Have any of you transitioned to a minimalist lifestyle?

[sportbikerider78]

Goo

Good point, after reading your post I realized how much stuff I've accumulated to manage the acreage. It's all been acquired via gift, Craigslist, yardsale, and "Sunday night trash pickup", but it's still is in contrast to a minimalist lifestyle. And I suppose the cords and cords of wood that I've scavenged that are scattered among the property also apply. I think I'll have to think about this more and perhaps have a yard sale of my own this spring to consolidate.

I'm 38 yrs old..this is my first house in the country. I did not build it and had minimal time searching for a home with a new job and 8 month old at the same time.

I will build my next home and design it and the property it sits on for minimal maintenance. Hardscapes (not landscapes), small yard (big surrounding fields), in the woods (but not too much land cleared), rock around the foundation (to decrease weed wacking), minimal trees in my yard (zero raking of leaves), square yard to make more efficient mowing...ect. I have given a great deal of thought about what my next house will be like. Every aspect will be geared towards low maintenance.

 

[SlyFerret]

I see the point about country vs city or more urban living but not sure I agree entirely. IMO having basic "stuff" that is used doesn't contradict the concept. Having 2 jet skis, a boat and a pool that never get used (guilty of pool) is not in line.

You guys have mentioned a few books I'd like to read. Maybe after reading more on the topic I'll change my tune.

We really liked "Everything that remains" by the guys in the Netflix documentary that we watched. We are reading "clutter free with kids" right now. I think next up is "minimalism: living a meaningful life" and then "Essential essays by the minimalists". "The millionaire next door" will be up soon too.

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[SlyFerret]

I will build my next home and design it and the property it sits on for minimal maintenance. Hardscapes (not landscapes), small yard (big surrounding fields), in the woods (but not too much land cleared), rock around the foundation (to decrease weed wacking), minimal trees in my yard (zero raking of leaves), square yard to make more efficient mowing...ect. I have given a great deal of thought about what my next house will be like. Every aspect will be geared towards low maintenance.

I have been thinking a lot about this.

I've always said that the only thing I'd sell this house for is a log cabin in the woods. I told my wife the other night that maybe we should go that route and design it just the way we want it in the process!

-SF


Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[firefighterjake]

If you're looking for low maintenance I'm not sure a log cabin is the right way to go . . . although I know "minimalist life style" is not the same as "low maintenance life style." I know my Uncle has to occasionally re-chink his log cabin which seems like a bit of a pain to me . . . about as much as having to repaint a house, poly cedar shakes, etc.

 

[jatoxico]

the guys in the Netflix documentary that we watched.

Remember the name of the documentary?

 

[SlyFerret]

Remember the name of the documentary?

I think it was just called "minimalism".

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[jatoxico]

I think it was just called "minimalism".

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

Found it thanks. And did a little reading and right off the bat I see my natural tendency towards simplifying and minimalism has a strong anti-consumerism component. I realized long ago that if you never buy it or accumulate it you won't have to worry about stepping on it for 3 yrs before throwing it away and that despite what Madison Ave. says, the solution to every problem is not buying another gadget or potion.

Interested in further exploring these ideas by reading and listening to those who have thought and written on this topic, thanks for bringing it up.

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

For the ultimate in minimalization, check out Richard (Dick) Proenneke's Alone in The Wilderness (program), and/or One Man's Wilderness (book). He even gave up women, children, neighbors. While I'm not willing to go as far as he did, there is some appeal to what he did.

He did have a wood stove that his brother built for him, and a slight firewood obsession, which was probably a healthy thing in his instance, as there was no backup!

 

[Ashful]

For the ultimate in minimalization, check out Richard (Dick) Proenneke's Alone in The Wilderness (program), and/or One Man's Wilderness (book). He even gave up women, children, neighbors. While I'm not willing to go as far as he did, there is some appeal to what he did.

He did have a wood stove that his brother built for him, and a slight firewood obsession, which was probably a healthy thing in his instance, as there was no backup!

Great story, and the first movie they made of his story is superb. The subsequent movies and books also enjoyable, but to a lesser degree for me. If you somehow missed it (you must have not tuned into PBS for a 10 year window, if you did), you need to see it!

