being more of the same. That can be said about every development ever. But it being more easy / efficient can bring out existing systems out of balance at some point, once counter-acting forces are overwhelmed... especially if those don't improve (as fast). > reach out to other communities and individuals and make them fee…

> That doesn't seem to be a winning strategy in current US politics.

There are lots of different parties between different constituencies that are incentivized to sow discord between them. I'm not sure any olive branches that are offered are even seen by the other side given all the blades flying about.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#429

Post by nigelcleland »

jonknee wrote: post #421
cableshaft wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do have Netflix, and other subscription services, but by the nature of licensing, they're very limited. Do you only watch/read/etc the most common, most popular, current movies/music/etc? If you seek out anything a little off the beaten path, you pretty much have to own it or you won't be able to consume it, or get access to it later. For example, I recently went through several lists of underrated (i.e. not the me…

> Is that what you want the future to be like? Where these movies might as well have disappeared off the face of the earth because no one can get ahold of them anymore? Because that's the direction we're starting to go in with more and more things going digital only and subscription only. Pretty much. Most of the time I am more than happy to watch something on the current rotation of Netflix/Amazon/HBO. It doesn't wo…

There is a huge network cost towards doing this. The centralised platforms by definition will push us closer towards the mean (as the mean is most profitable) at the expense of the outlier.

This means that you'll have a higher quality median (note, not mean) experience at the cost of experiencing any true outliers. The best way it's been put to me is the follows:

* (AI/ML/Algorithmic Recommendation) = 8/10 products you will like, none you'll love or hate

* (Serendipitous Searching) = 5 products you will guaranteed like, 1 you will hate, 1 you will absolutely love

By only having access to the current rotation on Netflix/Amazon/HBO you cannot find the 'diamonds in the rough' that suit your taste.

Re: Americans Own Less Stuff, and That’s Reason to Be Nervous

#430

Post by nigelcleland »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #340
ryandrake wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (One last question: Could you clarify "I do my own taxes?" What is it that doing taxes yourself, presumably by pen and calculator, gains over downloading a product like TaxAct and saving the PDF of the result?) The general principle I failed to articulate is that all other things being equal, I value Self Reliance over Interdependence. There are varying levels of interdependence though, maybe I can take a stab at r…

I'd personally flip 4 and 5 since I think having incentive not to screw you and recourse if you get screwed is important. Local businesses have much more reason not to screw people and people have much more recourse when screwed compared to state or national government.

I'd agree, another way to look at is who do you have the greatest recourse to when something goes wrong.

Local businesses will often be more sensitive to their customers than local governments. National governments will be even less sensitive.

Post reply on HN