I firmly subscribe to the idea that people and relationships are more important than material possessions, yet in a recent discussion I found myself defending the idea of possessions being important.
writes Bob Windmill
Subscribe or buy?
The context was a discussion with a group of friends on millennials increasingly buying rather than possessions, and opting for subscription services such as Spotify rather than physical ownership.
As a recent convert to Spotify, courtesy of remarkably generous upgrade offer from my mobile phone provider, I could see that attraction, but still felt that for some things physical ownership was the way to go.
The debate included what could politely be called a frank and open discussion ( It’s OK, my friends an I have been doing this for years) on ownership for ownership’s sake.
Possessions for possession’s sake?
I was clear on this: the stuff I own has to make my life better in some way, be that functional or decorative, and I have to feel that the benefits are worth the cost.
When I speak of value, I mean this idea of something being worth the cost, and in the discussion I gave three examples of things I own that value.
One cost tens of pounds, one hundreds of pounds and one tens of thousands of pounds, but I value each one in in its own way.
To my surprise there was a consensus that what I described was at least rational, even if not everybody agreed my choices, but that’s what makes friends fun.
Sharing with you
In my next three posts I will share with you what each of those possessions are, and why I value them, starting with the “tens of pounds” example.
As ever, there are no right or wrong answers here, just opinions and debate. If you’d like to contribute to the discussion just leave a comment below and I’ll respond.
Bob Windmill
