5 ms·

Spot on. This is something my wife and I have known for a while now. The shitty part of this reality, is that there isn't much anyone who isn't extremely can do

Spot on. This is something my wife and I have known for a while now. The shitty part of this reality, is that there isn't much anyone who isn't extremely can do about it. In countries like Denmark, there are many apartment communities which have communal areas and kitchens, which allows folks to have "villages" in close quarters to city centers. My experience on the west coast of the USA however, is that no such thing exists outside of convalescent homes for elderly people. Some people have gone to extreme lengths to buy up land with a 503c corp in order to create communes in the countryside, which is great! While that solves the issues around villages and communal living, it divorces itself from the life and culture of society at large. How can we still benefit from communal living, while still providing the option to work a modern job in a downtown office?

reustle 9y ago
In Japan (mostly Tokyo), the concept of "share houses" are super popular. With the ever increasing workload on everyone, people have a hard time spending social time with others. These share houses, with large common living areas and kitchens, give people a little bit more social interaction than they'd otherwise get. I've lived in a few myself, and as long as its a quality house (medium price range and up), it's a great experience.
jcbrand 9y ago
Next up: "Could modern work in downtown offices be the reason why we're all miserable?" I'm only half joking. I'm becoming more and more convinced that staring at a computer screen 40+ hours a week is not healthy at all. Couple that with the known psychological ill-effects of social media together with the hysterical, outrage-driven news-cycle, which we consume while staring into said screens, and the effect is downright toxic for mental and physical health and general happiness.
- jacobush 9y ago
  Not at all joking, rather.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  It's pretty much a given that staring at a screen 40+ hours is bad for you. It's bad physically and mentally. I used to take long trips between 6 and 8 weeks for vacation and I always noticed how after a few weeks I started seeing the world around me much clearer than when I work. I think we are losing the ability to take a break.
  - leggomylibro 9y ago
    >I think we are losing the ability to take a break. I'm not sure if it's just me, but I've been feeling a huge sense of urgency lately. The news just keeps coming that endemic corruption has finally eaten through the woodwork, and I feel like if I don't take the opportunity to learn while the learning is good, I'll be screwed in 2-5 years when the norms collapse. I guess that's a similar mindset to 'preppers', but I'm focusing on knowledge rather than things. Soon enough, I probably won't be able to look up how to...oh I dunno, make a blacksmithing forge on the cheap. Maybe if we felt like we lived in a stable situation, we'd be more able to step back and breathe. Relentlessly tap-dancing on quicksand isn't good for anyone's mental health.
    - maxxxxx 9y ago
      When you look at today's world compared to the first half of the 20th century this is nothing if that is of any comfort.
      - leggomylibro 9y ago
        It is, but the people in those eras bled and died for the protections that we are starting to eschew rather than strengthen. And people do have less time today than they did in the early 20th century. Smartphones have made sure of that. Maybe it's a moral failing to waste a significant amount of time on them, but do you know many people who don't? It seems more like a reliable exploit than an individual failing to me. "Things used to be worse" cannot be used to excuse "things will not get better."
        9y ago
alexasmyths 9y ago
Not 'spot on' - it's 'totally wrong'. Being isolated is a social function that has nothing to do with marriage. At least within a family there is a micro community. There's no reason not to be active and engaged as families. If anything - the 'problem' is modernity and consumer culture. When people lived in villages, and everyone knew everyone - it may not have been great, but I suggest people were less lonely. Even the more isolated people in small towns - have places they can go 'where everyone knows their name'. This is fulfilling - to know that 'people care' even if they don't know you very well. It's something to be 85 years old in a town where basically every resident knows you, and knows about you.
- iamcasen 9y ago
  I agree with what you're saying. I think the author was wrong in trying to pin it completely on the "nuclear family." I was more or less agreeing with the notion that many of us pursue this path to self-sufficiency with our nuclear families. We buy our own house. Do our own laundry, our own cooking and yard work, our own house repairs, etc, etc. After all that work, I personally find I have little time and energy to socialize. So then we work harder so we can afford services like maids and gardeners. I think the answer is akin to what the author mentions: we need a village! It would be great if I used my handy skills to help my neighbors, and the local green thumb helped me with my yard in turn. It would be great if a retired woman in the neighborhood wanted to help take care of the babies for a night while my wife and I go out. Back in the days of villages, this was how it worked. Now, along with the consumerist culture you mentioned, and the dogma about self-sufficiency, we are all working ourselves to death.
  - alexasmyths 9y ago
    I think you said it better than I. Existential problems: + We don't put a number value on these things, so it doesn't work into the GDP, ergo, things that do have a numbered value get overrepresented in policy making. This is how 'big business' and business/libertarian types move against communities without realizing it. + 'Old' cultural artifacts come with a lot of baggage (ie gender, sexuality), and it's hard to change - so lefty progressive types like to discount almost anything 'traditional' in favour of modern 'culturally secular' values of their own intellectual making. But they throw the baby out with the bathwater. This to me is how progressive type people and thinkers move against communities without realizing it. I am originally from a very small town, and I go back often, and I am very thankful for it. What scares me the most about modern culture - is the suburban kids I know have the concept of 'community' completely erased from their cultural knowledge after only one generation in the 'new world'. These are the types that get sold 'Starbucks' as being some kind of legit 'community meeting spot'. They don't grasp that the 'warm glow of a Starbucks' is manufactured in a marketing meeting! Ok, enough with my 'I'm getting old' rants :)
kelnos 9y ago
I read an article a few days ago (possibly posted here on HN) that was talking about a group that's been buying up properties in SF and turning them into (more or less) communal homes for middle-income people who make too much to qualify for affordable housing, but not enough to afford SF. They have small private bedrooms with semi-shared bathrooms, but with a large common kitchen and eating area where everyone can get together and cook and eat together. I hope something like this takes off; it's interesting that it's coming about in SF because of housing costs.

