The Virtue of Hoarding

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Most people would admit to hoarding money only with a tinge of guilt, because to be a hoarder carries with it the suggestion of being a miser — a Scrooge. And yet, every participant in an economy based on indirect exchange holds some amount of money and can be said to be hoarding it, that is, declining to spend it. Hoarding is a strategy for achieving personal goals or for dealing with economic uncertainty.

However, some economists argue that hoarding money causes recessions. In the Keynesian universe, hoarding is a great evil because it means people are stifling demand for the economy's products and services

The Virtue of Hoarding - George F. Smith - Mises Institute

 

[eagleseven]

There's also the virtue of hoarding necessities....behavior common to squirrels and men.

 

[JD_2B]

My mom was a pack-rat- but certainly not a hoarder..

And she saved money well, without being a money hoarder.. She shopped a LOT, really..

I can see the point of the thread though. It is better to find balance, than to stifle all spending. OK.

I do not want to minimize the thread's purpose though.. OP- what is your actual position on this?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

My mom was a pack-rat- but certainly not a hoarder..

And she saved money well, without being a money hoarder.. She shopped a LOT, really..

I can see the point of the thread though. It is better to find balance, than to stifle all spending. OK.

I do not want to minimize the thread's purpose though.. OP- what is your actual position on this?

My position is that it's good to "hoard" or save money, especially in times like these.

 

[eagleseven]

It's good to save money during all times, unless you enjoy living hand to mouth.

The fact that Americans have no net savings is a major cause of this recession.

 

[thrival]

I watched Dr. Oz last night and his piece on hoarding. I find it interesting that this set of habits is characterized as a compulsive "disorder." I always considered it thriftiness, recycling, and appreciation for things others have little or no value ("one man's junk is another man's treasure") or why/where else would such pithy sayings find their origins?

That some find this set of habits in others annoying, isn't surprising, and yet I find these same people incredibly short-sighted and the same who come to me for those things they're lacking and I managed to squirrel away.

It also has the economic value of not having to buy new all the time, much as the merchants of commerce may despise, as it threatens their system of through-put or the economic values of buy-&-discard foisted upon us. The fact is, hoarding can be smart. Some of us are old enough to remember when the economy operated differently, when items were made well, with tens of thousands of repair shops across the land, to keep them working and not in land-fills. It's not that we don't understand modernity and its values, we simply reject them (or pick and choose.)

People like Oprah hoard money, but because her surroundings are otherwise clean, no "disorder" is recognized. How perjorative and prejudicial is that!

Some of us have made our value-systems consciously. We find people annoying and things more interesting. Such people find occupations as inventors, artists and engineers. There's comfort in matter, and the things that can be done with it, over conditions of stark want & deprivation. Just because a thing may appear to have no use to one person now doesn't mean it won't have use to another person later. This is called being provident, or "putting by."

A messy dwelling or pick-up truck bursting with junk is often the perfect way to keep otherwise imposing, dictatorial, controllling, mean-spirited and short-sighted people at bay, or at least not importuning upon one's time & attention for favors. Call it the Ugh factor.

It's not that we can't decide what's junk (although the energy to sort through it all may be over-whelming at times) but little sense of immediacy because it isn't a problem for us. And that's a condition known as freedom.

I believe people who feel the need to force others change according to some notion of social uniformity, and lacking appreciation of human diversity, creativity or who demand explanations WHY a person choose to own this or that, are suffering from Obsessive Interventionist Disorder, and hoarders aren't the least bit interested in their feelings, opinions or research.

 

[Toro]

My mom was a pack-rat- but certainly not a hoarder..

And she saved money well, without being a money hoarder.. She shopped a LOT, really..

I can see the point of the thread though. It is better to find balance, than to stifle all spending. OK.

I do not want to minimize the thread's purpose though.. OP- what is your actual position on this?

My position is that it's good to "hoard" or save money, especially in times like these.

My position is that its great to buy things from people who hoard money, because everybody hoarding money has caused prices to collapse, creating great bargains.

 

[editec]

Most people would admit to hoarding money only with a tinge of guilt, because to be a hoarder carries with it the suggestion of being a miser — a Scrooge. And yet, every participant in an economy based on indirect exchange holds some amount of money and can be said to be hoarding it, that is, declining to spend it. Hoarding is a strategy for achieving personal goals or for dealing with economic uncertainty.

However, some economists argue that hoarding money causes recessions. In the Keynesian universe, hoarding is a great evil because it means people are stifling demand for the economy's products and services

The Virtue of Hoarding - George F. Smith - Mises Institute

What a load of Austian school Randian propaganda, Kevin,.

Tell me, Kevi.. you don't REALLY believe this, do you?

WIn the Keysenian universe personal savings isn't evil.

What IS evil is allowing bankers to take people's lifes savings and gamble them in dubious exoxtic investments that were so complex that even the CEOs of the banks didn't understand them!

Something the Austrian school was perfectly okay with, I might add.

Your fucking Randians anti-regulation banker idiots actually caused this depression, sport.

Time for YOU to do some reading about what really happened, I think.

Your ideological anger at government and regulation really makes sense if you IGNORE the reality of what just happened, ya know.

Try reading

IN FED WE TRUST​

This book will give you an event by event rundown of how things started falling apart ad WHY the RANDIAN in charge of the FED allowed it to happen.​

 

[Skull Pilot]

Keynes held the position that one can save too much.

Personally, i think one can never save enough.

"There has been," he said, "a chronic tendency throughout history for the propensity to save to be stronger than the inducement to invest. The weakness of the inducement to invest has been at all times the key to the economic problem."

