Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Rothbard

Ready for "Unjobbing"?

34 posts in this topic

Let's fight the biggest DAMN conspiracy of them all - slavery to the system.

http://campinglifequest.com/inspiration/unjobbing-or-how-to-make-a-living-withou 

From the article:

"When my husband and I deserted our cushy life and city jobs five years ago to stitch together a living on our dream homestead in the sticks, we didn’t know there was a term for such outrageous behavior. Ah, but, there is.

Coined in 1996 by fellow ship-jumper and author Michael Fogler, “un-jobbing” is exactly what we are doing here in the Ozarks. Like Fogler, we freed ourselves from a life of merely making a living. Instead of being rattled from sleep by a screaming alarm clock (a totally unnatural way to awaken) to trudge to a corporate establishment, we rise with the sun. No longer exhausted from grueling days consumed indoors, my husband can devote boundless energy to designing and building all we need here, especially his favorite – human-powered devices for the self-reliant.

And I can grow food, sew, draw, write, delight in nature and volunteer at the local food producers’ co-op. Although not impossible, it was less fun to do such things when depleted from work, worry and driving. As crazy as it sounds, I found I had more money by not working. Having a job means buying clothes, gas and food, among other nonsense, away from home. Incidentally, the higher one’s income, the more damage done to the environment.

In his gutsy, concise book (only 106 pages), Un-Jobbing: The Adult Liberation Handbook, Fogler explains how he pulled all the areas of his life into alignment with his personal values, living more simply and consciously. In a light-hearted style, he chronicles his journey in search of the ultimate fantasy job, a high-paying, full-time career “with benefits package and security.” Fogler’s frustrating pursuit led him in an entirely different direction – home, where his heart is, enjoying a non-job-dominated life."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Rothbard said:

Let's fight the biggest DAMN conspiracy of them all - slavery to the system.

http://campinglifequest.com/inspiration/unjobbing-or-how-to-make-a-living-withou 

From the article:

"When my husband and I deserted our cushy life and city jobs five years ago to stitch together a living on our dream homestead in the sticks, we didn’t know there was a term for such outrageous behavior. Ah, but, there is.

Coined in 1996 by fellow ship-jumper and author Michael Fogler, “un-jobbing” is exactly what we are doing here in the Ozarks. Like Fogler, we freed ourselves from a life of merely making a living. Instead of being rattled from sleep by a screaming alarm clock (a totally unnatural way to awaken) to trudge to a corporate establishment, we rise with the sun. No longer exhausted from grueling days consumed indoors, my husband can devote boundless energy to designing and building all we need here, especially his favorite – human-powered devices for the self-reliant.

And I can grow food, sew, draw, write, delight in nature and volunteer at the local food producers’ co-op. Although not impossible, it was less fun to do such things when depleted from work, worry and driving. As crazy as it sounds, I found I had more money by not working. Having a job means buying clothes, gas and food, among other nonsense, away from home. Incidentally, the higher one’s income, the more damage done to the environment.

In his gutsy, concise book (only 106 pages), Un-Jobbing: The Adult Liberation Handbook, Fogler explains how he pulled all the areas of his life into alignment with his personal values, living more simply and consciously. In a light-hearted style, he chronicles his journey in search of the ultimate fantasy job, a high-paying, full-time career “with benefits package and security.” Fogler’s frustrating pursuit led him in an entirely different direction – home, where his heart is, enjoying a non-job-dominated life."

I could never do this. I have two young children to take care of. It's a nice thought anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about this. Certainly there are many aspects of modern living that are unhealthy and stressful. But this is also true of living away from most other people and surviving alone or in a very small group. I think there are some good reasons why civilized countries have better life expectancy and more leisure time. For example, though much of modern medicine is corrupt and unhealthy, I think we can all agree that if you need your appendix removed or a torn retina repaired, anesthesia and cleanliness would be greatly appreciated. And it takes a lot of resources to train the surgeons, make the instruments, and build the facilities. Modern life is complex, but that complexity is not always a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a nice article and I would love to live that way but I'm getting too old to plow a field. LOL Actually, You can live a version of that life style if you want to.

I have spent most of my life being a homemaker. My husband and I discovered 30 years ago that it made more financial sense for me to stay home and take care of the house, yard, kids, cooking, etc. while he went out and made the money. In the 80's when most women left the home and started clawing their way up the corporate ladder, I bucked the system and reverted back to a 50's lifestyle.

We never had to paid for daycare. I cooked most of our meals at home. I grew a garden, canned, sewed, made gifts, shopped at thrift stores, mowed the lawn, I can do basic plumbing and electrical, drywall, paint, ...the list goes on and on. Living on one salary, I had to learn to do lots of  things because there was no money to pay people to do that stuff for me.

Our children are grown, doing well in life, we are at a point  where we have enough money to do anything we want to and can pay people to take care of all the things I've been tasked with over the years.  Ya know what? I still do it all. Why? Because my life has been greatly enriched by all the skills I acquired through necessity. Knowledge is power and I'm one powerful woman! Besides, staying active keeps the old body in good shape and away from doctors.

Modern society puts no value on being a homemaker. They sell everyone on the 2 income idea and consumerism. Yet, while both parents are working, they have to pay someone to do all the jobs a mom could do.

We wonder why 60% of marriages end up in divorce and our children are a mess. Its because having a 50 inch TV and a BMW is more important in today's world than a home cooked dinner and tucking kids into a clean bed.

How much money did my husband and I save over the years because I refused to buy into the madness? A lot, Read on.....

 

It's hard to argue with the fact that stay-at-home parenting is one of the most undervalued careers in the U.S.

Moms (and yes, some dads, too) do double duty as chauffeurs, cooks, psychologists, money managers and more, on average clocking a 94-hour work week, according to Salary.com.

Based on the 10 most time consuming tasks listed by more than 6,000 mothers, Salary.com estimated it would cost $113,586 a year to replace them. 

http://www.businessinsider.com/value-of-stay-at-home-moms-2013-5

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every year when I do my taxes I'm reminded why the government supported the feminist movement.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One person's slave job/lifestyle is another person's dream job/lifestyle; one size doesn't fit all. Everyone should decide for themselves how to live, and decisions are best made when there are choices. And that includes women; they are adult human beings and shouldn't be stuffed into someone else's mold.

Taxes are the root of much evil. Look at the "gay marriage" debate for example; the legal and financial issues created the problem of the state defining marriage. Taxes are simply robbing the poor to pay the rich. So don't blame "the feminist movement", which like many other things started out well and was infiltrated and subverted. Before the push for women's rights, a woman could not vote, could not own property in her name, could not open a checking account in her name, and basically was consigned to poverty or dependency on the state if her husband died. A woman who is made to be dependent becomes a burden.

So let's aim at the root of the problem: big government and fractional reserve banking. Then people could freely choose how to live, without anyone holding a virtual gun to their heads or telling them what their place is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thoughtful and thought provoking post Challenger. I guess I separate suffrage and feminism. But then should those who pay no taxes have a say in how the tax dollar is spent? Absolutely, if you're a contributing member of society (birthing and raising future taxpayers for ie. lol) Votes, doesn't matter how I vote, it matters who counts it. Women gave up their right to own property (rescinded in the 17th century) when they married but unmarried and widows certainly could.

Sweden: Female taxpaying members of the cities' guilds are allowed to vote and stand for election during the age of liberty; this right is banned (for local elections) in 1758 and (general elections) in 1771[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women's_rights_%28other_than_voting%29

 

Some interesting facts there. Certainly women had the right to vote long before the '60s feminist movement (Gloria Steinem and all) but qui bono? The tax collector. I got no benefit from working to pay someone else to raise my children. But I certainly see your point. It was necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Challenger said:

One person's slave job/lifestyle is another person's dream job/lifestyle; one size doesn't fit all. Everyone should decide for themselves how to live, and decisions are best made when there are choices. And that includes women; they are adult human beings and shouldn't be stuffed into someone else's mold.

Taxes are the root of much evil. Look at the "gay marriage" debate for example; the legal and financial issues created the problem of the state defining marriage. Taxes are simply robbing the poor to pay the rich. So don't blame "the feminist movement", which like many other things started out well and was infiltrated and subverted. Before the push for women's rights, a woman could not vote, could not own property in her name, could not open a checking account in her name, and basically was consigned to poverty or dependency on the state if her husband died. A woman who is made to be dependent becomes a burden.

So let's aim at the root of the problem: big government and fractional reserve banking. Then people could freely choose how to live, without anyone holding a virtual gun to their heads or telling them what their place is.

I respectfully disagree with you on this one Challenger. I do blame the feminist movement. When women left the home, our society started to fall apart. Our children were left to be raised by day care and brain washed by government educators. Women put in long hours in the work place for less than what a man would make.  After 8-10 hours on the job they could hardly gather the strength to make a pot of mac and cheese much less take care of anything else.

When women entered the workforce full time, traditional family structure began to crumble.

I grew up in the 60's. I burnt my bra along with the guys who burnt draft cards. I was all for "woman's rights." For that matter I was the first female "bellman" in Las Vegas. in the 70's. I made a butt load of money and worked very hard to pave the way for women in that town.

Then I got married in the 80's and realized that the most important (and hardest) job a woman could ever have is being a wife and mother. "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world! " Apparently, feminists have lost sight of that!

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brio said:

A thoughtful and thought provoking post Challenger. I guess I separate suffrage and feminism. But then should those who pay no taxes have a say in how the tax dollar is spent? Absolutely, if you're a contributing member of society (birthing and raising future taxpayers for ie. lol) Votes, doesn't matter how I vote, it matters who counts it. Women gave up their right to own property (rescinded in the 17th century) when they married but unmarried and widows certainly could.

