Live data from Hacker News

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

reddit.com

321–330 of 493 posts

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

#321

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…

Housing co-ops are somewhat in line with what you’re describing but cost more. The home is owned by a not-for-profit entity controlled by its residents. The ones in my area charge around $100 or more per month for food and $200-400 for the room (and most people buy food on top of that), but that’s still cheaper than most people spend and you don’t have to buy extra food. The challenge is that you need money in the first place to purchase the home.

I think the reason co-ops don’t aggressively reduce costs like you describe despite being frugal is that having more varied food and clothing, entertainment, and electronics are worth it for most people. I think people would have to give up quite a bit of personal space as well, which I don’t think appeals to many people.

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

#322
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you consider to be the ideal solution?

If I had a simple clean studio I would be fine. I am not asking for much, just clean and stable. But even a mess of a studio costs $800 a month which I can’t afford. even if I had a place to park that was stable I wouldn’t mind either. Just something close to a town with food and place to shower, etc.

Why don't you find a appropriate commune here https://www.ic.org/ and live on it with a small number of other people.

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

#323
Existence itself is un-freedom. You need to remember that, anything you do is bound by a complex network of rules and limitations from the fundamental constants of the universe to the historical precedents that lead to the systems we have today. You will never be free. No matter how hard you try, unless you mean you just wanna be free to like kick out some Kid Rock Jams on a Lake Beach, then be as free as you want I guess.

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

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> resources were plentiful for hundreds of thousands of years While they were plentiful. We chose agriculture because it means your entire tribe not dying of starvation because of minor variations in the local environment.

... and this tribalism led to the violent assembly of contiguous land and hoarding of resources to the alienation of everything/everyone outside the tribe. This pattern evolved into our modern system. If local environments began to change, then your nomadic tribe moved along rather sitting around waiting to die. Birds fly south for the winter.

> then your nomadic tribe moved along rather sitting around waiting to die

Which sucks if you’re injured when the migration must occur. Or if you migrate incorrectly. The evidence we have is for periods of plenty followed by harrowing narrowing of the population. These events are few in between and globally notable in the agricultural era (Bronze Age collapse, fall of Rome, et cetera).

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

#325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it matters what they claim or don't claim. The way to evaluate the position is to imagine what the US would be like if 100% of its population lived in Amish communities, with an Amish lifestyle and religion+ideology. Yes, this hypothetical country would be peaceful and immune to the (justified) criticism the US receives over its intervention in foreign wars. However, think of all it (and the world) woul…

The way to evaluate the position is to imagine what the US would be like if 100% of its population lived in Amish communities, with an Amish lifestyle and religion+ideology. No, it isn't, and that's not how game theory works. No one is suggesting that everyone be Amish, and it seems fairly obvious that the Amish would act differently (e.g., invest in self defense) if that were the case.

If they act differently then they are by definition no longer Amish. They have a very strict interpretation of their religion that depends on wider society to preserve their independence. That’s the point!

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

#326

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…

I think it comes down to the same reasons people pay insane housing costs to live in major cities rather than buying a $50k house in the rustbelt. The former is often more net profitable due to job prospects, despite the higher cost of living. In addition to non-work amenities like social circles and dating pools. Maybe you can live for $100/mo somewhere, if you can solve the part of actually getting the deed to some…

> Do those jobs still exist?

Yes, albeit in a slightly different form.

There are still lots of family farms out there, and they need workers of several stripes. Migrant labor for harvesting produce is commonly known, but there’s also a class of jobs out there where you basically act as an “apprentice farmer”.

A family we’re close to has a poultry operation. They have around 15 houses (as in “chicken houses”), probably fifty or so acres of hay, and various equipment and infrastructure to support it all. They do well for themselves, but absolutely cannot leave for more than a day at a time, because someone has to be caring for the animals and watching to make sure things don’t break.

They own a small home on the property that they don’t use for themselves. Instead, that home is part of the compensation for the “farm hand”. In exchange for doing whatever needs to be done around the farm during the week and coordinating any time away with them (so they can ensure someone is there to cover things), the farm hand gets to live in the house and is paid about $1,500 per month. They also get use of a pickup that belongs to the farm for both personal and professional use.

The house isn’t a shack or something either - it’s an older farm house, but it’s a three bedroom, two bath home that was remodeled not long ago and has a half acre or so of yard. It would be a great place to raise a family.

They’re having a lot of trouble finding people who they can trust to take that job. In the past couple of years I know they’ve hired three people, none of which lasted very long.

The first one did great for a few months but ended up getting drunk and driving a tractor through the side of a chicken house at 2am. They would have been willing to let that go with a warning if it hadn’t ended up costing something like $50k to repair once the cost of the animals that were killed or lost are considered.

The second was on heroin, though they didn’t know that at the time. Things went well until about six weeks in - he’d gotten paid at the end of the first month, spent it all on drugs, but had managed to keep that hidden well enough that he wasn’t fired for it. Two weeks later he ran out of money and decided the best way to handle that was to steal equipment and pawn it. Our friend discovered this when he noticed his chainsaw sitting on the shelf at a pawn shop in town. That whole ordeal ended up costing ~$25k. Most of the stolen items were recovered, but the house had been damaged pretty badly.

The third one was better, and they thought they’d found a long term employee. Almost a year in, they trusted him to the point that they finally felt comfortable traveling a few hours away for their wedding anniversary. The second night there, they got a call from the neighboring farm - there were “a bunch of cops” at their place. Turns out the guy had an outstanding warrant in another state. They had to cut short their first trip away in years and come home to deal with animals.

All of that said - farmers like that don’t see their long-term help as just “employees”. They feel responsible for their welfare, and end up seeing them as part of the family. It’s not at all uncommon for them to inherit substantial land and assets when an older farmer dies, nor is it uncommon for a “farm hand” to end up borrowing money from their employer to start their own farm nearby. The salary isn’t impressive, but you get a large amount of freedom, opportunity to learn an important and difficult to acquire skillset, and a support system.

In short… being a “farm hand” these days isn’t easy and you won’t get rich in that position, but it’s not just a job. In a lot of ways, it’s the way you enter the farming community.

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

#328
post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Romans had running water and sewer systems.

And taxes.

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

#329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India at the time of the Buddha was favorable to wandering ascetics. People were culturally conditioned to donate alms. And, indeed, alms-seeking is required by the vinaya for monks, so they can't live in complete seclusion from society. Society today is very hostile to wandering folks. Many western monastics independent of monasteries (especially female monastics) have a hard time getting alms without a lot of organ…

I went on a bike tour this summer and for a week was living the life of a wandering folk. I experienced no hostility. People were all very friendly and helpful the whole way. Like, super friendly and super helpful, offering me meals and places to sleep. I had a tire blowout which stranded me at a small town gas station for a few hours, and about a dozen dudes came up over that time and offering me use of their tools…

I'm very glad that you experienced generosity! But I don't think your experience is the norm. One week of wandering is not exactly a lifetime. I also can't help but assume from your plucky, overconfident dissent that is based on a very short duration of experience that you are a white man.

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

#330
>Edit: Several users have pointed out that homesteading was incredibly difficult, and we’d all likely die trying to live so simply.

That wasn't true even in 19th century, much less so today with all the modern technology they could have on such an effort (don't mean anything advanced, I mean from modern hunting gear to gas stoves, and from camping gear to insulated clothing, not to mention simple medical kits and other such stuff). I know people who live in remote places (even small islands) alone with things they've built themselves, it's not even that rare.

Post reply on HN