arma virumque cano (et alia)
This is one book that I won't be reading. Let's note that the subject wears glasses, rides a bicycle, and uses the Internet at his local library. Each of those was produced in an economy that depends on money to function. He hasn't quit money. He's just become a scavenger.
He clearly states in this video that he is going to use what is already freely available and I think those things he has or uses qualify. He would agree that he is scavenging.
I agree with Greg, if we didn't have people producing stuff this guy wouldn't be able to live. No roads, no cars, no roadkill.the real orlin sellers
Wow, what's it take to gain your respect, Orlin. I thought you'd love this guy.
The guy is free to live like he wants, he has a choice. He chooses to be a scavenger, others live simply by being hunter/gatherers. Choice is a wonderful thing. Some people choose to be armed, some don't. Unfortunately, it seems like the unarmed disdain choice and would like to dictate how others live.orlin sellers
Well, there you have it. Greg Camp and orlin sellers, two guys who are adamant about having to haz teh gunz (and the freedom to kill scary people without taking any responsibility for "collateral damage"), rugged individualists right out of the Charlton Heston mold* are critical of someone who lives off the land so to speak.What is it that pisses you off most, fellas? Is it the pink flamingo on the bike or is it that the subject of the book is STEALING food from dumpters and nobody has ended his scavenging and his miserable life with a double tap from their penisubstitute of choice?* Which is to say that they're ACTING like they're rugged indivdualists.
No, this man really doesn't bother me that much. He has his life; I have mine. But he's not superior to the rest of us, and he's living off the scraps of the society that he or the author are criticizing, not off the land.
My first observation was that the man was not living without money since he was benefiting from the activities of others involved with money.I agree that there are some huge problems with the fundamentals of our economy and more so with government budgeting and monetary policy. If government lived within our means, we would not have a national debt and the associated problems and risks. It never ceases to amaze me how our country got along just fine for decades without any significant national debt ... and how we somehow would have shrivelled up and disappeared had we not suddenly become indebted to the tune of about $47,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country. That means a nominal family of four -- their "share" of the national debt is $188,000. If the government stopped all deficit spending tomorrow, how long would take that family of four to pay down that $188,000 of debt?While there is some appeal to the way that man lives, I could not expect my wife and children to live that way. As much as we love camping in remote and rustic locations, we would eventually run out of soap, toothbrushes, and toothpaste. I don't want to live without those items.
Four more years of Obama and we'll have a lot more people living like this guy - but not by their own choice.orlin sellers