ever just feel overwhelmed?

There's a difference between commerce and consumerism. Consumerism is, specifically, the pursuit of happiness via the purchase of material goods - in many definitions, buying ever-increasing numbers of goods.

In the US, a huge increase in the number of material goods owned since the 50s has not brought an increase in happiness, rather the opposite.

Note, I'm not advocating not buying stuff. I'm merely stating that consumerism is not the only route to happiness. Your example of owning one Leica, vs being obsessed with acquiring more and more, is a good one. More and more stuff, like more and more food, does not necessarily bring happiness.
 
More and more stuff, like more and more food, does not necessarily bring happiness.
Click to expand...

The key phrase being "does not necessarily", which implies that it can bring happiness. I believe that the true source of human misery is the assumption that one's own beliefs apply equally to others.
 
@ Sejanus...

A high level of consumerism is a luxury that only makes economic sense if you live in a country that can make/grow/mine almost everything it needs without importing, and which can readily export to countries that cannot compete with it on price/quality/technology.

My country, Britain, is doing rather poorly nowadays in this regard, alas...
 
My country, Britain, is doing rather poorly nowadays in this regard, alas...
Click to expand...

That is completely untrue, in fact. Our country ranks number 7 by GDP and number 22 by GDP per capita. We have plenty of resources and we have better distribution than most countries. We have virtually no resident who falls under the UN poverty line. We're doing far better today than we were doing thirty years ago.

Just ignore the doomsayers of the Daily Mail and the Guardian.
 
Is it not possible to have a good life without rampant consumerist growth?

If not, why not?

Generals, they say, are always ready to fight the previous war. Economists are worse. Many are still stuck in completely irrelevant late 18th century classicism.

Cheers,

R.
 
Sejanus.Aelianus said:
That is completely untrue, in fact. Our country ranks number 7 by GDP and number 22 by GDP per capita. We have plenty of resources and we have better distribution than most countries. We have virtually no resident who falls under the UN poverty line. We're doing far better today than we were doing thirty years ago.

Just ignore the doomsayers of the Daily Mail and the Guardian.
Click to expand...

The UK would be doing well, if we weren't using other peoples money to pay for the high living standards of the residents...
 
Is it not possible to have a good life without rampant consumerist growth?
Click to expand...

What do we define as a good life and how much will we give up to achieve it? More to the point, how much do we expect others to give up to achieve our good life?
 
The UK would be doing well, if we weren't using other peoples money to pay for the high living standards of the residents...
Click to expand...

Another error, I'm afraid. UK based financial institutions lend the rest of the world much the same as the rest of the world lends the UK. Against a GDP of $2.43 Trillion we have a balance of payments deficit of roughly $20 Billion or 1%.
 
Hi Joe,
This is an important thread for a lot of us here, I think. Camera gear can be a real acquisition addiction. The stuff is beautiful to hold and to use. This was true in the pre-digital era, and probably more so today given the rapid camera design changes we're seeing.

Something I've noticed in myself, and maybe it applies to others here as well: If I can hold onto a camera long enough to really get comfortable with it, I begin to lose the feeling that I need to try the next great 'improved' model. If I can keep a camera long enough to really get it 'dialed in' to my liking... to my instinctual way of using a camera, then I'm much more likely to keep the camera for much longer.

So... how can I encourage myself to hold onto the camera long enough to really learn how to use it? I'm using a weird trick now that seems to be working for me. I bought an X-Pro1 back in the early part of 2012. Since then, I've had pangs of "its not comfortable; its not working right; it doesn't have enough pixels;... etc.". And then all the temptations keep coming out of camera-world: X-E1, E-M5, RX1, M...
But early on I did something to force myself to hold onto the XPro1 for as long as possible. I 'tagged' it. I had it engraved, removed the grip and put a different covering on it. I knew this would likely make the camera less sell-able and thus I wouldn't be tempted so quickly to move on to the next, best 'thing'. This seems to be working. I still have it and had it long enough to really get to know it. The newer cameras aren't making my "you need it - buy it" muscles twitch so much now.
 
Jamie Pillers said:
Hi Joe,
This is an important thread for a lot of us here, I think. Camera gear can be a real acquisition addiction. The stuff is beautiful to hold and to use. This was true in the pre-digital era, and probably more so today given the rapid camera design changes we're seeing.

Something I've noticed in myself, and maybe it applies to others here as well: If I can hold onto a camera long enough to really get comfortable with it, I begin to lose the feeling that I need to try the next great 'improved' model. If I can keep a camera long enough to really get it 'dialed in' to my liking... to my instinctual way of using a camera, then I'm much more likely to keep the camera for much longer.

So... how can I encourage myself to hold onto the camera long enough to really learn how to use it? I'm using a weird trick now that seems to be working for me. I bought an X-Pro1 back in the early part of 2012. Since then, I've had pangs of "its not comfortable; its not working right; it doesn't have enough pixels;... etc.". And then all the temptations keep coming out of camera-world: X-E1, E-M5, RX1, M...
But early on I did something to force myself to hold onto the XPro1 for as long as possible. I 'tagged' it. I had it engraved, removed the grip and put a different covering on it. I knew this would likely make the camera less sell-able and thus I wouldn't be tempted so quickly to move on to the next, best 'thing'. This seems to be working. I still have it and had it long enough to really get to know it. The newer cameras aren't making my "you need it - buy it" muscles twitch so much now.
Click to expand...
Highlight: brilliant!

Camera turnover may also be age related. I tried a LOT of cameras in my 20s, 30s and (to a lesser extent) 40s. At the risk of sounding unreasonably superior, I eventually grew up and began to see the difference between the 'upgrades' that did make a difference to my photography (doing things I couldn't do otherwise, or doing the same things more easily, comfortably or enjoyably), and the ones that didn't. I wish I'd cottoned on earlier.

That's quite apart from buying 'toys', which I've generally only done when I can make a profit by reselling -- which ain't gonna happen with ANYTHING digital, especially if bought new. So it does come down to a film/digi argument after all.

To return to the other theme, the rich world is richer than it has ever been -- but also (for the vast majority of people and nations) more deeply in debt. Someone is doing something wrong...

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom