Mastodawn

LillyPip

So many people don’t understand why we live in a society, and apparently have no capacity for empathy.

They’re free to go live in the wilderness, with no roads, no fire department, no water or electricity, no services whatever, and find out how much they’re actually benefiting from our collective.

They won’t, because though they like to complain, they’re pussies who can’t be bothered to think for 5 minutes that the fact they can read and write their snarky bullshit is because they benefitted from free education, else they’d be illiterate.

But gods forbid they pay back the overwhelming amount they benefit from society in a small way. It’s fucking infuriating.

gaiussabinus Dec 6

You are not free to do any of those things as the land is owned and you would be squatting. These people are removed by force. There is no choice except engage with society as there are no other options.

You’d have to buy your own land, of course.

But you could buy a tiny plot in the middle of nowhere, not hook up any utilities or have roads, and just live off your land if you wanted.

There are small parcels in the middle of noplace that nobody wants because there are no roads, utilities, or other services.

Eheran Dec 6

Small parcels? Australia and many other places are pretty much empty. And yes, nobody wants to be there for a reason.

Yeah, but the ‘nobody wants to be there for a reason’ is my whole point.

It will absolutely suck for you. That’s why civilisation is better, and also why we have to make some concessions to be in a society.

There’s literally no utopia where everything is perfect. There literally never was.

If you want societal amenities, you have to pay for them in some small way, and if you don’t, your like will be very hard. Those have always been the choices.

Eheran Dec 6

I know. I just wanted to point out that the are huge swaths of land that are empty, not buy tiny patches.

But you could buy a tiny plot in the middle of nowhere, not hook up any utilities or have roads, and just live off your land if you wanted.

Not legally mate.

LillyPip Dec 7

You literally can do that.

Why do people seem to think this is impossible?

What’s changed? Some parts of that life are sometimes illegal, but most people haven’t been against it like this.

What’s different?

For one there’s zoning laws, most property do not allow any construction, so you’re fucked for shelter. Likewise if you’re on agriculutrally zoned land as most of those large rural parcel are you are legally required to use it for farming. You can’t just go and fell trees or hunt animals, so you’ll be fucked for food. And if the council ever finds or hears of you living in such a place, they’ll send the police for you.

Linking to a few mansions in the bush isn’t the same thing as being able to just go fuck off to woop-woop for the rest of your days.

LillyPip Dec 7

Well, yeah. Regulations are a major part of society, and a major reason we tend to come together. Yet another reason libertarianism is misguided.

Regulations can be good, they can also be bad.

Such as regulations demanding housing meets a certain area size or standard plumping system means we are not allowed to live in afford tiny homes.

They’re free to go live in the wilderness, with no roads, no fire department, no water or electricity, no services whatever, and find out how much they’re actually benefiting from our collective.

Where?

This is what I want to do, but I can’t afford to buy land on which to do it (and not just any land is useful for this either, it needs to be capable of supporting people before you can count it). Land enough to support a small homestead isn’t cheap, and zoning/local laws often restricts what you can do on it. So for example you may buy land, but not be allowed to drill a well, even if you have the means and knowledge to do so. Or if you buy land you can afford, you may not be allowed to build a permanent structure on it at all.

You’ll get kicked out (and possibly fined) of both state and national parks in the US if they find you “permanently camping”, which they are likely to do since there are frequently people out there. The only other option is squatting on private property. If you get caught before whatever time passes for squatters laws to take effect, you lose everything you’ve built up.

I mean don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind paying for things I’ll never use because it makes society as a whole better. All I’m saying is opting out of living in a society is nearly impossible for most people even if they are ok with not having all the stuff society funds like roads and fire control.

Search off-grid properties. They exist.

Yes I know, I’ve looked at them. That’s how I know they are expensive.

But you never have to pay for utilities, rent, taxes for schools or roads or services … obviously it wouldn’t be completely free.

Ok, but if your plan is to live solo forever and not interact with society, you’d basically need to pay for it upfront. That means you need a lot of money all at once, otherwise you’ll still need income, which limits the ability you have to be separate from society.