reustle 9y ago

In Japan (mostly Tokyo), the concept of "share houses" are super popular. With the ever increasing workload on everyone, people have a hard time spending social time with others. These share houses, with large common living areas and kitchens, give people a little bit more social interaction than they'd otherwise get. I've lived in a few myself, and as long as its a quality house (medium price range and up), it's a great experience.

jcbrand 9y ago

Next up: "Could modern work in downtown offices be the reason why we're all miserable?" I'm only half joking. I'm becoming more and more convinced that staring at a computer screen 40+ hours a week is not healthy at all. Couple that with the known psychological ill-effects of social media together with the hysterical, outrage-driven news-cycle, which we consume while staring into said screens, and the effect is downright toxic for mental and physical health and general happiness.

jacobush 9y ago
Not at all joking, rather.
maxxxxx 9y ago
It's pretty much a given that staring at a screen 40+ hours is bad for you. It's bad physically and mentally. I used to take long trips between 6 and 8 weeks for vacation and I always noticed how after a few weeks I started seeing the world around me much clearer than when I work. I think we are losing the ability to take a break.
- leggomylibro 9y ago
  >I think we are losing the ability to take a break. I'm not sure if it's just me, but I've been feeling a huge sense of urgency lately. The news just keeps coming that endemic corruption has finally eaten through the woodwork, and I feel like if I don't take the opportunity to learn while the learning is good, I'll be screwed in 2-5 years when the norms collapse. I guess that's a similar mindset to 'preppers', but I'm focusing on knowledge rather than things. Soon enough, I probably won't be able to look up how to...oh I dunno, make a blacksmithing forge on the cheap. Maybe if we felt like we lived in a stable situation, we'd be more able to step back and breathe. Relentlessly tap-dancing on quicksand isn't good for anyone's mental health.
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    When you look at today's world compared to the first half of the 20th century this is nothing if that is of any comfort.
    - leggomylibro 9y ago
      It is, but the people in those eras bled and died for the protections that we are starting to eschew rather than strengthen. And people do have less time today than they did in the early 20th century. Smartphones have made sure of that. Maybe it's a moral failing to waste a significant amount of time on them, but do you know many people who don't? It seems more like a reliable exploit than an individual failing to me. "Things used to be worse" cannot be used to excuse "things will not get better."
      - 9y ago

alexasmyths 9y ago

Not 'spot on' - it's 'totally wrong'. Being isolated is a social function that has nothing to do with marriage. At least within a family there is a micro community. There's no reason not to be active and engaged as families. If anything - the 'problem' is modernity and consumer culture. When people lived in villages, and everyone knew everyone - it may not have been great, but I suggest people were less lonely. Even the more isolated people in small towns - have places they can go 'where everyone knows their name'. This is fulfilling - to know that 'people care' even if they don't know you very well. It's something to be 85 years old in a town where basically every resident knows you, and knows about you.

iamcasen 9y ago
I agree with what you're saying. I think the author was wrong in trying to pin it completely on the "nuclear family." I was more or less agreeing with the notion that many of us pursue this path to self-sufficiency with our nuclear families. We buy our own house. Do our own laundry, our own cooking and yard work, our own house repairs, etc, etc. After all that work, I personally find I have little time and energy to socialize. So then we work harder so we can afford services like maids and gardeners. I think the answer is akin to what the author mentions: we need a village! It would be great if I used my handy skills to help my neighbors, and the local green thumb helped me with my yard in turn. It would be great if a retired woman in the neighborhood wanted to help take care of the babies for a night while my wife and I go out. Back in the days of villages, this was how it worked. Now, along with the consumerist culture you mentioned, and the dogma about self-sufficiency, we are all working ourselves to death.
- alexasmyths 9y ago
  I think you said it better than I. Existential problems: + We don't put a number value on these things, so it doesn't work into the GDP, ergo, things that do have a numbered value get overrepresented in policy making. This is how 'big business' and business/libertarian types move against communities without realizing it. + 'Old' cultural artifacts come with a lot of baggage (ie gender, sexuality), and it's hard to change - so lefty progressive types like to discount almost anything 'traditional' in favour of modern 'culturally secular' values of their own intellectual making. But they throw the baby out with the bathwater. This to me is how progressive type people and thinkers move against communities without realizing it. I am originally from a very small town, and I go back often, and I am very thankful for it. What scares me the most about modern culture - is the suburban kids I know have the concept of 'community' completely erased from their cultural knowledge after only one generation in the 'new world'. These are the types that get sold 'Starbucks' as being some kind of legit 'community meeting spot'. They don't grasp that the 'warm glow of a Starbucks' is manufactured in a marketing meeting! Ok, enough with my 'I'm getting old' rants :)

kelnos 9y ago

I read an article a few days ago (possibly posted here on HN) that was talking about a group that's been buying up properties in SF and turning them into (more or less) communal homes for middle-income people who make too much to qualify for affordable housing, but not enough to afford SF. They have small private bedrooms with semi-shared bathrooms, but with a large common kitchen and eating area where everyone can get together and cook and eat together. I hope something like this takes off; it's interesting that it's coming about in SF because of housing costs.