Semi OT: Are we headed for a world in which we own nothing?

[MattTuck]

The Triathlete using bike share got me thinking.

The basic premise of bike share programs is that a bike has a certain capacity, it can be ridden 24 hours per day for 365 days a year. Since we don't NEED to ride it that much, the bike has spare capacity in the form of time that it wouldn't be used if we owned it. The bike share program allows multiple people to use the bike, and increases it's capacity utilization.

The same concept underpins NetJets, zipcar, DVD movie rentals, homeaway.com, etc.

The idea is to increase the capacity utilization of certain goods; different programs try to monetize it differently, but essentially it is all about selling unused capacity.

Do we think that this is where we're going as a society? In the future, will we own nothing and simply pay for time on the things we want to use?

[velotel]

You mean like wives/husbands too? There's a program here in France for cars like that.

[MattTuck]

You mean like wives/husbands too? There's a program here in France for cars like that.

Maybe there's a translation misunderstanding... I didn't mean that we'd pay to use a woman or man for our needs. That's called prostitution in the U.S. and is generally frowned upon. I was thinking more of actual products, cars, bikes, lawn mowers, camping equipment, etc.

Things that have low capacity utilization... in other words, things that sit idle for long periods of time and experience infrequent use. People are increasingly trying to figure out how to monetize some of that capacity.

[Chance]

Do we think that this is where we're going as a society? In the future, will we own nothing and simply pay for time on the things we want to use?

No. For the most part. Only on a few things we use very infrequently.

It goes against our human nature. That's hard to overcome.

[verticaldoug]

Yes, it's called being poor.

[rugbysecondrow]

Do we think that this is where we're going as a society? In the future, will we own nothing and simply pay for time on the things we want to use?

No

[bluesea]

Yes and yes, like Star Trek.

[G-Reg]

.... That's called prostitution in the U.S. and is generally frowned upon......


Speak for yourself. It just a matter of perspective. If you look at it as we are not paying for "the service" we are paying them to leave afterwards, it puts it in a different light.

[saab2000]

Yes, it's called being poor.

Not necessarily. Many people don't wish to pay for something they rarely use. A friend of mine flies as captain on large jets all over the world. Not poor by any definition. Does not own a car but is a member of a car share business like Zip Car. He finds the idea of owning a car something he doesn't wish to do. Hard to disrespect that. I bet most car share clients fit a similar profile - urban folks who have other things they'd rather do than deal with the hassles and costs of car ownership.

Choice is good. And I see rental bikes all over the place in and around Washington DC.

[rugbysecondrow]

Speak for yourself. It just a matter of perspective. If you look at it as we are not paying for "the service" we are paying them to leave afterwards, it puts it in a different light.

Amen Charlie Sheen.

I love it!

[dhorst]

I'm not so much minimalist as I am terrible at keeping things straight. For that reason I have a small place and try to own as little as possible. I love the idea of bike, car, etc sharing. We don't have it here but I'd really like to be a part of a tool share program.

you're right though, I think zipcar and bikeshares go against human nature.

[velotel]

Maybe there's a translation misunderstanding... I didn't mean that we'd pay to use a woman or man for our needs. That's called prostitution in the U.S. and is generally frowned upon.
Oh, I thought it was called marriage.

[MattTuck]

Imagine if some of the people on here used the bike share. There'd be a note taped to the handlebars.

"To the next rider that gets this bike, There is a low pitched creak on this bike, likely in the bottom bracket area. I spent 3 hours trying to diagnose and eliminate this sound before running out of time before I had to return it. If you have time, please remove the front derailleur clamp and apply some grease before reinstalling. Also, if possible try to ride the bike without a seat, in the off chance that the noise is coming from the saddle rails. Your Bike Share Friend, Lance"

[rugbysecondrow]

Imagine if some of the people on here used the bike share. There'd be a note taped to the handlebars.

"To the next rider that gets this bike, There is a low pitched creak on this bike, likely in the bottom bracket area. I spent 3 hours trying to diagnose and eliminate this sound before running out of time before I had to return it. If you have time, please remove the front derailleur clamp and apply some grease before reinstalling. Also, if possible try to ride the bike without a seat, in the off chance that the noise is coming from the saddle rails. Your Bike Share Friend, Lance"

Mine would read, "please don't **** with the seat height or make any seat adjustments".

:)

[Jaq]

The answer is yes. And no. As others have said, it goes against human nature. Bikeshare/car share programs are the exception, not the rule; they fulfill a niche. DVD purchase/rental - especially these days - is just silly because you can rent or buy that stuff to stream. Buy the movie/music/podcast/tv episode and store it on the cloud. But people will still buy those things because people are hoarders.

Look at house design now compared to 50 or a 100 years ago. Closets were few and small. Now storage space is huge. Storage for "stuff" is such a huge concept that whole stores are devoted to it, along with the storage industry. And unless you're very disciplined, you inevitably will expand your possessions to fill your house and then some. Live in a big house, you're going to have huge amounts of stuff, simply because you have more room to put things, thus putting off the decision of whether to keep it or toss it out.

As for bigger-ticket items (homes, cars, TVs), it's unlikely that we'll get rid of home ownership any time soon, unless we decide that the mortgage interest deduction is just too attractive not to raid for a source of government revenue.

Cars, though, have already switched to pseudo-ownership - aka leasing. I don't know what the numbers are (ownership vs. lease) at present, and the balance is probably leaning toward ownership (we own both our cars), but it would seem that leasing is on the rise. More and more people are simply factor in a few hundred (or thousand) dollars each month for the rest of their lives in return for getting a new car every 2-5 years.

[MattTuck]

The answer is yes. And no. As others have said, it goes against human nature. Bikeshare/car share programs are the exception, not the rule; they fulfill a niche. DVD purchase/rental - especially these days - is just silly because you can rent or buy that stuff to stream. Buy the movie/music/podcast/tv episode and store it on the cloud. But people will still buy those things because people are hoarders.

Look at house design now compared to 50 or a 100 years ago. Closets were few and small. Now storage space is huge. Storage for "stuff" is such a huge concept that whole stores are devoted to it, along with the storage industry. And unless you're very disciplined, you inevitably will expand your possessions to fill your house and then some. Live in a big house, you're going to have huge amounts of stuff, simply because you have more room to put things, thus putting off the decision of whether to keep it or toss it out.

As for bigger-ticket items (homes, cars, TVs), it's unlikely that we'll get rid of home ownership any time soon, unless we decide that the mortgage interest deduction is just too attractive not to raid for a source of government revenue.

Cars, though, have already switched to pseudo-ownership - aka leasing. I don't know what the numbers are (ownership vs. lease) at present, and the balance is probably leaning toward ownership (we own both our cars), but it would seem that leasing is on the rise. More and more people are simply factor in a few hundred (or thousand) dollars each month for the rest of their lives in return for getting a new car every 2-5 years.

In some ways, a condo association is the extension of car share into the home market, perhaps even preceded car share programs. You don't have to own the structure, roof, driveway, yard equipment, etc. You own it as a group, to supposedly defray those costs.

I'm surprised that there isn't (or maybe there is, and I'm just not aware of it) zipcar like program for boats. That seems like a nice niche that people would like to enjoy once or twice a year, but don't want to put up the full cost to own. Ride on lawn mowers are another one. Why own your own lawnmower, when you and your neighbors could each own 1/10th of it.

[rugbysecondrow]

In some ways, a condo association is the extension of car share into the home market, perhaps even preceded car share programs. You don't have to own the structure, roof, driveway, yard equipment, etc. You own it as a group, to supposedly defray those costs.

I'm surprised that there isn't (or maybe there is, and I'm just not aware of it) zipcar like program for boats. That seems like a nice niche that people would like to enjoy once or twice a year, but don't want to put up the full cost to own. Ride on lawn mowers are another one. Why own your own lawnmower, when you and your neighbors could each own 1/10th of it.

There is a coop system for boating as well, at least here in Maryland there is. I would much rather do that than have to do boating maintenance. Show up for your playing, turn the boat in and you are done.

[velotel]

The bike rental systems in Paris, Lyon, etc. are really just another form of that. Except with the bikes there's a company who buys them and puts up the system requirements to make it work (stations, mechanics...). People pay to use the bikes but if they return it into anther station within some time frame, the use is free. Apparently they're now putting in place some sort of electric car system also.

Something like that works well because there's one entity that is taking responsibility for the system, maintenance, etc. Thus one user isn't complaining that another isn't contributing enough whatever to the shared use.

[deechee]

I think that services like homeaway.com and whipcar.com will probably grow a bit, because people live beyond their means. I'm pretty sure the comment about people being poor was directed towards the renters but in this case, I say its the rentees who are the *poor* ones trying to make an "easy" buck.

I don't see why its not human nature. Don't you folks share? My neighbor asks for help with their bike, or borrow a webcam for a day, I do. I think the difference now is that people want to make money out of it.

For centrally controlled services like bike sharing and zipcar, I think they're great. For many people who live in a city with good public transportation or don't need a car daily, they make a lot of sense. I can see it gaining popularity as the cost of parking a car in the city is rising and spots are limited.

[malcolm]

Who knows, I do think over the next few decades there is going to be some major upheaval in the ways we live. We have become a global society whether we like it or not and we are struggling against that. We still like to define ourselves by our geography, culture or religion and that has for the most part become obsolete and we just haven't accepted it. The world wide density of internet access has made us all very aware of each others daily lives and we can no longer live in isolation. The sheer number of us and the growing consumer class in developing countries is going to put pressure on resources like never before and we are going to have to learn to share resources across continents and cultures or risk taking a huge step backward or at least live in a world with many more petty squabbles and wars over resources. Human nature what it is who knows where this will lead.

[djg]

Yes. We're all headed to a world in which we own neither personal nor real property.

You cannot take it with you. At least, not on my understanding of common state approaches to estate law, not that I'm an expert.

[mhespenheide]

I think that services like zipcar can be tremendous services for certain people. My sister lives in San Francisco, where parking (when you're out) can be a complete nightmare and parking (when you're home) can either be a complete nightmare or a heavy additional expense added on to rent. She takes the bus or walks to work, and rarely travels beyond the reach of local public transportation. Right now, she only puts 3000-4000 miles per year on her car. I can easily see her transitioning to a car share. You don't have the hassle of taking care of it when you don't want it, and with some advance planning, you get better rates than renting a car when you need it. Additionally, you can change which car you pick up -- a Prius for your weekend road trip, a minivan for that monthly costco run, an SUV to head up to the ski area... That's tremendous flexibility. I, on the other hand, live in such a low population density that zipcar (as a company) will never come here. The profit margins simply wouldn't work.

But! If you love cars, have a personal attachment to your car, and see it as an expression of your personality, a sharing program is probably not for you. As ardent cyclists, we'd probably never seriously consider a bikeshare program. (And I doubt they'd stock many 62cm frames...)

Except... I could totally see renting a TT bike for the 1-2 times per year I use one, instead of adding on a pair of aerobars and borrowing some deep-section wheels. I think there's a company out there, targeting triathletes, who rents high-end carbon aero wheels. Again, if I only want something once per year, why tie up money in it?

In addition to cycling, I love photography, and I actively rent high-end specialized lenses once every year or two. For $200, including shipping both ways and insurance, I get a week or two to use a $2000+ lens. That's worth it to me.

[1centaur]

In general, the more precious something is to you the more you want to own it, so you can control it. The logic of emotion, if you will. Time is something we find more precious as we age and life gets more complex, but renting generally takes away your time because you have to wait to experience the product or service and possibly take time to collect it and return it. So if it was up to what we want, then no, we'd stay an ownership society.

But that does not mean we will not be forced by scarcity (of resources and/or personal means) into renting more. I suspect a rental dominated society would attach less permanence to many things, possibly to the detriment of societal stability and cohesion. Though it would have a major impact on product design - durability would leap to the forefront to encourage the rentiers to buy.

For now, occasional rentals can seem a luxury of less hassle and sunk money, but that sentiment is informed in part by the overwhelming dominance of ownertarianism (a word invented here today...I own that).

[Louis]

I refuse to do this with books.

Even my mother, who's been a librarian her entire adult life, does e-books, but I refuse. I still have nearly all of my college textbooks, except for a few economics books, which were just too huge to bother to lug all over the country.

[MattTuck]

I refuse to do this with books.

Even my mother, who's been a librarian her entire adult life, does e-books, but I refuse. I still have nearly all of my college textbooks, except for a few economics books, which were just too huge to bother to lug all over the country.

+1. on all accounts. seriously, my mom is a librarian, she has a nook that she loves, and I too have virtually all of my college text books.

If society collapses, I won't have a gun, but I'll be able to explain developmental biology to the hoards looking to loot my home.

[Ralph]

I already do this with one of our cars. My wife likes to have a new car every 2-3 years. I usually pay for cars when we get them, but her car I lease (still buy and own mine).

Considering the value of money, and the price of many nice cars (she seems to like vehicles in the $35,000 to $40,000 range), and what I don't earn on it when it's in a car, plus the cost of depreciation, I think it's much cheaper to lease her car for about $5000 per year, with no investment in it, than it is to outright own it. I can usually buy it at the end of the lease (will spend some cash there), immediately resale it, and usually make a couple thousand. Then go look for another car to lease....whoever has the best subsidized deal on something she wants to drive a couple years. Am careful to make sure she picks vehicle with relatively low depreciation schedules. Honda, Acura's, Toyota, lexus, BMW, cars like that, etc. Eco Boost F150 maybe on that list also.

