Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 493 posts

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#101

Post by broscillator »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #66
keiferski wrote: post #15

It's interesting how quality of life baselines have increased so much in the last century. If you wanted to have the QOL of someone that lived in the American West a hundred years ago, it could be done today for probably $100 a month all-inclusive of food, clothing, and shelter. But you'd be eating the same 5-10 things repeatedly, wearing the same clothes, have a few books for entertainment, minimal or no electronics…

> but with the nature of marketing and social pressure, almost no one is willing to make that kind of sacrifice today. Maybe people prefer having pressurized clean tap water and sewer systems due to something other than marketing and social pressure. I know the women in my life would definitely prefer it compared to my grandmothers who had to travel to get water from the well everyday.

The problem is when that becomes so habitual that it goes unnoticed. No one really feels grateful when they use tap water, and instead that mental space is occupied with anxiety about getting the latest iPhone.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#102

Post by totallywrong »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #85
vjk800 wrote: post #75

Is the goal to live without working or without being in the system? If it's the first, maybe living here, in Finland, in a small, cheap village and living off the unemployment benefits would work. There are plenty of people who have been unemployed their whole lives. I guess there's a very small amount of work filling all the benefit forms and subjecting yourself to whatever periodic checks the officials want to make…

This wouldn't work in the Netherlands (anymore); while we're known to have a good social security system, if you're filing for unemployment or the other kind of support, you're expected to put in the work and show that you're doing so by doing courses, making applications, etc. Failure to do so means your benefits are cut.

Interestingly, the Netherlands has the largest squatters community that I know of, with lots of buildings across the country that have been occupied for a long time, legally it seems.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#103

Post by sokoloff »

danbruc wrote: post #9
pavlov wrote: post #7

If you’re a citizen or legal resident of a Nordic country, you’ll get paid basic subsistence when you have no other income. In Finland this is around 500 euros / month. There are lots of empty houses in the remote countryside in Finland (and I presume the same is true for parts of Sweden and Norway). You can probably rent something for next to nothing, or even make a deal with the owner to stay for free in exchange f…

It is also immoral. EDIT: As this is collecting downvotes quite quickly, would any of the downvoters care to explain their stance?

Presenting a one sentence expression of a value judgment as if it were a fact will tend to attract downvotes, because that doesn’t add any interesting perspective or information for anyone to take away other than they know your opinion on an individual topic. (Or they would, if they knew exactly what you were referring to with the unanchored pronoun. Are you referring to the state support program, the use of the state program to live indefinitely, or something else?)

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#104

Post by tonyedgecombe »

mdekkers wrote: post #89
Podgajski wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Try raising children that way. Come on now, people have done it for hundreds of thousands of years. Just because it’s different from what you used to doesn’t mean it can’t be done. And it doesn’t mean the children will come out harmed in anyway. > In the USA we have a problem with cost of living, but at the end of the day the reason for this is almost always misguided government intervention. If there is no governm…

> Come on now, people have done it for hundreds of thousands of years. Come now, people also used to die from toothaches, and during those hundreds of thousands of years infant and child mortality was incredibly high, and education practically nonexistent. These “we have done this since the beginning of time” arguments always make me chuckle, they are so incredibly simplistic.

>Come now, people also used to die from toothaches

Last time I was in America (about 20 years ago) there was an item on the news about a child that had died because of an untreated dental problem.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#105

Post by softg »

keiferski wrote: post #52
softg wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This was typical, to be expected a century ago, but with the nature of marketing and social pressure It might be typical and expected but that doesn't mean it was desirable even then. People lived that way because they had to. It was always considered a difficult way of life. It's more likely that people gave it up as soon as they could when they had the chance. I think there are two different concepts here. You ca…

You don’t need to go back that far. Even the quality of life circa 1950 would be very inexpensive to have today. But then you have less electronics, toys, clothes, food variety etc. This would cost more than $100 a month today, but it would be dramatically cheaper than the typical modern lifestyle. With remote work, I’m not sure you really need transportation. If you do, a bicycle is $50. But again I’m not sure why y…

The variety of electronics, toys, clothes or food available to an average person has definitely increased and I agree that one can spend less and maybe even work less (depending on what line of work they are in) by avoiding them. That's true.

The problem is they are not the big expenses that improve someone's quality of life. Decent housing, health insurance/healthcare, education and transportation are the big spending items for most people, not toys or even phones. Most of the things you mentioned are affordable to almost everyone in the developed world, maybe in an inferior form (like a huawei instead of an apple, h&m instead of gap) but still available.

For an average joe who has two kids and has to be at work because most people can't and don't work remotely even today, "hacking" inexpensive living isn't so much about giving up on their huawei phone or h&m clothes. It's more about giving up on having a decent place to live, giving up on their children's education, not being able to commute to work, etc. And that's not quite doable at all.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#106

Post by lotsofpulp »

keiferski wrote: post #52
softg wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This was typical, to be expected a century ago, but with the nature of marketing and social pressure It might be typical and expected but that doesn't mean it was desirable even then. People lived that way because they had to. It was always considered a difficult way of life. It's more likely that people gave it up as soon as they could when they had the chance. I think there are two different concepts here. You ca…

You don’t need to go back that far. Even the quality of life circa 1950 would be very inexpensive to have today. But then you have less electronics, toys, clothes, food variety etc. This would cost more than $100 a month today, but it would be dramatically cheaper than the typical modern lifestyle. With remote work, I’m not sure you really need transportation. If you do, a bicycle is $50. But again I’m not sure why y…

>I’m not sure why you’d be commuting to a job daily in a car if the presumed objective is to have less expenses so you can work less

Because you need a backup plan for when you lose that job. Or your employer does not increase your wages and you need other employers to sell to to earn income that keeps up with your expenses.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#107

Post by lotsofpulp »

vivekd wrote: post #93
LeafItAlone wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cost of land fertilizer transportation animals My read of the parent’s comment is that you aren’t paying for land. You don’t need store bought fertilizer. I had a garden for a few years and avoided manufactured fertilizer for most of it. At an industrial scale, sure, it is needed, but not at an individual garden level. No transportation needed other than your own two feet or what you can build. It’s not like you ne…

I think life in the 1920s, while having downsides, was a lot better than many people imagine.

I imagine many women would disagree. Or the people who just got back from WW1, and are about to send their kids to WW2.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#108

Post by keiferski »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #99
keiferski wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was obvious that I was referring to consumer goods like clothing and food, not tap water and sewer systems. But alas, if there is any opportunity to misinterpret a comment in the least obvious way possible, someone in the comments will be sure to do so.

The material costs are not consumer goods like clothing and food. It is the infrastructure, moving mountains to move water, paving land to move food, laying wires for electricity and communication, train lines to move fertilizer, refineries, ports, universities to study medicines, etc. $100 per month is not going to cover any of this, but I am pretty sure you are going to want the benefits.

My comment was from the viewpoint of an individual today. That’s what it says. It doesn’t say anything about society as a whole.

So, no, an individual is not paying for train lines and ports from their personal budget. Perhaps there are some people who spend 90%+ of their income on food, shelter, and electricity, but I’m fairly certain that the majority of costs are “unnecessary” consumer goods.

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#109

Post by m-i-l »

There are often incentives offered to encourage people to move to various underpopulated Scottish islands. The Scottish government even considered a fund offering up to £50K per household[0].

[0] https://consult.gov.scot/agriculture-and-rural-economy/devel...

Re: Is there anywhere in the world someone can just live for free?

#110

Post by keiferski »

Larrikin wrote: post #98
keiferski wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was obvious that I was referring to consumer goods like clothing and food, not tap water and sewer systems. But alas, if there is any opportunity to misinterpret a comment in the least obvious way possible, someone in the comments will be sure to do so.

Did they purposefully misinterpret or was the original comment poorly thought out dismissal of modern life that ignores, very real things like medicine and clean water?

No, I’m pretty certain it’s just nitpicking and uncharitable interpretations that quibble over irrelevant details and miss the bigger point being made.
Post reply on HN