When you own things, your benefit from them comes from your experience of them when they are in use. As you increase the number of things in your life, the aver

When you own things, your benefit from them comes from your experience of them when they are in use. As you increase the number of things in your life, the average utility of them decreases. There are a few counter examples[0], but for most people spending their own private money it follows that rule. Note that this is not the case with average degree of quality, but usually quality costs hit diminishing returns pretty fast (a couple of doublings). Ok so really what the original argument was saying wasn't the straw man of living like a stoic vs buying a better car or toaster. The original argument was taking time to experience the world is worth the cost compared to the alternative. That it's better to have a Honda instead of a Porsche if it means you had time to travel Europe and Africa for half a year instead. And I mostly agree with that. I don't mind shelling out the dollars for stuff that really matters like my primary dev machine, or what have you, but I really don't need $500 sweaters, or a luxury car, even though I can afford it. The delta to my own enjoyment just isn't worth it compared to other priorities like travelling or helping someone out. [0] e.g., horse plus cart is better than two horses or two carts.