If you could downsize your life. Would you?

[Earth_First]

Poll question: If you could downsize your life. Would you?

I'm talking everything from your home to your car. Your job to the way that you eat. Could you sell your home to build a smaller, more energy efficient shelter? Could you sell your second vehicle and become a one car family? Could you quit your job to farm your land, and work menial, barter-type labor?

[MADem]

1. I already have done some downsizing

But I admit I'd be sad to leave the "family manor." It has a great deal of history and memories attached to it.

[NMDemDist2]

2. already doing it

we're a one car family and am selling our home in the big city to move to a small town this year.

[SoCalDem]

40. We are too..

I used to "shop" every week, and now if I go once a month, it's a miracle.. :) We don;t buy anything we don;t "need"..and we have bought only used cars for YEARS...DECADES...

We have lived in the same crappy house since 1981, and when we sell it after my husband retires in 5 years, we will pay cash for a much smaller one and it will be "owned" by our sons..(saves on probate later)..:)

We used to eat our 3-4 times a week, and now go only once a week (started that when the smoking nazis took over)..and we don;t miss eating out that much:)..saving lots of money too :)

We cut up all our credits cards (except for one) about a year ago and don't miss using them either

[stray cat]

3. You can downsize your life so if you want to go for it

There are certainly economic consequences but no one is keeping anyone from doing it.

[auburnblu]

8. The consequences can be good

Downsizing your career to have a simplier less stressful way of life can cost $$$. But downsizing your house, car, travel etc... may cost someone $$$ but not the person downsizing.

[pitohui]

17. downsizing your career doesn't work

there is no such thing as a less stressful career, there is only less money and power -- which, inevitably -- means more stress since people w.out money and power don't have the same freedoms of choice or mental peace as those with plenty of money and power

i am thinking of a friend who downsized from her high-powered law office after a brush w. breast cancer to become a professor, she was warned, but she had to learn for herself that just because profs are ill-paid by compare to her former job it doesn't mean they have an easy job, after a couple years of the academic in-fighting and backbiting, she realized that you know what? ANY job worth doing is stressful, so you might as well grab the $$$

fortunately the law office took her back

some people never get their lives back after an ill-fated attempt at "downsizing"

[electron_blue]

32. LOL about her thinking the professor job wasn't going to be stressful

That said, I think there are ways to get into less stressful jobs, they do require working in an environment where respecting eachother is tops.

[pitohui]

37. i don't think there are many less stressful jobs

i remember in the 80s that they did a study showing that presidents and ceo's had the least stress symptoms -- while vice-presidents and clerks had the most!

the dude at the top who is getting his ass kissed and who doesn't do any real work any more for his millions may not experience stress

but jobs where you have no power and yet are constantly called to satisfy other's demands (like clerk, customer service etc) they are horribly stressful even if the pay is v. low

hence my contention that you can look for more pay or less pay but in the real world you are not going to get less stress

this is what makes the scene in american beauty where dude goes to work at burger king so silly, he didn't reduce the real on the job stress by flipping burgers, he just guaranteed himself a much lower paycheck, but he still has the stress of meeting the constant demands of others

[Tesha]

49. This is not true.

> downsizing your career doesn't work

This is not true and I'll trade my anecdotal story for yours ;-).

Nearby, there used to be a famous, wonderful photographer.
*EVERYBODY* went to him for their family pictures; his style
was unique and very attractive. He office was his home and
his studio was his countryt backyard.

A while before he was famous, he was an electrical engineer
working on microwave electronics for some defense company
or other.

He didn't exactly downsize his career but he certainly made
a radical change taking a big gamble. And for him, it paid
off handsomely.

So it can be done if you really want it badly enough
and have a bit of luck.

Tesha

[pitohui]

50. but that isn't downsizing is it?

that is trading one big career (engineer) for another even more glamourous big career (photographer)

i think you have made my point for me!

friends?

:-)

[Tesha]

54. I'm pretty sure that, for the first few years, it was a *BIG* downsize!

> but that isn't downsizing is it?
>
> that is trading one big career (engineer) for another even more
> glamourous big career (photographer)

I'm pretty sure that, for the first few years, it was a *BIG* downsize!
It took a while for his photography business to take off.

Tesha

[pitohui]

67. i'm equally sure it wasn't

the professional photographers i know work much longer hours and travel all over the world -- for a fraction of what an engineer is paid -- and i'm talking abt successful ones who get grants from nat'l geographic etc.

that isn't downsizing, that is just not being in a v. well-paid profession

but it isn't downsizing

you don't get to be a successful photographer without pretty much giving everything else the boot!

it's like saying someone "downsized" to start their own business, it shows a complete ignorance of what is really involved in working for oneself, and it's usually 60-80 hours a week for no benefits and shitty pay until the great if and when

that is not downsizing nor is it living a simple life

[crispini]

80. Yes, but there are more stressful and less stressful places to work.

Some companies are a lot better than others about protetcting their worker bees from BS, providing decent salary, and treating you like a human instead of a resource.

