Consumer revolt: Andrea Tringo, toting her 3-week-old son, peruses free book bins at a store in Lafayette, Colo. Ms. Tringo and her husband, Steven Posusta, have been exploring the world of used furniture and hand-me-down clothes in their quest to live a greener, less materialistic lifestyle. (Jillian Lloyd)
Colorado couple tries to go a year without buying anything new
Dipping into the world of secondhand furniture and recycled clothes, they want to set a ‘socially responsible’ example for their son and reduce their environmental ‘footprint.’
By Jillian Lloyd | Correspondent / December 10, 2008 edition
Lafayette, Colo.
Andrea Tringo is running errands on a crisp Colorado day, employing her favorite form of transportation – her own feet. “It feels good to be walking,” she says, ambling past turn-of-the-century storefronts.
“Lafayette is great for this. I can walk anywhere.” Lafayette, a quaint community of 26,000 just east of Boulder, boasts striking views of the Continental Divide and an easy bus commute to Denver – which is how Ms. Tringo’s husband, Steven Posusta, gets to work these days.
Last summer, they sold his gas-guzzling pickup truck. When their remaining car, a 1999 Subaru, needed a new engine, they got a rebuilt one. They also frequent the public library to get books and DVDs instead of buying new ones, and they grow some of their own food in the backyard.
The middle-class couple is trying to follow an unorthodox lifestyle even for these frugal times: They are attempting to go a full year without buying anything new. That’s right, a full year. Whatever they need, they try to borrow, buy secondhand, or do without.
Eleven months into their social experiment, they are largely adhering to their commitment to the simple life: Sure, they’ve purchased a few new things – who wants to use recycled underwear? – but for the most part they’ve adjusted painlessly to a life of secondhand furniture and used clothing.
What started out as largely a green initiative – to live more in harmony with the environment – has since transformed into something more fundamental: a journey into what the couple considers a “socially responsible” lifestyle. Tringo says they want to set a good example for their newborn son. Along the way, the couple has learned a lot about their own values, as well as the nation’s.
“It was deciding to create another person who will be consuming resources for a lifetime that made me think seriously about this,” says Tringo. “I don’t want my son to grow up to be materialistic, or to not think about the impact of what he does.”
•••
Tringo and Posusta were never spendthrifts. And they were always environmentally conscious. But with both comfortably employed in the high tech industry, they had disposable income. The question was, what were they going to do with it? As a newlywed couple, they set out to define a lifestyle for their family.
They knew it wouldn’t include being a target for advertisers. “It’s crazy, it’s frivolous stuff – the Kate Spade diaper bags and very expensive shoes,” says Tringo. “I just didn’t feel comfortable with that.”
Then, a little over a year ago, the family heard about an anticonsumption experiment called The Compact, which began serendipitously in 2006 when 10 San Francisco friends pledged to flee the must-have-everything ethos and buy nothing new for a calendar year. [Editor’s note: The original version had the wrong inception date for The Compact.]
Espousing a rebellion against bourgeois consumerism and eager to reduce their environmental “footprint,” they vowed to only borrow, barter, or buy secondhand. The only exceptions would be food, consumable products like soap and toilet paper, and items related to health and safety.
By Jan. 1, 2008, Tringo and Posusta were enthusiastic converts. And they were in good company: Today some 10,000 Compact followers exist worldwide – in places as far away as Iceland and Taiwan. Ironically, The Compact originators never intended to start a movement.
“There are about 10,000 people on our Yahoo forum, and people are joining every day,” marvels Rachel Kesel, one of the founders. “At the outset, we thought, ‘There are 10 of us willing to do this! Isn’t that great!’ ”
Of course, some Americans have been living a version of The Compact since, well, the Mayflower Compact, after which the experiment was named. In certain circles, there’s nothing new here except the sudden cachet of frugalness. While the terms thrifty and penny pincher verge on pejorative, being a Compacter sounds novel, adventurous – trendy, even.
“It’s not so much the practice that’s new, but the mobilization of people making it into a community effort,” says Tringo, dressed in secondhand blue jeans and gray pullover. “People have been practicing this recycle-reuse lifestyle for generations in some families. Then there are people like me who decided, ‘I’ve got to stop the madness!’ ”
In this season of frenzied gift-shopping, when it’s practically an American tradition to spend beyond one’s means, Tringo maintains a Mona Lisa calm. “I don’t feel obligated to give big gifts,” she says with a shrug. She, in fact, will be giving homemade baked goods and gift certificates for services like a massage.
But the challenge of gift-giving also drives home an essential point: “The reason it’s so hard to think of what to buy for most adults is because none of us really needs anything,” she says.
