7 ms·

Minimalism is something only the truly rich can actually afford to do: https://priceonomics.com/post/45447777955/is-minimalism-just-for-rich-people https://pric

• vorpalhex 7y ago
  Owning things comes with its own cost - the cost of storage, care, and upkeep. The more complex the item, typically the more expensive it is to store it decently. Getting rid of things and keeping a smaller amount of possessions can be cost saving - but it does require you to invest in better possessions. If you're only going to keep one pair of scissors on hand, you want to be pretty sure those scissors will do anything you need and not fall apart. That's not necessarily more expensive overall but it can require more initial investment - and that can be the rub for many people.
  • TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > Owning things comes with its own cost - the cost of storage, care, and upkeep. Care/upkeep is usually very minimal, especially with "dumb" items. As for storage, this is an inflexible cost. Your apartment has a fixed surface area for which you pay, and on a day-to-day basis, you only manage how dense you pack it with stuff. If you decide to throw away some stuff, you can't just shrink your house down and pay smaller rent. This is why poor people tend to own a lot of stuff - because it's really hard to fill your living space to capacity with things, which makes stuff ownership effectively free on the margin.
    • perl4ever 7y ago
      "it's really hard to fill your living space to capacity with things" This depends on the size of your living space, which varies greatly. Is it really that difficult to fill a 900 sq ft apartment, assuming you don't want to put a lot of boxes in the middle of your living room? I notice that there are a lot of storage rental places, including major chains.
      • TeMPOraL 7y ago
        > assuming you don't want to put a lot of boxes in the middle of your living room? Assuming. If you're a poor person with a place to live, you don't assume; you put the box. Where I live, we have nothing like the popularity storage rental has in the US so I can't extrapolate, but I'd guess that it's something that lets you declutter your living space if you can afford it, thereby reinforcing the original point.
        • perl4ever 7y ago
          You wrote in the previous comment that "poor people" own lots of stuff because it's free to store. Having your living space taken up by stuff that you're not even benefiting from is a significant cost, so it's not free. At least where I am, cheaper apartments tend not to have garages, where many people put all the stuff they are hoarding instead of their car. As far as storage rental goes, it's generally available month-to-month, and can be useful when moving. Also, it comes in various sizes, from small lockers to garage-sized, so the expense varies. Say €60-€160/month.
• bobobooey 7y ago
  How can spending less and being mindful of what you own a thing only rich can do? Sure, if you're throwing away useful items and replacing them constantly then you're wasting money. But if you're buying only what you need, discarding items that haven't been used in 18 months, and constantly being mindful of purchases/items you own, there is no way it's "only for the rich". What an absurd sentiment.
  • tylerhou 7y ago
    I haven’t used my plunger in 18 months. Should I throw it away?
    • drstewart 7y ago
      I didn't buy a gimmicky As Seen On TV kitchen gadget I'd use once and store in the garage for the rest of my life, am I a rich person?
    • LiquidSky 7y ago
      It's difficult to see this as good-faith engagement with Kondo's advice of asking whether a particular item is useful or "sparks joy".
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • tylerhou 7y ago
        From the person I responded to: > But if you're buying only what you need, discarding items that haven't been used in 18 months, and constantly being mindful of purchases/items you own, there is no way it's "only for the rich". By their logic, I should throw away my plunger since I haven't used it in the last year and a half. But obviously I need to keep my plunger around in case of emergencies. If you're not wealthy, you need to keep possessions around in case of emergencies. You need a car because you can't afford to Uber around everywhere. Or a thick winter jacket in case it becomes extremely cold out (even if that only happens every few years). Or an air conditioner/header because you can't afford an apartment with central AC. Or an old laptop because you can't afford to go out a buy a new one should your current laptop break. Another example: I have an office job that lets me use work printers for personal purposes. I could get by with not having a printer at home. If you're less wealthy, you're more likely to not have an office job. Even if you do have an office job, it's possible that they are stricter wrt. printer rules. Another example of the disparity between wealthy people and non-wealthy people wrt. minimalism.
• lm28469 7y ago
  Meh, not really, it's more of a mindset. I don't own much and I'm far from rich, I'm not poor either, I could own more stuff I just don't like it. I'm always surprised when I visit people and see all the shit they accumulated over the years, it's like entering ali baba's cave. Almost as if there isn't a single week going by without adding more gadgets or useless things into their life. I will move to a new place in a few days and I could probably transport all my stuff in a regular car with foldable back seats. Actually the only thing that would fit your description is that I'll have to buy a washing machine, I'd gladly use public ones if they were not so expensive.
