In the securities world, at least as portrayed by the movie Wall Street, "churning" means selling for the sake of making commissions- of course ALL selling is eventually done for the sake of making a commission, but the term connotes selling people things they will want or need to sell again quickly, thus earning the salesman a second commission. The customer is the one who gets burned.

And all of that leads me to what I think Riverkilt was considering. Is there something a little disheartening about selling off a kilt you thought long and hard about buying? Are some of us naturally inclined to what has lately come to be called hoarding ( speaking of your pejorative terms)? How do we manage an expanding wardrobe in the face of a contracting universe?

Riverkilt, it seems to me you have given all of this a great deal of thought. But I am reminded a little of the worm that always goes halfway. If you start with your present wardrobe and you sell kilts at, say half or so of what you paid for them, and, assuming you can still buy one now and then at the same price, you find yourself in the middle of a gaping math(s) problem:

R has 40 kilts. Each kilt can be sold for 3/4 of the cost of a new kilt. If he sells all of his kilts and replaces them once a year, how long before R finds himself reduced to wearing trousers? Show your work.