•••
Strolling along historic Public Avenue – Lafayette’s version of Main Street – Tringo is toting her 3-week-old son, Victor, in a baby carrier, and reflecting on the experience of eschewing consumerism as a new mother.
“From Day One, I never wanted a lot of baby stuff,” she says. When visiting family members with children, she noticed how their homes were stuffed cheek by Barbie doll. “I wondered how much of it was really necessary,” she says.
These days, Tringo relies on Craigslist, thrift stores, and Freecycle (an online recycling network) for essentials. Thanks to hand-me-downs, getting most of the baby’s gear (including crib, stroller, and high chair) was easy. For now, the family’s modest 2,000 square-foot home is free of piles of brightly colored molded plastic. They used recycled materials when remodeling their kitchen. Their furniture is secondhand. Even their dog Pixie, a 3-year-old Dalmatian mix, came from a rescue group.
“If we have another baby, we’ll probably get the next one used,” Tringo jokes.
When unable to find an item she truly needs secondhand, Tringo will buy it new – such as the Onesies bodysuits she recently got Victor. Other new-purchase exceptions she makes – like most Compact followers – are socks and underwear, and safety items such as bike helmets.
As for food and consumable products, the family buys in bulk, and locally when they can. They also grow their own vegetables. This year they had plenty of tomatoes, cucumbers, spinach, and carrots.
Outside Oasis Books, Tringo pauses to peruse the free book bins. Lifting a text on data analysis software, she grins, exclaiming. “Oh, I need this one!” Earlier this year, Tringo was laid off from her job as a data analyst. Now home with Victor, she’s job-hunting, preferably for home-based work. As family members stretch their one income taut, the savings from their new lifestyle is a welcome boon.
“The cost-savings is the biggest thing for us now, with a new baby and Andrea not working,” says Mr. Posusta, a technical editor. “But we also want to have less of an impact on the environment. And we find that when we’re trying to save money, we’re also being green.”
As with any life change, there have been humbling moments. Over herbal tea at the Mojo Coffeehouse, Tringo says she has learned to smile when relatives bring new items for the baby. It’s more important to keep family peace than to foist her principles on others, she’s decided. “Some people don’t agree with this lifestyle,” she says. “I have to respect that.”
Victor, who has been sleeping blissfully, opens his blue eyes, blinks, and then returns to slumber, snuggled against his mother.
For Tringo and Posusta, what began as a one-year experiment is now a lifestyle they embrace – and plan to continue. “This hasn’t been a chore for us,” says Tringo. “I think life is pretty simple. That was part of the motivation behind it.”
3. Mary A | 12.10.08
Been there-done that! The Big Depression followed by WW11. But we must not carry it too far for the new provides the jobs.
4. jack reeman | 12.10.08
Our group of four families have been exchanging baby, child and adult clothing for over 40 years. I bet many other families have done the same.
5. David D. Boggs | 12.10.08
Respecting individual life-style choices, I enjoyed reading the subject of this article and their unselfishness in undertaking and finally embracing their experiment. And given the importance of reducing our footprint, how do we balance that with choosing to not buy new and thereby putting other producers out of jobs? More and more we hear about our materialistic consumerism, but what would happen if everyone stopped being consumers? How many people would be out of jobs? Thank you for letting me pose a perplexing question that doesn’t have a simple solution.
6. Scijo | 12.10.08
This is a very interesting experiment. Reminds me of the way we actually used to live our lives when we were young and had little money.
8. shirley boyer | 12.11.08
I couldn’t agree more with this life style no matter what ones income is!
9. Bill Weir | 12.11.08
Although I credit this couple for their green choices, what is good for these folks is not good for the country. We need a certain amount of consumer spending to fuel our economy. Like it or not, producers must produce and consumers spend for America to survive.
10. rayy | 12.11.08
I think if it is overdone, the kid will grow up and want everything. There has to be some moderation, which seems to be there in this case. Always a good idea to live within one’s means.
11. Tara | 12.11.08
I’ve relied almost exclusively on thrift stores for both clothes and furniture for years. Not only does it leave a smaller carbon footprint, but it provides something the article barely mentioned: the savings I enjoy. Many of the posters seem worried about the loss of jobs inherent in shifting away from manufacturing, but the U.S. has been steadily losing that battle to China, India and other oversees sources. I think we’re at a time when ‘quality of life’ as we Americans have understood it is being redefined, just as the popularity of gas-guzzling vehicles is being replaced by green technologies. The flip side of our tattered economy is that consumers will, by sheer necessity, wean themselves off the products they really don’t need.
