Is "Simple Living" Just Another Term for "Giving Up"?

[indieretailer]

I am 46 years old and I'm finally comfortable in my own skin, so to speak. My life evolved from being a hedonistic child of the 80's to being very content with what I have and truly appreciating who I am.

This is just something I thought while I was with my kids at the park today---

I was wondering if there are those people who have decided to lead a "sustainable-frugal-simple-green life" only because they didn't have the ambition, drive, smarts, energy, tenacity, charisma to be an accomplished mogul or bigwig? Do they say "oh yeah, I'm into simplicity now", when what they always craved is a prestige,luxury laden life.

Are there people giving up going up to greater heights in their careers only because they don't have what it takes and are now "simplicity poseurs".

I hope no one takes offense at my question. It's not directed at anyone. I know that there are so many accomplished, brilliantl, well-educated, and articulate people on this forum who choose quality of life over quantitiy. I just thought I'd throw this out there...

[Looby]

I guess for some people that could be the case, but I don't think it would be too common.
Maybe it's the opposite- they've been planning for a simple life all along? Or they were just faking enjoying the rat race because that's what they thought they should do?
I have a friend who is a stock broker- he's had a plan since he was a teenager, to work in that field for 10-12 years, buy property and gather large savings, then he will retrain as a math teacher and spend his summers sailing. He's only 5 years into his plan and has already bought and sold an apartment for almost 2 times what he paid, and the mortgage on his new house is mostly gone.
My partner and I have a similar plan, he is moving from academia to consulting so that we can increase our savings and eventually move to the country.

[SouthShoreGirl]

I make a fairly decent living wage for my field. I think I have pretty much topped-out at the higher end of the payscale for social work. However, I have been questioning if it's worth it for awhile now........I really work a lot of hours, the job is super-stressful and many days I am just not happy to be completely honest. I have to stay there for the time being since I am pregnant but after the baby, I am seriously considering either a career change, or a pay-cut to a job in my field still but with less stress and committment.

[Gootsy]

I definitely think many/most people who live the 'frugal life' do so because they don't have any other choice.

It reminds me of these people who are in debt. When they finally get above water, their disciplined saving suddenly vanishes and they're off to the mall living paycheck to paycheck. How frugal would many of these people(the 'frugal life' people) be if they didn't have to be?

"Simple Living," to me, is more like retirement/semi-retirement.

[amyschiff]

I think there's a misconception that a "simple, frugal" lifestyle == easy. I personally don't believe this is the case. Being frugal takes work and ambition.

[Glue]

Agreed Amy; so in order to guard against such misconceptions I prefer to use the term Abundance over Frugality. It's not splitting hairs, either. Abundance is making the most of what you have. Frugality often implies settling for less and doing the least.

[72Tiger]

There are probably some like that, but I can't see it working long term in that sort of situation. Most people are eventually going to naturally find a spot in the middle of 'simplicity' and 'luxury' where they are most comfortable.

[Philip Brewer]

I think the question gets at the heart of the difference between choosing a simple life and simply being poor.

Half of the difference is intent--if you've made a choice to live this way, you're living simply. Someone living at the same standard of living, but doing so unwillingly, is just poor.

The other half, to my mind, is capital. One thing that you find much more often among the voluntary simplicity folks is some amount of savings or investments--maybe some mutual funds, maybe some money in a 401(k), maybe a house that's not mortgaged, maybe just an emergency account big enough to tide them over through several months without an income.

If you want to find poseurs, the place to look is not among the voluntary simplicity folks. You'll find way more among the people making an income that supports a less-simple life, but who choose to live at a standard of living that requires even more. Who's more of a poseur than someone who makes ends meet by borrowing ever-increasing sums?

[wildgift]

What's wrong with "giving up" shopping so you can spend more time working on things you care about? That's all this "simplicity" stuff seems to be, to me. (Excepting that magazine Real Simple, which appears to be mostly bullshit.)

[colorcozy]

This is quite a thought-provoking post for me, as I've recently begun a blog on simple living (http://colorcozy.sampasite.com).

Just this morning I was looking for some fresh content online to incorporate into a new post (I'm just back from vacation), and found the Wikipedia article on Simple Living which I hadn't read before...

Their definition clarifies, "Simple living as a concept is distinguished from those living in forced poverty, as it is a voluntary lifestyle choice."

I think that if people make the choice to live simply then, by definition, they're not merely "giving up" on living large. They (we) are intentionally deciding that there is a better way than what they see advertised, that by simplifying with their pocketbook and possessions they can reap more abundantly in their personal relationships, their spiritual lives, and their experience of community.

As another commenter mentioned, living simply can actually be quite difficult. As I've discovered in my own life and in the lives of others who have made this choice, though, it's quite worth it... and it's actually rather fun :-)