6 ms·

The author seems quite selfish and manipulative of others. He chooses to live this way because it allows him to avoid social interactions with others. Unlike t

by bhawks 4y ago

The author seems quite selfish and manipulative of others. He chooses to live this way because it allows him to avoid social interactions with others. Unlike true poverty he could easily utilize both his relational capital (call parents, get cash) and educational capital (had the ability to get a professional job and turned it down) these are simply not options for people who are actually poor. He clearly wants more from life, as long as someone gives it to him on his own terms. There seems to be a lot of baggage from his childhood and subtle resentment to his parents. I'm concerned for his mental health. If this is truly just his personal choice though, I really question the relationship he has with his children and his justifications for how he provides the bare minimum for them when her could certainly do more. For someone so focused on frugality and minimalism his discussion about his children was focused completely on materialism, gift giving and the fact that a little under half of his monthly income came from government programs targeted at children. I kept expecting to read something about how he connects with them in emotionally meaningful ways or helps them grow and thrive. That love and care just didn't seem there. Ultimately I worry about the kids, specifically their emotional and developmental needs. Their dad is so focused on himself and how he wants to live. That sounds like a very tough home to grow up in, even if the author was spectacularly rich.

ano88888 4y ago
Since I came from a very poorish developing country, i can't understand some Europians contempt for wealth. I still lived in the poor country but i am making much more money than the OP and I am proud of it. They have this attitude of 'oh, i don't care about money' prabably they think their government is gonna be always be able to support them and their economy will always be good. Things change. These people will likely regret when they put their family in a fragile position.
- vintermann 4y ago
  Or maybe, like you, they understand their own position quite well. As I wrote in the reply above, I know many now adult children of similar parents. They're doing fine. I also know some whose parents had more of an attitude like you, that this could all be gone soon and you need to resolutely pursue money and status to be safe when that happens. Usually kids of immigrants. They seem to have much more strained relationships to their parents - and not that much better outcomes on average. Where you are, maybe your advice is sound. But odds are that OP understands their own situation better than you who aren't in it; and that in Sweden you would be barking up the wrong tree, guarding against the wrong threats.
- xyzzy123 4y ago
  If you live out in the woods, grow much of your own food and don't do many things that require money, I would argue you are quite well equipped to handle the most likely societal catastrophes. What would be even better is knowing a few useful trades. And if the government or economy fails, children are more or less the traditional sort of "insurance" against penury in old age.
vintermann 4y ago
> Unlike true poverty he could easily utilize both his relational capital (call parents, get cash) and educational capital (had the ability to get a professional job and turned it down) these are simply not options for people who are actually poor. This is true, but the author doesn't pretend otherwise, or hide this fact. That you accuse him of being selfish I think says more about you than him. I went to a Waldorf school once upon a time, so I knew a lot of kids who grew up in a similar-ish way - lots of siblings, little money, low tech and with unconventional and somewhat iconoclastic parents who had rejected the middle-class lifestyle (which they, like OP, could easily have had access to through relational capital). None of those kids that I know of have done especially poorly. Most of them have turned out very different from their parents, from becoming social media celebrities to getting involved with MLM-like schemes. But I don't think any of them are bitter about their upbringing, or alienated from their "selfish" parents.
- yellow_lead 4y ago
  Although I'm not the original commentator, I think selfish is a fair characterization. When you have kids you should want to give them the best opportunities possible. If they end up wanting to make the choices the author made, that is fine, but at least they would have the option of living differently too. I'm not saying that it's impossible they will have those opportunities, but it's less likely than if they had access to the best schools - which the article states they don't. Maybe the author tries to make up for this in other ways, but IMO it's unlikely to afford the same opportunities. Plus, as GP mentions, there's no mention in this article of any of that. > None of those kids that I know of have done especially poorly. Most of them have turned out very different from their parents, from becoming social media celebrities to getting involved with MLM-like schemes. Getting involved in MLM sounds like doing poorly to me. At least it is morally questionable. Maybe they're doing well financially.
  - vintermann 4y ago
    As I said in the other comment, I think this guy knows his own situation (which is probably very different from yours) well. He's giving his kids an upbringing that is good in its own way, that gives them experiences and opportunities not many others have. It's very questionable if "prestigious schools before the age of 18" is as optimal as you think in Sweden. It's good to have strengths not many other have. My "social media star" friend is a school nurse who connects extremely well - and constructively - to the youth generation she serves through her job. I would think that her uncommon background (including a lot more younger siblings than is common in this country, and all with an individualistic streak) prepared her somewhat for that job. I'm sure that if she had instead been given what you and the person I replied to see as an "optimal" background, she would be less prepared for it. As for the MLM guy, to be fair, I don't know if he's still into that, he just pitched some questionable cell phone provider once when we were in engineering school together. I do know he's better off than me materially today. I mentioned him to illustrate that the apple can fall further from the tree, too.
rwnspace 4y ago
I would hazard that these are closer to your projections - he does mention having more time to spend socialising with his kids. You were expecting him to allay your fears about what a lack of financial resources might do. The article isn't a celebration of things he does with his kids, but an exploration of having less material wealth, hence the focus, no? I know several families like this, generally hippies with an educated middle-class background, but without the desire to sacrifice themselves for money and it's trappings (and benefits). Their kids are intelligent and interesting people, and as far as I can see, have been given life as an open canvas, not as a paint-by-numbers exercise, which so many others experience.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
geysersam 4y ago
Just because he doesn't brag about connecting emotionally with his children you assume he's not a loving father? I think that's an unwarranted fear considering he's got more time for his kids than most parents. His upbringing/mental health is probably not without flaw, but seriously whos is? We've got such narrow minded ideas about what a healthy life looks like nowadays. I blame advertisement.
low_tech_love 4y ago
It's interesting that, indirectly, you managed to take away from the article two very basic things about Swedes: (1) Yes, they will do anything to avoid human contact; dialog and human connection are two extremely emotionally expensive things for them. And (2) yes, love and care mean totally different things here than most other people from other countries are used to.
rootusrootus 4y ago
> The author seems quite selfish and manipulative of others. And snobby. He spends a lot of time rationalizing how his choices are morally superior.

