
The hazards of too much stuff - m-i-l
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30849473
======
malingo
I really enjoyed this related post from a few years ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5371253](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5371253)

"Poor people don’t have clutter because they’re too dumb to see the virtue of
living simply; they have it to reduce risk. When rich people present the idea
that they’ve learned to live lightly as a paradoxical insight, they have the
idea of wealth backwards. You can only have that kind of lightness through
wealth."

Edit (additional thought): the privilege is the ability to move about as
unencumbered as one pleases, (re)acquiring anything they need at their
discretion.

~~~
pm90
So true. After you pass a certain income level, discounts and such stop being
as attractive as they would be, because the utility that you get from saving
money but keeping stuff around is probably less than not having stuff until
you need it, albeit paying more for it.

------
greggman
By choice I've been living out of a suitcase for 19 months now. As a
stuffoholic and someone that kind of likes fashion it's been an interesting
experience.

Dumb stuffoholic examples. I hate that I can't have more than 2 pairs of
shoes. I need one dress pair for when I go to a wedding etc and I need one
pair I can hike in, exercise in etc. I'd really prefer 2 or 3 more but there's
no room.

I can't buy anything without throwing something away except software,
ebooks... I'd prefer more computers (had 6 before this episode) all of which I
used (Windows, OSX, & Linux). I run VMs on my laptop but the perf isn't there
to be able to run various apps I'd like to run (games and other graphically
intensive apps). Similarly I can't own an XBoxOne or PS4 as much as I would
like to play.

Another interesting thing when preparing to do this and getting rid of lots of
my stuff was just how much stuff is probably actually useful but only
seldomly. An obvious sample might be a winter coat. You only need it in winter
so it stays in storage for 9 months of the year. But, there's plenty of things
I use less often. A paper cutter. A mac screw driver. A drill. An xacto knife.
A hole punch. A pizza stone. A casserole dish. A printer. A scanner. I could
list 1000s things. I don't know if having them is really having too much
stuff. It seems rather it's semi freeing. If I want to make some crafts today
I don't need several days of running around acquiring the stuff as I have it
and can start immediately. If I want to cook something I most likely have all
the utensils even if I only use them a couple of times a year. If I want to
make something or repair something I have several drawers of tools.

So sure, we can have too much stuff (I had 44 pair of shoes of which I only
ever used 5 or 6) but it's hard to say where the balance is.

~~~
lugg
Somewhere between 5 or 6 and 44 I'm guessing.

I find I very rarely mind not having lots of things. I moved country a year or
so ago, planned to spend around 10k at IKEA, ended up getting tired and
leaving after spending 3. Planned to get all those little things I "need" on
another big trip. I never went back. Apparently I didn't need that pizza
cutter after all.

I suspect most of us have much more than we really need. I suspect most of us
do just fine with that. Some people it can be an improvement to remove some
clutter, others it doesn't really matter.

I'd love to live out of a suitcase again, it really sets your priorities
straight when you have to choose what to remove when you "need" something new.

Out of curiosity, what do you do in winter? Follow summer? or simply get a
larger suitcase? (re the jacket conundrum)

~~~
greggman
I moved countries a couple of times too and it was educational how much stuff
I didn't miss, all my books for example, all my memorabilia as well.

At the same time over time I did replace tons of stuff. Examples: Had to buy
scissors, a tape dispenser, knives, pots and pans, lots of tools, serving
dishes, cupcake sheets, cookie sheets, craft utensils, etc... All stuff I
already had before I moved.

As for the jacket I've just been carrying it the last 19 months.

------
carlio
George Carlin on stuff:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvgN5gCuLac](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvgN5gCuLac)

Dylan Moran on stuff:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLmkRR2oGUA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLmkRR2oGUA)

I now feel obligated to contribute more to the conversation than some YouTube
videos.

I've been a kind of move-around-a-lot person for about 6 years now. I've lived
in 4 cities. I guarantee you, if it's going to cost several thousand dollars
to move your stuff, it's much easier to purge. I'm also glad that moving
forced me to have a purge occasionally. I think you'd be surprised how many
things you hold onto just in case. I've had a rare pang of lost nostalgia, but
in general, I haven't missed anything.

------
jweir
If you have a problem with stuff you could do worse than reading up on Mari
Kondo - [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/23/garden/home-
organization-a...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/23/garden/home-organization-
advice-from-marie-kondo.html)

Never did I think I would be interesting in house tidying, but her techniques
are effective.

~~~
eswat
I believe her technique is effective because it tries to combat hoarding using
the same kind of emotional response that gets us to stockpile on stuff in the
first place.

Others will suggest attacking the problem with logic: “Do you need this now?
No? Get rid of it.” But stuffocation is as much a problem with our emotional
attachment to things as it is to our evolutionary hardwiring. In my case I was
finding it easier to find reasons not to keep something by doing what Mari
suggests: take items into your hands and ask yourself if it actually brings
you joy.