Sweden: Female taxpaying members of the cities' guilds are allowed to vote and stand for election during the age of liberty; this right is banned (for local elections) in 1758 and (general elections) in 1771[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women's_rights_%28other_than_voting%29

 

Some interesting facts there. Certainly women had the right to vote long before the '60s feminist movement (Gloria Steinem and all) but qui bono? The tax collector. I got no benefit from working to pay someone else to raise my children. But I certainly see your point. It was necessary.

Thanks. Of course, the times and places women had such rights were not at all common or consistent. Yes there were always exceptions and brave women who went against societal dictates.

Actually, suffrage is what feminism grew out of and was a good thing at first. But as it has become, feminism is no worse than many other -isms, all of which combined to destroy the family. Certainly there was/is a historical unwritten rule that men could have affairs or sleep around before marriage while women who did so were shamed, and this did as much to destroy families as anything else. But instead of raising the bar on the men to be as faithful and pure as they demanded for their wives/girlfriends, TPTB saw to it that the bar was lowered for women. But not only this by itself; we can also add the public "education" system, mass media, entertainment, and social media. On top of all that has been overbearing government that dictates, directly or indirectly, the mores and mindset of people, to the point where a large percentage are welfare leeches or otherwise carry the entitlement disease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CGK said:

I respectfully disagree with you on this one Challenger. I do blame the feminist movement. When women left the home, our society started to fall apart. Our children were left to be raised by day care and brain washed by government educators. Women put in long hours in the work place for less than what a man would make.  After 8-10 hours on the job they could hardly gather the strength to make a pot of mac and cheese much less take care of anything else.

When women entered the workforce full time, traditional family structure began to crumble.

I grew up in the 60's. I burnt my bra along with the guys who burnt draft cards. I was all for "woman's rights." For that matter I was the first female "bellman" in Las Vegas. in the 70's. I made a butt load of money and worked very hard to pave the way for women in that town.

Then I got married in the 80's and realized that the most important (and hardest) job a woman could ever have is being a wife and mother. "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world! " Apparently, feminists have lost sight of that!

 

But I would counter, "Correlation is not causation"; the coincidence of the two isn't necessarily a causal relationship. Remember also that identical "slippery slope" arguments were made during US debates on slavery, such as that equality of the blacks would mean the breakdown of society... and there are many today who think this is true.

Women have always done work outside the home, but had extended family and close friends to help with the children. Throughout history, many women have had to work the fields, or in factories, earning a fraction of a man's pay for the same work, because the man was poor or absent. But she generally had other women to help her with child care. TPTB have cut those ties in many ways, so that a woman who had to work (many women have always had to work; the 1950s in the US were not the historical norm) was forced to hire a stranger.

Once again, though, we have to realize that a grown woman is nobody's possession, that others should determine how she lives her life or raises her children, or has any at all. That's not society's call to make, not a man's call to make, and not other women's call to make. Many woman work outside the home because they must, just as many men do. How many men would go to work if they didn't have to? I'd guess the percentage of women would be very similar. People in general would prefer to spend their days doing what they enjoy, but are forced to do other things by economic necessity.

I have no desire to "rule the world", or to manipulate my husband (the game played by many "subservient" women). I too stayed at home to raise my children, though I had higher earning potential than my husband. And I worked because I enjoyed the work I was trained to do, work that should not have been denied to me just because maybe someday I might have babies. Many men travel so much for work that they are absentee fathers anyway, but nobody thinks to blame them for the breakdown of the family... or to blame porn, or drugs, or a million other things. All they focus on is the new F-word and blame it all on women wanting to be independent adults who make their own decisions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CGK said:

I respectfully disagree with you on this one Challenger. I do blame the feminist movement. When women left the home, our society started to fall apart. Our children were left to be raised by day care and brain washed by government educators. Women put in long hours in the work place for less than what a man would make.  After 8-10 hours on the job they could hardly gather the strength to make a pot of mac and cheese much less take care of anything else.

When women entered the workforce full time, traditional family structure began to crumble.

I grew up in the 60's. I burnt my bra along with the guys who burnt draft cards. I was all for "woman's rights." For that matter I was the first female "bellman" in Las Vegas. in the 70's. I made a butt load of money and worked very hard to pave the way for women in that town.

Then I got married in the 80's and realized that the most important (and hardest) job a woman could ever have is being a wife and mother. "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world! " Apparently, feminists have lost sight of that!

 

I agree wholeheartedly CGK.
The feminist movement has caused so much damage to our society I don't know if it can corrected at this point.
I was taught that feminism was not only about giving women choices but also empowering them to make those choice.
When I made the choice to be a traditional housewife it was my feminist "friends" who berated me for making the wrong choice.
It's true, like you, we did the math and found that we would save a lot of money by me not working and taking care of the kids and home myself. 
Funny thing is, those old friends are now all divorced, resentful and miserable; raising their kids in daycare on one salary and some child support.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor


Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.