Comments on: How I got out of consumerism

By: after the hacking, and links | brip blap

after the hacking, and links | brip blap — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 14:00:53 +0000

[...] always interesting, has How I got out of consumerism: I don’t know if it works for everyone but it’s something I would like to think I could [...]

By: Frugal Blog Buffet!

Frugal Blog Buffet! — Mon, 17 May 2010 21:08:19 +0000

[...] Retirement Extreme, run by Jacob, a man who has embraced thrift as a means to early retirement.this blog post, I just love. I think he nailed the issue that I’m having with: consumerism as a lifestyle. I [...]

By: Slavery didn't die, it just evolved

Slavery didn't die, it just evolved — Sun, 16 May 2010 12:37:37 +0000

[...] my head against the wall. Instead, I’ll beg you to read how Jacob of Early Retirement Extreme got out of consumerism. It’s a flat-out awesome [...]

By: Chad

Chad — Mon, 10 May 2010 17:02:11 +0000

“Families essentially engage in a bidding war…”

This war is of course encouraged by their supposedly “helpful” real estate agents, because it gives them a bigger commission.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Mon, 10 May 2010 16:49:12 +0000

@Ruth – Families essentially engage in a bidding war driving up the real estate prices in a given location based on which school district it is. They base their bidding on two incomes paying the maximum they can afford for the house leaving very little wiggling room. Two incomes now means that they must find daycare (this is usually an economic solution for high income earners although net it is sometimes not better than if one of them had simply staid at home).

It is essentially a highly leveraged gamble on real estate (motivated by school district) and based on job security that too many people lose.

Yes, it is a consumption problem. It is people buying what they can not afford (specific real estate) and working as much as possible to do so instead of buying in a less expensive place and taking more care of their own children (helping with home work instead of outsourcing to schools and daycare because they are too busy paying for it).

That’s just my opinion.

By: Ruth

Ruth — Mon, 10 May 2010 12:13:05 +0000

I agree with you Jacob, at least about my own life, but what do you think about Elizabeth Warren’s data showing that most bankruptcies are the result of families trying to cover house payments in good-school neighborhoods, health insurance, and child care? Are these still consumption problems, in that they should’ve stayed as renters and somehow found a neighbor to watch their kids? Or is the 5% of their income that they spent on luxuries like cable and cell phones the real culprit because it left them without an emergency fund? As a supersaver who sees other people struggling, I’m not sure how much of their problems they brought on with bad decisions or not.

By: Marie

Marie — Sun, 09 May 2010 20:32:01 +0000

I was blessed with a filter on my brain that always would look at “hours working” when I looked at the price of something. It never set while with me to be external driven by work.

We recently found out we live near a wonderful high volume non profit used good store…just in time for transitioning from RV fugal living to small cottage frugal living. whew.

As always you inspire me.

By: mingus

mingus — Sat, 08 May 2010 17:05:56 +0000

Muji-Thank you for the post. It is my goal to replace only those items in my life that are completely functional and only when they cannot be repaired by myself.

Jacob-I have been checking in with your blog daily for inspiration to continue to live outside of the Matrix (one of my favorite movies).

Some of the ways I enjoy life without consuming are: growing and harvesting fruits and veggies, having pets, spending time with friends, cooking, reading, thinking, writing and raising an awesome son (also outside of the matrix).

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sat, 08 May 2010 16:43:53 +0000

@Kevin M – It’s been done already. There’s a book called Affluenza. Another is Luxury Fever.

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sat, 08 May 2010 16:39:48 +0000

@Andy – It depends on the country. Generally you can sell them in the same way you acquire them. If you only need to be 18+ you can sell them to others who are 18+. If you need a permit to buy, you can sell to others who have a similar permit. [This is not legal advice, obviously.]

By: Muji

Muji — Sat, 08 May 2010 15:29:34 +0000

@mingus
Perfectionism is dominant in our society. Marketing has taught us to focus on the set rather than on the play. Style over substance.

Marketing enforces the message that if we just have the “right” sofa, stove, carpet, clothes….then we will enjoy a full substantive life. I’ve noticed people actually delay activities (entertaining, camping, exercising…) because the setting/possessions aren’t just perfect.

By: Robert Muir

Robert Muir — Sat, 08 May 2010 15:18:37 +0000

Adam hits the nail.

I don’t buy every digital gizmo that comes down the pike. I never bought an iPhone or iPod Touch, although I did fall for a Verizon Droid which will most likely be my last “smart” phone. I also succumbed to the iPad because I’ve wanted it from the moment I saw one being used in the movie 2001.

That said, in the last few months I’ve reduced consuming from fire hose down to perhaps garden hose proportions. I finally kicked my DVD/Blu-ray habit with the help of Netflix, and book purchases have been reduced from an average of 5 or so per week to perhaps 1.

My wife and I have pensions that bring in three times the amount of Jacob’s expenses. We have no debt and a paid off house. So why do we work? Good question. For me, I think it’s because unlike Jacob, I still believe in the possibility of the Singularity and I want to have that million dollar nut to give me better odds of getting in under the wire.