------
namuol
One anti-stuffocation tip: Invest in a good camera. Get one that can take
decent close-ups.

Why? So when you have something you don't want to get rid of for one
sentimental reason or another, you can just take a few pictures of it for
archival purposes, then toss it. Years later you can still look through the
photos for a trip down memory lane.

~~~
pc2g4d
This is my preferred method of ditching old junk I'm attached to but that
serves no other purpose than to connect me to the past.

------
yassam
I wonder to what extent a lifetime of exposure to advertising contributes to
our craving for stuff. The article claims an evolutionary psychological
explanation: anyone know of any research to back that up? Our ancestors were
nomadic, so acquiring a lot of stuff wouldn't have made sense, would it?

I wonder whether the super rich of the 17-century wanted to acquire stuff as
much as we do. They would have had the means to buy a lot, but would not have
been exposed to as much marketing as us. I concede there would have been a lot
less stuff to buy then.

~~~
matthewwiese
Interesting thought! However, I think in the case of the super rich of earlier
times, the amassing of 'stuff' was a sign of material wealth. Hoarding fine
linens, brilliant jewels, and the like would've served a different purpose.

I think a parallel between the "middle class" (in quotes as I am unsure that
term makes much sense depending on the period) of a time gone by and our era
makes more sense. For them, I'd say the issue of stockpiling stuff would've
been less problematic. Perhaps a large supply of tools or other utilitarian
objects, but beyond that nothing of excess. They didn't have Billy Mays back
then to sell them "As Seen On TV" goods.

~~~
yassam
The reason I mentioned the super rich of the past, is that they had enough
money to buy whatever was available. Most other people couldn't afford to buy
much at all, I imagine.

So the question is, were the super rich then as acquisitive as we are today?
Were there rooms in their mansions filled with pointless things? Or were they
surprisingly spartan by the standards of today?

I'm trying to figure out whether our insatiable appetite for more and more
stuff is a modern thing, or whether it's always been there. And if it is
largely a modern thing, what caused it? Non-stop advertising?

Your point about amassing wealth in the form of jewels etc. is a good one.

~~~
icebraining
Well, when you have a rococo interior, the house looks filled even when it's
empty :)

I'm hardly an expert, but from what I've read about the 18th century, the idea
of filling your house with bric-a-brac and bibelots was very common - though
probably more among the bourgeoisie than the aristocrats.

An example:

 _Victorian interior design was characterized by three words: gaudy, ornate
and formidable. Following fashion, private and public rooms were stuffed with
objets d’art, bric-a-brac, heavy velvet drapery, tables, chairs, paneled
walls, Oriental rugs, potted plants, gilded reproductions of Louis XVI
furniture—intricately carved, fragile sofas and chairs—Chinese ivory figures,
German porcelain vases, ormolu clocks, and miniatures lined the fireplace
mantle, the mantle itself shaded by heavy, ornamental fire-shades, and all was
overlooked by wall to wall portraits and priceless paintings, richly framed in
gold._

[http://www.edwardianpromenade.com/marriage/the-twin-
bed/](http://www.edwardianpromenade.com/marriage/the-twin-bed/)

------
poulsbohemian
I read somewhere once that the average estate sale yields just $900. That made
an impact on me as for all the personal value that we put on our stuff - be it
jewelry, electronics, motorcycles, boats - whatever your toys might be, in the
end aren't worth much to anyone else. The _stuff_ that really bothers me is
consumer packaging. I'm shocked each week when I take out the trash and
recycling how much of it is redundant - a cardboard wrapper with a plastic
wrapper or two beneath, only parts of which are recyclable locally. I really
wish manufacturers, especially of high-volume consumables, would come up with
less energy-intensive packaging. Stick it in a brown cardboard box with black
ink and I'll still buy it, but will feel a whole lot better to not see so much
waste.

~~~
icebraining
Amazon has been working on it:
[http://www.amazon.com/b/?&node=5521637011](http://www.amazon.com/b/?&node=5521637011)

Alas, they don't always get it right:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1d3il7/so_i_ordered_a_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/1d3il7/so_i_ordered_a_battery/)

~~~
stegosaurus
Large cardboard boxes don't especially bother me - they're generally useful to
have around and cardboard can be repurposed in a number of ways anyway.

More annoying are multiple layers of completely wasted plastic wrap. Or the
notorious blister pack which is essentially designed to be _useless_ once
opened.

~~~
poulsbohemian
Yes, that's exactly what I mean - you are right, cardboard or really any paper
I'm fine with because its reusable, recyclable, and a renewable resource. But
all the endless layers of cellophane, plastic wrap etc.

------
0942v8653
Also worth reading:
[http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/stuff.html)

~~~
arbuge
The only part I disagree with a bit is the one where he exempts books. I think
it is possible to buy too many. I've probably engaged in this behavior myself.
I find it hard to resist buying a good book, but I have a bunch of them now
piling up physically and electronically which I find it hard to find time for.

