Man living without money since 2008

Remove all ads!

I think what he is doing is quite impressive.

I honestly don't understand why people claim that he has 'regressed' to prove a 'stupid point'. I don't care what point he might be trying to make, I'll draw my own conclusions from my observations. I do something similar with the Star Wars movies, I'll come to my own interpretation instead of buying George's BS hook line and sinker ('They are movies for kids, lolz')

Now, I don't have a solid stance in regards to the validity of the monetary system. In fact, I really don't care. However, I do admire the guy for:

- Living frugally and minimising wastage. I see wastage all around me. People using heaters in 16 degree (celcius) heat when they could change from shorts to pants. Water being left to drip (or even gush) for hours. Good food just tossed out. The problem is that people don't see the impact of this wastage, they never are forced to look at the coal power factories which produce that energy, or the environmental devastation caused by plantations.

- Not being caught up in consumerism. Too often people buy things that others make them think they want/need, only to later realise that it isn't want they really want/need. Meanwhile a significant proportion of the world is starving or dying of easily treatable diseases.

- Is happy with what he has. If someone can find pleasure in living life so simply, then someone such as myself should be happy with my more comfortable lifestyle.

- Only working for what you need, rather than hoarding currency to burn on credit card debt (this ties back in with consumerism). Gordon Gecko might think that greed is good, but I think there is something admirable about not taking more than your fair share of the pie.

- Being resourceful enough to live off the land. As he rightfully pointed out in another video, it's pretty stupid to buy dried nettles from a supermarket to make tea when you have them growing in your backyard. If people lived in harmony with the land a little more, perhaps the environment wouldn't currently be up **** creek.

- Has the fortitude to go beyond his comfort zone.

Again, I honestly don't care about what the guy is saying about money being unnecessary, etc. That doesn't mean I can't draw my own inferences about his experiences. The dude is pretty cool, in my book.

 

I'm not familiar with the tax laws in question, but bartering is a form of income. While they may not have "forms" to base their assessment on, there are ways to calculate what you have done.

 

Will the government ask him for 20% of his oats?

 

Living with no money for two years? BAH! Amateur! Marriage means 'the money the husband makes is the family's money to pay bills, the money the wife makes is HER money.' I've been married nearly 25 years (on and off) ... THAT'S a long time without money (and the off time was even worse).

 

Yeah, I've gotta admit, you've got him beat.

 

There could be some form of lower limits on how much you are able to earn without having to pay tax for it. Hiring someone to work for goods is technically illegal in Finland but I suppose there are ways around it. If the guy is just "helping a friend" and then as a gift receives a gift in return that is well under the taxable limits for gifts then I suppose it could be done legally. He could not be working for the benefit of a company though, in those cases it would violate various taxation and labor laws but if he's say painting the house of a good friend and got oats in return, I think it would be OK.

What you call "hoarding" (and I'd rather call saving) is also one of the finer inventions of man. The lifestyle this man lives makes him basically screwed if he hurts himself and is unable to work for one reason or another. If he says breaks a leg while working, he'll die or be forced to use social benefits or charity. If he barters for enough oats to last over such periods then he's basically hoarding as anyone else in order to minimize risks. Even then though a more serious illness will likely either kill him or put him at the mercy of society, at which case I suspect he will not be dying voluntarily.

 

Well, English literature mentions various people who managed to 'live well on nothing a year'. Nihil novi sub sole!

 

It depends on the nature of that hoarding. I see nothing wrong with generating a surplus, and saving it for a rainy day/retirement/getting married/getting divorce/having children. However, as I made clear in my earlier post, I'm against earning more money than you need to pay off debt for stupid **** you didn't need. These days, 'saving up' means scraping together the leftover cash to pay off your credit card debt for a plasma TV, or toys that the kids play with once before forgetting about. Or paying off the interest accumulated on that debt.

If I wanted to save $200 a week, and could achieve this by either working an extra 10 hours, or just not blowing my money on stupid ****, I'd choose the latter. Unfortunately, lots of idiots would rather do the former. Yeah, trading off time (a resource which is limited and you can't get back) for junk is such a good decision. Oh well, at least this generation of compulsive spenders fuel the economy.