"Buy experiences, not things" have always bothered me as irrational.
Sure, one-off experiences are valuable, but I think they're overrated. Maybe it's because I don't have a good memory, but, to me, an experience is orders of magnitude more valuable in that moment, while it's happening, than the memory of it, which will fade, and eventually disappear entirely.
Buying experiences are short term value propositions for me, they're great while they last, but they tend to fade, and the absolutely best of them, those that fade slowly or not at all, those cannot be bought anyway.
Things on the other hand, are an investment in the future, it I buy an item, I will have many opportunities to derive value from it, at least as long as I can remember that I own it.
I've had the experiences, including kisses and much, much more.
Now it's only a sorrow memories, while 1TB Transcend StoreJet still holds them well [in .jpg and .mov form] and serves well to occasionally transfer files > 30Gb.
And I still have a couple t-shirts from that time, though relegated to in-house wear only, of course.
I don’t think the point is that you can sit on your couch and remember the experience and derive value from that. It’s more that you undertake experiences with other people and then when you see those people you reminisce about those experiences. When my friends and I hang out we talk about holidays we went on 15 years ago. We relive it, laugh, different people remember different parts. We can repeat this every time we see each other and it never gets old.
That is exactly the point, why else would they say "buy experiences, not things"? I need things to survive, so I buy things. Then I use the rest of my time to get experiences for basically free. There is no point in buying stuff that is basically free anyway. It is worth it to make a few trips around the world, but that is really cheap if you consider your whole life. What you don't need is a trip every year etc, experiences you pay for stops being an experience and starts being mundane very quickly.
Instead of making a trip, why not just build something, like a program or learn to cook or make some sports goal or read up about some studies etc. All of those are free or saves you money and way more memorable and interesting than things people pay a lot of money for.
Sounds like the bad memory has something to do with it.
I still think about some conventions I went to where I got to meet friends I had only known through the internet. They were like ten years ago.
I went to a concert in 2019 for a band I wanted to really see and was (and still) and into, and stood right up front. I still think about that and it's driven me to see more shows. Now I have an amazing photo collage above my desk that I can see all the time and remember how awesome it was.
Yes, the memory thing is definitely a factor, it's not like I avoid having experiences, I love to go to LAN parties and there has been great concerts too, but my recall of them are weak, I mostly remember that I enjoyed it very much, but there's very little recall of the actual things we did or feelings I had.
Okay, if you want to apply that interpretation, then how would there be a difference (except the price) of buying a house and going to a concert?
In my humble world, going to a concert is great but when the concert is over, you're left with nothing, it was a one-off purchase.
If you buy a house, you'll have a place to live until you decide to sell it, after you bought it, it's yours, your experience continues,it's not a one-off, you'll repeatedly have that experience every single day you wake up in that house...
Depends on one's life, but there're lots and lots of repeated experiences available.
I go for a run on the same route every saturday. In summer I go for bicycle routes on same routes. Repeating such experiences opens up an entirely new layer. Observing the nature change over the yearly cycle as well as longer times changes is very different from just having one-off experiences when you can't compose them into a bigger picture.
Have to disagree. For every thing you buy, you should have time to use it. I can’t count how often i bought expensive things just to use it once. On the other hand, experiences are already the time you buy, not a material thing.
The sectors of the economy that are becoming more expensive every year – which are preventing people from building durable wealth – include real estate and education, both items that are sold by the promise of irreplaceable “experiences.” Healthcare, too, is a modern experience that is best avoided. As a percent of GDP, these are the growing expenditures that are eating up people’s wallets, not durable goods.
I don't find this type of reasoning very persuasive.
First of all, "experiences" like live music or tourism seem to be conspicuously absent ("education" is an experience?! healthcare? People want to pay for the experience to be in a hospital?).
This, in turn, makes me wonder what the author has in mind when he talks of "durable goods". A laptop? A camera? a fridge?
I shattered my collar bone into about 5 big chunks from mountain biking in my twenties. It would have been fatal (after a long infection) a 100 years ago. I'm glad I got it fixed.
I was speaking in the general case about the point of medical care that doesn't balance out economically.
I'm not so nihilistic to say that people shouldn't live they life they have, but it's pretty well known the most expensive health care people get is usually right at the end of their lives. Chronic conditions aside of course.
I am not contesting this. I am arguing against stuff like "education is an experience-type product".
Usually - at least nowadays - you "buy" (i.e. put money and time) in pursuit of some kind of education (be it a degree or a Kubernetes bootcamp or whatever) in order to increase your chances to get a good job.