 

[jatoxico]

Seen it about 3 times. Interesting story, ditching a wife/GF would help unload a lot of stuff.

 

[SlyFerret]

For the ultimate in minimalization, check out Richard (Dick) Proenneke's Alone in The Wilderness (program), and/or One Man's Wilderness (book). He even gave up women, children, neighbors. While I'm not willing to go as far as he did, there is some appeal to what he did.

He did have a wood stove that his brother built for him, and a slight firewood obsession, which was probably a healthy thing in his instance, as there was no backup!

I've read the book, but I haven't seen the videos yet. I need to. He shot a lot of film and I really want to see the footage that shows what he described in his journals.

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

Seen it about 3 times. Interesting story, ditching a wife/GF would help unload a lot of stuff.

True enough. But, there is that old saying about throwing out the baby with the bathwater!

I've found that the wedding ring has transformed countless reasonable people into complete nutjobs. It's 2017. Isn't it time to put that old, outdated tradition to rest?

 

[jharkin]

I would not call myself a minimalist, but I certainly dont do the keeping up with the Jones'es thing. It a slippery slope - case in point being the fact that 2000 sq feet is considered a starter house today when a generation ago 1500 was the norm for your average family of 4.

If you like that Millionaire Next Door Book you might like some others from the Bogleheads (Jack Bogle fan group) reading list:

https://www.bogleheads.org/RecommendedReading.php
https://www.amazon.com/s/?search-alias=aps&tag=hearthamazon-20

I am a huge fan of the Bogle method - make the financial system work for you, have a plan a stick with it, keep your costs low and dont chase a quick profit, live below your means.

On the other extreme there is the Dave Ramsey cut the cord philosphy, and the real nutcases at MrMoneyMustash forum who do the live in a shack, eat ramen noodles and ride a bike method to retire at 40.... No thanks, thats a little tooo 'minimal' for me. I still want to enjoy life

 

[Ashful]

I would not call myself a minimalist, but I certainly dont do the keeping up with the Jones'es thing. It a slippery slope - case in point being the fact that 2000 sq feet is considered a starter house today when a generation ago 1500 was the norm for your average family of 4.

I believe this had more to do with the cost of building, than any desire to live in cramped quarters. Most of the 18th century homes still standing in my area are well over 5000 sq.ft., and while we know these are the better-built homes of wealthier farmers, it shows they were not interested in living small if they could afford otherwise.

Anything worth doing is worth over-doing.

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

I would not call myself a minimalist, but I certainly dont do the keeping up with the Jones'es thing. It a slippery slope - case in point being the fact that 2000 sq feet is considered a starter house today when a generation ago 1500 was the norm for your average family of 4.

If you like that Millionaire Next Door Book you might like some others from the Bogleheads (Jack Bogle fan group) reading list:

https://www.bogleheads.org/RecommendedReading.php
https://www.amazon.com/s/?search-alias=aps&tag=hearthamazon-20

I am a huge fan of the Bogle method - make the financial system work for you, have a plan a stick with it, keep your costs low and dont chase a quick profit, live below your means.

On the other extreme there is the Dave Ramsey cut the cord philosphy, and the real nutcases at MrMoneyMustash forum who do the live in a shack, eat ramen noodles and ride a bike method to retire at 40.... No thanks, thats a little tooo 'minimal' for me. I still want to enjoy life

Are you spying on me? I just got done with cup o' noodles that I had for lunch.

And you are right, many around me probably think me a nutjob, with five or more years worth of heating fuel stacked and piled around the yard, my enormous garden, my antique garden implements and wood hauler. Come to think of it, they might be right!

 

[jharkin]

I believe this had more to do with the cost of building, than any desire to live in cramped quarters. Most of the 18th century homes still standing in my area are well over 5000 sq.ft., and while we know these are the better-built homes of wealthier farmers, it shows they were not interested in living small if they could afford otherwise.

Anything worth doing is worth over-doing.

Ash, you know as well as I do that those 5000sq ft homes where just as unattainable for working class folk in the 18th century as they are today. The average family back then lived in a 2 room shack.

My house is nearly the same age as yours, its was only about 1000sq ft when it was built and most likely a farmer and his 8 kids lived here, all piled into one bed for warmth.

