9 ms·

You don’t “need” any of that.

xboxnolifes 5y ago
You don't "need" very much of anything. People get by with a 100-200sqft room shared with other people, but that doesn't mean it's what I would want to live in.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
  I feel like it's kinda missing the point of the article to say that you "need" 500sqft for canning. That is a want, plain and simple. Wants can be expensive. Indulging wants like this is something that rich people can afford to do, and if you are rich that is good for you! But indulging this want is far from economically efficient, especially in a high cost of living real estate market. It's basically the exact opposite of the point of the article.
  - strken 5y ago
    You don't strictly speaking need indoor plumbing, a private bedroom, windows, or paint that doesn't have lead in it. If you're rich enough to afford windows, a bedroom you don't share with another family, and to not have your kids die from heavy metal poisoning, then good for you! But indulging many of these wants is hardly economically efficient.
    - onion2k 5y ago
      Are you seriously suggesting that the need for a "summer kitchen for canning fruit" and a "private bedroom" represent the same human needs? Because if you are that might be the funniest, most entitled thing I've ever read on HN.
      - strken 5y ago
        Nope, I'm suggesting that wants and needs are a sliding scale with no clear dividing line except subsistence, and that it's therefore a bad idea to argue for lowering your standard of living to only what you strictly need. This is pretty obvious if you don't take a deliberately uncharitable perspective on what I wrote.
        onion2k 5y ago
        Anyone who thinks the privacy to sleep in your own bedroom and the luxury to have a second kitchen to use for canning fruit because it'd make using your first kitchen a little harder are two points on the same scale is just plain wrong. They aren't. One is a point on the scale of "things you need for basic human dignity", and the other is a point on the scale of "amusing shit deluded rich people think is normal." Those are definitely different scales. Arguing they're just two points on the same scale makes me wonder if you have some sort of agenda to argue that people don't really need bedrooms because they don't really need summer kitchens.
        strken 5y ago
        It seems like you're creating a scale of things you believe everyone ought to have and calling it "needs". If you're defining need in such a subjective way, then telling someone else to divide their life up by what they need vs what they want is telling them to live their life with only the luxuries they're unwilling to compromise on. That's a great way to live and I approve of it, but I remain steadfastly convinced that it's good for humans to have some unnecessary luxuries.
        onion2k 5y ago
        I remain steadfastly convinced that it's good for humans to have some unnecessary luxuries. It'd be amazing if everyone had things they don't need. I'd love to live in a world where everyone had what they need and more. That's a no brainer. The problem is that you're saying "the luxuries they're unwilling to compromise on" should be considered needs because some entitled rich idiot isn't able to accept that they could actually live with just one kitchen. That's stupid. They're still luxuries, and absolutely not equivalent to actual needs. Needs and wants are not the same things. Arguing that they are, and that they're just two things on a scale of wants, or that they're two things on a scale of needs, ignores that there are things people actually need and things that people can live without. I'm not arguing that rekabis shouldn't have their second kitchen. I'm only saying that they could live without it, and that they would probably give it up before giving up the privacy of their bedroom. Maybe that's wrong. Perhaps they could put a bed in it and sleep there. I don't know.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
      Technically we can adapt to a lot and contemporaries with our same biology still routinely make do without much in the way of permanent shelter. However, a summer kitchen is on a different tier of requirement from food safety. If it doesn't seem so to you then we just have a different notion of what is a reasonable baseline to expect from life in this country.
- cammikebrown 5y ago
  My apartment is 325 square feet. I wish I had a bit more but I have a washer and dryer in my unit too and it’s awesome and cheap for the area. Ideally I’d have 450 or so.
barnabee 5y ago
You also don’t “need” a second home for diversified income. Prioritising your finances over a satisfying and interesting life sounds dull, and like a great way to make yourself mentally unwell if you do it for too long. Not everyone’s preferred life “needs” much space but when yours does, not having it can be very stifling and stressful.

You don't "need" very much of anything. People get by with a 100-200sqft room shared with other people, but that doesn't mean it's what I would want to live in.

asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
I feel like it's kinda missing the point of the article to say that you "need" 500sqft for canning. That is a want, plain and simple. Wants can be expensive. Indulging wants like this is something that rich people can afford to do, and if you are rich that is good for you! But indulging this want is far from economically efficient, especially in a high cost of living real estate market. It's basically the exact opposite of the point of the article.
- strken 5y ago
  You don't strictly speaking need indoor plumbing, a private bedroom, windows, or paint that doesn't have lead in it. If you're rich enough to afford windows, a bedroom you don't share with another family, and to not have your kids die from heavy metal poisoning, then good for you! But indulging many of these wants is hardly economically efficient.
  - onion2k 5y ago
    Are you seriously suggesting that the need for a "summer kitchen for canning fruit" and a "private bedroom" represent the same human needs? Because if you are that might be the funniest, most entitled thing I've ever read on HN.
    - strken 5y ago
      Nope, I'm suggesting that wants and needs are a sliding scale with no clear dividing line except subsistence, and that it's therefore a bad idea to argue for lowering your standard of living to only what you strictly need. This is pretty obvious if you don't take a deliberately uncharitable perspective on what I wrote.
      - onion2k 5y ago
        Anyone who thinks the privacy to sleep in your own bedroom and the luxury to have a second kitchen to use for canning fruit because it'd make using your first kitchen a little harder are two points on the same scale is just plain wrong. They aren't. One is a point on the scale of "things you need for basic human dignity", and the other is a point on the scale of "amusing shit deluded rich people think is normal." Those are definitely different scales. Arguing they're just two points on the same scale makes me wonder if you have some sort of agenda to argue that people don't really need bedrooms because they don't really need summer kitchens.
        strken 5y ago
        It seems like you're creating a scale of things you believe everyone ought to have and calling it "needs". If you're defining need in such a subjective way, then telling someone else to divide their life up by what they need vs what they want is telling them to live their life with only the luxuries they're unwilling to compromise on. That's a great way to live and I approve of it, but I remain steadfastly convinced that it's good for humans to have some unnecessary luxuries.
        onion2k 5y ago
        I remain steadfastly convinced that it's good for humans to have some unnecessary luxuries. It'd be amazing if everyone had things they don't need. I'd love to live in a world where everyone had what they need and more. That's a no brainer. The problem is that you're saying "the luxuries they're unwilling to compromise on" should be considered needs because some entitled rich idiot isn't able to accept that they could actually live with just one kitchen. That's stupid. They're still luxuries, and absolutely not equivalent to actual needs. Needs and wants are not the same things. Arguing that they are, and that they're just two things on a scale of wants, or that they're two things on a scale of needs, ignores that there are things people actually need and things that people can live without. I'm not arguing that rekabis shouldn't have their second kitchen. I'm only saying that they could live without it, and that they would probably give it up before giving up the privacy of their bedroom. Maybe that's wrong. Perhaps they could put a bed in it and sleep there. I don't know.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
    Technically we can adapt to a lot and contemporaries with our same biology still routinely make do without much in the way of permanent shelter. However, a summer kitchen is on a different tier of requirement from food safety. If it doesn't seem so to you then we just have a different notion of what is a reasonable baseline to expect from life in this country.
cammikebrown 5y ago
My apartment is 325 square feet. I wish I had a bit more but I have a washer and dryer in my unit too and it’s awesome and cheap for the area. Ideally I’d have 450 or so.

barnabee 5y ago

You also don’t “need” a second home for diversified income. Prioritising your finances over a satisfying and interesting life sounds dull, and like a great way to make yourself mentally unwell if you do it for too long. Not everyone’s preferred life “needs” much space but when yours does, not having it can be very stifling and stressful.