I was reading this old post from The Simple Dollar today about how we have much different bills today than our parents and grandparents used to. Basically, the article talks about how the things we think are essential today really aren't because they are not actually necessary for us to live. He argues that our dependence on new "extras" like internet constrains our life choices in ways previous generations weren't. While in the past families could survive with one working parent, but that's so much more difficult these days, if not nearly impossible. So he believes people can, when stuck in a financially difficult situation, look at what kind of bills our parents and grandparents would have tolerated to see what bills can be eliminated- that cutting these bills won't affect quality of life.

My initial reaction to this post is a little conflicted. One one hand, I completely agree that, these days, people tend to prioritize some pretty trivial things. Material things are number one on the list for that. Electronic gadgets seem like the number one culprit. Whether it's a big screen tv, an iPod or fancy laptop, I know people who think they are absolutely essential. I know one person at school who, despite barely having enough grocery money, has at least 3 ipods. They actually used student loan money to buy the iPods because they "deserved" them. Similarly, you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that 900 channels with 200 in HD are essentials.

So you won't hear me arguing that people don't have extraneous bills. But I think using past generations as such a strict template for living and spending is problematic as well. Times have changed, and things that weren't necessary before are now. While a cellphone isn't strictly necessary to have for chatting, I personally think they are invaluable to have in the case of an emergency. Payphones aren't an option like before because they're being removed left and right.  You  don't have to have an iPhone for that though- a simple prepaid phone will suffice. And even a cellphone without minutes on it can dial 911.  Internet access of some kind is pretty much necessary as well. My parent's are having problems getting a connection, and their being without internet for about 5 months has shown me the effects. There are countless things I have to take care of for them online at my place. It's definitely affected my dad's job search. Again, you don't need a 20 mpbs down internet connection, but even DSL is fairly inexpensive these days.

So I don't think the the problem so much is thinking we need items or services we won't need at all. I think it's more of a problem of excess when it comes to things we do need. People either are mistaken about what the basic requirements are, or they get caught up in wanting the best just for the sake of having the best. It's having the complete cable package when you only watch the local stations, ordering the large popcorn for 25 cents more when you can only eat a small, and having an iPhone and data plan when you just need a few minutes of talk time a month.  So I think it's a matter of degree and amount than anything else.

What do you guys think? Do we have a problem of believing we need items we dont?  Or do we just don't know when to stop when it comes to a need? Or maybe we don't have a problem at all because times are just changing?

Discussions about efficiency will often include the idea that there comes a point when it's better to pay someone to do something instead of doing it yourself.  For instance, it might take you longer to do a chore so that the value of your time makes it more costly in the long run for you to do it yourself.

But let's be honest- sometimes, there are chores you just hate doing. These are the chores we procrastinate and bribe our younger siblings to do whenever possible. For me, it's laundry. In a perfect world, I'd love to have someone else do my laundry. I'd love to send it out, but in this town it pretty much doubles the cost of each load. The biggest thing, however, is that I'm too weirded out by someone else touching my clothes. Plus, a lot of my clothes have require special care and I'm afraid they'll get messed up. If the price were about the same as doing  it myself in our laundry room in the apartment building, or at least not more than probably 15% more, I'd probably get over my "issues" and send out my clothes.  More Here...

Fortune Magazine and CNNmoney.com have release their most recent list of the Top 100 Best Companies to Work For. The data focuses on US. employees and includes part-time workers in addition to full-time workers.

Without further ado, here are the Top 20 Best Companies to Work for:
20. Devon Energy
19. Genentech
18. Whole Foods Market
17. Methodist Hospital System
16. Cisco
15. Zappos.com
14. Recreational Equipment
13. W.L. Gore & Associates
12. Bingham McCutchen
11. Robert W. Baird & Co.
10. Camden Property Trust
9. Qualcomm
8. Boston Consulting Group
7. NetApp
6. Dreamworks Animation SKG
5. Nugget Market
4. Google
3. Wegmans Food Marketa
2. Edward Jones
1. SAS

For more information on these companies and companies #21-100, check out the full article here:  http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2010/full_list/

Are you lucky enough to work at any of the top companies? Are there any you'd like to work for?