Retirement

100 Things Challenge

I’m sure you’ve all heard of the concept of reducing your possessions to 100 items. Why 100? [and then returned to my normal ways with a nice check from the publisher to boot]? Maybe because it makes a great book title or blog project “How I did X in a year.”

.

πŸ˜‰ [instead of 2 and 5]

Life would be much easier if humans had 8 fingers instead because it could easily represent round numbers in powers of 2 or 4 or 8.

. Also, there will be more of them. However…


  • That may be all well and good. Admittedly, minimalism has a cult following and I love minimalism to the extent that it makes many of my goals, primarily revolving around the concept of freedom, very easy to accomplish. However, in many cases there seems to be some kind of one-upmanship going on where people try to show that their “faith” is definitely stronger than others.

  • From a practical point of view, 100 is only useful for inventorying your goods. However, unless you are writing about your own project, there is nothing special about it. From a practical point of view, this is far more important to consider.
  • How much volume does your luggage take?

How much does it weigh?

How much do you use it?

Volume usually determines your storage constraints and somewhat increases your transportation constraints. There’s a theory that houses have gotten weird β€” a word possibly derived from stupid, I’m just guessing β€” because we need to shelter all the household junk from department stores. Shelter is really expensive, especially if you want it in residential areas and want to keep your stuff hot or cold at the same temperature you keep yourself.

Weight is a problem if you are carrying it. This is also a problem if you live on a boat or in an RV. We live in an RV, but we don’t have a slide out. This means we can take a few tons per person. If we had slide-outs, our weight barrier might be surprisingly small (after deducting the allowance for water (white, gray, and black): perhaps one hundred pounds each (including the person’s weight). Weight included!). This is because the slide-out is a modern invention (and therefore not a solid construction) intended to provide a sense of space for a short vacation at minimal cost, by reducing cargo allowances, RV engines. Can slide out without increasing size. The frame is for wide-beam cruising boats, but not as secure as the deep ones.

Utilization is the primary concern for a financially sound ship. This goes into your personal return on asset accounting so to speak. How much have you paid for something you don’t use? In terms of savings and spending, economically and environmentally, if you have 101 items (and consequently you’re probably headed for a minimal version of Hell, which probably has pictures hanging on the wall or papers have piles of them scattered around your desk) it doesn’t matter if they’re used regularly, don’t take up much space, and don’t weigh a ton.

.


Weight is also a good proxy for environmental effects. With a few exceptions (like laptop computers and hybrid cars only affecting a high-tech factory), the heavier it is, the more resources it takes to make it, and the worse it is. Also, 100 items is a static number. Let’s say you have 100 items and your pair of pants is one of the items (or is it two items?!) out of stock. Then you go and buy another pair. You have now used 101 items. Does it really count if you keep your list short by rotating things in and out, just because you haven’t bought them yet? From a strictly “religious” point of view it matters because it is not against the principles of minimalism. Although this would negate the other points. For example, I might get rid of all my cookware and start eating out. This would reduce the number of things, but would it be a net benefit to my “business” of living to outsource all my assets? For some reason, I don’t understand, except to cling to some belief. Now it looks like I’m crushing the challenge. I am somewhat. For the most part though, it’s probably doing more good than bad because it forces people to take a hard look at what they really need. It also reduces shelter requirements and makes transportation so easy that one of the items on the 100 list isn’t an Ompak swimming pool or lawn tractor. What I’m evoking is the idea of ​​putting a number on it and sensationalizing it. It’s just nuts. More Yakizi:


Whichever is greater: $500,000 or $2,000,000
@ engineer your finances and
Cutting Fat – Losing Things You Don’t Need

@Frugal Zeitgeist. These posts have been chosen as the best post of the month by the bloggers who submitted them, so check them out if you want to add more blogs to your reading list.

Copyright Β© 2007-2023 earlyretirementextreme.com This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only. Use of this feed on other websites violates copyright. If you see this notice anywhere other than in your news reader, this makes the page you are viewing a copyright infringement. Some sites use random word replacement algorithms to obfuscate the original. Find the original uncorrupted version of this post at earlyretirementextreme.com. (Digital Fingerprint: 47d7050e5790442c7fa8cab55461e9ce)Originally posted on 2010-03-04 09:11:58.


Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button