And even for stuff which is not about markeatable skills (like, I dunno, painting lessons) I doubt that the actual cost would be significant enough to make a dent in their investment opportunities.
Indeed this is more than weird. My mind simply cannot grasp why on earth would somebody advocate for dumbing down the education or healthcare. It's not like they perform that great, or that they're optional/luxury/impulse.
My read is that the author is using "experience" to mean "something produced in a low-productivity sector" and "thing" to mean "something produced in a high-productivity sector", which is definitely an idiosyncratic interpretation of those words.
As with all things there is a balance. I’ve removed many physical things (whole categories of things in some cases) from my life, but at the same time I have a full home gym, more tools than I really need and more bikes than my wife thinks I need.
In some areas I would be considered Spartan and in others indulgent. The key is paying attention to what things/experiences make you happy and spend your time and money there, regardless of what other people think.
Getting rid of your stuff should only be a priority if it brings you some quality of life improvement - otherwise buy all the stuff you want.
This feels like a straw man argument. Who was saying you should not own a set of tools, nice kitchen wares, or exercise equipment? Some people, I’m sure, but not the economists (or psychologists or whatever) who found the “experiences produce more happiness than things” effect, nor most of the people who use this principle to guide their purchases. The idea is that a vacation does more for you than buying a new car instead of a used one (i.e., that this applies to purchases made with disposable income/for fun), not that you should eschew pots and pans in favor of purchasing restaurant experiences. Further, I think most people who generally prefer experiences to things acknowledge that acquiring thoughtfully chosen objects can be a very good idea.
You would be surprised with the kinds of people out there. I used to flat share in a large city with a friend and I had bought most of the kitchen wares since the flat was unfurnished and I had a preference to cook at home. He would constantly tell me how I only cared for things and I should be a minimalist like him. When I was packing to move out on my own he was complaining that I was taking everything and it would be unfair to not leave most of my things behind and I should by new things when I move into the new place. I would hesitate to generalise that people want experiences over things or actually understand what minimalism is
No idea about the Lambo, but the Ferrari programs seem designed to encourage driving the hell out of the car. Everything is X years with unlimited miles. When you buy the car, you can opt to purchase a 15-year long "you pay for gas and tires, we cover everything else including car washes" package. I'm sure the cost is insane, but then again so is the car.
Personally I believe travelling the world on a much smaller budget (like lower 5 figures, depending on how many years you travel of course) is more interesting. Instead of big hotels you stay in small guesthouses, more contact to fellow travellers (of that age-group) and contact to the locals.
It was in the lower spectrum of 6 figures, spread out over 4 years of almost persistent travel. A lot of that money went to plane tickets, which is crazy to think, really. But for the most part, I was renting houses that were maybe $300 a month on the lower side and $600 a month if I was staying in Bali. I enjoy quiet and in a sense it is priceless for me to be away from busy roads.
And, of course, a lot of hotels along the way.
I also learned to eat entirely local, but this took time. The first 6 months of traveling Asia was an absolute nightmare for my gut. And I truly mean that. I don't even want to go into details because it was that gross.
But I understand what you are saying. I made some costly mistakes, especially in the first part of my journey. It certainly taught me a lot about myself in the process.
Have been reading Hacker News for many years, and feel like this kind of headline is quite common from the HN/SV bubble. Paul Graham writes like this too. It’s the language of a software tutorial for novices, applied to life. It’s this shift that makes it feel so pretentious! As a reader it’s fine to accept being a novice reading expert advice, when the subject is a computer program. When the subject is life choices, a writer would normally adopt a more humble tone, since most readers would need to be convinced that someone had all that more expertise than themselves. At the same time, I find it slightly endearing in its naivety, because these subjects being too complicated to capture in simple rules doesn’t stop the authors from trying.
It is best avoided. Avoid meaning to alter your course in advance, i.e.:
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, or
the best way to stay healthy is not to get sick.
This is a pretty “duh” statement. Of course people don’t want to get sick. But many illnesses are genetic, even illnesses that we presumably have some control over (like blood cholesterol levels or addiction). Many illnesses are caused by exposures and traumas in our childhoods where we had very little control in our life. Even lifestyle illnesses can be pointed to as coming from a place where one may not have been enabled to live a healthy lifestyle, due to ignorant raising.
Well, I think so, but around 65% of adults are overweight in my country, less than 30% eat enough dietary fibre and 82% of adults consume alcohol. Of course there are things out of our control, but a lot of people act like they don't care about getting sick.