by bhawks 4y ago

ano88888 4y ago

Since I came from a very poorish developing country, i can't understand some Europians contempt for wealth. I still lived in the poor country but i am making much more money than the OP and I am proud of it. They have this attitude of 'oh, i don't care about money' prabably they think their government is gonna be always be able to support them and their economy will always be good. Things change. These people will likely regret when they put their family in a fragile position.

vintermann 4y ago
Or maybe, like you, they understand their own position quite well. As I wrote in the reply above, I know many now adult children of similar parents. They're doing fine. I also know some whose parents had more of an attitude like you, that this could all be gone soon and you need to resolutely pursue money and status to be safe when that happens. Usually kids of immigrants. They seem to have much more strained relationships to their parents - and not that much better outcomes on average. Where you are, maybe your advice is sound. But odds are that OP understands their own situation better than you who aren't in it; and that in Sweden you would be barking up the wrong tree, guarding against the wrong threats.
xyzzy123 4y ago
If you live out in the woods, grow much of your own food and don't do many things that require money, I would argue you are quite well equipped to handle the most likely societal catastrophes. What would be even better is knowing a few useful trades. And if the government or economy fails, children are more or less the traditional sort of "insurance" against penury in old age.

vintermann 4y ago

> Unlike true poverty he could easily utilize both his relational capital (call parents, get cash) and educational capital (had the ability to get a professional job and turned it down) these are simply not options for people who are actually poor. This is true, but the author doesn't pretend otherwise, or hide this fact. That you accuse him of being selfish I think says more about you than him. I went to a Waldorf school once upon a time, so I knew a lot of kids who grew up in a similar-ish way - lots of siblings, little money, low tech and with unconventional and somewhat iconoclastic parents who had rejected the middle-class lifestyle (which they, like OP, could easily have had access to through relational capital). None of those kids that I know of have done especially poorly. Most of them have turned out very different from their parents, from becoming social media celebrities to getting involved with MLM-like schemes. But I don't think any of them are bitter about their upbringing, or alienated from their "selfish" parents.

yellow_lead 4y ago
Although I'm not the original commentator, I think selfish is a fair characterization. When you have kids you should want to give them the best opportunities possible. If they end up wanting to make the choices the author made, that is fine, but at least they would have the option of living differently too. I'm not saying that it's impossible they will have those opportunities, but it's less likely than if they had access to the best schools - which the article states they don't. Maybe the author tries to make up for this in other ways, but IMO it's unlikely to afford the same opportunities. Plus, as GP mentions, there's no mention in this article of any of that. > None of those kids that I know of have done especially poorly. Most of them have turned out very different from their parents, from becoming social media celebrities to getting involved with MLM-like schemes. Getting involved in MLM sounds like doing poorly to me. At least it is morally questionable. Maybe they're doing well financially.
- vintermann 4y ago
  As I said in the other comment, I think this guy knows his own situation (which is probably very different from yours) well. He's giving his kids an upbringing that is good in its own way, that gives them experiences and opportunities not many others have. It's very questionable if "prestigious schools before the age of 18" is as optimal as you think in Sweden. It's good to have strengths not many other have. My "social media star" friend is a school nurse who connects extremely well - and constructively - to the youth generation she serves through her job. I would think that her uncommon background (including a lot more younger siblings than is common in this country, and all with an individualistic streak) prepared her somewhat for that job. I'm sure that if she had instead been given what you and the person I replied to see as an "optimal" background, she would be less prepared for it. As for the MLM guy, to be fair, I don't know if he's still into that, he just pitched some questionable cell phone provider once when we were in engineering school together. I do know he's better off than me materially today. I mentioned him to illustrate that the apple can fall further from the tree, too.

rwnspace 4y ago

I would hazard that these are closer to your projections - he does mention having more time to spend socialising with his kids. You were expecting him to allay your fears about what a lack of financial resources might do. The article isn't a celebration of things he does with his kids, but an exploration of having less material wealth, hence the focus, no? I know several families like this, generally hippies with an educated middle-class background, but without the desire to sacrifice themselves for money and it's trappings (and benefits). Their kids are intelligent and interesting people, and as far as I can see, have been given life as an open canvas, not as a paint-by-numbers exercise, which so many others experience.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

geysersam 4y ago

Just because he doesn't brag about connecting emotionally with his children you assume he's not a loving father? I think that's an unwarranted fear considering he's got more time for his kids than most parents. His upbringing/mental health is probably not without flaw, but seriously whos is? We've got such narrow minded ideas about what a healthy life looks like nowadays. I blame advertisement.

low_tech_love 4y ago

It's interesting that, indirectly, you managed to take away from the article two very basic things about Swedes: (1) Yes, they will do anything to avoid human contact; dialog and human connection are two extremely emotionally expensive things for them. And (2) yes, love and care mean totally different things here than most other people from other countries are used to.

rootusrootus 4y ago

> The author seems quite selfish and manipulative of others. And snobby. He spends a lot of time rationalizing how his choices are morally superior.