In short savings is the problem according to Keynes.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Most people would admit to hoarding money only with a tinge of guilt, because to be a hoarder carries with it the suggestion of being a miser — a Scrooge. And yet, every participant in an economy based on indirect exchange holds some amount of money and can be said to be hoarding it, that is, declining to spend it. Hoarding is a strategy for achieving personal goals or for dealing with economic uncertainty.

However, some economists argue that hoarding money causes recessions. In the Keynesian universe, hoarding is a great evil because it means people are stifling demand for the economy's products and services

The Virtue of Hoarding - George F. Smith - Mises Institute

What a load of Austian school Randian propaganda, Kevin,.

Tell me, Kevi.. you don't REALLY believe this, do you?

WIn the Keysenian universe personal savings isn't evil.

What IS evil is allowing bankers to take people's lifes savings and gamble them in dubious exoxtic investments that were so complex that even the CEOs of the banks didn't understand them!

Something the Austrian school was perfectly okay with, I might add.

Your fucking Randians anti-regulation banker idiots actually caused this depression, sport.

Time for YOU to do some reading about what really happened, I think.

Your ideological anger at government and regulation really makes sense if you IGNORE the reality of what just happened, ya know.

Try reading

IN FED WE TRUST​

This book will give you an event by event rundown of how things started falling apart ad WHY the RANDIAN in charge of the FED allowed it to happen.​

Talk about propaganda.

For starters, not all Austrians or libertarians are anything close to Randians. I for one am not a fan or follower of Ayn Rand. Secondly, by "Randian in charge of the Fed" I'm assuming you meant Alan Greenspan considering his past affiliation with Ayn Rand and objectivism. I assume you're trying to say his "free market policies" were to blame for this recession, but this is a myth that has been repeatedly shown to be incorrect. Alan Greenspan denounced his prior beliefs at his confirmation hearings to become Fed chairman, and none of his policies while Fed chairman could be considered "free market." His keeping interest rates at 1% during the dot-com bust, rather than allowing the market to correct itself as any true free market economist would do, is what set us up for the housing bust. Now Ben Bernanke is keeping interest rates at 0%. Is he a Randian too, or a free market economist? Get real.

I suggest you read End the Fed by Ron Paul or Meltdown by Tom Woods.

 

[Thinman]

Put it away for a rainy day. Just the opposite of what our government is doing. When your broke, you can't spend yourself rich.

 

[Paulie]

Ed, you came in her to rant about bankers when all we're really doing is debating saving vs. spending.

You saw an article that came from Mises and lost your mind.

Just stick with the topic, it's a basic debate.

There's nothing WRONG with wanting to be cheap at times and save money. People seem to think they can spend their paychecks away because there's another one coming next week.

Well at LEAST 10% of those people are finding out the hard way that they were wrong.

Whenever I'm in Walmart and I see someone picking up the $700 42 inch flat screen deal, I think to myself "WHY??"

Do you really HAVE to spend that $700 on a fucking TV when you probably already have several? I watch an old ass 20 inch TV that was given to me by a friend, and I'm fine with it.

The only time I feel like I want to be in front of a big screen TV is for a big sports game, or MAYBE a movie.

Just an example.

You and I have been over this 'spending too much money' crap before.

An argument can be made for why it's good to save a little dough. There's absolutely NO argument that can be made for some kind of apparent economic necessity to spend as much as we can 'for the sake of the economy'.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Also, ed's claim that the Austrians were perfectly fine with the banks' irresponsible lending and investing is a complete and utter lie. We simply realize that none of that would have been possible without the Fed's loose monetary policy.

 

[Paulie]

Also, ed's claim that the Austrians were perfectly fine with the banks' irresponsible lending and investing is a complete and utter lie. We simply realize that none of that would have been possible without the Fed's loose monetary policy.

For him to say such a thing only proves he doesn't really know Austrians like he seems to think.

That he automatically lumps us all in with Ayn Rand is a good example.

Just like any other yahoo who takes one position of someone's, and thinks it automatically gives them "X" political label.

It's ridiculous.

 

[Toro]

Also, ed's claim that the Austrians were perfectly fine with the banks' irresponsible lending and investing is a complete and utter lie. We simply realize that none of that would have been possible without the Fed's loose monetary policy.

Actually, that's not true.

Well, its true about the Austrians being perfectly fine with reckless lending.

However, loose money can and certainly does happen in a private market. Technological innovation often brings about cheap money because technological innovation lowers cost curves and increases the illusion of permanently higher rates of return on equity, which leads to excessive lending. It is much easier though with a compliant Fed.

 

[Paulie]

Well, its true about the Austrians being perfectly fine with reckless lending.

It's not the we LIKE to see reckless lending, we prefer to see the population learn from the mistakes of the reckless lending so as not to let it happen again.

Rather than just install a regulation that insulates people from HAVING to learn from the mistakes.

 

[Care4all]

but do you really walk off a high cliff to learn the lesson that you will be squished to smithereens?

Or do you know already the result and put up warning signs for others not to get too close to the edge of the treacherous cliff?

 

[RadiomanATL]

I thought this thread was about teh virtue of horing.

Mehbad, I'll be moving along now...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Also, ed's claim that the Austrians were perfectly fine with the banks' irresponsible lending and investing is a complete and utter lie. We simply realize that none of that would have been possible without the Fed's loose monetary policy.

Actually, that's not true.

Well, its true about the Austrians being perfectly fine with reckless lending.

However, loose money can and certainly does happen in a private market. Technological innovation often brings about cheap money because technological innovation lowers cost curves and increases the illusion of permanently higher rates of return on equity, which leads to excessive lending. It is much easier though with a compliant Fed.

Yes, but that money comes from actual innovation, which is not the case with the Fed artificially manipulating interest rates.

 

[JenyEliza]

I thought this thread was about teh virtue of horing.

Mehbad, I'll be moving along now...

Yeah. You and Black Shrek. Room 201.