Those would be cases then where it couldn't be avoided, so you end up seeking health care. There is a difference between 'avoiding' and 'not using under any circumstances'.
Sarcasm noted, but there is truth to that. You could sit down and slop together some code or you could do it thoughtfully according to a plan. Likewise with health, you could eat right and exercise or eat junk and sit on that ass. Doing these things don't guarantee bug-free code or sick-free life, but the improve the odds. It's a cliche and obvious, I understand the resistance.
One of the things I encourage kids to do is make up their own games, may that involve a creative take on tag or putting together a checkers board with a piece of paper and painted rocks. The reason is simple: we put too much value on attaching happiness to money. I certainly don't want to see their happiness evaporate simply because they cannot afford it.
I think the author misses the point. We live in a culture where people frequently buy things and then never use them. Those are the things people mean when saying "buy experiences, not things". Putting money into tools for a hobby you already do is buying experiences.
> Putting money into tools for a hobby you already do is buying experiences.
That is true. Like I have a board game hobby, and each one of those I buy is to buy a new experience, a new set of mechanisms, art, theme, etc. Now unfortunately a lot of what I buy ends up just sitting on shelves, because I have way too much of these to ever play more than a handful more than once every couple of years now, but at least at the time of purchase it was so I could have a game experience that I don't have access to yet (used to be I could count on some friends to get some games and experience it that way, but I've seen them a lot less since the pandemic, and a lot of what I buy can be played solo now).
The "things" in the charitable reading of "buy experiences not things" are about the throwaway consumerism stuff that ends up in landfills. Stuff like fast fashion or kids toys that children get immediately bored of the day after Christmas.
A minimalist can get rid of all the unworn clothes cluttering up the closet while also buying a sewing machine to make clothes the wearer truly loves. The advice to "buy experiences not things" shouldn't mean sacrificing the sewing machine and only use that money for a trip to see a Paris fashion show.
I think reasonable people already know that many hobbies require buying things.
I think you're right, but in another sense I think the consumerist junk reading is just one segment of the population looking down their nose at another. I'm not sure that a game I quickly become bored with is substantially different from a weekend holiday. They're both things that occupied me for little time, but which I enjoyed for that little time and form positive, if rarely reviewed, memories. I don't go much for fashionable clothing, but I suspect the same is true there.
There are other arguments against disposable goods, but I don't know if they're strictly worse than the experiences that the maxim seeks to replace them with. It's a lot easier to replace a pound of cotton than it is to take a flight's worth of CO2 out of the air.
Its almost like there isn't an easy either/or scenario here. Life can't be broken down into such an easy phrase.
Most of the things I own are to enable experiences. I enjoy kayaking and backpacking. Is my kayak a thing or is my kayaking an experience. I'd say it fits both.
This! When people "buy experiences" and travel/visit etc, I just don't really find it interesting. I buy things because I enjoy doing stuff with them. I buy a camera and a drone because I like taking shots. I buy a new computer because I like coding/design/video editing and it does it faster. On the other hand, I've never found traveling an enjoyable activity of any kind. It's just extra stress for me (unless there's some specific reason that excites me that justifies it all). I buy tools that enable me to create more stuff, and I'd always pick it over many experiences that I'd buy.
I think the strawman here is assuming that an experience needs to be "bought".
What kind of photos/videos do you take with your camera/drone if you don't like traveling/visiting places?
In any case, the author makes the distinction between experience-like things. A camera is a perfect example of an experience-enabling thing. Photography and videography are experiences. I don't think anyone in the "buy experiences not things" crowd would discourage buying a camera, or something like say a surfboard, snowboard, basketball, woodworking tools, raspberry pi, etc since those enable experiences.
On the topic of travel - personally I think it's extremely valuable from a cultural/educational perspective to venture outside of one's city and/or country at least once in one's lifetime. I've spent the last 4 years traveling and living abroad, and while I wouldn't necessary recommend going that hard, I certainly wouldn't trade the experience for anything. Also, experience is more than just buying plane/train tickets and hotel rooms, nor do experiences necessitate travel.
Very good. While the OP may disagree, I suspect, years from now, it will be certain experiences taking photos with the camera/drone that will still linger in their mind.
I know for myself that a couple decades ago I excitedly rode the digital camera revolution and photographed/video'd family vacations (yeah, not very original of me). The photos now recall to my mind the heat and wind of Death Valley, the girls jumping on the beds in the hotel ... not the particular gear I was using.