Yes, that would need to be the plan. One upfront payment then never paying for utilities or other things forever. That’s the only way this works.

I think this is madness, but that’s how you do this.

Right, and you get why this is impossible for most people? That was my original point. Most people, even if they want to do this, can’t. It’s unaffordable.

The point is that your suggestion that someone is free to do this is just very much not the case.

Of course I do. And again, that’s my point.

People romanticise this, but it’s impossible for many reasons. You can easily try, but we have societies for a reason.

Everyone is free to do this, but good luck in practice. It’s not just hard, and it’s not just stupid, but why the fuck would you want this? It’s insane, and we’re not geared for this.

Life in the wilderness is not a Disney movie. It’s so ruthlessly difficult, that’s why society exists. We are stronger, safer, and happier together.

ayyy Dec 6

It’s almost as if we all rely on each other to exist. If only there was a word for that.

papalonian Dec 6

People aren’t down voting because they don’t think the properties exist, they’re down voting because your argument doesn’t really make sense. People that are saying, “I’d rather just live in the wilderness” are not the ones that can afford to just purchase land. You almost will certainly have to pay taxes on the land as well.

Saying you can not participate in society by participating in society very hard so you can afford to participate a little less and a little further from society isn’t what these people are looking for, they want to hop in a truck with some tools, drive into the woods, never to be seen again. Without a million dollar piece of paper saying they’re allowed to.

Well yeah, I get that. But there are plots for really cheap, but they don’t have any kind of access to water, sewage, or whatever. Plots for like 10,000 or less. That sounds like a lot, I suppose, but it isn’t. I think it’s more that people don’t understand how money works,

GreyEyedGhost Dec 8

I like how your dream of self-sufficiency starts with there being g a road you can drive on. Or do you think most woods are reasonable places for driving trucks? You’d be better off buying a donkey or mule. Worst case scenario, you’d have a bit more meat to eat before you starved.

papalonian Dec 8

I was speaking figuratively, but if you want to be literal, I never said anything about a road, and there’s many kinds of trucks that can drive over many types of terrain.

GreyEyedGhost Dec 8

The kind of truck that can handle any kinds of undeveloped forest are more expensive than the land you say is too expensive for the people who would want to do what you’re saying. So, unrealistic expectations all around.

papalonian Dec 8

many kinds of trucks that can drive over many types of terrain

truck that can handle any kinds of undeveloped forest

Again, not what I said. A second hand F150 or Tacoma will get you damn near anywhere you want to go that is not heavily forested and is certainly cheaper than a plot of land. You’re trying to pick minute details of my comments and blow them up into the most literal sense of the words yet somehow failing to actually read what I’m saying.

At this point the conversation is a day old and the chance of actually interesting dialogue coming from it is practically zero, so any further misreadings will have to be done on your own.

Off grid in Australia is a joke.

You’re still located within a council who have bullshit laws and won’t even allow you live in a tiny home on your land because it’s not up to code that only allows for McMansions.

🍉 Albert 🍉Dec 6

we live in a society, while rich people live in an economy

FireRetardant Dec 6

As someone who works on private wells and water systems, its always baffling to me when someone with a “hunt camp” more luxurious than any house I’ll ever afford is complaining about the cost of our services. Like dude your “camp” is 2000 sqft and and 200 kms from the nearest city. Yea its gonna cost a bit to make your well water clean, clear, and safe to drink while running on a solar system.

They’ll even start to question my wage and why the bill costs so much (as if i have any say) completely tone death to the struggles of people outside their class. They imply if i was paid less their bill would be much cheaper despite me barely making enough to own my own tiny home and my wages really aren’t a major cost on the bill.

mrgoosmoos Dec 6

if you guys don’t have much competition, you should start treating those customers fairly

and by fairly I mean treat them how they treat you

davad Dec 6

Sounds like you need to raise your rate. And also not break out your wage from the other costs in the invoice.

You know the Mongols did this thing where they poisoned wells.