Hacker News Reader

Agreed -- it shows a materialist/consumerism bias.

There are many environmental and psychic benefits to requiring/desiring fewer possessions.

If we want to sustain a growing population, we're going to have to confront the bias the title of this article shows.

If we want to sustain a growing population, we're going to have to confront the bias the title of this article shows.

Or alternatively, we could just build decent places to live in the vast amounts of empty space owned by a handful of rich people who inherited it (UK bias here; don't know how the upper class landowners got the land in other countries).

At least in America, land out in the middle of nowhere is extremely cheap. The problem is that people don't want to live there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com