You shall own nothing!
Discussion
You all may have seen this line "you shall own nothing and you will be happy".
A line that is becoming more widespread in daily conversation, and its an issue that is affecting the gen Z and millennial generations more than the older generations.
Although I probably qualify (just) as a millennial, the question to others of my age and younger..... are you happy to rent everything rather than buying things that you can call your own?
And does renting everything make you happy?
(Suppose that should be asking if only being able to rent everything makes you happy?)
A line that is becoming more widespread in daily conversation, and its an issue that is affecting the gen Z and millennial generations more than the older generations.
Although I probably qualify (just) as a millennial, the question to others of my age and younger..... are you happy to rent everything rather than buying things that you can call your own?
And does renting everything make you happy?
(Suppose that should be asking if only being able to rent everything makes you happy?)
I’ve always thought usage is more import’ant than ownership. I’m lucky to live in a house that backs onto a National Trust Park. I can wander around 1800 acres and most days never bump into anyone else. I don’t have to employ anyone to maintain it, insure it or worry about others using it. There’s no way I’d want to own it.
I qualify as a Millenial being born in 1981 I am apparantly at the very limit of being one. Its a strange definition as I feel there's very little similarity between where I am in life and someone born 1996 which is the opposite end of millennial.
I own my own house (with mortgage) and own two respectable cars which are mine.
I also have a few investments running which are modest but they exist.
I dont think I really fit in to the whole "own nothing and be happy" mantra which is banded about
I own my own house (with mortgage) and own two respectable cars which are mine.
I also have a few investments running which are modest but they exist.
I dont think I really fit in to the whole "own nothing and be happy" mantra which is banded about
Already, digital stuff like movies, music and video games are effectively rented; just you pay a one time fee for unlimited access*
Subscriptions for extras within cars are being offered already. Want a feature like heated seats... you need to rent it. Cars themselves are expected to become rented, as self-driving takes over. Certainly it would make more sense to someone who uses their car only to for a few journeys a month.
I think its more a case of we *WILL* like it, than we will like it.
Subscriptions for extras within cars are being offered already. Want a feature like heated seats... you need to rent it. Cars themselves are expected to become rented, as self-driving takes over. Certainly it would make more sense to someone who uses their car only to for a few journeys a month.
ONS said:
1. Main points. The number of households in the private rented sector in the UK increased from 2.8 million in 2007 to 4.5 million in 2017, an increase of 1.7 million (63%) households. Younger households are more likely to rent privately than older households; in 2017 those in the 25 to 34 years age group represented the largest group (35%).
Just a quick google. If that trend has continued, which it probabaly has it means that renting a house is becoming the normal. I think its more a case of we *WILL* like it, than we will like it.
Little bit of fact checking
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-i...
All statements can be taken out of context like this one been and what weight should be given to one sentence from a Danish MP? Even if you believe she means it?
No one is ever going to stop you owning shares or business or a house or a car etc.. it's bizarre that people get hoodwinked into that type of thinking, the issue is being able to afford it in an increasingly unequal world and that's what needs to be addressed.
There are a lot of bad actors that want you to worry and be angry and many seem happy to lap it all up.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-i...
All statements can be taken out of context like this one been and what weight should be given to one sentence from a Danish MP? Even if you believe she means it?
No one is ever going to stop you owning shares or business or a house or a car etc.. it's bizarre that people get hoodwinked into that type of thinking, the issue is being able to afford it in an increasingly unequal world and that's what needs to be addressed.
There are a lot of bad actors that want you to worry and be angry and many seem happy to lap it all up.
Surely depends on what people want to own/rent.
I’d be happy to lease a car / TV etc and happy to subscribe to services that deliver content.
Still feel more secure owning a home, as renting introduces a huge degree of uncertainty in terms of cost and availability.
I can always ditch Netflix, Amazon and buy and old banger. I’ll always need a roof above my head.
I’d be happy to lease a car / TV etc and happy to subscribe to services that deliver content.
Still feel more secure owning a home, as renting introduces a huge degree of uncertainty in terms of cost and availability.
I can always ditch Netflix, Amazon and buy and old banger. I’ll always need a roof above my head.