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

Ash, you know as well as I do that those 5000sq ft homes where just as unattainable for working class folk in the 18th century as they are today. The average family back then lived in a 2 room shack.

My house is nearly the same age as yours, its was only about 1000sq ft when it was built and most likely a farmer and his 8 kids lived here, all piled into one bed for warmth.

You and me, both jharkin. I still have the old stone outhouse, too, although it is no longer used for its original purpose. Only one in the neighborhood!

 

[Jags]

Dunno - I don't get this "war on stuff" thing. My stuff doesn't stop me from doing anything. It doesn't hold me back. Its all paid for. Its nice to have when I want it. I fiddle. Everything from computers to metal working. Gotta have tools (stuff) for that. Making firewood takes "stuff". Building things takes "stuff". I have about every tool known to man and I use them. I don't see how eliminating this "stuff" will enriched my life. Without it, I wouldn't be able to do many of the things I enjoy. Minimalizing my world simply will not afford me the opportunity to do anything more than I already do.
I am not looking for a fight or an argument and have heard this mentioned before,but I honestly don't understand the position.

 

[jatoxico]

At least for me, the idea is to not have unnecessary stuff (like knick knack collections) or overly "fancy" stuff when simple will do. That and not being wasteful. But I agree anything you're actively using doesn't fit my definition. Others would disagree and argue the only reason you need most stuff is to take care of other stuff. There is some truth in that.

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

Dunno - I don't get this "war on stuff" thing. My stuff doesn't stop me from doing anything. It doesn't hold me back. Its all paid for. Its nice to have when I want it. I fiddle. Everything from computers to metal working. Gotta have tools (stuff) for that. Making firewood takes "stuff". Building things takes "stuff". I have about every tool known to man and I use them. I don't see how eliminating this "stuff" will enriched my life. Without it, I wouldn't be able to do many of the things I enjoy. Minimalizing my world simply will not afford me the opportunity to do anything more than I already do.
I am not looking for a fight or an argument and have heard this mentioned before,but I honestly don't understand the position.

I hear you, Jags. Both sides of the family are from agricultural backgrounds, and the amount of stuff that has been acquired over the years to farm and ranch is enormous. But, despite the scope of the operations, and the underlying sophistication of the people running these large, complex, risky businesses, there is something about them that seems like it fits into this minimalist mindset. No fancy houses, clothes, cars, attitudes, hidden agendas. Just good, hardworking folks, where what you see is what you get.

 

[SlyFerret]

Dunno - I don't get this "war on stuff" thing. My stuff doesn't stop me from doing anything. It doesn't hold me back. Its all paid for. Its nice to have when I want it. I fiddle. Everything from computers to metal working. Gotta have tools (stuff) for that. Making firewood takes "stuff". Building things takes "stuff". I have about every tool known to man and I use them. I don't see how eliminating this "stuff" will enriched my life. Without it, I wouldn't be able to do many of the things I enjoy. Minimalizing my world simply will not afford me the opportunity to do anything more than I already do.
I am not looking for a fight or an argument and have heard this mentioned before,but I honestly don't understand the position.

Ha! Not a fight at all. This has been a great thread so far. Your post is no different!

It's about focusing on value in your life more than about getting rid of stuff. Also, it isn't about not having tools to do the things you want to do and love to do. That is just silly! If those things are truly valuable to you, it is worth it!

I'm not talking about sitting in an empty room with nothing on the walls, practically no furniture, only 2 changes of clothes, one set of dishes, one skillet, and so on...

What it means to me is looking at spending and taking a harder look at our needs vs. wants. It can be quite difficult to tell the difference some times. Lots of people think luxury items are necessities. My wife and I realized that we had started to lose sight of our real priorities.

Do I really need to buy that sweatshirt? Sure, it's cool, but in have 6 already. Do I need to buy that new phone? The one in have works fine. How about that hot new truck? The one I have looks and runs great. Do I really need that new 4k smart TV? I'm trying to watch less TV and be more productive with my time anyway. Do I need to buy that new dining room set? The table and chairs we have works just fine, it just isn't fancy. The list goes on and on.