When I buy a thing, I can use it for a while then sell it on eBay to recoup some of the cost. I can return it to the store if I don’t find it useful. With some items, I can share it with a friend and he can get the same utility from it. None of these things are true for purchased experiences.
I used to think I liked travel, but turned around later in life. To me, travel is nothing but stress. Let’s take a typical international trip: Big payment up front for plane tickets, hotel, rental car and so on up front, then you’re praying it all goes well. You can substitute travel insurance for prayer if you want to spend even more money. Then, the security/boarding circus of air travel. Then cramped seating and crap service in what has turned into a Greyhound Bus in the sky. Once you land, assuming the airline didn’t lose your bags, you and the rest of the cattle are marched through immigration and customs, where you pretty much have no rights as a human being. Finally you are in your glorious destination! Except you probably don’t speak or understand the native language so everything you do is going to be 5X more difficult than at home. You rent a car that’s not as nice/familiar as yours, stay in a hotel that just doesn’t have everything you’re used to at home. With kids in tow you’re desperately trying to keep everyone corralled together and (in some destinations) not kidnapped. Finally, you hit some tourist sites, lay on the beach, check out the local cities, whatever your goal was. Then, back to the circus to get home. COVID has added “pass last minute COVID tests or you are stuck without compensation” to the equation. By the time you’re home you are so thankful to get back to real life! Spent all that time and money for what? A memory that we can’t even sell on the secondhand market. Maybe 100 more photos on the phone which we might look at again sometime later.
Last vacation I took with my family, my spouse mentioned to me two days before it started “I can’t wait till this is all over and we’re back here at home again!” I agreed, and we both realized “why are we doing this??”
I can definitely relate to the "I wish we could just cancel the trip and take two weeks to relax at home" sentiment, pre-departure. At the same time I'm almost always retrospectively glad that I went on any given trip.
I often feel the same way about social engagements ("I hope the other party cancels so that I can just stay in and relax") which retrospectively were much more enjoyable than being alone at home.
I think both of these are about intentionally complicating your life for a period of time. Sometimes that's called for, but I can imagine if you're raising kids and working full time there's a real appeal to not complicating your life any further.
Travel is spraying you with novelty from a firehose. Everything around you is new - people, buildings, cusine, language, nature, climate e.t.c.
It's not for everyone, sure
> This! When people "buy experiences" and travel/visit etc, I just don't really find it interesting.
Agreed. The things I buy make my life richer in some way that matters to me. The person buying the Lambo presumably has his life made a little better for owning the car.
I know someone who, even though they had to sell their house due to loss of income, did not miss a single vacation (at least once each year, sometimes twice, to a resort) in the last 25 years. They told me, at least once when I was buying some new toy for myself, that experiences matter more than material goods, because "after all, you can't take it with you".
Then they got annoyed when I asked them if they thought that they're taking their memories with them.
Given a choice between blowing a ton of money on some ephemeral thing and only having a memory of it in return, and blowing a ton of money on some concrete long-lasting item, I will pick the item most of the time.
After all, the more assets you can leave your children, the better off they will be. They can also turn those assets back into money.
We're different then. On the road is the only time I truly feel unburdened by the stresses and distractions of everyday life. My best and most creative ideas come while on the road.
Maybe it depends on the baseline. I don't have much stress in my daily life and I'm okay with (physically) being at the same comfortable space. Any traveling activity is more stressful than my daily life.
Maybe if I had my daily life more stressful or for whatever reason I didn't like where I was, I might find traveling more appealing. Maybe it's just me of course.
A personal example is my motorcycle. It's as material a thing as you can get, but the enjoyment I had gotten out of it would be hard to match if I looked to "buy experiences" instead.
Of course, the by-product of owning a motorcycle is getting the experiences of riding it through beautiful canyon roads, feeling the wind on your body, and meeting new friends in the community. But it had to start with "buying things".
Buying things can be equally problematic, speaking as someone with a bit of an impulse control problem who has probably 200 more board games than I have proper storage for and are spilling out all over the place (some in the garage, some in the sitting room, dining room, living room, basement, my office, the crawlspace, a walk-in closet, just laying on the ground in some circumstances). There comes a point where getting more of a thing isn't really useful anymore.
Also, it really should be "buy neither". I'm trying to stop my bad buying habits this year, in part, because it's helping contribute negatively to climate change. Those games (or any good) have to be manufactured and transported, and use up precious resources we have on his planet.