As much as the WEF and many of these groups of terminally dull wealthy bureaucrats seem to want to do their own thing for everyone else’s benefit, undermining our democratic processes… I do think this was taken out of context.
“You will own nothing and be happy”
“If you own nothing, you’ll still live a happy content life, because materialism will shrink away from the reason you exist”
Personally I’d prefer to live in a world where that’s the case, think Star Trek where you just do what you want, no possessions, find meaning, purpose and value beyond just getting a better job so you can buy more expensive versions of the stuff you already buy.
BUT, I think these stuffy old bureaucrats are just fooling themselves about human nature.
Humans won’t be like that, and can’t be forced or coerced to be like that. Just look at Russia during its communist years.
Humans might end up there but it’s a pipe dream for morons to think they’ll find it over decades, not lifetimes.
Given the choice in order of preference.
-Star Trek
-What we have now.
-Living like native Indians or similar.
-Living in the WEF world (not their vision, the s
t reality that’d we’d get which will end up being communist Russia at best)
“You will own nothing and be happy”
“If you own nothing, you’ll still live a happy content life, because materialism will shrink away from the reason you exist”
Personally I’d prefer to live in a world where that’s the case, think Star Trek where you just do what you want, no possessions, find meaning, purpose and value beyond just getting a better job so you can buy more expensive versions of the stuff you already buy.
BUT, I think these stuffy old bureaucrats are just fooling themselves about human nature.
Humans won’t be like that, and can’t be forced or coerced to be like that. Just look at Russia during its communist years.
Humans might end up there but it’s a pipe dream for morons to think they’ll find it over decades, not lifetimes.
Given the choice in order of preference.
-Star Trek
-What we have now.
-Living like native Indians or similar.
-Living in the WEF world (not their vision, the s
t reality that’d we’d get which will end up being communist Russia at best)Materialism will remain - it's one of the drivers of renting in preference to owning something. The "market" will soon find its equilibrium with regards to what you pay in renting your life and the knick-knacks you furnish your life with - you'll be financially consumed funding the lifestyle which someone in some far away office thinks you should have.
Thinking we'll be living some Star Trek life is delusional. There's a chunk of people who have wealth and power and who aren't wanting to give it up any time soon. The WEF know that, which is why they see the world being run with the assistance of corporations being a significant part of enabling it all.
Thinking we'll be living some Star Trek life is delusional. There's a chunk of people who have wealth and power and who aren't wanting to give it up any time soon. The WEF know that, which is why they see the world being run with the assistance of corporations being a significant part of enabling it all.
Edited by rodericb on Tuesday 2nd August 08:20
Camoradi said:
I think people's suspicions may be aroused by the fact that the source of this statement is a group of people who are perceived as being pretty big on ownership of material things
Look, the WEF is just a big talking shop for the rich and the politicians who perhaps the rich may quite like to influence.To think that they may actually have an agenda is into the Conspiracy Theory area as we can all become members of the WEF for free ! I am sure they would welcome the input from us folk………
There are numerous forcing factors at play with this whole issue.
On one angle you have wannabe global bodies wishing to gain more political controls and levers, sounding off on their authoritarian desires. The likes of the WEC spouting nonsense which doesn't apply to the everyday man on the street, yet step by step with compliant national governments who will likely bring in legislation to introduce more restrictions on living, they will eventually get their way. (So we look here at things like "the great re-set" and "Central bank digital currencies", and travel/work mandates based up on compliance via a vaccine or otherwise brought to us via the WHO).
Then at national level we have governments trying to control inflation and at the same time trying to get the economy moving since the financial crash of 2008. Governments want people to be putting money in to the economy, living life on credit/debt rather than putting their money in to their bank accounts. This makes a sitting government look good for their term in office, a economy that is showing growth is always a box ticked for the next election.
Then we have companies and the capitalist angle, whereby shareholders demand their returns at any cost. So companies want you to rent as this ensures at the end of the rental term you enter in to another one with adjusted interest rates and deals to keep making companies the profit they want. It also ensures that new products need to roll off the production line for all those new rental agreements. Banks also love the rent model as it is based up on finance packages, credit and debt, which all attract their preferential interest rates.