[auburnblu]

4. An interesting question for politicians

I think someone like Dennis K could probably answer yes. Al Gore could probably answer yes. John Kerry, hmmmmmm, private jet and 5 houses indicates he's not downsizing or focusing on conserving energy anytime soon.

[Tsiyu]

5. I'm already halfway there

It's kind of nice to let go of the hype over having it all - materially speaking.

Accumulating stuff is an individual endeavor. "Me, me, me!"


When you think beyond "me" to "what is good for my community, my family, my neighbors?" you become a citizen, an investor, a participant.

[Pharaoh]

6. downsized

to a trailer a VW
1 cat
1 dog......

now if I could just quit my job, that would be sweet!

[acmejack]

7. Done deal!

I live in a one room cabin, no car. Minimal appliances, I have a very small ecological footprint. I try very hard to minimize it. Use canvas shopping bags, etc. Vegan lifestyle, it is very easy to make large changes that make a big personal impact but unfortunately they count for little unless every one else participates also.

Everyone else needs to play too!

[pitohui]

16. everyone else doesn't need to play

a poster says: I live in a one room cabin, no car ...

sorry, my dad didn't go to war and to college so that i could live in a hillbilly shack....

no one should live in my area (southeast louisiana) if they are unwilling to maintain a car, having your own car and the ability to evacuate can be the difference between life and death in hurricane country...

trying to sell a miserable limited lifestyle is a great way to limit the appeal of the progressive agenda, we should be looking for ways to expand opportunities to all, not to grab people's cars, meat, and decent housing...


if spoiled, pampered individuals want to play like marie antoinette played at being a shepherd girl, i got no problem w. it but i think we need to be aware that such games do nothing to help the people who are actually in need in this world and it undoubtedly antagonizes those who feel that their own resources are under threat from the gun grabber, car grabber, meat grabber mentality

[acmejack]

26. Excuse me?

I do have a swimming pool, I have a greduate degree in engineering, I am veternan, I am can afford a mcmansion if I wish to live in one.

Quite a vehement & wholly unwarranted personal attack on your part pitohui

[pitohui]

29. it isn't a personal attack

it is a response to your claim that everyone needs to play

everyone does not need to play and anyone who claims to know what is right for everyone needs a reminder

read what i posted again, there is nothing personal there abt you, it is pointing out how the limits of living a miserable vegan existence in a tiny cabin with no car would be harmful and indeed even life-threatening for some of us

if you take that as a personal attack, i'm not sure how to help you except to say, read it again, the personal experiences described there are MY personal experiences, which i have a right to share

[Maru Kitteh]

78. I'm curious to know what authority you have to decide that a vegan

existence in a cabin is somehow miserable. The poster said that everyone needs to play, as in find ways to conserve. Where did the poster say everyone must be a vegan? Where did the poster say everyone must live in a small cabin? You twisted this I believe because you felt your flesh consumption and square footage were being attacked but I think you read WAY to much into the post and over-reacted.

[Katherine Brengle]

34. Um...

I think the point is that most of us are consuming a lot more than necessary. Yes, we all have a right to be reasonably comfortable in our lives, but one person doesn't need a whole lot of space in order to be comfortable. And just because a home is small doesn't necessarily mean that it is a "hillbilly shack" as you said.

I live in a 4-room apartment, and I am very comfortable, along with my daughter and normally my husband. In fact, I rarely even go in the "extra" bedroom.

I guess if you think it is a good idea for humans to keep scarfing down cheeseburgers and driving cars when they don't need to and sucking electricity and oil to power 5 different gaming systems so they don't actually have to interact with other people and buying clothes they don't need and blah blah blah, then this wouldn't make sense to you.

No one is asking you to live in poverty--but there is no disputing the effect such rampant consumerism has on the environment and on our quality of life.

