Just what the name says. You live simply voluntarily. The people who live like this without much choice is typically called “So poor you don’t have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of”
My post is stemming from this article from the New York Times article (and a nod to the Metafilter thread) about a family leaving all their worldly possessions behind in order to move to the country and live as simply and self-sufficient as possible (Dad is still keeping his job that generates a pretty large income).
I admire them for doing something like this, but also question it. Why do you have to run to the country to live self-sufficient? It’s easy to let go of all your stuff and then move to the country, but how about letting go of all your stuff and live simply in the city? This way you’re showing others the benefits of living simply and expanding the idea on a more metro level then in the forest where deer and bears don’t really give a shit.
I think it’s a fantastic idea really, and I think the idea could be expanded upon for others to start adopting a more simple life without having to abandon all of their stuff. There’s some sites that touch upon the subject, but I think if people really want to see how to live simply… go to a village in Europe. It’ll be a crash course, I promise you.
But all this talk about simple living has me remembering things my mom has told me about her childhood in the war and also how resourceful she is now. She said they didn’t have much growing up so you had to use what you have or think of other ways of getting what you want. Hubby is the same way. And now I’m starting to try and change the way I think because I’m the epitome of a greedy American. If I want something, I go out and buy it. I don’t want Peanut to live in this manner. So I’m making the change… it’ll be a slow change, but a change nonetheless.