The Less is More Project: Week 38 - Is it your duty to pay rent or a mortgage?

RowdyKittens, Flickr

Is it your duty to pay to live somewhere?

In this world of mortgages and rent, very few adults can claim they reside somewhere for free. 

But there will always be subgroups to refuse to follow the mainstream ways. Here are some categories of people, most of them qualifying as minimalists, who have opted out of mortgages and rents altogether. Why is their lifestyle so alluring, and what are some of its downsides?

The hermit

I just finished reading One Man's Wilderness, by Richard Proenneke, the man who lived as a hermit in the Alaskan wild for about 30 years. Arriving there with the bare necessities, he built himself a log cabin and the furniture, tools and other objects he would need.

The hermit life and the self-reliance it implies has had an appeal for me ever since I read Robinson Crusoe when I was 8. I replicate it, smaller scale, whenever I go back country camping with my family.

The nomad

The nomad category has also fascinated me for as long as I can remember. Modern nomads are those people who sold their house, and live on the go, sometimes in a camper or on a boat. The story of La V'limeuse, a family of six who traveled the world for six years on a sailboat, stayed in my heart ever since I read it, as if I had been there with them all along. The nomad life bears the unique appeal of the constant discovery: new places, new people, new schedules: you never get tired of anything, simply because nothing lasts long enough for that.

My own take on nomadism lasted three months, that I spent travelling Europe on a train pass (actually sleeping on the train, and sometimes on a ferry, as often as I could to save on hostel costs). 

More recently, a German student decided to ditch her apartment and live on a train to save money (and to avoid the hassle of dealing with landlords, apparently). 

The tiny house enthusiast

New trend in the rebellion against mortgages and rents, the tiny house movement is gaining in popularity. Its proponents usually start by mentioning they were tired of spending so much money to just live somewhere. With seducingly low costs and some elbow grease, many were able to build themselves a small but cozy living space. See what it's like here and here. 

The other side of the coin

At first glance, it seems like the hermit, the nomad and the tiny house enthusiasts are making an individual choice of frugality. However, a closer look sheds some light on the tacit agreement they have with others, and on the fact that complete self-sufficiency might be a pipe dream.

Proenneke, the hermit, depended on someone to bring him the life's necessities he could not find or build himself. His friend Babe made several trips with his airplane to carry such things, including his mail.

Muller, the lady who lives on a train, "tries to sleep at the apartments of relatives or friends. Often, she is accommodated by her boyfriend, her mother or grandmother." 

Williams, who built and installed her tiny house in a friend's backyard, also uses said friend's water, fridge, and oven. The friend is, needless to say, also responsible for a mortgage and property taxes that Williams does not mention (and does not seem to contribute to). Admittedly, the friend expresses great joy about having Williams in her backyard. But for the latter, this arrangement doesn't qualify as living off the grid.

And so for a lot of those self-proclaimed minimalists, frugality is partly made possible thanks to other people's generous input. 

There are even individuals who, in addition to not paying mortgage or rent, refuse to use money altogether. It's the case of Heidemarie Schwermer, this 69-year old woman who hasn't used money since the turn of the century. She gets around by bartering: she will, for example, offer to clean a grocery store in exchange for food. That seems fair. Some people, however, have commented on the fact that the house-sitting and house-cleaning services she offers to homeowners in exchange for residing in their houses are hardly worth the real cost of the rent/mortgage, utility bills and other home related expenses. Following that premise, one could argue that she is able to live mostly thanks to the generosity of others, not based on a fair exchange. 


In light of the above examples, do you think it is our duty to pay for where we live?

WEEK 38 IN REVIEW

I might have become the queen of resisting temptation. We had to go shopping for kids' swimming suits (sun, sand, salt and chlorine have destroyed the old ones). That task involved facing one of my biggest temptations: sports gear and outdoor equipment stores. Surprisingly, I was able to keep my calm. My heart rate did go up a smidgen when we walked past the running clothes and the backpacks, but that was quickly and easily managed.