[pitohui]

39. a cabin with no car and no meat

that was the hillbilly shack back in the day

and most people do want to escape that kind of life

until we acknowledge that the billions of chinese, south asias, and everybody else wants a BETTER lifestyle and that most people are NOT willing to give up cars, meat, and live in tiny cabins, then we are not facing the real-world

we need technological innovation and, yeah, free access to birth control/abortion, not a call for people to accept a lifetime of misery and poverty

and, yeah, for many of us a tiny cabin with no meat and no car is exactly what our parents or grandparents worked so hard to escape

the people calling for the down-sizing are no different from marie antoinette in her shepherd girl's cottage, they are play acting because they can afford to

and they need to be aware that, like, marie antoinette, their self-righteous attitude or perceived as self-righteous attitude is resented and wins enemies not friends

you have to give people HOPE

down-sizing isn't a hope or a dream for most people, it is what happens when they fail or are discriminated against or become disabled, it is a source of grief

until you get that, you don't quite get it

i have no problem w. downsizing as a hobby, i have a big problem with pretending that it represents anything but failure to those who are forced into it tho

[Earth_First]

44. Downsizing is not a hobby...it is a way of existance...

Maybe not today. Maybe not tommorrow. But real attempts at responsible consumerism will be existance for ALL.

Remember this: We need Mother Earth MUCH MORE that Mother Earth needs US.

[pitohui]

52. playing little shepherd girl a la marie antoinette is silly

sorry it is a hobby at best and elitism at worst

it is not a serious approach to the real problems of the world, poverty, hunger, injustice

[Lorien]

58. Oh bullshit

my mother lives in the tiniest of homes with very little-ands she CHOOSES to give what little extra retirement income she has to those that are even less fortunate than her. She's lived in a poor village in China (she's a missionary) and came to realize that true happiness and fulfillment doesn't come from "stuff". Her minimalist lifestyle isn't a "game"; she's found it essential to her peace of mind and her strong belief in good global citizenship-it is very much a serious approach to real world problems. She's been the happiest I've ever seen her since she downsized her life-and why shouldn't she be? She no longer has debt (her home only cost $55,000), but she has plenty of time for friends and the causes she's passionate about.

You love you stuff-fine-but don't ridicule others for seeing beyond the corporate hype and advertising to a better way of life that isn't solely focused on consumerism.

[NMDemDist2]

60. agreed, that's exactly where we're at. we don't need a big house

I hate shopping unless it's in a thrift store.

we need a small house for the two of us (I also hate cleaning 3000 SF when I really only live in 1200SF)

I'll have broadband, my kitchen and garden, DH will have dark skies and his SOTA telescope and hopefully we'll have a community. I can volunteer for the library committee, give my excess veggies to the women's shelter and make the small house as energy efficient and independent as possible.

stuff is just that STUFF. it doesn't make me happy, it's a pain to acquire (shopping) maintain (housecleaning) and it just clutters up my environment

[pitohui]

69. well goody two shoes for your mother

but i wouldn't be happy living like that and neither is the majority

you know perfectly well that most people are not happy living in poor villages in china and that kind of noblesse oblige is, quite frankly, almost parasitic

why does her happiness depend on others being miserable in a rural backwater in china?

[Earth_First]

66. It sounds as though you have much more to let go of than some of us...

Search yourself first, before resorting to broad generalizations towards what my impact has on 'serious' approach to global issues.

[Katherine Brengle]

70. How do you figure?

1) POVERTY
2) HUNGER

Both problems that can be solved by me taking some of MY hard-earned cash and putting it back into the community, both local and global.

3) INJUSTICE

Well, I would argue that judging from this discussion so far, you have no problem with social injustice, since you feel entitled for some reason to all of the "better" things in life, but setting that aside... I don't think that living simply has a negative or positive effect on injustice. Living simply does not keep one from fighting injustice, on the contrary, it might help free up some time for just these kinds of activities.

Why don't you just come out and admit that there are certain things that you enjoy in your life that you feel an uncontrollable need to hold onto? No one asked you to simplify your life--you decided to play the victim.

Ugh...

[Katherine Brengle]

68. if NOT having those things is a conscious CHOICE, then how is...

that something one would want to escape?

I choose to be vegan, to live within walking distance of the things that I need (food, household items, personal items, parks) so I don't need to drive a car, and live in a dwelling that is just the right size for me and my family.

I don't feel that I HAVE to do this, or that there is no other choice. I do these things because I am a person of conviction who understands that the material things of this world do not define me.

Clearly, you have some materialism issues--that's fine, most people do. But don't act like everyone who tries to make more conscientious life choices is giving up the good life just because they aren't watching cable television, talking on a cell phone, and drinking a martini while soaking in a swimming pool sized whirpool bathtub.

Get a grip.

