Hacker News Reader

Comment by prolikewh0a | Hacker News Reader

Ok, but you still need people to buy things. If they're only saving, there's no demand for products. Capitalism requires people to consume.

View on HN

It's been addressed on MMM:

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/04/09/what-if-everyone-b...

The key quote: "If an entire society gradually decides that it wants to consume less, then it needs to produce less as well.

If there is less stuff that needs to be produced, then people don’t have to work as many hours to create it. That’s perfect, because many people will be dropping out of the workforce much earlier as they finish earning the money they need to get going on their early retirement. The shortage of available work will be balanced by the reduced number of people willing to do that work."

Spending money on basic necessities like housing, food, electricity, water, health care etc. is still consumption. Also note that retirement can still contain some money for extra widgets and other fun stuff - just less than the average consumer.

Other than the biggest costs—housing, food, transportation and perhaps healthcare—I doubt people that FIREd have withdrawn 100% from inconspicuous consumption. They just focus that consumption on more necessities than frivolities.

But the purpose of such saving is to prolong the consumption in the future.

You as an individual are not responsible for saving capitalism

You are responsible for your own welfare though, particularly in the US

What are these people supposed to do - stay broke to make some soundbite economist happy?

It is perfectly rational for people living in a society without safety nets to weave their own

That doesn't answer my question. People have always weaved their own safety nets and saved, but if this is becoming common in USA to spend almost nothing and live frugal, how can this system stay afloat?

Another point that's pretty unrelated, why would you live decades of your life doing nothing, living extremely frugally? Sounds like a pretty garbage life to me.

As long as my boat is afloat, I care not about yours.

If the US fails, I will sail my boat elsewhere.

We created the scenario these people are reacting to

Worry not, we will not run out of people willing to impoverish themselves buying baubles

>As long as my boat is afloat, I care not about yours.

Everything that's wrong about the USA right here.

It could also be the perspective that you can really only try to control your own lot in life. Is it not possible that by focusing on my own welfare, I am more productive and happier? And that by trying to float other boats, I am distracted and less happy?

I don't subscribe to the OPs opinion, necessarily, just pointing out a situation where it might be better to just take care of yourself.

Yet you are the one telling us we all have to spend ourselves into the poorhouse or society will tip over....

Living extremely frugally doesn’t equate to doing “nothing.” If we’re going to start passing judgment, pinning happiness to consumerism seems like a pretty garbage life to me.

It's not just consumerism. What doesn't cost money? Walking around?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com