12. Ethel | 12.11.08
Adding to the perplexity of the question regarding jobs is the sustainability of a lifestyle where others cannot live unless we buy new. Eventually, resources for new things will be harder to find and the damage to the earth caused by producing new things will mount. By buying new, we do not permanently shield these people from poverty. We may only be passing an even greater burden along to the next generation.
Of course, everyone isn’t going to suddenly stop shopping. Change will be gradual, and spending will not stop but will move from one area to another. And of course, if everyone lived this way - we’d need less money to live in the first place, so we’d work less, and we’d all have more time with our families.
I’m sure there are dimensions I’m missing, but I have faith that people will find new ways to live. We shouldn’t feel like we are harnessed by our need to spend so others don’t go hungry; if we want to give charity, there are real charities we can give to.
14. PT Money | 12.11.08
Great story. I’m always impspired when I read stories like this. These folks are doing it right. Less is more. Consumerism is dying.
15. Amy H. | 12.11.08
This is very admirable, and I’m going to try to do it for a month in 2009, just to see how it goes. (”Food” as an exception can be tricky, since my partner and definitely tend to overspend on good food and wine.)
One thing that sort of jumped out at me, though — and maybe only because I live in a city apartment rather than the suburbs — but I don’t really think of a 2000 square foot house “modest.” Especially for only two people and a tiny baby.
17. odozone | 12.12.08
There is no need to worry about taking anti-consumerism “too far”. First of all, it may bring more jobs for repair, refurbishing, creative renovation. Second of all, there will always be people who want stuff new– it’s a psychological and affluence thing. And third, stuff will irreparablywear out and break and items will become scarce. Until then, why should we just throw out perfectly good stuff or buy houses with bigger storage space to keep all that crap?!
Hooray for smaller landfills!
18. Melissa | 12.12.08
What an inspiration! I have always thought that there is plenty of “stuff” already in the world- we just need better ways to swap it around. My New Year’s resolution is to be more like this.
19. Tanya | 12.15.08
There’s rarely any discussion about how having kids creates a huge increase in consumption — not just now but over time, for generations to come, as each generation reproduces. You cannot live without creating any environmental impact, and having kids expands the footprint, even if they are ardent environmentalists (and that’s not a realistic expectation).
20. Mrs. R. | 12.23.08
This isn’t a conservative lifestyle by every standard, and too anti-consumerist for some. Compactors have individual variations on the philosophy. I agree that we can’t let commerce come to a grinding halt and expect that to be good for our economy and society. However, many of these people feel that the buying and producing of goods is out of control, and the excess has a negative affect on our values. I have never heard anyone suggest that it would be a good idea for everyone to quit buying new products for one year, but that would never happen.
The discussion about having kids is a topic that deserves its own article and forum. It might be considered the 800# gorilla in the room, because it’s such an emotionally charged subject (sorry for using the cliche, but I couldn’t come up with a better way to put it). But it was mentioned briefly. The decision to increase the population by one was the biggest factor in addressing current and future carbon footprints (see paragraph seven).
21. elizaqbeth | 12.23.08
[please excuse if this is a double-posting; I received a strange message from Wordpress when I hit “submit”]
Just read this article with my arms aching from the shopping of setting up a new household-for-two in western Sydney (fan for our summery Xmas, dishes, etc), after spending several years in Hong Kong. Just before moving here, I picked up some great second-hand luggage and exotic Indonesian/Chinese furniture for a tenth of the price it would cost new; we’ve always bought mainly secondhand: it’s luxury within my price range.
Hong Kong is saturated with the pollution and byproducts of the cheap- and middle-range goods destined for the shelves of affluent countries like the USA. These products don’t create much quality of life for anyone but the factory owners. The jobs created are dead-end, though important for segments of the Chinese workforce.
Bottom line, if we buy high-quality products made in our own countries, we’ll have less of a carbon footprint (less transport to the store/home) and support local economies that are directly linked with our own tax base. These products will last longer than those made in generic 3rd-world factories, though they’ll cost significantly more. Think Volkswagen (their stock is doing very well) with their high production costs and reputation for quality, vs. the unfortunate KIA or Yugo.
Quality products are worth reusing, and last lots longer before they become landfill.
22. fay | 12.24.08
Welcome to our world. My family, to my knowledge, has never bought a brand-new piece of furniture or new clothes apart from underwear. We are not being ‘green’ but we just try to live within our means, which means Goodwill or the Salvation Army store. Growing up all I ever wanted were brand new clothes, the latest technology and store-bought cookies. You are making a middle-class choice from the comfort of your 2,000 square foot house. Many many Americans don’t have the choice. You’ve probably already chocked up more landfill refuse in your short lifetime than two generations of my family.