[pitohui]

71. MOST people do -- now you're starting to catch on

MOST people want more than miserable subsistence farming in a hovel without meat and without a car

if you are happy w. so little, fine, but to insist that you are morally superior or that your choice should be emulated is elitist to put i mildly

i do not have cable teevee -- and i bet you do

it is rude to say "get a grip" when losing the argument and it doesn't make your argument any the more convincing

you know perfectly well that people want a better life -- MOST people do -- and they DON'T want a downsized life, and to pretend that your choice of a downsized life makes you better than everyone else is a bit twee

you only get one life to a customer, should i choose to live large or should i chose a life of playing the martyr, hell, most of us don't even like being around people who play martyr, we sure don't want to be one

[Katherine Brengle]

77. oh my god--are you even listening???

>>MOST people want more than miserable subsistence farming in a hovel without meat and without a car

I am not miserable. I live in a perfectly nice apartment, with electricity and heating and all of the comforts of modern life (such as plumbing and a nice gas stove and a refrigerator). I do not find life miserable without meat. I do not find life miserable without a car. If I did, why would I live this way?

>>if you are happy w. so little, fine, but to insist that you are morally superior or that your choice should be emulated is elitist to put i mildly

I never said I was morally superior. I do believe that we all have a responsibility to leave as light a footprint as possible on the earth, but I am not going to tell you how to do that. All I am pointing out if how I do it.

>>i do not have cable teevee -- and i bet you do

Actually, I do not have cable. I do own one television, and I use an antenna which gets me decent reception on 4 channels on a good day--it's more than enough.

>>it is rude to say "get a grip" when losing the argument and it doesn't make your argument any the more convincing

I don't feel as if I am losing an argument--I feel as if you are not actually listening to anything I and others in this thread are saying to you. It is also rude to call someone an elitist when she is simply stating the facts of how she lives her life.

>>you know perfectly well that people want a better life -- MOST people do -- and they DON'T want a downsized life, and to pretend that your choice of a downsized life makes you better than everyone else is a bit twee
you only get one life to a customer, should i choose to live large or should i chose a life of playing the martyr, hell, most of us don't even like being around people who play martyr, we sure don't want to be one

I have a great life. I lack nothing that I need or desire, I have a wonderful child and a wonderful husband, and I love the work that I do. My entire point was that you can still be happy and comfortable and fulfilled without making the world worse than it already is. Just because everyone "wants" certain things, does not make it right.

There are no martyrs here--just two sides of an argument which you are wildly overreacting to.

I don't know if you are just having fun picking a fight or if you really believe what you are saying, but either way I think this has probably gone far enough.

[goreo8]

43. Ah

But have you given up your computer yet? Just wondering

[NMDemDist2]

59. and how much environmental impact do you think his/her PC is making?

that was an odd question under the circumstances.

[Obamarama]

9. Already have...and it feels great!

Iam in the middle of a career change and am working, by choice, a low-paying part-time job. My partner and I are lving on his income and my small income. We have more than enough money socked away to pull from to live at our previous standard of living and still havelots left over. But, we decided to try an experiement to see if we could make it on a little more than half of what we had been pulling in.

It AMAZED us at how frugally we could live without necessarily sacrificing quality of life. Just as a really simplified example, by shuttling the two to three $3.95 Venti Caffe Lattes I used to procure from Starbucks in a day, I've learned to make some pretty great coffe drinks at home for a fraction of the cost. There are many other ways we have downsized, but I don't want to bore everyone.

We were talking recently that when we are back to a full, two-income DINK status, we'll probably save a hell of a lot more money since we doubt we'll revert back to the level of consumerism we were engaged in before.

[H2O Man]

10. In the summer of 2001,

a fellow on a cell phone drove his car through two stop signs and a red light, hitting me at 55 mph. It downsized my world. Up until that point, I had been working on living the simplier life. I have an old, old house, which was a stage coach station in the late 1700s and early 1800s, then a farm. I have the Reader's Digest book on homesteading, and raised a good deal of our food here, etc. But I'm not able to do those things anymore. On the plus side, I don't drive much these days.

[renate]

28. Oh, no....

I'm so sorry. It's so unfair to have choices about your life taken away like that by a person who just couldn't be bothered to pay attention.

It's happened to two people I know and it's just heartbreaking. I hope you'll eventually be able to do the things you used to do.

:hug:

[madmom]

11. Have been doing so for the last several years.

[BiggJawn]

12. I only have 1 auto and live in a 400-foot apartment.

Sure, I own a lot of books and "Shit", but it follows the directive of "Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful or believe to be beautiful.?.

An Ascete, I am most assuredly NOT.

[sheelz]

13. No

I'm already there.

[supernova]

14. Already there

for this stage of my life.

I'm not going to do "menial, barter-type labor" if I can help it, not because it's menial, but because I'm very low on physical strength and I'm not going to get a whole lot more. I have to make do with what I got.

