Originally Posted by
catherine
I guess the point of the article is spending money is spending money and if you can't afford it you shouldn't do it.
People who advocate spending on experiences tend to be the anti-consumerist people who look at "things" as worthless drag on resources, landfills, and are empty fulfillment because they don't make you happier.
Those people will argue that experiences fortify social connection, get you to expand your horizons (as razz suggested), and open you to seeing things anew. I get a thrill every time I travel--even business travel is fun for me. I understand that a lot of people wouldn't agree. I've had clients say to me, "Oh, you poor thing, you have to travel!" to which I respond "I look at it as 'Lucky me, I GET to travel!"
My two sons went together on a trip to Europe and I was so gratified to hear one of them say that it changed how they saw the world. Fait accompli.
I have to admit that I'm starting to gag watching those gosh darned HGTV shows, especially the vacation home ones, where the perky mom and dad with 2-3 kids and two dogs say that they want to purchase the $500,000 vacation home in order to allow their kids to "make memories." I truly have no issue with the idea of it--I've spoken about my own positive experiences growing up with my aunt at her cottage, but that phrase is just so trite and contrived. You can't cook up a memory.
But again, the idea is.... is there a "right" way to spend money, if you don't have the money to spend? Probably not. The "right" way would be to not spend at all.