Even more impressive was my reaction to D bringing home a dozen doughnuts barely 48 hours after I decided I wouldn't eat sugar anymore. After an initial reaction of terror, I regained my composure, didn't eat a doughnut, and generally speaking felt pretty good. A week without sugar, and I must admit I haven't been half as cranky as I thought I would be. I did eat a little bit more fruit than usual, and I did buy a 80% dark chocolate bar, with only 4 g of sugar per portion, to share. I also lost two pounds, which was not even the goal!!! 


Your turn to share about your struggles and victories of the week! What did you resist? Did you donate or get rid of anything? Did you face any challenge? Please comment below! And...

Become a follower of the blog/subscribe by email (top left corner of this page)!

Follow me on Facebook (click here)!

Follow me on Twitter (click here)!

The Less is More project: Week 7 - Your biggest investment

JulieSaintMleux, 2012

After I mentioned the cleaning chores I had accomplished on a certain housebound day (winter storm number 259!), along with the time it had taken me, my friend S remarked: "you do have a big house".

Funny... I don't think I have a big house. Granted, it's not small, but it certainly does not qualify as a McMansion. 

Upon verification, our house is around or slightly above the US national average and median in terms of total square footage. According to the American Enterprise Institute, in 2013, the average size of new houses was 2679 square feet, whereas the median was 2491 square feet. The United States Census Bureau gives numbers a touch smaller for 2010: an average of 2392 square feet and a median of 2169 square feet for single-family houses. (As some of you know, we live in Canada, where the numbers seem to be inferior, a 200 square feet difference or so.)

For an interesting comparison, the site Shrinkthatfootprint has put together the numbers for other countries (based on 2009; the numbers might be higher now):

Honk Kong: 484 ft2
UK: 818 ft2
Canada: 1948 ft2
US: 2164 ft2
Australia: 2303 ft2

The interesting thing about those numbers - the North American ones anyway - is that they have increased significantly over the past decades. Houses have been getting bigger. I assume my house's size is "just right" for a family of four, but truth is, we do not need all that space. Before we bought the property, we lived in an apartment that was significantly smaller. We did fine. The kids have grown, but we could still live in the same apartment, even if I would probably miss, although only temporarily, the 2 full bathrooms we have right now, as well as the formal dining room (currently used as my home office). (We also have a third toilet in a powder room that really we don't need - how often do 3 different people have to use the bathroom at the same time?) As for the storage (right now I benefit from generous closets, including a walk-in almost big enough to be used as a nursery), you suddenly don't need as much when you cut down on stuff. The only real issue would probably be the following: where to store 4 bikes and all the camping equipment? 

If you currently have small living quarters, how do you make it work? I'm specifically interested in knowing where you store your sports/outdoor equipment.

So. "Big" houses are nice. And what's wrong with them if you can afford them? The question is: what does it mean, exactly, to be able to "afford" a big house?

Let's say you would like to work less. Or do something else that you are passionate about, but pays less. Or maybe you would love to travel more. Yet you don't, because "there are bills to pay". The biggest of which are most likely house related: mortgage payments, insurance, maintenance, heating, electricity. You are stuck working more than you want and/or in a job you don't really like in order to pay for that house. Feeling resentful yet? 

Big houses usually come with land as well. We opted for countryside/forest living, and have close to 2 acres (or 75 000 square feet) of greenery around the house. Surely I appreciate it: tons of space for the kids to play, for the dog to run around, for us to make a big garden. Unfortunately, big spaces also mean lots of work: just mowing the lawn or shoveling the driveway is a Herculean task here. Luckily a good part of our property is wooded, which requires very little work. Still, all that maintenance - house and yard - takes time and/or money (depending on whether you do it yourself or hire someone).

All that time and money, you don't have it for other things. There are days in the summer when I have to pick between weeding the flowerbeds and going to the beach. Frustrating. I know it's the ultimate "first world problem", but why can't I have a nice front yard AND a nice relaxing day with family and friends?

If you are lucky enough to have the time and/or money for a big house, take a moment to think about your environmental footprint: is your choice of property kind to the Earth?