I downsized considerably after my divorce 10 years ago, especially in the financial depaartment. I got out of debt (CCs, mortgage, car loans, all gone). The furniture I couldn't use I let an auction company come take it. Best decision I ever made. I do it some more, if I have to.

[pitohui]

15. if i was any more downsized i'd be homeless and carless

there are no more smaller shelters and more energy efficient shelters are out of my budget

downsizing is a game for the comfortably well-off, the rest of us downsized when reagan got in and thoughtfully got rid of all the jobs

when you get older and find out what happens to the human back after 40, you'll realize how ridiculous it is to think you can live forever off menial, barter-type labor

[area51]

22. Great points.

Concerning the OP, I'd like to add that you'll be forced to downsize when you lose your job, since jobs are so hard to find.

[gollygee]

18. We've done some of that

bought a small energy-efficient home that is within bike distance of my husband's work, have skills that are barter-able. Are doing some gardening. We could easily have one vehicle where we live and in fact don't drive as much as most people by a long shot because of house convenient our home is to everything.

[radfringe]

19. reminds me of an old joke

an American capitalist and a Soviet communist are discussing the fundemental principles of their respective government

Capitalist: so you believe that wealth and property should be distributed according to need?

Communist: yes

Capitalist: If you had two houses and I need a house would you give me one?

Communist: yes

Capitalist: If you had two cars and I need a car would you give me one?

Communist: yes

Capitalist: If you had two shirts and I need a shirt would you give me one?

Communist: no

Capitalist: Wait a minute - you said if you had two houses or two cars you would give me one if I needed it, but you won't give me a shirt???

Communist: (smiling) ahhh, but the two shirts I have

[kittenpants]

20. I don't think I would be willing to quit my job and barter unless

it became unavoidable, but I try not to over consume in the first place...buy small cars & generally avoid goods I don't need.

[SmokingJacket]

21. Any smaller and it would freaking vanish.

Seriously, if my house were any smaller with my loud husband and two loud sons I'd have a nervous breakdown. I can barely get a moment to myself as it is. We only have one old, used car. We're self-employed and grow a big garden. I even knit/sew some of our clothes. We cook three meals a day.

I daydream about the day my kids move out and we can move onto a cruise ship, or something...

[riona]

23. not the farming part

[Greyhound]

24. I don't have to, shrubCo. has already done it for me.

2000: House in the Hollywood Hills, company car, classic 'project' car, crotch-rocket, member of a yacht club for weekend sailing, several girlfriends, salary in the top 5%, almost every meal out at some LA hot-spot (many of which would greet me by name and seat my party with no wait, very important social currency in LA), lots of travel all over the country (mostly work related), 5 or 4 star hotels and a generous expense account, able to give generously to Big Brothers/Big Sisters, Nature Conservancy, LA Womens shelter, etc. (was also a well-known as an easy touch to the local homeless), really big tipper, on and on and on...

2006: Living hand to mouth in a backward red-state, bankrupt, 'project' car is only car now, negotiating with mortgage company to try to avoid foreclosure, no vacation since 1999, un-employable (over 40) in my field, haven't bought clothes or new shoes in 5+ years, have managed to save up enough to get a haircut this week (yay!).

So my footprint is much smaller now, and I can be sure the woman who loves me, loves me, not my lifestyle. OTOH, I contribute nothing to the economy, Charities are out many thousands of dollars every year as are all those service people that used to love to see me coming, just when they need it the most.

[Strelnikov_]

25. Already Begun. Trying To Get A Head Start On Petrocollapse

Phase II begins this spring with trying to buy some acreage outside a small to medium sized Iowa town. Quarter Quarter would be about right, mix of woods and pasture. Time to convert savings into something that will still be of value during the 'special period'.

I just hope the timeframe for the beginning of Petrocollapse is more like Fall of 2009 like the CNN 'documentary' currently airing. I am afraid, however, that this summer/fall is beginning to look like the jackpot.

[LeftyMom]

27. Honestly, no.

I have the smallest car and dwelling that suit my needs. I can't garden to save my life. I can't care for my small kid while doing physical labor, but I can do my paper-shuffling office job from home and keep an eye on him.

I should eat less packaged stuff than I do, but I'm way ahead of most people in terms of my diet's effect on the planet so I'm not going to give myself a hard time if I want to get a package of newman-o's or something.

[Katherine Brengle]

36. I don't think the question really applies to those who have...

already made substantial strides in cutting down...

For myself, I need to modify my shopping habits (I am sick of the stupid plastic and paper shopping bags from the grocery store, need to do something about that, and I am going to stop buying packaged items that I can buy loose).