But experiences (at least the ones most people think of when they say this, like long-distance travel) also contributes badly to climate change. Which is another thing I'm struggling with, because I've never really traveled outside the US (except a week in Canada, once), and I've been mostly stuck within a three state radius for the past two years. I've always valued other cultures and seeing the world, just didn't feel like I can afford to before, and now I have to feel guilty for wanting to do that while the climate change specter looms.
I may still let myself make a big trip or two at some point, as just watching other people do it on streams or whatever isn't quite the same, but my bucket list for travel was pretty long and it no longer really feels super ethical to burn a bunch of jet emissions just so I can see in person what the Angkor Wat ruins look like in Cambodia, as an example of what was on there.
There's probably lots to see closer them that people ignore because everyone keeps being encouraged to think big and grand with experiences. State parks can have some beauty in them as well, even if they're smaller and simpler, you don't always have to go to national parks or other countries to see nature. My wife and I did quite a few of those near us the past two years and there's still quite a few more we could explore within a two hour drive of us.
While I do think minimalism is overrated, and probably a side effect of the overpriced housing market the post mentions, experiences are definitely a better investment, if it's something you WANT to experience, and not just experience for the sake of experience.
I love to travel and I have taken many a fun and interesting course to further educate myself post university. And while I certainly don't regret any of it for second, I needed none of them and from a purely utilitarian point of view they where pretty terrible investments.
> So I would, if anything, reverse the maxim: “Buy things, not experiences!” Sure, the Lambo might still be a waste of money, but thoughtfully chosen material goods can enable new activities can enrich your life, extend your capabilities, and deepen your understanding of the world.
certain goods can "enable new activities". It seems like the author is still prioritizing experiences, just acknowledging that some experiences require things. Camping is a good example.
I think the author misunderstands the original point though. Overconsumption generally leads to having a big collection of stuff, ever larger houses to store it. Having a reasonable collection of items that the user can leverage to have higher quality experiences, that are built to last where possible makes absolute sense. What is reasonable? That's for everyone to decide themselves. I don't find "buy things, not experiences" to add much to the discussion though.
Maybe a more flexible maxim would be "buy what lasts". A memory can last, but overpaying for an insta photo op is a fleeting status bump. The skis that let you take spontaneous adventures in with friends might last, but yet another single-use kitchen appliance probably won't. Disposable goods and services attract the most exploitative business models.
> Disposable goods and services attract the most exploitative business models.
Not sure that's true. Most people aren't particularly exploited by the toilet paper industry, are they?
Whether some industry is 'exploitative' is more of a function of whether its customers and workers have outside options available. Competition provides discipline.
Funny you mention toilet paper, cutting trees to clean your ass , and not very well at that, double layer, triple layer, scented...how many kinds of toilet paper, companies, people producing, managing, transporting, selling it...and it all ends up not very recyclable... all that because ? the bidet never took off?
> I think he was commenting on other’s misinterpretation and misapplication of the original point.
He is dead-on.
Other's *Imagined misinterpretation, or is there some evidence to go on? To my knowledge, the recent push back against consumption was against the traditional life pattern of accumulating new things on the rat race track (new car, house, upgrading your tastes, expensive clothes to keep up with your peers). Having read some pop psychology books (no expert) there seemed to be some academic support for pushing back on this arrangement and rather prioritizing relationships with people around you and experiences / shared experiences.
I'm not sure how the wires get crossed and people take from that narrative, to own less and buy more prestigious items and experiences like an expensive haircut.
Or, don't buy things. Chances are you are getting by just fine with what you have and the only reason you think you need to buy something else is because someone who sells that thing paid professional manipulators to convince you that you need it. It's the same with experiences, really. Most of the reason you think you need to travel is because other people have travel blogs and talk about how amazing it is while taking staged photos that don't show off all the annoying parts and bills.
> While I appreciate the Stoic-style appraisal of what really brings happiness, economically, this analysis seems precisely backward. It amounts to saying that in an age of industrialization and globalism, when material goods are cheaper than ever, we should avoid partaking of this abundance. Instead, we should consume services afflicted by Baumol’s cost disease, taking long vacations and getting expensive haircuts which are just as hard to produce as ever.
This seems like a silly argument. People don’t hear that aphorism and stop shopping.
The genesis of that aphorism is people buying into the lifestyle that modern advertising sells to you and feeling unsatisfied. Like something is missing. Turns out, having a ton of crap that was sold to you as being life changing is seldom so. But take a walk in the park on a good day; meet up with friends to just hang out makes you feel better.