Books piling up exert pressure to be read, but simply succumbing to the
pressure to read them all might result in falling victim to what Einstein
talked about:

"Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy
habits of thinking."

~~~
vinchuco
Easy, just buy a book when you have finished reading the previous one

~~~
jessaustin
It is difficult for me to imagine, reading only one book at a time.

------
acd
Makes me wonder if the world will turn out like wall-e in the future or if we
will recycle. It also makes me wonder if the central banks outcries that we
need to consume more to boost economics is good for the environment?

You don't own stuff your stuff owns you. That's why you need a larger home
when you can't fit your stuff anymore. You also worry about your stuff, home
burglary somebody taking it's, car some taking it or damaging it, dropping
your phone or computer etc.

~~~
maxerickson
I think the future depends on whether energy continues to get cheaper or not
(cheaper energy probably leads to increased consumption, but it also makes it
cheaper to clean stuff up, and gives people more time to worry about cleaning
up, etc.).

I also think that one of the many factors involved with the fall off of crime
is that (the typical) stuff (found in a house) isn't worth as much anymore.

In 1990, a "nice" TV might have cost $1,000 (inflation adjusted, $1,800).
Today, a fantastic TV costs $400.

~~~
bluedino
I feel bad for criminals who had to team up to haul 36" televisions out of a
house during a burglary. These days one robber could haul out a pair of 60"
thin LED televisions by themselves.

~~~
yardie
Man, I'm having flashbacks of when my friend's mom bought a 36" Sony
trinitron. 4 skinny teenagers trying to move this behemoth up a flight of
stairs and position it into it's cabinet. I think we aged our backs a few
years on that one project.

------
bcks
We live in a four unit building and one of the units just went on the market.
The former tenants cleared out everything for their open house and just
brought in some minimal, modern "staging" furniture. It was astonishing to see
essentially the same apartment layout but with none of the stuff — a kind of
bizarre alternate reality. It prompted our new year's resolution: we will get
rid of (at least) 5 things a day for a year. So far so good, and we've cleared
off and removed an entire set of shelves.

~~~
thrownaway2424
You really have thousands of things you can get rid of? My house is a mess
because my wife won't stop buying things for the kids but even so, I'm sure
there's not 365x5 things in here I could get rid of, unless I could every
sticker and crayon separately.

~~~
mathgeek
The goal is just 5 * 365 = 1825 things. I'd wager that most of us over the age
of 30 have/had at least that many things we could get rid of before our first
experience in purging.

------
Elvie
We don't have to go back to 1750 as they mention in the article... In 2000
earning much less CDs cost over £15 and I am still surprised to find price
tags on old things like that...

------
Retra
I recently moved and made a decision to only take with me what I could fit in
my car. I have a cot, small 3-drawer chest, collapsable desk & chair,
computer, a box of office supplies, a box of dishes, and not much else.

In fact, I've been pretty happy with this arrangement, so I don't really feel
the need for anything more. It was easy to commit to, since I had deployed in
the military with far less and when I would return, I would see a big pile of
stuff that I didn't even miss.

------
jqm
I would love to own absolutely nothing, but have a portal follow me around,
and anything I needed appeared through the portal, then disappeared as soon as
I didn't need it anymore.

I bet something like this is one day possible and it happens.

People hoard for the same reason they overeat. Because scarcity has been the
rule until very recently. When scarcity hasn't been the rule for for a long
time I think these things won't be a problem anymore.

~~~
anon012012
When there'll be drone delivery, you could imagine a service where you rent
for example a hammer for one hour, when you need one, for a few cents it'd fly
to your window, then you send it back.

~~~
iamwithnail
Definitely waiting till the tech is a tiny bit better before I request drones
fly at my windows with hammers...

;)

------
gsands
Jerry Seinfeld on stuff (new):
[http://youtu.be/HfYzlSNHapA?t=1m15s](http://youtu.be/HfYzlSNHapA?t=1m15s)

edit: start time

------
wstrange
I have a large collection of auto repair tools, gardening equipment, etc, that
have an insanely low utilization. And my neighbours are the same.

A large community shed where we could all pool our stuff would make so much
sense. But alas most communities are not organized to make this happen.

------
yabatopia
Not only have we too much stuff, a big part of it is crap: low quality but
cheap, often produced with obsolescence in mind. If you focus on quality items
you automatically buy less. An excellent example is clothing.

------
holri
To have or to be?:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Have_or_to_Be%3F](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Have_or_to_Be%3F)

