TED Conversations

Huey Freeman

This conversation is closed.

From possessions to access

Does it make sense to buy something only to use it for a fraction of the time of its full utility? For example, is it smart to make one of everything regardless of their usage by the person? it seems to me that the idea of "possessions" is completely unstable on a finite earth.

There is a place in Toronto where people share tools and when your done with using the tool you simply but it back in the tool deposits. A city near Amsterdam also share bikes in which they all use and share, no single bike "belongs" to anyone, and there are enough bikes to be used since no one takes the bikes home with them, kind of like a library. Abundance being the key notion here.

If we could extend these practices to larger objective (like cars, electronic devises ect.), we could cut down on the environmental cost of "having one of everything", and we would develop into a society with a new set values, such as sharing, and access abundance, instead of constricted possessions and "property".

Let me know what you guys think.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jul 4 2013: This idea is unattractive to most businesses because of individualism. There is no thought into what would be best for everyone as a whole, only what is best for them and that means bringing in they money in order to stay alive in a monetary system.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.