Even if we don't need to move (we still made a reasonable choice with that house), some days, I do wonder: would we be better off (and would Mother Nature thank us) with a smaller property? I know it's a dangerous thought: I might like it a little bit too much, become addicted to the sense of freedom and simplicity, keep downsizing, and end up in a tiny house (nothing wrong with that, you might say). I thrive when we go camping, and our camping style is rather minimal: a tent, some basic gear, no water/electricity/electronics. No car access either, meaning we have to carry everything on our backs. I love that way of life. (My only questioning is whether I would take to it 12 months a year - it does get pretty cold around here.) 

I have dreamed of moving into a "treehouse with a view" or even a sailboat. What's so special about those kinds of places? Mark Boyle, author of The Moneyless Man - A Year of Freeconomic Living, has experienced the joys of living in a smaller, closer to nature dwelling: 


"My favorite times were when it rained heavily. I'd listen to the rain crashing on the roof with a real appreciation for the shelter that was keeping me dry and protected [...] Such gratitude increases as you get closer to nature and the things that you use; the more degrees of separation you have, the less you appreciate them." 


This is exactly what I like about camping. And so I have a feeling that if we moved to something smaller, I would quickly embrace it. Despite all that, there is something about living where we live that is hard to renounce... what is it called? Oh yeah, I got it: it's called status.

To be honest, I don't even know if status is something that bothers me all that much - but I can't come up with any other reason why moving into a smaller house would be problematic - unless we have to leave the neighborhood... and what I like most about the neighborhood is not the status, but rather the close-knit community, the peaceful atmosphere, the nature that surrounds us.

Any thoughts?

WEEK 7 IN REVIEW

Temptations 

Once again, I had to go to the pharmacy for one small purchase (medication for a family member), but almost got sucked into buying more. Did you notice how big most pharmacies have become? If you wanted to, you could probably do half of your groceries and buy half of your clothes there! That on top of acquiring cosmetics, candy, toys, books, school/office supplies, decorative items, gadgets, etc.  

Donations

This week I tackled my hutch. I filled 3 boxes with various plates, glasses, bowls and vases I haven't used since we moved here in 2007. (Don't worry mom, I still have the one vase you told me to keep!) 

This wasn't as easy as one would think. As I cleaned the shelves, I was tempted to simply move the things around. When I got to the shot glasses, I thought "What if I want to do shots with friends?" (D doesn't drink). Then it occurred to me that I don't remember the last time I had shots with friends (other than one random time in a bar 2 years ago). We are grown-ups. We drink wine. Okay, and beer. But shots? I don't need those glasses.

Come to think of it, there are very few things that you should keep in your kitchen if you don't use them at least on a weekly basis. One exception is the fondue set (we love fondue in this family). Other than that... toss it!

Good news: I found the screwdriver I had been looking for! (Please don't ask me what it was doing in the hutch.)

Observations

The Less is More spirit also applies to the projects we take on, and in my case, one of them is reading. When I go to the library, I take too many books, and then have to rush reading them all before they are due back (they cannot be renewed when somebody else places a hold on them). I need to get into the habit of taking only 1 or 2 books at a time.

Cogitations  

Just because you can afford something is not a good enough reason to buy it. I cleaned my pharmacy this week. I keep all medications in a high cupboard in the kitchen (the bathroom is not a good place as it gets too hot and damp), but it's been kind of messy, and I though that a small, inexpensive basket would help me keep all the little bottles organized. Problem is, I am on the Less is More project, and not supposed to buy anything. All my baskets are already put to good use. What to do? Well, I was inventive. I found a rather sturdy and empty shoe box, cut the top off, and filled it. Who cares if it doesn't look pretty. It's gonna be inside a cupboard! And now I can say that I did a good deed for the environment: reused something that was perfectly fine instead of acquiring something new.

What did you resist this week? Did you donate or get rid of anything? How did that make you feel? Please comment below! And...

• Become a follower of the blog (top left corner of this page)
• Follow me on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/happinesssavouredhot
• Subscribe by email: mleuxj@gmail.com