[9rx]

> paying for 100% of your food.

Aren't you going to pay for food no matter what? You can pay for it indirectly by trading your time with someone else who has put in time to produce it (the way most people pay for food), or you can put your time directly into the food (how self-sufficiency would pay for it), but either way the time will be spent. There is, quite literally in this case, no free lunch.

> you can't DIY your way into a fibre network and/or cell service.

Do you need these anyway? They are arguably necessary services for participating in a modern society, but if you are self-sufficient that implies a disconnect from society.

[pyrale]

You are trying to theorize it too much. There’s a big difference between growing part of your own food and buying it. Also there’s a big difference between wanting to rely less on anonymous service providers and not wanting to communicate with anyone.

[9rx]

> There’s a big difference between growing part of your own food and buying it.

Because if you grow your own food you have to worry about storage? You are right that, while not impossible to overcome – our ancestors managed, is not the easiest problem to deal with. Especially if you like variety in your diet.

That's why I, a farmer, don't (knowingly) eat the food I grow. It is a lot easier to exchange the food for an IOU. Then, later, when I'm hungry, I can return the IOU for food. Someone who specializes in food storage can do a much better job than I can. Let them deal with it. My expertise is in growing the food.

What is even the point of growing part of your own food? I'd at least have some understanding of being fully reliant on your own food if you fear a zombie apocalypse or something, but if you remain dependent on others anyway, what have you gained? If it is that you enjoy the process of growing food like I do, you may as well become a farmer and sell the product.

> not wanting to communicate with anyone.

Want and need a very different concepts.