Right now, however, I need to eat vegan tacos.

[haele]

30. Problem with that scenario is that it is too drastic for many people -

A single person, or even a couple might be able to do something like that (historically, trappers, miners, and other explorer type jobs were done long term only by single people), but if you have a family, you have to have a much bigger ecological "footprint" for everyone to survive.

There's many reasons why people nowadays are surviving in the cities instead of staying on the farms. Much of it has to do with the ability to actually live as a single "nuclear" family instead of the standard multi-generational families (usually with seasonal hired hands)that was needed for a successful family farm.

A family such as mine, where there are only three of us - where there is also one diad of mobility disablement and another diad that has a lot of health care issues - could never make it out in the country on our own for more than a month or two before there are some serious consequences that would force us to move back to the city where there are more resources available for less work - or have us disband as a family by the time next winter kicks in.

From what writings I have from a set of great-great grandparents who owned a family farm in Missouri back in the 1870's indicate, it takes at least three healthy working people and two at least seasonal hands or friendly neighbors with time or extra big kids to spare to have enough manual labor resources to maintain house, acreage, and supporting structures and still grow/create enough food to keep that family and livestock healthy and fed year after year. That's just for subsistence farming. If you want to have an income off your farm, or be able to pay taxes, you need at least ten people to support the operation and maintain the home.

The average subsistence farmer and his hands worked an average of 12 hours a day on the land and amongst the flocks - not counting hunting when butchering one of the farm animals wasn't feasible.
The average "farmer's wife" who just kept the house worked an average of 14 hours a day - from the moment she got up to the moment she lay down in bed to go to sleep, she was constantly moving, collecting enough water for the day, cleaning, cooking, keeping an eye on the condition of the available food for the season, keeping an eye on the available health-care items for the season, making, resizing, repairing clothes and the essential linens, overseeing the condition of the household essentials like furniture, fire, stove, keeping an eye on the pest and parasite situation around the house and out-buildings, taking care of the younger children...
And the children - until the children were able to expend energy at the same level as adults and could take some of the load off the adults, they took in up to three times the resources of sustainability just to raise to that level. Children were an investment. And by the time they reached the ages of ten to thirteen, they were expected to be able to pay off their investment.

In small rural communities, you were either a farmer, or supported farming in one fashion or another.
If you were a skilled craftsman, like a potter, a metal-smith, a woodworker - in those days, if you didn't work in the city, you hired yourself out to one or several large farms and participated in the farm life as much as you could to get by. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, farriers(veterinarians) - they lived off "subscription" by their community as well as worked their own land when they weren't being paid for their skills.
If you were an artist, you were basically SOL if you stayed rural. One of my g-g-grandmother's cousins was a professional pianist for the Metropolitan Opera in New York - he had to leave Missouri and never came back to the farm. My g-grandmother and grandmother were both good enough to be professional - but since they were women and were more valuable as mothers according to the community, leaving the farm or the family store was not considered a wise thing.

If you remained "rural", your art work would always take second place to your ability to labor or to convince the community that you had value that would translate into some sort of survival as say, a teacher or minister - or if you could make lots of money sending your art work to those "fancy-pants city dwellers" that you could pump back in to the community.

If you were mobility disabled, you were a burden to your family and community. If your family or community were generous (i.e. - fairly well off and sustainable), you would be placed with someone who had the time and resources to care for you as if you were an extra baby or toddler. If not, you were out begging or you found yourself a church or charity hospital to take you in. Or you died.

If you were mentally disabled and either couldn't work or were unreliable, you either self-medicated yourself to an early grave - or jail - ,or lived a hard life with co-enablers (if you were lucky to get one), or you were literally institutionalized; left at a charity hospital or kept in a back room, a shed, or an attic.

Most families who moved to the cities and lived "the easy life" as a clerk, a banker, a shopkeeper, a factory/construction worker, a service worker, or any other "8 hour day" union type or professional salaried "thinking" type jobs did so because there was not enough resources, internal and external, for them to provide for their families in a subsistence manner.

A family of three or four, even if everyone were totally healthy, could not sustain rural living for more than a few months without going back to a city or town-like community as a support base. And once that happened, that "softening" townie influence would start creeping in...

That's the primary reason why farm families that would "survive on their own" placed such a high priority on having large numbers of kids and adopting "orphans" when they became available up until the 1940's.

Your scenario requires a few more things to happen for the average person to survive.
It requires access to a local community of support, and it requires arable land, available water, and seed stock of both plants and animals. It requires planning.

Otherwise, you end up with either a bunch of dying individual families or lots of bands of tribes that survive on temporary farming and raiding for a generation or two until they find an area they can settle in and resources enough to make a stand.