• patcon 7y ago
  I lived in a city park without an apartment for 2 years, mostly Toronto and SF. It didn't require much ($CAD unless stated otherwise): access to a kitchen once per day. a list of fave cafes. layered clothing. wool socks. 4 sets of undershirts/wear. 2 outerwear variants. tupperware. hammock tent ($100). bike ($400). bike lock ($60). bike multitool ($15). hand bike pump ($20). small backcountry backpack ($100). sleeping bag ($100). scrubba laundry bag ($50). leatherman utility knife ($60). spork ($5). white male privilege. single. $400/mo for groceries and entertainment. planet fitness membership ($22/mo). PO box ($400/yr). unlimited data plan (USD$10/mo). yes, i was lucky to be able to do it easily, but no, true minimalism certainly does not require boat loads money, just the above, plus planning and commitment and some social capital as a safety net :)
  • gimmeThaBeet 7y ago
    the most unbelievable part of that is where in sweet gigabyte do you get unlimited data for $10 in Canada?
• rifung 7y ago
  > Minimalism is something only the truly rich can actually afford to do I disagree. I was forced to be minimalist because I had to live in a tiny space since I didn't have money to rent a bigger one. You also need money to be able to accumulate things in the first place, like people who have 10 pairs of shoes or a huge wardrobe. I only buy clothes if I actually don't have enough and it causes me to do laundry too often.
  • perl4ever 7y ago
    "You also need money to be able to accumulate things in the first place" Or time.
• LiquidSky 7y ago
  Good thing Kondo isn't espousing minimalism, then.
• MFogleman 7y ago
  I think that is painting with a fairly broad brush. Head into Target, and somewhere near the centerish of the store, diagonal to the greeting cards and cosmetics, is aisles and aisles of stuff. Not sheets, or plates, just stuff. Decorations to go on an end table, whos likely purpose is only to hold the decoration. Knick Knacks to go on that one wall with too much empty space. But lets go back to sheets and plates. How many sets of sheets do you own per bed? Is there a reason for that number? For years, the answer was "More than 4" for my bed. There was "The good sheets", "The warm sheets" and the rest were sheets that I used because the good sheets were in laundry pile and I havent done laundry yet. Even then, why have the other pair of sheets? Minimalism isn't necessarily "Dont own a drill you dont need it", but more of "Dont buy stuff to put on shelves that you bought for the sole purpose of putting stuff on but you had more shelf than space so you bought more stuff but now its too much and you need another shelf"
• coldtea 7y ago
  >Minimalism is something only the truly rich can actually afford to do Hardly. I know lots of minimalist people that barely make ends meet (and could have loaded their credit cards to get a house full of junk like other people I know, but they didn't) -- you just have to get out of the rat race. A writer that lives in a bare apartment, doesn't even have a TV set, doesn't need a designer espresso machine, or to stuff the house full of IKEA, is not a "truly rich" person. Some such people I know make like 20-40K/year (US equivalent, they are in Europe, but I'm pretty certain tons of people like that exist in the US too. E.g., does this person look "truly rich": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmfz_8b5fA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmfz_8b5fA ). And yes, this includes people with kids. It's also not about having few but hella expensive "quality" things. E.g. you don't need a Macbook to be a minimalist, you can do it with a knackered PC laptop you use for 10 years.
  • ip26 7y ago
    Maintenance is a big catch. You can either pay other people to maintain your things, or you can maintain them yourself. The former is expensive, the latter involves keeping an array of tools & materials. Cooking is another, and similar. There's always the option of simply not doing maintenance and eating unhealthy, of course. But I wouldn't' consider that successful minimalism.
    • coldtea 7y ago
      >Maintenance is a big catch. You can either pay other people to maintain your things, or you can maintain them yourself. The former is expensive, the latter involves keeping an array of tools & materials. Cooking is another, and similar. But how is minimalism related to maintenance? I mean, minimalist just have/feel the need for less stuff. They still take their cars for service (if they have a car), wash their clothes, call the plumber, etc. In that sense, minimalist is the opposite of consumerism. It's not about fixing your fridge yourself or making your own furniture. It's more about buying less furniture. Same for eating. A minimalism and a non-minimalism can eat exactly the same, there's nothing much about minimalism as commonly understood that dictates how to eat. Minimalist just says you don't need 50+ kitchen gadgets, fancy coffee makers, etc. A simple kitchen (with an oven, fridge, pans, microwave, etc) will do. And you can always cook (if you have the time regarding work) or eat out. Minimalism doesn't say anything about not eating out. Just says "don't amass stuff / consume less clothes/furniture/gadgets/shoes/etc / simplify your surroundings".
• WhompingWindows 7y ago
  I disagree, I was a minimalist when I made 16k per year in a high COL area as a graduate student. Minimalism is about reducing spending, getting rid of pointless (and cheap) knick knacks, and de-cluttering your life. The poor and the rich can both do this...it's not some definitional quality of the poor that they can't have few possessions, in fact they are probably much less likely to own a lot of possessions.
  • ip26 7y ago
    they are probably much less likely to own a lot of possessions My observation has been the more hard up someone is, the larger their collection of almost worthless stuff "just in case". That used to be me, too.
  • rajacombinator 7y ago
    It’s more about having a scarcity mindset than necessarily being poor. (Although the two are closely related.) As a grad student in a high COL area who posts on HN, you probably did not have a scarcity mindset.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]