Good read for me. I'm always fascinated by people that challenge the idea of a monetary-based society -- what is money, fundamentally? Is it the best way?

(Disclaimer [confession?]: I make more money than I need, more than I ever thought I would, and spend equally much, but definitely think about those whose broken backs my lifestyle is built on, so I am always searching for the mental strength to find a new structure]

The article addressed that Jo is not anti-money, nor anti-tech. It addressed how she handles medical treatment. More accurately, she's on the path to living without money (but still, by necessity, relies on money indirectly - understandably so).

I think the idea of a transactionless "giving" community is very powerful. It's something I'm trying to get better at - not the giving without expecting to recieve (that's easy), but the recieving without feeling obligated to reciprocate. I recently have begun to realize that rejecting a gift is also denying someone else the joy of giving. Remembering that makes transactionless recieving much easier.

This next statment may come off as rude, but it's not meant that way, rather it's meant to bring attention to why it's tough for me to envision how a valid movement like this will attain mass appeal without change: When I have interacted with, I'll say "bravely free spirited" folks, it does feel to me like being on the verge of homelessness. In this story, Jo lived in a car in someone's backyard for a year. That's not me. A little scattered, a little dirty, with smells of patchouli and compost filling the air. I don't look down on that, it's just not how I personally want to live, yet there is a sense that if I lean more into the path of communal sharing vs traditional monetary structure, then I need to change things up to be accepted by that community - forgo my daily showers or sense of style and clean/orderly/abundant living, start dumpster diving or eat/wear things out a dumpster. Never spoken aloud, it's just a vibe I get. I'm not doing that, but I also don't believe the two are intrinsically linked.

Another thing I'll raise is the idea of 'time banks' vs. money banks. If you listen to freakonomics, Steven Dubner is a big proponent. But I still think money is an amazing abstract human idea that is much more flexible than bartering, and isn't the enemy. It's like technology used for harm - the tech itself generally isn't the issue, it's how people decide to use it. Money is the same way.

I think Jo, and I agree with her, probably feels good about doing away with money, not because the idea of money itself is bad, but the fact that you can't trust the people you give it to to use their money for good, vice, say, using it to open a sweatshop.

Not one to raise problems without suggesting a solution, I'd posit that this is a potential good application for cryptocurrency. A coin use by the good 'free farmers' of the world to have a currency all their own, so they can benefit from the abstract nature of money but in a more regulated way that can help protect against exploitation of the planet's resources (e.g. I get coin for selling a 30 bags of strawberry's and use that coin for dental work, whereas before, even if the dentist was a good person, I could not trade 30 bags of strawberries for dental work because - what's a dentist going to do with 30 bags of strawberries).

That's an idea I could get behind and could envision scaling.