I usually keep my cars a while, but considering the value of invested money, thinking about doing the same for me. So yes.....we're old people and we're leasing some things now we used to write a check for. Just want to pay for about 25,000 miles on a vehicle that should last about 150,000 miles.

[Louis]

I already do this with one of our cars. My wife likes to have a new car every 2-3 years... (she seems to like vehicles in the $35,000 to $40,000 range)

Wow, you mean everyone doesn't buy a $17.5k car and keep it for 15+ years? ;)

[Ralph]

Wow, you mean everyone doesn't buy a $17.5k car and keep it for 15+ years? ;)


No....but it would be smart if we did.

[bluesea]

How about if we can own our own bibs?

[saab2000]

Wow, you mean everyone doesn't buy a $17.5k car and keep it for 15+ years? ;)

Pretty much my M.O. The difference goes into my 401k and my Roth and making early house payments. I hate car payments.

[Chance]

In some ways, a condo association is the extension of car share into the home market, perhaps even preceded car share programs. You don't have to own the structure, roof, driveway, yard equipment, etc. You own it as a group, to supposedly defray those costs.

I'm surprised that there isn't (or maybe there is, and I'm just not aware of it) zipcar like program for boats. That seems like a nice niche that people would like to enjoy once or twice a year, but don't want to put up the full cost to own. Ride on lawn mowers are another one. Why own your own lawnmower, when you and your neighbors could each own 1/10th of it.

Don't know about boats, but RVs are commonly rented for a week or two at a time. Since most owners wouldn't use one year round it makes sense to rent at vacation time. Cruise America is big at this nationally, but local businesses provide similar services.

As to lawn mower, that doesn't make as much sense to me by comparison. If ten neighbors share the mower it will just wear out in 1 year instead of ten. And then there is the time required to get it and pass it on to the next guy. Too much trouble to save a few dollars. With large and expensive items like RVs it makes sense because you can save insurance, maintenance, parking, and so on. Even then spending hours picking it up and returning is a hassle compared to owning your own. Which comes back to affordability relative to our wealth or lack thereof. The more expensive the more we share. Airplanes, RVs, vacation homes, and so on. Not as much with lower-cost items or things we use regularly.

[Ralph]

There are share programs for boats. A few hundred dollars a month gives you choice and time for various boats in a fleet. The share company owns the boats, maintains them, usually stores them, pays the insurance, etc. No need to own a hauler, or have a large storage place of your own. The fuel goes on your monthly bill. Probably the cheapest way for a family to go boating once in a while on local waters.

My son, who lives on the W side of Columbia, SC, near Lake Murray, has told me about a share program on Lake Murray.

[slidey]

I hope that's what the future looks like - no misuse of any resources whatsoever, and people looking at it with an "It's not mine, it's ours" attitude, akin to what kindergarteners are taught but forced to forget by the greed of the society at large.

However, coming back to reality, no...I don't think so. It's a mix of the following factors - delivery of timely service, genuine emergency needs, people convincing themselves to give in to the marketing hype that every need is an emergency need, sellers who will be hit by lack of selling their services/goods as opposed to sharing.

Do we think that this is where we're going as a society? In the future, will we own nothing and simply pay for time on the things we want to use?

[efuentes]

I think time sharing its a good way to go for most utilitarian tools, the hard part is to define utilitarian, take cars for example, I took a long time for me to accept that what I really nedded was a basic Toyota car to go around, once I got over it , it saved me a lot of money that could be used for nice shiny things :)

[verticaldoug]

Sorry, a rental society is more poor than an owner society. If you think everything going to rent/time-share is a good thing, you are mistaken. Moreover, the notion that people begin to think of things as 'ours' rarely works. Generally, they think of it as not mine, therefore use it a little harder.

In addition, someone does 'own' the item that everyone else is renting, and this is were you get concentration of wealth. Your rate is the general return on their capital. Therefore, by definition, you are not growing your capital.

In the late 80's when leverage was king in Japan, there was the same talk of the Rentership Society etc. It did not work out well.

[cmg]

i can see this with housing as prices put it out of reach of most peoples incomes but i refuse to do it with a car. Buy them cheap, drive it until the motor falls out, replace the motor and drive it somemore. buying a new car..........never.