Hacker News Reader

Comment by chrisseaton | Hacker News Reader

So for example what would you do if you decided you want to go for a hike one day? You don't own any hiking boots, only a pair of shoes. Does that mean lot of activities aren't possible for you because you want to own as little as possible?

View on HN

If I only owned one pair of shoes I'd choose a pair I could comfortably walk ten miles in.

Great - but then those boots are too heavy for walking around in a city - and are those boots suitable for wet or dry conditions?

I'd love to have less stuff, but I don't know how that doesn't turn into simply having the wrong stuff.

I love my Waldviertler boots:

http://w4tler.at/schuhe/jaga-schwarz-herren

Perfect for almost everything all year. This guy [1] walked 15.000 km with them. He needed just 3 pairs of them.

[1] http://www.globalchange.at/home/willkommen.php?main=home&sub...

I've effectively used hiking boots for city-life for years. Yes, they are heavier, and the first week you get tired of walking faster than everyone else, but then it becomes natural.

I've used the same pair of lightweight waterproof Timberland boots for the last 10 years (in the Spring, Fall, and Winter). It's not a problem at all walking around a city (Boston & NYC) in them, or hiking outdoors. In the summer, I go with my barefoot shoes, but that's a luxury and not necessary.

(really a reply to sibling)

I just did exactly this. There is now ten miles a week of walking in my commute. I wore out three pairs of shoes before spending a bit more for some Doc Martens; they meet exactly this requirement. Not too heavy for "city" walking, although a bit heavier than trainers. No problem in the wet. Durable. The only reason I wouldn't go hillwalking in them is wanting to keep them clean.

(This is almost literally the "Vimes boots theory of poverty" from Pratchett)

It all depends on how minimal you want to go. I own three pairs of footwear. An everyday pair that I use for everything from walking to work to mowing, a more formal pair for special occasions, and a pair of work boots I use for a variety of other circumstances--dirty work, times I need waterproof footwear, felling trees, they'd work for hiking but are heavy, if I want something warm in winter (where I put on an extra pair of thick socks). If I was in a different circumstance I might be able to get by with less, but the lesson I take home from the minimalism movement (which I'm not a part of) isn't that I should have the bare minimum of stuff; it's that I should consider having have less stuff and should be more mindful of why I have the things I do.

So if you're hiking a lot and sneakers don't cut it, go ahead and get something that does. But applying the lesson above, if you think about it and you hike only occasionally and it's on easy terrain and sneakers really are good enough, then don't buy the hiking gear that might make those easy hikes 1% better. That 1% comes at a cost of A) the purchase price itself, and B) having more stuff in your life to deal with. Yeah, it's nice to have sweet gear even in those circumstances, but it doesn't really make life appreciably better. Overall, cumulatively, such purchases make life worse.

I get your point but I think a lot of people overestimate the amount of special gear they need to pursue certain activities. Sure, if you're going to be in the wilderness for days, hiking boots and outdoor clothing are a good idea. A few hours walking through the forest, you're fine wearing whatever.

And then the weather turns and you are in deep dodo.

I wonder how many times i have read a news report about some tourist that needed to be rescued because he or she tried to visit some view or other in shorts and loafers.

My shoes are hiking boots :) I recycled myself some nice Teva sandals in October, but after 4 months in the rough landscape of Tenerife, they were ruined so I threw them away. If I need new shoes, I know I will find them somewhere, most likely in a freeshop.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com