« Why are Latin American politicians so bad? | Main | The Paris School of Economics »
Why do people own things?
A loyal MR reader asks:
This is related to a recent post and something I've been thinking about a lot as I pack up my house to move: Why do we buy books and videos? Doesn't it make much more sense to outsource their storage to libraries and video stores or services like Netflix?
I have an intrinsic desire to collect and flood my house with nuggets of joy (not Natasha's phrase), but that doesn't explain everyone. Often people own books and DVDs for reasons of identity and self-expression; that is why iTunes outcompeted Rhapsody, even though the latter in some ways offered a better deal. Ownership, especially of the non-digital kind, also allows you to lend out, to send to friends, and to show off. The ownership puzzle is related to the "why do we buy mostly new music" puzzle.
It makes the most sense to own songs and CDs, if only because the desire to hear them is more spontaneous, and renting them is harder. The costs of renting are falling, but the costs of personal storage are falling too, as houses become larger. The mail isn't getting much quicker, but the demand for immediacy is growing. Ownership remains robust.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on February 28, 2007 at 01:08 PM in Economics | Permalink
Comments
#3 is not any series of 50 I know about.
Posted by: The Garbageman at Feb 28, 2007 1:41:14 PM
For the same reason our ancestors used to collect bird feathers and animal skins and to take care to hide hair clippings and other personal items. Books and records are fetish objects, at least to many of us. Which is to say--"reasons of identity". The percentage of my books that I have ever reread gets smaller daily.
Posted by: Bill Harshaw at Feb 28, 2007 1:58:07 PM
I'm with Bill. Without all our stuff, how could we prove our value and identity. Also, I sellers would rather sell than rent. It's just easier for them and they can charge more.
Posted by: John Wesley at Feb 28, 2007 2:03:41 PM
I'm lazy, and don't like bothering with libraries (never open when I want to do anything) and the mail.
I've noticed that with movies-on-demand I buy far fewer movies.
Posted by: Foobarista at Feb 28, 2007 2:12:40 PM
I think most people strike a healthy combination between "library"-style media and ownership depending on the use. For example, I own my favorite movies because if on a whim I decide I want to "watch a movie," one of them will likely make me happy immediately. I own books that I've felt the need to highlight in or that I reference in conversations with others, in writing, etc. There's also a personal satisfaction that comes from browsing my bookshelf.
That being said, I will always have a use for Netflix or a library for research, for reading or viewing something I'm not sure I'll like, etc.
Posted by: Chase at Feb 28, 2007 2:23:39 PM
Alas, with ownership comes buyers remorse. Therefore I never watch the movies I have bought, nor listen to the music I have bought. Ownership is, IMHO, a trap of regret, and only income-generating assets give long lasting satisfaction. But I'm funny that way.
Posted by: pawnking at Feb 28, 2007 2:29:16 PM
"Often people own books and DVDs for reasons of identity and self-expression [...]" this is certainly true for tangible things, although music has already substantively moved to hard drives and movies are heading in that direction, so it may not be true in the indefinite future.
Still, for now, the identity issue is important: when people walk into my apartment, they judge me in part based on what I have -- as I do of others. So when they see bookshelves, they know not only that I like to read, but they also learn part of my intellectual history and development through knowledge. Incidentally, one reason I write a book blog is similar to the reason I like to own books.
There are also additional costs to renting books that the original reader implicitly ignores when he writes, "Doesn't it make much more sense to outsource their storage to libraries and video stores or services like Netflix?" Going to the library incurs time costs (to go there and to come back), as does having to wait for newer or more popular books, as does the potential for late fees. Compared to ordering off Amazon, it becomes inefficient in that respect unless one derives substantial benefits from, say, browsing. I also tend to reread good books and lend them out to friends.
Eventually the convenience of books on hard drives will win over books on paper, and I look forward to that day if for no other reason than because moving will be much easier. But that day appears far off.
Posted by: Jake at Feb 28, 2007 2:32:15 PM
Maybe it's an age issue.
At my advanced age I have declining interest in owning things. I would much rather collect experiences than objects.
Posted by: David Sucher at Feb 28, 2007 2:33:22 PM
It is a control issue. Owning a book or DVD gives others (and possibly yourself) the impression that you are in control of the item. You can decide to read the book or watch the movie when you want too. You can decide to lend it out. You can even decide to sell it. Having to deal with a library or netflix means that you are forfeiting some control and that you have to deal with the library's or Netflix's rules.
Posted by: Vincent Clement at Feb 28, 2007 2:39:19 PM
Fun musings.
I wonder if it's worth doing a taxonomy of ownershi
I don't have the collector's gene, for instance. I know some art collectors, and I'm just not like them. For them, ownership or maybe collectorship is fulfilling, almost artistic or religious in its own right.
On the other hand, I own a lot of books and DVDs. I take no aprticular pride in this, and I'm certainly not creating a shrine to my tastes. So why do I do it?
Unsure, but I think the thrill of the hunt is part of it. Tracking down books that seem of especial interest, or even trashy DVDs that are on sale that might -- who knows! -- turn out to be great, is a deeply satisfying experience to me.
Then I drag the animals I've killed home and am stuck with them. A few months pass and I've lost track of the thrill that once possessed me, and off I go to do it again. Meanwhile, the animal carcasses accumulate....
