Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I went to a college where a high percentage of the students would like to/were planning to homestead in some way. However, almost none of them were going to not pay their taxes. Most of the extremely few that I have met, live out of the country. I am speaking of people now in their mid to late 20s.
Also, the idea of a nursing home is relatively new. Coming from a long line of farmers, there was no plan for living off the farm, SS money or not. You pass the farm off to the child, you help the child as long as possible, the child's family takes care of you. Of the old bachelor farmers that I know (just a couple), the immediate community has taken care of them. Church ladies make sure they have food, neighbors help with chores. These are people that have given to the community and their neighbors in small ways throughout their life. You get what you give.
However, I am a firm believer in a healthy, strong community. I believe in helping your neighbor whether you like them or not, whether there is something in it for you or not. For those who are truly isolated--because they chose to be--then they can die alone in their cabin. Probably how they would want it anyways.
I think overall, homesteaders tend to be less exhaustive on government payout than others. But that is purely my opinion without any data to service it.
-----almost none of them were going to not pay their taxes---
I was referring to young " homesteaders" ( or wannabes) who desire to live off the land and make very little money.
Thus they wouldn't owe income taxes nor would they be paying into SS.
The reason the days of --the community-- caring for their own is there are fewer and fewer women who are not working off the farm.
Where I live, a rural farming community, it is getting harder to get women to prepare the funeral lunch at the rural church if a funeral falls during the week.
Your OP and your subsequent posts in this thread are just great. I tried to rep you but had done so too recently to repeat. You have pointed out a major fly in the ointment for some of the young, naive, idealistic dreamers who have not thought things through. I especially like the irony you cited about the anti-government types who end their days on the government dole. Your points are even stronger for being rooted in your own observations and not just on theorizing.
Just dying on one's own homesteaded land would be an acceptable ending for many, I suppose, but not everyone is lucky enough to just die in his sleep without going through a protracted period of seriously declining ability to cope with the activities of daily living. And in that case the misery of the end could be extreme and prolonged. Not a pretty picture.
Self sustainment has nothing to do with the wilderness. It is the ability to sustain life, at a reasonable level, indefinitely.
I'll just throw this out there. Many of these 30/40 somethings that are going out to self-sustain, aren't doing it because they are loners or individualists. They are doing it because they don't think the economy, SS, medicaire, medicaid, - is even going to be available the way it is now - within their lifetime.
Self sustainment has nothing to do with the wilderness. It is the ability to sustain life, at a reasonable level, indefinitely.
I'll just throw this out there. Many of these 30/40 somethings that are going out to self-sustain, aren't doing it because they are loners or individualists. They are doing it because they don't think the economy, SS, medicaire, medicaid, - is even going to be available the way it is now - within their lifetime.
Interesting point, and certainly relevant to the thread topic. But if their assumptions are wrong, and I think they are, then they could end up in the fix that the OP is talking about. Unless, of course, they have managed to put in a certain number of quarters under Social Security, which is also the qualifier for Medicare.
If a person bought 100 acre farm 15 years ago for $500/acre,by the time they are ready to retire it would be worth much more...Your friends should sell their farms.
We paid $45k for our land,put another $50k in,could probably sell it quickly for $175k right now even in this crappy market. We owe $30k on the land.
The OP sounds bitter.
In what year did you buy your land? The assumption that land values will continue to appreciate as in the past, once the present market turns itself around, may turn out to be false. After the Japanese economy tanked about 10 years ago, they have had nothing but stagnation ever since. Of course it would make sense to sell a farm if one could no longer operate it, but the amount one would get for a small farm may not go terribly far toward paying for one's own medical care out of pocket.
I found it surprising to hear you say the OP sounds bitter. How is pointing out a potential future problem of a certain lifestyle choice being bitter? I am very alert to nuances but I did not detect any bitterness.
Coming from a long line of farmers, there was no plan for living off the farm, SS money or not. You pass the farm off to the child, you help the child as long as possible, the child's family takes care of you.
It has never been the only way. But it was to a large extent the norm not all that long ago. Nowadays, most people have an aversion to this notion. In my opinion, it was a tradition that we are far the worse off for abandoning. I guess if I were a conspiracy theorist (which, perhaps I am), I would say it's another step in the assault on the family and the drive toward state-sponsored collectivism.
So let me get this straight--only older people should be able to homestead because they have worked and lived within popular society? Only now, after years of working meaningless jobs and buying into consumerism, do they realize that this is a healthy, rewarding lifestyle so they are going simplify, become self-sufficient and secure their own freedom. Bravo! Way to go! Yes, that is the way!
Wait, you are young and realize this? How dare you! Who the hell is going to take care of you in 60 years? Definately not me! Get out there and work the office grindstone and live in suburbia hell.
Homesteading is and should be a choice any one can make, no matter the gender, race, income, or age. Plenty of older citizens try homesteading and fail miserably, just like young ones do. Some don't plan for what will happen will they get too old to work the land--except that in older homesteaders' cases, that is a lot sooner. Someone who is 28 has 30-40 years to figure it out.
In what year did you buy your land? The assumption that land values will continue to appreciate as in the past, once the present market turns itself around, may turn out to be false. After the Japanese economy tanked about 10 years ago, they have had nothing but stagnation ever since. Of course it would make sense to sell a farm if one could no longer operate it, but the amount one would get for a small farm may not go terribly far toward paying for one's own medical care out of pocket.
We bought about six years ago.
Land hasn't dropped like housing,no-one is making any more land.
Quote:
I found it surprising to hear you say the OP sounds bitter. How is pointing out a potential future problem of a certain lifestyle choice being bitter? I am very alert to nuances but I did not detect any bitterness.
From reading this and other threads.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.