katmainomad’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I don't think it is so monastic to live on about this much, I have frequently done it. As a grad student, I made about $1000/month, $650 of which immediately went to rent (which was cheap for the Berkeley area). For the 3 years before I returned to work after my child was born, our family of three lived on about $18,000 per year. My life was just as rich, if not richer, than now when I have plenty of money. I don't really buy more material items, but I do buy more expensive food (a bit more organic than I could before), am a bit more likely to go out for entertainment (cafe, the museum, the symphony, the pool, etc) with my friends instead of just meeting at one of our houses. And I now own a 4-plex where we live - so even though my 'rent' is the same as before, I pour all my extra money into weatherization and fruit trees and such. It was nice to just have the $8,000 lying around to insulate the foundation with 4 inches of blueboard, but I only have to do that once! I figure once my 4-plex is weatherized and permacultured to the point I want it in about 3 years my utilities will be so low and my produce needs so taken care of from the garden, that I should be able to live on about $10,000 for the whole family and have a rich life. A biggie, of course, is biking and walking instead of owning a car. Maybe I don't even need to save for retirement - My mortgage will be paid off when I am 65, and the rent I take in on the other 3 units will be my retirement (making a lot of assumptions about the future...as we all do when planning for it).On Simple people posted 4 days, 12 hours ago 6 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Absolutely, the general wisdom is that 20% of people or less will choose to make these changes (whether you call them lifestyle or not), so things will have to be mandated or heavily incentivized, or the way things work will have to change to get 100% on board. I do find a problem with people who agree these things should be done but complain that it is impossible in their lives. It is not impossible to do these things on a budget, or change jobs, or move somewhere more conducive, etc. Plenty of people have made these choices. Admit this is not a choice you want to make right now, but admit it is a choice. It is a choice to have air conditioning and central heating, it is a choice to live in single family housing, it is a choice to live far from work, it is a choice to own a refrigerator. But before I alienate anyone further - no commenter seems to argue with the efficacy of the options, just the feasibility. It comes down to will...and we just don't seem to have that. Sigh.On Simple lifestyle tweaks key in climate change fight posted 3 weeks, 4 days ago 47 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I don't think these changes are so out of reach. Most efficient appliances aren't very much more expensive than the non-efficient version and pay for themselves. Most of the changes (turning down the heat, hanging laundry) save money with no upfront cost. If you can't afford a more fuel efficient vehicle (used civic or justy or escort - I have bought them all for under $3000, each gets 35 mpg+) ride a bike (my current only vehicle). However, I'm under the influence of Jensen these days, so I'm leaning to the 'civilization just has to go' side of things...On Simple lifestyle tweaks key in climate change fight posted 3 weeks, 4 days ago 47 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  It is an interesting question. In my local sierra club group, I notice a rough split of people. there are (very simplistically), those whose lives revolve around biking and farmers markets and urban permaculture gardens and simple living, and who adamantly want to lower greenhouse gas emissions, fix the climate, and reduce overall resource use. Then there are those who want to hike in a pristine local park, even if they drove their SUV there, and work tirelessly to protect local area X from ATVs, mines or whatever. Yah, it's not so cut and dry, and you can guess which group I am in by my crass characterization. While ecosystems as a whole, and many versions of 'the land' are important to me, it is much more about justice - enough for all species and groups and a livable world, than about a few protected places. I want to protect the earth, not the land. The word 'land' seems too limited. But maybe it rhymes better in the song? I'll go listen...On Does anyone still care about "the land"? posted 1 month, 3 weeks ago 25 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I, for one, am with you. I send my kid (age 6) to a waldorf-inspired public school that would rather we kept our kids from any screen time. Most of us parents cave and open up at least non-school nights to some appropriate movies or internet. With an only child, self-entertainment is a magic thing, and luckily my kid finally likes to play by himself with objects he pretendsd are space ships or swords for long hours. I also nab any playmate I can to come help him in this activity. I agree that games, internet or otherwise, are not inherently damaging to most normal adults or near adults. I think they can have adverse effects on the development of a young child. The debate will continue, but screens are inherently different from paper books, and both may need to take a backseat to social and environmental play to raise a healthy child. I was a bookworm, but my parents made me and/or took me outside to play a fair amount, and the combination of the two is wonderful.

  On The fight to save childhood posted 2 months ago 8 Responses