Hacker News Reader

Comment by fragmede | Hacker News Reader

> Scale the dollar amount up a few orders of magnitude

But that's what makes it "weird". Most people can't afford to do that. As you point out, it mashed a certain amount of sense, but we're in the midst of an housing crisis. People who have enough money to own, not just multiple houses, but so many cars that they got tired of different cars so they just bought more of the same? Weird because I've never done that.

How many iphone 13 minis have you used concurrently, and in how many different locations did you own them? Byb your own admission, you only use one at a time.

View on HN

I don't know if its weird. This seems to me using money to reduce hassle. At my even lower level of existence I do similar thing in sense I keep one pair toothbrush and paste in upstairs bathroom and another pair at main level just to avoid whatever inconvenience I've thought of in my mind. Same with multiple pair of glasses at different location I work from.

I have not done these things when I had less money and now I think removing minor hassles with extra money is worth it. At another order of magnitude of money I'd definitely acquire multiple copy of things I need.

Just wanna say I do a few things like this, too. Examples being duplicate toiletries and clothing I keep permanently packed so I don't need to actually pack when traveling. I have duplicates of the same vacuum cleaner and broom/dustpan combos on every floor of my house so I don't need to go down or up stairs to get one. If I was wealthy enough to have a vacation home, I could see owning a duplicate car to keep there, assuming I was a more typical person who drove more.

Exactly right. Indulgences become necessity when one moves up the affluence ladder.

I love your go-to bag example which I wished to have but never did. In a weird way because I have more time to pack but not much resources or time to travel anyway.

Why maintain a grip you never expect to need?

The incredible comfort of having readily available that thing which you never, never need, but for some reason you suddenly do now.

See, now you're speaking my language. I hate travel. So, one less thing to bother with when stuck doing it...I believe you may have convinced me.

We'd somehow have to poll a large randomized demographic as to whether having two bathrooms in which you brush your teeth is weird to begin with though.

We could talk about the lingering effects of redlining and the post-WWII housing crisis and how those manifest differently in different parts of the country. Or we could keep up with the weird conspiracy theory stuff. Your call, and I don't mind either way; this look inside your head that you don't realize you are giving has not yet ceased to fascinate.

> How many iphone 13 minis have you used concurrently, and in how many different locations did you own them? Byb your own admission, you only use one at a time.

It's not about concurrent use at all. It's all about availability. I had my simple, trusty Logitech keyboard and mouse. And 2x more of each, in a box, in a cupboard. I'm not using them. But I have the comfort of knowing that if either fails, I'm back up again in two minutes. That, for me, is comfort.

Now, if I had two workplaces (for example home and the office) would I carry my hardware between places? If I can't afford to buy two of them, yes. But if I can afford to pay 20€ twice, I'll have one keyboard at home, the same keyboard at the office, and so. That, for me, is comfort.

Now, scale the keyboard for 20€ to a Lexus for 40k€. Same thing.

I didn't say that it wasn't grotesquely flagrant consumption, only that I can follow the reasoning behind it. And I have made no admission of which I am aware.

Hmm, could this whole side-thread be summarized as: a meta thing rich people can do is wield larger sums of money without hitting the same "qualitative boundary exceeded" circuit trips that regular people might hit?

It feels like a bit of a tautology, but I think has some reality to it as well. When you're steeped in a more frugal mindset, it can be hard to remain rational or detached when analyzing consumption patterns "just a few orders of magnitude" larger...

No, I don't believe so. That just reduces to "you learn to spend what's in your pocket" again. That sentence turns on the verb "learn" for a reason.

If I had to guess, I would say I've been braced by someone whose morning was complicated by treating "take with food" as a little too much more of a suggestion than an instruction. No judgment. Nothing I haven't run into before.

A lie by omission is still a lie, in my world. You may inhabit one in which it is not, however

Now you've called me a liar. Would you like to try to substantiate that presumptive libel? Or do you simply mistake for virtue the inability you have cultivated to entertain a thought with which you don't agree?

I'd ask if you were new to the Internet, but no one would believe the answer of a liar.

Of the 261 words in your comment (archived at https://archive.is/Vfx9Z#selection-161.6-184.0), none of them mention that you see it as "grotesquely flagrant consumption", so reads like the meme about the temporarily embarrassed millionaire.

Why bother archiving a comment whose edit window has closed? What on Earth do you imagine to be going on here? Your account is twice the age of mine. Do you not know how this website works?

I will say, this no longer appears to me to qualify for the name I suggested a few minutes ago. Oh, the statement remains false, only I now no longer believe you competent to defame. Have you had a meal today?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com