Downsizing is one thing. We already do that because we can't afford anything else on a straight middle class income in San Diego County. We're renting a "vintage" city house (1943 - we would love to buy and upgrade if we won the lottery or came into at least half a mil) on about 3/4 acre with lots of yard and a thriving(so far) veggie plot and cooking pit, cutting our luxuries to the bone - hanging laundry to dry, one vehicle, recycling - everything we can to save money. But with just the three of us, mobility disabilities and a surly, clinically depressed teenager who is just learning the concepts of organization and getting off her ass and actually doing things for herself, it's difficult to expend the energy and resources to do much more.

Damn Medical bills and inflation are killing us.

Personally, I'd love to be able to do what you suggest. I've got some experience with living on minimal resources, including knowing how to spin and weave wool, grow and use medicinal herbs, some security and medical training, pottery, basic metal craft, tooling, and basic woodcraft (at least enough to frame and side a shelter). My husband has some experience in hunting, fishing, and farm maintenance. But I'd only be able to participate in your scenario if I can manage to get about a hundred acres (at least 60 wooded, with at least one year-long creek and pond) in a temperate zone, fifteen other like minded, fully abled people - families that have had even a minimum training in rural survival skills and some craft knowledge, and some minimal tools, seed, fruiting trees, and livestock - to create a small, self-sustaining community.

But daym - it takes mucho money just to do that nowadays. Back in g-g-g's day, you'd just save up a month's pay, grab some extra tools, livestock, and seed from the farm, pack up the kids in a wagon, and head out.
And hope you survived.

It sucks living in 21st century urban America.

Haele

[pitohui]

41. ok here's someone who gets it

it takes mucho money just to do that nowadays

ain't that the truth!

[AngryOldDem]

31. Already have...

...and not necessarily by choice. If I downsized any further I'd be in a shack by the river.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

33. No. Until It Becomes A Forced Emergency I Feel No Need.

Though if the day comes where those things are forced and not choice, then I could do just fine. I'm very good at adapting to any circumstance. I'm a survivor :)

[Nutmegger]

35. Without a doubt!

Any sacrifice is worth it for the well-being of our planet.

I've been taking the bus to and from work / school. Mass transit is a beautiful thing.

[lanah]

38. already have...by choice...

There is peace in simplicity....and alot more free time!

People are so busy running around to make ends meet(sometimes paying for things they only think they need because society tells them it is so) it leaves them with no time to think about anything but their immediate needs, which is why less people talk about politics and what is going on in the rest of the world these days, which is how Bushco has been able to get away with what they have, which then contributes to the cycle of struggle.

[pitohui]

42. simplicity

reality is that simplicity is going to school, going to college, getting the job, and paying for the house, car, etc. you need along the way in the conventional/traditional sense

the so-called simple life is anything but simple, trying to scrounge out sometime to pay a medical bill on earnings from menial labor as suggested in the original post, you can't do it, instead, you will not receive care for the injured back and the decades of your life past 40 will be spent in pain or drinking away the pain

people who have these fantasies about how simple life is back in rural communities should have to live in one for awhile

nothing simple about having to do everything from figure out how to get the septic tank repaired or how to barter with the vet for hope of some medical treatment at least for your animals on up to putting your own roof back on your non-code, impossible-to-insure "cabin" (i remember when we just called 'em shacks) after a storm

everyone who calls it "the simple life" should have to raise their own food -- 100 percent of it for an entire year -- and then those still alive can tell us how "simple" it was

the poor people of the world are fighting to get away from the hell of the "simple" life of subsidence farming, and it ain't because they are fools

i still have a friend living like this, she is fighting to finish her college education, and get the heck away from the "simple" life

[GliderGuider]

45. Already done it

I dumped a 3300 sq. ft. suburban McMansion in favour of an urban 1200 sq. ft. bungalow. The BMW 540i/6 was traded for a used VW Jetta TDI diesel. Chandeliers were replaced with compact flourescents, "Throw it out!" became "Repair, recycle or compost", biodiesel replaced the 94 octane gasoline, and the daily commute is now done on the bus. Instead of hiring a lawn service we now do "edible landscaping", which is a fancy word for turning every bit of dirt you own into a garden.

This all happened in the space of three years, thanks to my new girlfriend who reawakened my social conscience, and the internet that introduced me to the threat of Peak Oil.

We have been thinking about taking over my parents' 50 acres in Southern Ontario, but for this old urban couboy that's still going to take some thinking.

[EFerrari]

46. Working on it. Got rid of the car. Stripped our STUFF down

to fit comfortably in about 600 sq ft. Even the library. Instead of collecting, we trade for books or buy them and give them away when we've read them.