Then finally we have the political ideology angle. For some, any step along the path of socialism and on to the road of communism and the eventual goal of the perceived utopia is always going to be something they will advocate. (Obviously those on this ideological path need to block out reality and every historical attempt done previously regarding such a utopia, but nonetheless, there are always a number who are ideologically driven and who often reach positions of power and influence within society - many in the media would fall in to the political activists/ideologist bracket for example).
So with all those forcing factors, competing or collaborating in what are often undemocratic circles, the end result is that we are seeing a trend of things over a certain value (those that are generally not considered disposable items), being things that are now rented by many, whereas in the past such things would have been saved up for and bought outright.
There is a clear split between those that hold the mantra that you only live once and you should be spending all your money as soon as it arrives, because you never know if today is your last day etc., and on the other side of the coin are those that save and plan for the future, looking to retire early or retire comfortably, not living under debt and having to pay back more than the value of the item in added interest payments, etc.
It seems the "live now" mantra is winning, or is it? The purpose of this thread is to ask if those under a certain age are forced and have no choice over the "live now" mantra, or whether they actually prefer it that way?
Or are they looking to fight off or oppose the international and national factors put forward in the above paragraphs so that they can achieve a life that has a more financially secured future?
On one angle you have wannabe global bodies wishing to gain more political controls and levers, sounding off on their authoritarian desires. The likes of the WEC spouting nonsense which doesn't apply to the everyday man on the street, yet step by step with compliant national governments who will likely bring in legislation to introduce more restrictions on living, they will eventually get their way. (So we look here at things like "the great re-set" and "Central bank digital currencies", and travel/work mandates based up on compliance via a vaccine or otherwise brought to us via the WHO).
Then at national level we have governments trying to control inflation and at the same time trying to get the economy moving since the financial crash of 2008. Governments want people to be putting money in to the economy, living life on credit/debt rather than putting their money in to their bank accounts. This makes a sitting government look good for their term in office, a economy that is showing growth is always a box ticked for the next election.
Then we have companies and the capitalist angle, whereby shareholders demand their returns at any cost. So companies want you to rent as this ensures at the end of the rental term you enter in to another one with adjusted interest rates and deals to keep making companies the profit they want. It also ensures that new products need to roll off the production line for all those new rental agreements. Banks also love the rent model as it is based up on finance packages, credit and debt, which all attract their preferential interest rates.
Then finally we have the political ideology angle. For some, any step along the path of socialism and on to the road of communism and the eventual goal of the perceived utopia is always going to be something they will advocate. (Obviously those on this ideological path need to block out reality and every historical attempt done previously regarding such a utopia, but nonetheless, there are always a number who are ideologically driven and who often reach positions of power and influence within society - many in the media would fall in to the political activists/ideologist bracket for example).
So with all those forcing factors, competing or collaborating in what are often undemocratic circles, the end result is that we are seeing a trend of things over a certain value (those that are generally not considered disposable items), being things that are now rented by many, whereas in the past such things would have been saved up for and bought outright.
There is a clear split between those that hold the mantra that you only live once and you should be spending all your money as soon as it arrives, because you never know if today is your last day etc., and on the other side of the coin are those that save and plan for the future, looking to retire early or retire comfortably, not living under debt and having to pay back more than the value of the item in added interest payments, etc.
It seems the "live now" mantra is winning, or is it? The purpose of this thread is to ask if those under a certain age are forced and have no choice over the "live now" mantra, or whether they actually prefer it that way?
Or are they looking to fight off or oppose the international and national factors put forward in the above paragraphs so that they can achieve a life that has a more financially secured future?
That phrase is definitely wearing out its welcome.
We are seeing it happen in many areas. I don't think there's anything any more sinister than usual about it, it's just better business for Them.
Other than a sim card I don't 'rent' anything and shun everything else.
I prefer my transactions to be a one time deal. Some of them have been converted retrospectively into rent seeking. They were shut down and I'll never deal with those companies again.
At some point certain things will be a better deal than ownership. Not there yet.
We are seeing it happen in many areas. I don't think there's anything any more sinister than usual about it, it's just better business for Them.
Other than a sim card I don't 'rent' anything and shun everything else.
I prefer my transactions to be a one time deal. Some of them have been converted retrospectively into rent seeking. They were shut down and I'll never deal with those companies again.
At some point certain things will be a better deal than ownership. Not there yet.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff