You must log in or register to comment.

Daileon wrote

This seems like a dropout strategy, or am I wrong?

In some places I think this is more than viable and recommended than living in a megalopolis. But we reached a point where the intent to "empty" our society does not work anymore.

But it still one of my goals, living of the land


RichOldWhiteMan OP wrote

Not necessarily, but for people not doing mutual aid yes. Ideally you have enough money to cover your expenses so you work to fund projects or just have to work a little. Retiring at 40, allows you to put a lot of time into mutual aid. You can live in some US cities for this amount. It rough but doable.

In this scenario you retire so you can do some kind of praxis at a preferable pace. If you end up being successful at distributing free/ cheaper food and housing that makes your existance much cheaper. If your making a community of people who support each other having a financial emergency might be less of a problem.

If you ever have a project that needs lots of funding you take a new job then all of your paychecks can be used on the mutual aid.

The answer for those with higher expenses is just saving more. Though I would only be acceptable living a bare bones lifestyle if my sole income is from being a capitalist.


rot wrote

this is really cool