Posted by: Michael Blowhard at Feb 28, 2007 3:03:21 PM
I've stopped buying DVDs since joining Netflix.
I do still buy current TV shows from iTunes when I really like the series and want to keep up and not wait for next year's DVD set. . .
Posted by: Matthew at Feb 28, 2007 3:04:19 PM
I agree with Jake that there are costs associated with renting. Books and DVDs are often gifts. Gifts of intangibles are largely regarded as inferior to their tangible counterparts (this is not true for nonsubstitutes like Caribbean vacations though).
I don't much like buying books for myself; I am a heavy library user.
Also music on CD is durable; if you lose a hard drive, you can re-rip your CD and not have to pay again to download. The purchase of the CD has an embedded call option giving you the right to buy again at zero cost.
Posted by: asparagus at Feb 28, 2007 3:24:50 PM
Why do people own stolen Picassos?
Posted by: evm at Feb 28, 2007 3:27:27 PM
I think a lot of it also is a question of trust.
I trust that my physically owned objects will not go out of business and become inaccessible, that they are protected by 4th amendment warrant requirements from the government and by my house from nosy neighbors and marketers, that they will not cease to exist in a technical glitch.
For "outsourced storage" to gain this same level of trust would require a careful arrangement of arms-length negotiations, well-specified security protocols, partially anonymized service guarantees and bonds, and offshore storage that I think nobody has yet begun to assemble.
Posted by: Grant Gould at Feb 28, 2007 3:53:30 PM
I agree with many of the points made above, ie signaling, ability to lend, etc.
Also, over the last few decades the costs of reproducing and shipping media has probably gone down; a movie is certainly cheaper than it was 20 years ago, and an album probably is as well.
Over the last few years the value of my time has certainly gone up.
Going to the library means walking all the way over to 5th and 42nd, planning ahead to get there when the library is open, figuring out how to get a card, hoping that I can get one of the few copies of "Fooled By Randomness" in the system.
Buying it on Amazon means about 30 seconds online after lunch.
Time is irreplaceable. But as far as money goes, we'll just make more.*
Also for me is the sense of duty. Maybe its a defect of my personality, but I feel bad if I bend the pages of a library book when I'm on the subway. If I own it, who cares if I spill coffee on my book? That peace of mind is worth something to me.
*going to the library is itself a fun experience once in a while, but eventually becomes a chore.
Posted by: Brant at Feb 28, 2007 4:26:21 PM
Yeah, so I was watching my Fight Club DVD the other day, and re-listened to Tyler Durden's line: The things you own end up owning you.
Man, that was funny.
Guess you had to be there.
Posted by: Aaron at Feb 28, 2007 4:26:22 PM
Also, the library gets angry when I write in their books.
Posted by: Matt at Feb 28, 2007 4:45:11 PM
Since I'm the one who asked the question, please allow me to address the issue of time cost. I realize the time it takes to go to the library has a value. But so does the space these books and videos take up. Filling that space with books or videos means sacrificing something else, whether it be other items that could take up that space or even just empty space, which can have a psychological value of its own.
Posted by: Ted Craig at Feb 28, 2007 4:46:29 PM
Public libraries in my area in generally do not stock the books I would like to (re-)read. Their space is also limited, they will have to cater to the lowest common denominator. I also think that people like to emulate other people. That once you see someone having a DVD collection, you want one yourself as well. For some people such conformity is an issue, for others it is not.
Posted by: kurt at Feb 28, 2007 6:20:11 PM
Ownership certainly doesn't remain robust at my end. I have shrunk my library from over 100 books to just 3 (a dictionary, a copy of Don Quixote, and an economics text), I have given over 2/3 of my clothes to charity because I realised I tended to wear the same ones over and over, and I have binned tonnes of newspaper/research articles with the view that most of this stuff can be found on the net if I ever need it. I believe we have an innate need to collect and hoard, but I feel a lot 'lighter' for having fought this instinct.
Posted by: Caravaggio at Feb 28, 2007 10:03:03 PM
A variation on Aaron's comment:
"Anything you can't walk away from, owns you."
Posted by: MR at Feb 28, 2007 11:08:47 PM
Yes, it is about identifying with something, which 'appears' to give one a sense of security and happiness.
Posted by: Alex at Mar 1, 2007 1:18:52 AM
I have attempted an answer.
Posted by: sammler at Mar 1, 2007 6:29:03 AM
Objects, books especially, have aesthetic value. A room lined with overflowing bookshelves, with well-thumbed tomes stacked about, with books on a variety of subjects and in a variety of genres everywhere you turn--that is a very cozy room indeed. Some people prefer minimalism, some people prefer hobbit holes. That you can even read the books and learn something or be entertained is only an added bonus.
Posted by: Thelonious_Nick at Mar 1, 2007 12:02:22 PM
I would think that this relates to the idea of personal utility and value. I seem to remember learning that what we consume is utility and that there are three types of utility: form, place and time. Form utility meaning that the item consumed has a form we find useful; place utility that is available at a place we find useful; and time utility means it's available when we find it useful.
As a collector of books, I don't particularly care whether anyone else sees my books. I find value in the place and time utility, i.e. the specific books are available to me whenever I want to use them in a place that is most convenient. And value being subjective, it would explain why some people collect and some don't. The collectors just place a higher value (read satisfaction) on having the times when and where it is most convenient.
Posted by: Tim at Mar 1, 2007 2:19:37 PM