It's wonderful.

[formercia]

47. Been working towards it for years.

It's not easy to wean yourself from all the amenities but I really don't miss it. The good life is not having to be dependent on the 'system'. If the US economy completely collapsed tomorrow, it would be difficult but we would survive. I feel sorry for those who live in the city or live from paycheck to paycheck and are within 30 days of life on the street.
I see them coming by our house on their annual vacation, working at some bullsh*t job the other 50 weeks of the year. I'm on a working vacation 24/7/365.

[degreesofgray]

48. I could certainly simplify

but I see no reason to become a farmer. And, I have no house or second car to sell--a lot of people would probably look at me and think I've already simplified.

[alfredo]

51. On SS disability. I have no choice.

[pitohui]

53. yeah...this appears to be the privileged person's game EOM

.

[alfredo]

61. According to Republicans, that's the only game.

[Lorien]

55. I'm in the process of doing that now.

I'm Freecycling and giving to Goodwill (and my neighbors-a young couple with very little of their own) like mad these days. And I'm hoping to built a very energy efficient home in the near future-it will be slightly larger than what I live in now so that I can effectively run my business from it, but it should be far more eco-friendly than my current 1925 craftsman cottage if I plan correctly. I'd also like to have my own garden and fruit trees, and ditch my Camry for a Prius. I'd like to have about half as much "stuff' as I have now by the time I move.

[Clarkie1]

56. For the the vast majority of people the question is not "If you could.."

It is are we willing to be mindful enough to do it.

[WestSeattle2]

57. I've been seriously thinking about it....

Seems like I spend every weekend working on my house, (it's nickname is Casa Del Moneypit), or yard.

In Seattle we can live on houseboats in the city, (Lake Union). I often think how cool that would be. No yard maintenance, limited interior space would limit discretionary spending on useless crap for a house, and summers would be SWEET, living on the water.

A well designed 600-800 sq ft houseboat would certainly be enough for me!

But no, I'm not eating vegetables or giving up my truck! You'll have to pry my truck keys out of my cold dead hands...........

[Deja Q]

62. Sorry, I can't seem to get a job doing menial labor.

I must be missing something in those personality profile questions. :shrug:

[HeeBGBz]

63. If I downsized any more, I would cease to exist

eom

[rucky]

64. My wife and I are at a major disagreement on this topic.

I'm wanting to move more in that direction & she's pretty attached to life in the mainstream. She's getting better and sees the value in it. It'll just take more time.

[lumberjack_jeff]

72. The recognition that every new widget is paid for by...

some number of the finite hours of your life, is an epiphany.

I highly recommend "your money or your life" by Vicki Robin.

Take your salary, subtract the costs of obtaining it (transportation, costuming, training, etc). Divide that number by the hours you spend at work (or commuting to it, or thinking about it, or decompressing from it) and you have your real wage. Divide the cost of every shiny object you covet by this wage and ask yourself if that item is worth trading X hours of your life for.

By the way, if you're the primary breadwinner, remember that it's your life hours that are being traded for your spouse's standard of living. Only you can determine what's "worth it".

I'm lucky - my wife and I are both on the same page. Neither of us confuse standard of living with quality of life.

[upi402]

65. I have!

Bigtime!
Post 9-11 I figured the sh*t would hit the fan and splatter us working fools.

[Kerrytravelers]

73. We have been working on this!

[Maru Kitteh]

74. I've done some of that already. We're a one car family and happy

that way. I would LOVE a smaller house, and that will be accomplished when we more to Estes Park in a few years. I don't think I'll be farming there but I always have an organic veggie garden composted with household waste. Menial labor? It's good for the soul as long as it's fruitful.

[tabasco]

75. Hell yes. My footprint is already small.

I'm thinking about moving to Brazil and getting a very small house with room for a big garden.

[politicat]

76. Have done a reasonable amount of it.

We have one vehicle, and use the bus for as much as possible. We live in a house that is smaller and cheaper than what we could afford, but is big enough for us. Our car is small, efficient and paid off.

We live on one income - my partner's - and either bank or invest or de-debt with mine so that if something happens to my income - like having to stay on medical leave - we won't miss it.

We watch our diets and the budget; we don't have a dish or cable, keep a single DSL phone line (with VOIP for outbound phones). I have a garden in the summers and preserve what extra we have.

The only way we could really downsize any further would be to have more land to farm and raise animals upon; not likely to happen as we live in an older, semi-urban neighborhood.

[mandyky]

79. Kick

I like this poll

[Maru Kitteh]

81. And again! I like this poll too.