These people have decided to simplify their lives by limiting themselves to only owning 100 things. Better say bye-bye to that antique button collection. [TIME]
Post a comment
Comments:
I really don't know why abolishing sentimentalism is considered an essential goal of thrift.
Modest households throughout the world have plenty of sentimentalism, and it enriches their lives.
So they may have saved a few hundred twenty years earlier if they hadn't bought this or that. But they get enjoyment from it and get to look back on it happily.
There has to be another method of affordable living that doesn't involve self-punshiment. If not, we have socioeconomic problems that all the thrift in the world won't solve.
The main problem is that the numbers chosen are so arbitrary. Why 100? Why not 82 or 126? It makes more sense to not consume any new products you don't need and only purge whatever is meaningless and useless.
I'm betting that whatever guidelines he sets allow him to comfortably keep most of what he'd want anyway. His wife isn't in on it so he doesn't have to "count" anything she "owns". It's pretty dubious as well as based on an arbitrary notion that 100 things is very little to have.
I looked at his blog and there are a few posts about consumer debt, but he's not eliminating debt by getting rid of things he's already paid full price for. It's like closing the barn door after the horse is long gone.
I guess you're dead if you gonna have dinner for 8. 2 forks, knife, spoon, dinner plate, salad plate, dessert dish, water glass, wine glass... oops! Forgot the chair! That's 80 of my things already. No pots, pans, fridge, oh, right, the TABLE!! Salt/pepper shakers, napkins, dang. I know we're over by now.
Does the breakfast cereal count? What if you like wheaties and the wife likes cheerios? Is that 2?
Almost bordering on OCD








You'll spend more time accomlpishing this than it's worth.