Is it a necessity if you can cut back on it?

[disneysteve]

Driving home today, I heard a report about a survey that said a certain percentage of people interviewed had reported that they have had to cut back on spending on necessities due to the economy. My question is if they were able to cut back what they were spending, was the stuff really a necessity? They mentioned food and medicine specifically. If you reduced your grocery bill, does that really count as cutting back on necessities or is it actually cutting back on the non-necessities in order to lower your spending? We certainly spend way more on groceries than we truly need to. There are lots of things we could cut out if we had to. I don't count those things as being necessities.

[sweeps]

Agreed. But just to play devil's advocate... Maybe the things they cut back on can only be cut back temporarily. Withdrawing them over the long run could cause harm. For example, if I never took a vacation again, I might go insane -- which of course could be costly.

[GREENBACK]

This brings up the old argument about needs vs. wants. Are these people realizing what they thought they had to have isn't reality. If you go to the grocery store and buy Porterhouse steaks then lump that into your food budget can you call that a need? Food certainly is but there are ways to cut back there for sure.

Medicine can be tricky. If you stop taking meds to stop excessive dandruff it's a little different than cutting out your heart meds. I'd be interested to know what "neccesities" people are cutting out.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by GREENBACK

Medicine can be tricky. If you stop taking meds to stop excessive dandruff it's a little different than cutting out your heart meds. I'd be interested to know what "neccesities" people are cutting out.

I agree. Being a physician, I'm well aware of this issue. Even so, if someone has me change them from brand name Zocor to generic pravastatin to treat their high cholesterol, does that count as cutting back on necessities? I'm not quite sure.

And I totally agree about the food spending. That was my point, exactly. If we gave up buying cases of Diet Coke to trim our spending and just drank tap water, or started baking cookies from scratch instead of buying Oreos, we haven't cut back on necessities but on luxuries.

[kork13]

it's a very literal interpretation, but think of it this way... Food, housing, medicine, etc, are all necessities. If you cut back on those things (by buying less of it, or finding cheaper alternatives) it's still technicallycutting back on necessities.

Also, it could be perceived necessities.... phones, transportation, etc... they're pretty important, and considered necessities by most, but you could technically continue living without them.

[DebbieL]

Well, if they have given up the things that I consider necessities (good healthy fruit/veggies) and are having to live on noodles, then I think that is possible. Nutritious food is a necessity (or it should be), but it can be a lot cheaper to live on junk.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by DebbieL

Well, if they have given up the things that I consider necessities (good healthy fruit/veggies) and are having to live on noodles, then I think that is possible. Nutritious food is a necessity (or it should be), but it can be a lot cheaper to live on junk.

True. I thought of that, too. If they are buying Ramen instead of apples, that's a problem. I just wonder how many were truly cutting back on important stuff and how many were just cutting out some extras but considered it necessities.

[GREENBACK]

I think it's possible that we'll see a new definition of "neccesity" as we move forward into and out of this recession. I learned early on and thru my young adult life what a neccesity is and though I'm far better off now, it's a lesson I'll never forget. Perhaps it's that nagging reminder of true poverty that never let's me forget about what real neccesities are.

[maat55]

I'm surprised at what some people think are necessities, like cell phones, pop, cigarettes, beer, GOLF. Many will run up CC's before cutting these items.

[wnlbutterfly]

I think the average person confuses "wants" as "needs". So to them they are cutting back on "needs" when it is nothing more than a "want". I know we still have a lot of things we could cut back on, baby steps though. But then there are a lot of things we don't buy/use that others feel they couldn't live without.

Perhaps this recession will give a lot of people a wake up call on spending.

[boosami]

In the current American mindset, a "need" is really no different from a "want" for many things.

Bottled water is a necessity to live, for the person who refuses to drink tap water. If I refuse to drive an unreliable car, a new car becomes a need. You absolutely must buy organic food because everything else is processed and bad for your body. The mindset is "if I can rationalize it, I need it."

Refuse the alternatives, and all your wants become needs.

As my uncle quips: "Don't come asking me for grocery money when you already have beer money."

[Like2Plan]

Originally Posted by disneysteve

They mentioned food and medicine specifically. If you reduced your grocery bill, does that really count as cutting back on necessities or is it actually cutting back on the non-necessities in order to lower your spending? We certainly spend way more on groceries than we truly need to. There are lots of things we could cut out if we had to. I don't count those things as being necessities.

I know some folks who have in the past cut their meds in half to make them last longer. Usually it is for things like high blood pressure or cholesterol--et'c--I guess since it is for chronic type conditions which sometimes don't have an immediate and profound effect on lowering the dosage, folks figure they can get away with a temporarily cut back. Or, another example might be cutting back on pain meds or anti-inflamatory drugs--like back problems or arthritis where there are flare ups and such. Personally, I believe that anytime quality of life is reduced or health is jeopardized it is a necessity.

[noppenbd]

I think the quibble here is with the term "necessities". In the strictest sense, there are very few real necessities for survival. Take a person living on the street. Technically they are surviving, and maybe on only a few dollars a day in food (or less). Food can be scavenged from scraps, and water can be had for free from public facilities. You could argue that shelter can also be found for free. Most medicine is not a short-term necessity, but improves the quality of life and/or prolongs life.

So maybe they should have used the phrase "cutting back on the basics" or "staples", but necessities is not really the right word to use. For us, our weekly staples include orange juice, milk, coffee, and vitamins, but they are certainly not necessities. If we had to eliminate one or all of them, it would not kill us, but it would definitely cramp our style a bit.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by Like2Plan

I believe that anytime quality of life is reduced or health is jeopardized it is a necessity.

I agree 100% with this.