That said, I do agree that the economy has “caught up” on that and is now selling experiences too. A vacation experience. A cruise experience. And so on.
The right attitude seems to be skeptical of anything advertised and try to find your own thing. Not to just give in to rampant consumerism.
I would also challenge the notion that city dwellers are setting the tone for this conversation. Very few Americans live in apartments willingly; it seems like a temporary thing; the goal is always to get a house. I doubt the apartment dwelling Americans are significant enough to set the cultural mores.
206 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 260 ms ] threadBuying experiences are short term value propositions for me, they're great while they last, but they tend to fade, and the absolutely best of them, those that fade slowly or not at all, those cannot be bought anyway.
Things on the other hand, are an investment in the future, it I buy an item, I will have many opportunities to derive value from it, at least as long as I can remember that I own it.
I don't think the argument applies to things like love, kiss, or any non-quantitative things.
Now it's only a sorrow memories, while 1TB Transcend StoreJet still holds them well [in .jpg and .mov form] and serves well to occasionally transfer files > 30Gb.
And I still have a couple t-shirts from that time, though relegated to in-house wear only, of course.
Now guess, how often do I look at them?
Instead of making a trip, why not just build something, like a program or learn to cook or make some sports goal or read up about some studies etc. All of those are free or saves you money and way more memorable and interesting than things people pay a lot of money for.
I still think about some conventions I went to where I got to meet friends I had only known through the internet. They were like ten years ago.
I went to a concert in 2019 for a band I wanted to really see and was (and still) and into, and stood right up front. I still think about that and it's driven me to see more shows. Now I have an amazing photo collage above my desk that I can see all the time and remember how awesome it was.
> Sure, one-off experiences are valuable, but I think they're overrated
One-off experiences are literally what your life is made from
In my humble world, going to a concert is great but when the concert is over, you're left with nothing, it was a one-off purchase. If you buy a house, you'll have a place to live until you decide to sell it, after you bought it, it's yours, your experience continues,it's not a one-off, you'll repeatedly have that experience every single day you wake up in that house...
I go for a run on the same route every saturday. In summer I go for bicycle routes on same routes. Repeating such experiences opens up an entirely new layer. Observing the nature change over the yearly cycle as well as longer times changes is very different from just having one-off experiences when you can't compose them into a bigger picture.
I don't find this type of reasoning very persuasive. First of all, "experiences" like live music or tourism seem to be conspicuously absent ("education" is an experience?! healthcare? People want to pay for the experience to be in a hospital?).
This, in turn, makes me wonder what the author has in mind when he talks of "durable goods". A laptop? A camera? a fridge?
All of what I listed may not be durable forever, but for the cost they go a good while.
When I'm 80, I don't want to spend 80% of my wealth on living another year.
By this logic I should just lay down and die instead of trying to get better??
I was speaking in the general case about the point of medical care that doesn't balance out economically.
I'm not so nihilistic to say that people shouldn't live they life they have, but it's pretty well known the most expensive health care people get is usually right at the end of their lives. Chronic conditions aside of course.
It sounds like that's their choice, but made no mention of applying this to others.
Their scenario is an 80yo living for one more year. It sounds like that's significantly different than your scenario.
Usually - at least nowadays - you "buy" (i.e. put money and time) in pursuit of some kind of education (be it a degree or a Kubernetes bootcamp or whatever) in order to increase your chances to get a good job.
And even for stuff which is not about markeatable skills (like, I dunno, painting lessons) I doubt that the actual cost would be significant enough to make a dent in their investment opportunities.
In some areas I would be considered Spartan and in others indulgent. The key is paying attention to what things/experiences make you happy and spend your time and money there, regardless of what other people think.
Getting rid of your stuff should only be a priority if it brings you some quality of life improvement - otherwise buy all the stuff you want.
It completely altered my life, consciousness even.
If a Lambo can replicate that, I will gladly save money to buy one down the road.
And, of course, a lot of hotels along the way.
I also learned to eat entirely local, but this took time. The first 6 months of traveling Asia was an absolute nightmare for my gut. And I truly mean that. I don't even want to go into details because it was that gross.
But I understand what you are saying. I made some costly mistakes, especially in the first part of my journey. It certainly taught me a lot about myself in the process.
This is a joke, right?
This is a pretty “duh” statement. Of course people don’t want to get sick. But many illnesses are genetic, even illnesses that we presumably have some control over (like blood cholesterol levels or addiction). Many illnesses are caused by exposures and traumas in our childhoods where we had very little control in our life. Even lifestyle illnesses can be pointed to as coming from a place where one may not have been enabled to live a healthy lifestyle, due to ignorant raising.