23. Maureen Sheridan | 12.24.08
It is odd that this makes the news although kudos to the Tringo’s for setting an example re a necessary shift away from over-consumption. As the founder of an animal shelter in Jamaica which houses 150 plus animals at any given time and which has gone through five hurricanes in less than four years, I have been unable to buy anything new for several years and have managed okay nonetheless (although I could use some new jeans now:). Would anyone like to write my story?
24. Teresa | 12.24.08
Thanks for this article! It has inspired me and my husband, as well as few friends to take the challenge, but with a few alterations. Where we do need to buy something new, we’d look to support only companies who offer eco-friendly and socially responsible products, and that conduct their business in an ethical and sustainable manner.
A friend sent me this article discussing ways in which business models could change in order to be more sustainable, and actually promote sustainable consumerism. It helps to bridge the gap a little between buying nothing and supporting a responsible economy:
http://www.greenbiz.com/feature/2008/12/22/taboo-talk-buy-less-stuff
Definitely requires a paradigm shift from all consumers and businesses. A business model and consumption pattern that are dependent on the exploitation of human and natural resources cannot be sustainable and should not be acceptable.
25. Casey | 12.24.08
This reminds me of something I read 30 years ago while I was moonlighting at a second job so I could buy pretty stuff for my apartment(it was the same night I was robbed at gunpoint and could of lost my life)
“He who seeks more than he needs, hinders himself from enjoying what he has”
Jewish proverb
26. Isabelle | 12.24.08
I totally agree with that type of lifestyle having followed it most of my adult life. My question is, what are they doing with all the left-over money which they must have saved after a year of living a thriftier and greener lifestyle? Are they giving some money to project that support a green economy and/or people who have no other choice but to shop at thriftstores or, sadly, at Walmart?
27. Lory | 12.24.08
I am a Thrift Store Manager. Truly we are out of balance. Although we are in an economic crisis, we Americans especially, are some of the largest consumers in the world. More than not are consuming in large quantities. We live, generally speaking, in a numb state. Yes, we need to consume new items, but there must be a balance. We are way out of whack, but I know this “crisis” we are going through will wake alot of people up. Only good can come from it.
28. Betty | 12.24.08
I’m so glad you think you discovered something new. And hopefully it does change your lifestyle. But you didn’t discover anything new - some have been living this way forever. Just because you buy used items doesn’t mean you didn’t add new things to your life. They are new to you thus new things entered you life.
30. Sandi | 12.24.08
WOW! I envy you!!! I do this also. I hate the thought of paying $60.00 for a simple piece of clothing or the high prices of items.
I shop in thrift stores all the time.
Thank you for the inspiration.
sandi
31. Maureen Flanagan, | 12.24.08
I am 65 years old and last year it is the first time we have bought a new TV and it broke within 12 months. We have gone back to the old one. Until last year we never had any new sofa’s. Many hand me down clothes for the children, and I am offered nice clothes. I do buy new clothes though as well. Just recently we bought some second hand clothes for a 70’s party. John bought a bright coloured shirt for $2 and would you believe he gets so many compliments about it he has decided to keep wearing it. I think it would be difficult to buy everything new as the article stated but I think it is fun also going to garage sales, going to St. Vinni’s and just recently someone was trying to get rid of a cane chair and it is like new with little cushions on it and it look great in my hallway. I just enjoy being relaxed about life and not having to live up to the ‘Jones’ as we say in Australia. I think it would be hard not to buy anything new during the year however. I think it is an interesting challenge for them and good luck. Happy Christmas to everyone as it is Christmas Day. Maureen Flanagan. Sydney Australia.
32. denis khan | 12.25.08
Lower Middle Class (LMC) Indians are following this lifestyle for ages. Simple living, high thinking.However, if perchance they break out, or finance improves, they opt for a more opulent standard of living.
In the first case, it means less carbon footprints. Luxury means supporting the job based consumer industry
33. Jamey | 12.27.08
While the jobs issue is a real one, the resources issue is a red herring. We need to move towards super-single stream recycling, where *ALL* of the trash and other waste we generate is gathered up and recycled. In the end, it can all be broken down to raw elements to make new stuff with - and the vast majority doesn’t need to go that far. (Even radioactive wastes could just be dumped in tectonic subduction zones for the Earth to recycle for us.)
35. Sue Whiteman | 12.27.08
I totally agree that having kids is rarely discussed. Our planet can only handle so much population no matter how we choose to live.
