“One major finding is that spending money for an experience—concert tickets, French lessons, sushi-rolling classes, a hotel room in Monaco—produces longer-lasting satisfaction than spending money on plain old stuff.”
This phenomenon is also neatly reproduced by small-space living, which the article mildly addresses without geographic specificity. I wonder then if city folk, with square-footage constraints, combined with more opportunities to spend money on experiences and more entertainment available outside the home, are happier than your average 2.5 bath/4 bedroom subdivision-dweller with rooms full of stuff they never use.
Says the neat-freak with extreme prejudice against “spare” anything.
Also! Isn’t it odd that “spare” means spartan and also extra? Words are fun.
And shopping is still a science and I still love Paco Underhill.
AND: “BEFORE credit cards and cellphones enabled consumers to have almost anything they wanted at any time […] You saved for it, you anticipated it.” That’s so true. I think I’d call it the “Allowance/Roller Skates Effect.”
NYT: Consumers Find Ways to Spend Less and Find Happiness (via caro) (via mikehudack)