The best way to have a correct program is not to write buggy code in the first place. /s
That is true. Like I have a board game hobby, and each one of those I buy is to buy a new experience, a new set of mechanisms, art, theme, etc. Now unfortunately a lot of what I buy ends up just sitting on shelves, because I have way too much of these to ever play more than a handful more than once every couple of years now, but at least at the time of purchase it was so I could have a game experience that I don't have access to yet (used to be I could count on some friends to get some games and experience it that way, but I've seen them a lot less since the pandemic, and a lot of what I buy can be played solo now).
A minimalist can get rid of all the unworn clothes cluttering up the closet while also buying a sewing machine to make clothes the wearer truly loves. The advice to "buy experiences not things" shouldn't mean sacrificing the sewing machine and only use that money for a trip to see a Paris fashion show.
I think reasonable people already know that many hobbies require buying things.
There are other arguments against disposable goods, but I don't know if they're strictly worse than the experiences that the maxim seeks to replace them with. It's a lot easier to replace a pound of cotton than it is to take a flight's worth of CO2 out of the air.
Edit: rephrased a line.
Most of the things I own are to enable experiences. I enjoy kayaking and backpacking. Is my kayak a thing or is my kayaking an experience. I'd say it fits both.
Good to see that I'm not really alone.
What kind of photos/videos do you take with your camera/drone if you don't like traveling/visiting places?
In any case, the author makes the distinction between experience-like things. A camera is a perfect example of an experience-enabling thing. Photography and videography are experiences. I don't think anyone in the "buy experiences not things" crowd would discourage buying a camera, or something like say a surfboard, snowboard, basketball, woodworking tools, raspberry pi, etc since those enable experiences.
On the topic of travel - personally I think it's extremely valuable from a cultural/educational perspective to venture outside of one's city and/or country at least once in one's lifetime. I've spent the last 4 years traveling and living abroad, and while I wouldn't necessary recommend going that hard, I certainly wouldn't trade the experience for anything. Also, experience is more than just buying plane/train tickets and hotel rooms, nor do experiences necessitate travel.
I know for myself that a couple decades ago I excitedly rode the digital camera revolution and photographed/video'd family vacations (yeah, not very original of me). The photos now recall to my mind the heat and wind of Death Valley, the girls jumping on the beds in the hotel ... not the particular gear I was using.
When I buy a thing, I can use it for a while then sell it on eBay to recoup some of the cost. I can return it to the store if I don’t find it useful. With some items, I can share it with a friend and he can get the same utility from it. None of these things are true for purchased experiences.
I used to think I liked travel, but turned around later in life. To me, travel is nothing but stress. Let’s take a typical international trip: Big payment up front for plane tickets, hotel, rental car and so on up front, then you’re praying it all goes well. You can substitute travel insurance for prayer if you want to spend even more money. Then, the security/boarding circus of air travel. Then cramped seating and crap service in what has turned into a Greyhound Bus in the sky. Once you land, assuming the airline didn’t lose your bags, you and the rest of the cattle are marched through immigration and customs, where you pretty much have no rights as a human being. Finally you are in your glorious destination! Except you probably don’t speak or understand the native language so everything you do is going to be 5X more difficult than at home. You rent a car that’s not as nice/familiar as yours, stay in a hotel that just doesn’t have everything you’re used to at home. With kids in tow you’re desperately trying to keep everyone corralled together and (in some destinations) not kidnapped. Finally, you hit some tourist sites, lay on the beach, check out the local cities, whatever your goal was. Then, back to the circus to get home. COVID has added “pass last minute COVID tests or you are stuck without compensation” to the equation. By the time you’re home you are so thankful to get back to real life! Spent all that time and money for what? A memory that we can’t even sell on the secondhand market. Maybe 100 more photos on the phone which we might look at again sometime later.
Last vacation I took with my family, my spouse mentioned to me two days before it started “I can’t wait till this is all over and we’re back here at home again!” I agreed, and we both realized “why are we doing this??”
I often feel the same way about social engagements ("I hope the other party cancels so that I can just stay in and relax") which retrospectively were much more enjoyable than being alone at home.
I think both of these are about intentionally complicating your life for a period of time. Sometimes that's called for, but I can imagine if you're raising kids and working full time there's a real appeal to not complicating your life any further.
