Curious that he doesn't mention "big bank balance" which makes life a lot more comfortable for him.
He needs food? He buys food. He needs emergency accommodation? (Because his friend's house burns down or some such) He can buy that accommodation for the nights he needs it.
Having just become homeless[1] myself (not through choice) I've whittled down my possessions to something that's easy to carry. Following his rules (stuff that'd be annoying to buy again) I have a computer; a games console; an mp3 player; some headphones; a kindle; one pair trousers.
I have more clothes, but they're easy to replace. The Kindle is odd - one item, with many books on it. But they are easy to replace. Personally, I think that's a flaw in his method.
By a more reasonable counting system I have money (not much, but much more than other people in similar situations in my country, and very very much more than people in other countries); I have the gadgets (and associated chargers / headphones / cases / bags / media / software); I have clothes.
[1] As I've mentioned it, take a look at this website.
It's aimed at people needing "social housing". (I don't; I have no idea why I was given that URL, maybe it's just the script they follow.) IT IS AN APPALLING WEBSITE, AND A DREADFUL FORM. From the broken security mixing secure and insecure stuff, to the weird form flow.
I'm not sure if Mr Hyde's definition of a personal possession was a (well-played) PR trick or simply a certain lack of accounting intuition. Which is a shame, because his putative balance sheet should be a fascinating thing to think about.
If we were to take a look at his assets and guess reasonable values for each category of asset, I wouldn't be surprised if all 15 items he listed (give or take his wallet and computer) ended up in a catch-all 1%-of-total-value "other assets" category.
In reality, Mr Hyde's own description of how he lives (and how he manages to get around with so few 'objects') suggests that the most valuable things he has, by far, are (and probably in that order): his contacts, his reputation, and his cash.
Close to these three, his clothes, iPod and sneakers, however annoying to replace he imagines them to be, should be next to meaningless.
... to the 420k image of a 306k document. Firebug shows it as 1.1m, but headers say 420k. Oh, and the image is 'no-cache' so it'll reload on every page request from a server apparently running on a 64k ISDN line.
He needs food? He buys food. He needs emergency accommodation? (Because his friend's house burns down or some such) He can buy that accommodation for the nights he needs it.
Having just become homeless[1] myself (not through choice) I've whittled down my possessions to something that's easy to carry. Following his rules (stuff that'd be annoying to buy again) I have a computer; a games console; an mp3 player; some headphones; a kindle; one pair trousers.
I have more clothes, but they're easy to replace. The Kindle is odd - one item, with many books on it. But they are easy to replace. Personally, I think that's a flaw in his method.
By a more reasonable counting system I have money (not much, but much more than other people in similar situations in my country, and very very much more than people in other countries); I have the gadgets (and associated chargers / headphones / cases / bags / media / software); I have clothes.
[1] As I've mentioned it, take a look at this website.
(http://gloshomeseeker.co.uk)
It's aimed at people needing "social housing". (I don't; I have no idea why I was given that URL, maybe it's just the script they follow.) IT IS AN APPALLING WEBSITE, AND A DREADFUL FORM. From the broken security mixing secure and insecure stuff, to the weird form flow.