Hello, my name is Bob and I’m a consumeraholic.

By: Randall

Randall — Sat, 08 May 2010 15:17:02 +0000

“Many go through their entire lives working to create a stream of happiness bursts… which they are told they “deserve” because they work so hard.”

Sorry I was not the first one to comment on this!

Hit me like a ton of consumer bricks. If we never learn to live in the moment and appreciate it, we will never learn to be content. One who is always thinking “If I have this, it will make me happty”. They are not really thinking this but are not appreciating what they have and therfore trying to derive some sort of satisfaction from this little “burst of happiness” that the consumerism fable pretends to provide.

“Specifically, I tried to become more self-sufficient by creating many solutions myself. This solved problem #2. At the same time I derived a sense of competence which is very satisfying to me. This solved problem”

ABSOLUTLEY! This in a real and practical way solves the problem. Creating a real satisfaction that endures, not just for a moment, but a new lifestyle that works.

Captivating Post..

By: George

George — Sat, 08 May 2010 14:42:43 +0000

@Andy – checking your web site, I see that you’re in Belgium. The USA, as a country, does not have a law against selling knives. Some cities or states try to differentiate between kinds of knives and may make possession of certain kinds illegal.

Overall, though, if one wants a steel implement with a single or double edge, one can buy it, own it, sell it, or trade it with impunity in the USA.

So how does Belgium deal with, say, a chef’s 12″ butcher knife or meat cleaver? Can you not purchase and own one? How do they distinguish that from 12″ Bowie knife?

By: Adam @ Sit Down Disco

Adam @ Sit Down Disco — Sat, 08 May 2010 14:09:47 +0000

Consuming has been bothering me for some time now but I do still find myself buying stuff. It’s not bad stuff, but it’s still stuff. Finding the balance between living in a cave with an animal skin for clothing and living in a mansion with a wardrobe full of clothes (and heaps of debt) is tough to achieve! A great way to start, I have found, is to just not earn as much. Earn less money and you are forced to consume less.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 08 May 2010 13:55:29 +0000

@Robert: That would require some serious crafting, but I guess it could be done…

By: Robert Muir

Robert Muir — Sat, 08 May 2010 13:12:15 +0000

@Andy – how about a carefully crafted Craigslist posting?

Excellent post Jacob! I hope more stuff like this is in the book.

By: jacqjolie

jacqjolie — Sat, 08 May 2010 12:43:28 +0000

There’s a reason they call it retail therapy. I used to find in my consumerist days that it gave me a drug-like rush to spend money.
I ended up staying completely out of malls and shopping places (outside of a grocery store) for over 2 years to “detox” myself.
I also wonder if there isn’t a little bit of a hoarder mentality in all / most of us.

By: AngryLemming

AngryLemming — Sat, 08 May 2010 12:41:58 +0000

People have to stop living like customers. We’re stakeholders in many ways, if not then we have to demand the respect and dignity for ourselves as such. We’re all consumers in as much as we do not produce content:
We buy food, not grow it.
We buy entertainments, not create them.
We buy devices and web-access, not build complex kernels and OS’s.
We are consumers of someone else’s efforts. Those efforts are aimed at us. WHO, how, and where are the questions we must ask. The outright rejection of responsibility in the market which rejection of consumerism attempts (in the majority, not necessarily what I think you mean) is folly and leads back to the company-vs-organizational ethos which defined the stock market and the corporations like Wal-Mart has become. Large versus good, power versus people… this is the winter of our discontent.

By: AngryLemming

AngryLemming — Sat, 08 May 2010 12:17:34 +0000

Consumerism… the concept isn’t far from my mind, as an MBA student. I think, however, you’re engagement with the concept is divorced from what it means in forward-looking business models. Granted, it is exactly what most U.S. companies have traditionally seen these stakeholders as, but (and a big, BUT) this is not how emerging business models view their constituency. And I do very much mean to use the words “stakeholder” and “constituency”. Take (given our previous public convo) Apple as an example. The aim for Apple is not to reduce their target market to zero, rather it is to satisfy a need at a price which is reasonable for both parties. In order to figure out what that need is (in concern to a personal or professional computing device) they need to view the consumer as a part of the company: i.e. as a stakeholder. Everyone, in the market chain must be taken as a stakeholder if the company is to succeed in the quickly growing and evolving markets. They must offer products and services which can meet the same standards of NPV which the company uses to evaluate alternatives. They assume the consumers are aware of their financial constraints and are able to make rational decisions. The problem is when they try to convince you that price should be no object, when they tell you you have defined the next generation of products and services. Why? because they are plying to pride, which sells more than consumers are comfortable admitting. But, that isn’t inherent in the idea of a “consumer” so much as a lingering specter of a bygone corporate model, which says the company dictates the needs of customers, not that they must anticipate the needs of stakeholders.
It’s a marginal difference, given the main point of your argument here, but I think it’s a significant change in engagement, enough to make note of it, for the record.