36. Sondra | 01.05.09
I think, what would happen, if everyone did this is that, yes, at first, it would put people out of jobs that were essentially unnecessary to begin with - we would slow production and have to start thinking of value in an entirely different light. If there were less jobs to do - eventually - perhaps people would begin to work less and make a more living wage for doing it - this growth at any cost economy we’ve built just makes us all work harder than we really need to for the things we need. We’re on a freight train heading nowhere. It’s scary to think of jumping off and walking - what will happen to the freight train? But when you start to see that it’s headed into a brick wall - you’d better jump. And walking isn’t really so bad, once you get the hang of it.
37. Beth | 01.05.09
Am commenting because I ‘know’ Andrea via the Yahoo Compact group. This was such a great article, and shows that you can sustain local economies in a variety of ways. Stores that carry used items, not only produce tax dollars where there are sale tax, but they also help keep landfills out of the area, help to make sure items with plenty of use, get used and used and re-used. And then there is the domino effect that The Compact and other like minded groups, create. It helps people to rethink where their food is coming from and from how far. This means locally produced foods are encouraged. These businesses then hire people, who get paid and spend money locally. This in essence does a lot in my opinion to create community. Hopefully we will see new businesses that will be devoted to repairing items, like when many of us were growing up. We already see this with computers, where people get them fixed rather than simply toss and buy new. There is a good book title Bowling Alone which discusses the whole sense of community, or lack thereof, in the past decade. And reading how Andrea’s husband rides the bus reminded me of how he is helping build community as well, where he is probably see the same as well as new riders, which is akin to a neighborhood. And think of the gas that is being saved from all those riders not driving individual cars. As well as all the pollution all those cars would produce. And looking at Andrea, one can see she is healthier than most people who simply jump in a car to make quick stops for things. Not to mention the psychological joy, that comes from walking as well as buying locally.
38. Jeanette | 01.09.09
My family followed a model similar to this for the first 3 years of our first daughter’s life. I often wondered how much money the thrift stores were making, selling the same used items over and over at close to 100% profit; I would purchase clothes and then donate them back. There is likely a potential sector of the economy that could be expanded a great deal offering used items to people. A total service industry since there is no production! This could create jobs as we think of new ways to re-use and improve on things i.e. used couch with new fabric for example.
I did find that it was much more time consuming to buy used and when my second daughter was born I didn’t have the time to browse the web or stores the way I did with just one child. I also began to be frustrated that a lot of my clothes didn’t match or fit me funny (people seem to keep and wear out the really good clothes and give away the ones that had a problem). So it wasn’t all roses. Since then I have gone back to work and after 3 years of the thrift it feels really great to be able to get exactly what I need without having to go through a lot of work to find it.
Overall great idea… we need more stores and workers to help us reuse items!
39. Clara | 01.09.09
While admirable in their goals, I think we can improve on the implementation!
They rely on used items and hand-me-downs. This means we still need items manufactured. Let’s have manufacturing used recycled materials and support them. Also instead of Kate Spade or another large corporation, buy a diaper bag from a craftsperson, be they in your own city or in Cambodia and ask if they used recycled materials. A seamstress I know has vowed to use nothing but recycled materials and she makes diaper bags, luggage, couch covers, even tote bags from the plastic banners corporations use at conventions.
A used baby? I think she means adoption - which is a terrific idea!
Giving a child a home of their own sounds like the very best way to take care of our planet.
40. Steven | 02.20.09
Hi, this is Steven, aka “Andrea’s husband” …
I’d like to thank Jillian and CSM for writing this article about The Compact and us, and publicizing how thinking about things differently can affect our lives in positive ways.
All of the comments here are enjoyable to read. I wanted to chime in about a couple of questions people asked. Our 2,000-sq foot home was built in 1985, and is near the center of town next to a mobile-home park and medium-density townhomes. My wife bought it on a single income before we met, so it was one of the more affordable places around here. There are brand-new golf course developments surrounding us where the houses are double the size and price (and then some).
Our “savings” from living according to the Compact allows us to keep our house and pay our bills. Andrea and I both got laid off, then she got pregnant and I became self-employed — we’re still adjusting to living on half the income we once had — like many in the US today. Our favorite charity projects are donating to the local library, and to the food bank, both of which are within 1/2 mile of our house. We’re lucky we live in a small community and can walk or bike ride most anywhere.
What gets lost in some of this is how little work it takes these days to buy used instead of new. We are all surrounded by resources like garage sales, church and community sales, craigslist and ebay, to name a few.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Robert | 12.10.08
Very inspiring article.