Agreed. The things I buy make my life richer in some way that matters to me. The person buying the Lambo presumably has his life made a little better for owning the car.
I know someone who, even though they had to sell their house due to loss of income, did not miss a single vacation (at least once each year, sometimes twice, to a resort) in the last 25 years. They told me, at least once when I was buying some new toy for myself, that experiences matter more than material goods, because "after all, you can't take it with you".
Then they got annoyed when I asked them if they thought that they're taking their memories with them.
Given a choice between blowing a ton of money on some ephemeral thing and only having a memory of it in return, and blowing a ton of money on some concrete long-lasting item, I will pick the item most of the time.
After all, the more assets you can leave your children, the better off they will be. They can also turn those assets back into money.
Maybe if I had my daily life more stressful or for whatever reason I didn't like where I was, I might find traveling more appealing. Maybe it's just me of course.
Of course, the by-product of owning a motorcycle is getting the experiences of riding it through beautiful canyon roads, feeling the wind on your body, and meeting new friends in the community. But it had to start with "buying things".
Also, it really should be "buy neither". I'm trying to stop my bad buying habits this year, in part, because it's helping contribute negatively to climate change. Those games (or any good) have to be manufactured and transported, and use up precious resources we have on his planet.
But experiences (at least the ones most people think of when they say this, like long-distance travel) also contributes badly to climate change. Which is another thing I'm struggling with, because I've never really traveled outside the US (except a week in Canada, once), and I've been mostly stuck within a three state radius for the past two years. I've always valued other cultures and seeing the world, just didn't feel like I can afford to before, and now I have to feel guilty for wanting to do that while the climate change specter looms.
I may still let myself make a big trip or two at some point, as just watching other people do it on streams or whatever isn't quite the same, but my bucket list for travel was pretty long and it no longer really feels super ethical to burn a bunch of jet emissions just so I can see in person what the Angkor Wat ruins look like in Cambodia, as an example of what was on there.
There's probably lots to see closer them that people ignore because everyone keeps being encouraged to think big and grand with experiences. State parks can have some beauty in them as well, even if they're smaller and simpler, you don't always have to go to national parks or other countries to see nature. My wife and I did quite a few of those near us the past two years and there's still quite a few more we could explore within a two hour drive of us.
People just need a balance mostly.
Convince me that I am wrong.
I love to travel and I have taken many a fun and interesting course to further educate myself post university. And while I certainly don't regret any of it for second, I needed none of them and from a purely utilitarian point of view they where pretty terrible investments.
certain goods can "enable new activities". It seems like the author is still prioritizing experiences, just acknowledging that some experiences require things. Camping is a good example.
I think the author misunderstands the original point though. Overconsumption generally leads to having a big collection of stuff, ever larger houses to store it. Having a reasonable collection of items that the user can leverage to have higher quality experiences, that are built to last where possible makes absolute sense. What is reasonable? That's for everyone to decide themselves. I don't find "buy things, not experiences" to add much to the discussion though.
Not sure that's true. Most people aren't particularly exploited by the toilet paper industry, are they?
Whether some industry is 'exploitative' is more of a function of whether its customers and workers have outside options available. Competition provides discipline.
He is dead-on.
Other's *Imagined misinterpretation, or is there some evidence to go on? To my knowledge, the recent push back against consumption was against the traditional life pattern of accumulating new things on the rat race track (new car, house, upgrading your tastes, expensive clothes to keep up with your peers). Having read some pop psychology books (no expert) there seemed to be some academic support for pushing back on this arrangement and rather prioritizing relationships with people around you and experiences / shared experiences.
I'm not sure how the wires get crossed and people take from that narrative, to own less and buy more prestigious items and experiences like an expensive haircut.
This seems like a silly argument. People don’t hear that aphorism and stop shopping.
The genesis of that aphorism is people buying into the lifestyle that modern advertising sells to you and feeling unsatisfied. Like something is missing. Turns out, having a ton of crap that was sold to you as being life changing is seldom so. But take a walk in the park on a good day; meet up with friends to just hang out makes you feel better.
That said, I do agree that the economy has “caught up” on that and is now selling experiences too. A vacation experience. A cruise experience. And so on.
The right attitude seems to be skeptical of anything advertised and try to find your own thing. Not to just give in to rampant consumerism.
I would also challenge the notion that city dwellers are setting the tone for this conversation. Very few Americans live in apartments willingly; it seems like a temporary thing; the goal is always to get a house. I doubt the apartment dwelling Americans are significant enough to set the cultural mores.