I guess I had a different reaction to his no-money thing, kind of putting it into the context of my own recent experiences, feeling drowned in the rat race some

I guess I had a different reaction to his no-money thing, kind of putting it into the context of my own recent experiences, feeling drowned in the rat race sometimes, and seeing that happening to other people I know. Have we made things better in the last 50 years? The culture in the U.S. seems to be very focused on money, keeping the gdp growing, counting on consumers to keep consuming, etc. Isn't money supposed to be just a means to an end? So I took this guy's stance on money as making a statement. Are we hating on the guy who doesn't want to play the game so many of us feel stuck in? Is he worse then the rich who dupe the rest of us, plundering the common good for their profits? I think it's great that there's people out there dedicated to exploring different ideas. That seems to be inevitable, there's billions of us, and we're not evolved to be the same, for good reason. The majority shouldn't need to be scared of the minority, right? And we're all equal, aren't we? Also, unrelated to the idea of no money, I liked his taking a stand on allowing people to sleep in parks. Many homeless people want to work and need to be near cities, where the jobs tend to be, and have nowhere secure to sleep. Maybe lockers, porta potties, showers, cheap boarding houses, camps for the better behaved, camps for the crazies, etc. What we're dong now isn't good enough. I'd like to think if we got all opinions in a room we could work something out. They're people, too. Anyways, that's what was running through my mind when I read the article. I've also thought of stuff like this from the van life perspective, like you mentioned. In the past I've railed against welfare, but lately I wonder more about the burdens we place on the poor more than the money we give them. I don't think I've ever thought it was immoral to be poor.