(July 27, 2013 at 12:45 am)CapnAwesome Wrote:(July 26, 2013 at 1:00 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: If I wanted to live in the wilderness off the land, yeah, I could get by on little or nothing. I see a lot of people living under bridges and such, I'm sure they get by on little as well.
It's kind of insane that you think the two options are paying crazy amounts for rent (and crap) or living under an overpass. I live in my girlfriend's Van and am one of the happier people on these forums. Probably because I keep my expenses so low I only have to work a couple of months out of the year and then travel full time the rest of the year. Traveling with lots of money is not really traveling, it's just experiencing your own culture with different scenery.
Perhaps you misunderstood what I was saying. I wasn't attempting to bifurcate the issue and paint it in terms of living under an overpass vs. paying high rent. I was merely presenting an extreme end of the spectrum of what one *could* do if one *chose* to.
I *chose* not to.
As I have a child to support (not to mention an ex-wife), it's pretty much a necessity that I maintain stable, gainful employment - which means I don't get to live in a van down by the river - even if I wanted to (which I don't) - because I have responsibilities that mean something to me.
Your lifestyle works for you, and that's cool. Were I younger, with fewer responsibilities, I might find it appealing as well.