As far as existing stuff, I have a ton of stuff here that I don't need and don't use, and should have never bought in the first place. If somebody needs it or could use it, I might as well hand it off. Let them get some value out of it and get it out of my way at the same time.

I'm wondering if maybe the reason you don't get it is because it's something you just naturally do already. If all the stuff you have are the tools to do the things you love and you don't really buy stuff you don't really need, that fits with this philosophy, even if it doesn't seem minimalist.

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

Ha! Not a fight at all. This has been a great thread so far. Your post is no different!

It's about focusing on value in your life more than about getting rid of stuff. Also, it isn't about not having tools to do the things you want to do and love to do. That is just silly! If those things are truly valuable to you, it is worth it!

I'm not talking about sitting in an empty room with nothing on the walls, practically no furniture, only 2 changes of clothes, one set of dishes, one skillet, and so on...

What it means to me is looking at spending and taking a harder look at our needs vs. wants. It can be quite difficult to tell the difference some times. Lots of people think luxury items are necessities. My wife and I realized that we had started to lose sight of our real priorities.

Do I really need to buy that sweatshirt? Sure, it's cool, but in have 6 already. Do I need to buy that new phone? The one in have works fine. How about that hot new truck? The one I have looks and runs great. Do I really need that new 4k smart TV? I'm trying to watch less TV and be more productive with my time anyway. Do I need to buy that new dining room set? The table and chairs we have works just fine, it just isn't fancy. The list goes on and on.

As far as existing stuff, I have a ton of stuff here that I don't need and don't use, and should have never bought in the first place. If somebody needs it or could use it, I might as well hand it off. Let them get some value out of it and get it out of my way at the same time.

I'm wondering if maybe the reason you don't get it is because it's something you just naturally do already. If all the stuff you have are the tools to do the things you love and you don't really buy stuff you don't really need, that fits with this philosophy, even if it doesn't seem minimalist.

-SF

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

Awesome, Sly. I think you nailed it here.

I think of it really as anti-materialism, the counterpoint to a culture that has replaced values with things as a direct result of the marketing machines that exist at every corporation on the face of the earth.

Marketing is a well studied science, designed specifically to get people to think they need stuff that they really don't. It's a jedi mind trick. And it is specifically designed to make your wealth theirs.

The ultimate conclusion is the existing mcmansion kardashian culture that exists today. It really turns it's most successful victims into slaves, as people end up having to work for a paycheck until they die to pay for crap that they bought that did not need when they were younger.

It's all about figuring out what it is that makes us truly happy as human beings, and focusing more fully on that.

If you think that what makes you happy is "stuff", so be it. If you think enlightenment lies elsewhere, you might have better luck.

 

[peakbagger]

If someone is a fan Alaska's Last Frontier (a very staged show with interesting characters), Otto Kilcher has a lot of stuff yet I expect someone would describe their lifestyle as minimalist.

Despite the premise of the show I expect that the homestead is far more of a hobby farm of a couple of retired brothers and a paid gig for their kids that allow them to live at the homestead. (I do note that one son seems to have acquired a rather nice shop, and new boiler along with his recent high end boat project)

 

[Easy Livin’ 3000]

If someone is a fan Alaska's Last Frontier (a very staged show with interesting characters), Otto Kilcher has a lot of stuff yet I expect someone would describe their lifestyle as minimalist.

Despite the premise of the show I expect that the homestead is far more of a hobby farm of a couple of retired brothers and a paid gig for their kids that allow them to live at the homestead. (I do note that one son seems to have acquired a rather nice shop, and new boiler along with his recent high end boat project)

I was thinking the same exact thing. Otto sure has a lot of stuff, my favorite is that giant barge.

 

[sportbikerider78]

For me, it is a battle of materialism. Stuff is just stuff. Cars end up in the ground. Homes rot and fall apart. Tools rust and get lost. You pass away and all you cared about is sold at a garage sale for pennies. Your business collapses. Your health deteriorates as you age.

Happiness is not in stuff. It is in experiences, loved ones, faith and many other things with no price.

I'm an outright capitalist through and through. That doesn't mean I believe consumerism or stuff makes people happy. It really doesn't.

In my mind, children and the positive experiences we give other people are our only legacy.