6 ms·
Strange article. It is about an unrepairable pair of shoes that need to be recycled but its title is "Buy well, buy once". Not really the case, then ? Then he
by ajnin 3y ago
Strange article. It is about an unrepairable pair of shoes that need to be recycled but its title is "Buy well, buy once". Not really the case, then ?
Then he mentions that he has only 192 "worldly possessions". I'd like to see the actual list, because if it is accurate he mustn't have many forks or boxes of food in his cupboards. So he probably lives in a big city, eats out very often, takes public transportation, and basically relies on external services for things he does not have. Which is a kind of lifestyle that has a lot of externalities and does not really have a minimalist impact on society as a whole, so it feels less appealing to me.
I'm rather in the opposite camp, if I have some fixing to do in my house, rather than call a plumber for example I'll buy the tools, learn by watching youtube videos of experts, and do it myself. Not because of a philosophical view of the world but because I like to learn skills and be self-reliant. My possessions also last a long time because I'm often able to repair them.
- mailund 3y ago> So he probably lives in a big city, eats out very often, takes public transportation, and basically relies on external services for things he does not have. Which is a kind of lifestyle that has a lot of externalities and does not really have a minimalist impact on society as a whole, Not sure how living in a big city and taking public transit has more negative externalities than the alternatives, care to expand?
- abnry 3y agoHe didn't say they are negative, he said they are externalities. I've come to the same conclusion that minimalism is only supportable by other people not being minimalists. That's not necessarily a judgment on whether it is good or bad, but a statement of fact.
- mailund 3y agoMaybe I can clarify, I felt there was an argument that living in a big city and using shared services (e.g. public transit) had a bigger impact than other alternatives. I was wondering what those alternatives that would be. I also feel it was implied that this impact was negative - or else it wouldn't be an argument against the post - but that's besides the point.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago> Then he mentions that he has only 192 "worldly possessions". I'd like to see the actual list, Author didn't even seem to read the LA Times link he linked. I've personally got close to 5000 staples in a drawer. And I'm sure the author has some similar huge amount of an object. He's undoubtedly not counting his shoelaces as separate objects, where it seems likely the authors of the research on items in a household are. From the LA Times piece: > The average U.S. household has 300,000 things, from paper clips emphasis, mine. A box of paper clips is considered multiple items.
- Noumenon72 3y agoThat seems like a pretty bad statistic. No source online, possibly just an oft-repeated estimate from "professional organizer Regina Lark". There are only 100 paperclips in a box of paperclips, so that's not a major source of items. This statistic requires 150 items for every square foot in a 2000-square-foot house. Not even things like my laundry basket or spice rack manage that.
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago> or spice rack I see you aren't counting the individual granules.
- klyrs 3y agoCue Monty Python; "Every Sperm is Sacred"