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.
So you loan half of your family's income for somebody else to buy junk/live beyond immediate means. Makes no difference if you did it. Doing well professionally usually involves lots of junk and waste too. Climb down of that purpose driven delusion tree.
Put down the Jim Beam and try posting again when you're ready to write something coherent.
We watch this last night and loved it I think this might go along with living in a tiny home to some extent.
Although those who have kids who can't do a tiny home can still live without most of the things Americans figure that they need/want.
I find it rather interesting because it seems to conflict with things.
It shows people leaving the big city but from my experience, it is the city that makes minimalism possible.
I'm getting ready to live in the country and the list of things that I need, ought to have goes on and on because when it comes to living in the country, you and you alone are the answer to any problems that come up.
As I pack, box after box of the same item is the most numerous in books and in DVD/Tapes. Taking it in reverse order, it is out in the country where there is no cable service, where the internet will have to come from satellite, where the smart phone comms are possible but they exist with a 5 second delay.
If we address it from the book side, saying perhaps to read instead of watching or even more vitally of what happens with a main grid/communication outage and one needs an answer to something, then there is the reason to have books on just about every subject on site in the house.
It's bulky, it's multiple, but it is necessary.
I won't deny that as I pack, I wonder what it would be like not to have so much. The thing is, it is not the kind of life, homesteading, I am embracing.
Etc, etc............
So for the beautiful photography they are showing, I find it contradictory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpg35223
........The thing about Minimalism isn't that it rails against the consumer culture. It really doesn't. All it does is say is to think about what you buy and make sure it has lasting value, as opposed to being constantly buffeted about by the must-have of the week. In an era of disposable, well, everything, it's an important distinction to make.
Well, that is something about having one's visual entertainment as all "canned".
Someone observed on this site that without TV, one misses out on the consumerism influence that tells one to buy, buy, buy.
Now, perhaps with the services such as Hulu, one doesn't see that and hence, both sides of the minimalism equation can be achieved without having the bulk and without having the influence. Since I do not use any of the services, I cannot say.
As with most things in life, however, it appears that minimalism is not as simple as one might want to believe.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 01-19-2017 at 03:51 AM..
Doing well professionally usually involves lots of junk and waste too. Climb down of that purpose driven delusion tree.
Well, that's the trick isn't? Avoid the high paying professions that require the emphasis on amassing junk and waste...
It seems that some of the traditional high net jobs like law and finance still require appearance-minding and appearance-enhancing lifestyles, but fortunately there are plenty of lucrative positions in other industries where going casual or even a bit more than relaxed, is perfectly acceptable. This Steve Jobs and his jeans and black turtlenecks. Mark Zuckerberg and his grey t-shirts. President Obama wears (wore!) the same sort of suits. True, suits are dressy... but even I expect the POTUS to dress the part... however I wouldn't care if he's sporting the same exact suit over and over again. In fact, that would be pretty cool if he did...
Some live this way ...not by choice but by circumstances....
I loved the Theory as I often think we clutter up our lives with "things".
But then I got to thinking....where are the important documents you need? Medical? Legal?
What about "safety"?
so many intricate things to weigh out before casting off ones "life" belongings.
I've "decluttered" for two reasons....down sizing, and who needs ten sets of bed sheets ??!!
And No tiny house please....One nice flood and swoop...its gone.
One GOOD flood & just about any home is gone. Same with a tornado, Etc, So much of legal documents are stored online these days too. Again it's not for everyone I know we can't live with less then 100 things just because of all our books & hiking gear alone.
Well, that's the trick isn't? Avoid the high paying professions that require the emphasis on amassing junk and waste...
It seems that some of the traditional high net jobs like law and finance still require appearance-minding and appearance-enhancing lifestyles, but fortunately there are plenty of lucrative positions in other industries where going casual or even a bit more than relaxed, is perfectly acceptable. This Steve Jobs and his jeans and black turtlenecks. Mark Zuckerberg and his grey t-shirts. President Obama wears (wore!) the same sort of suits. True, suits are dressy... but even I expect the POTUS to dress the part... however I wouldn't care if he's sporting the same exact suit over and over again. In fact, that would be pretty cool if he did...
So how much environmental damage does it take to become a Steve Jobs? Keeping appearances is just a tiny speck in the picture of mayhem. Lucrativity of a business is directly proportional (at the very least) to its impact on environment. Low impact businesses, people and cultures are necessarily low status ones which translates to lower income etc. Even if one' occupation is seemingly benign, it can become lucrative only in the context of a larger business/industry/nation imposing mandatory heavy toll on environment. No toll=not lucrative, simple.
So how much environmental damage does it take to become a Steve Jobs? Keeping appearances is just a tiny speck in the picture of mayhem. Lucrativity of a business is directly proportional (at the very least) to its impact on environment. Low impact businesses, people and cultures are necessarily low status ones which translates to lower income etc. Even if one' occupation is seemingly benign, it can become lucrative only in the context of a larger business/industry/nation imposing mandatory heavy toll on environment. No toll=not lucrative, simple.
Won't disagree. I can't. Pure definition of a conundrum.
My husband gets to wear whatever he wants to work (most days). We enjoy a very minimalistic life that is only requiring 18% of his take home pay this month (this is after 401k contribution). He takes public transportation for free and I use a little electric bike for most my outings. We pay extra each month to our utility company to offset our carbon. We love our community garden. We minimize our beef consumption to just a few pounds per person per year.
Did I mention my husband works for Jeff Bezos?
And this is why I usually try to pleasantly offer alternative, greener behaviors. Unless you're coal rolling in my neighborhood, I'm not going to shame you for what you do. I like my lifestyle. I think it's great, but I'm well aware of what's sustaining it. Absolutely aware of it.
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.
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.
