In the small village in which I was raised, it was common
for a neighbour to bake twenty or so loaves of bread one day, and make the
rounds giving away a few loaves to each of her closest friends. Another neighbour might have cooked a vat of
stew, which she shared with others. In
hunting season, the men would bring home thirty or more birds for plucking and
cleaning by the women, who then distributed them in the community.
Men would, whenever needed, spend a day or two building
shops and sheds for friends, or one who could do electrical repairs would fix
plugs and lights throughout the village, asking nothing in return. However, when he need mechanical work done,
there was always a neighbour who would be able to weld or repair machinery.
This concept of community seems overly simplistic and
archaic, yet it worked exceptionally well.
Where and when did it die?
The 2008 economic downturn helped to revive the spirit of
need, but not the spirit of sharing and cooperative effort. It may be that the entrepreneurial,
independent spirit that we have been told is the hallmark of American society
has been the cause of this misguided independence. It is not dependency to offer your skill set
to those in need, and then, in time, to have the favour returned.
Those of us who have opted for one variation or another of
voluntary simplicity in our lives have uncovered the benefits of community, and
caring for the community. It is nothing
more than barter. I do something that is within my skill set and abilities for
someone, and, some time later, I call on someone else to provide a service or
goods for me.
Money has interceded in the very logical and most-often
effective system of tradeoffs and pooling of resources for individual and group
benefit. Money, and government.
The IRS and Canada Revenue Agency both view bartering as
taxable. You do carpentry work for Joe,
and then “bank” that service,” redeeming it later for free merchandise, you
have bartered. If you are operating as a
business, then you and the other party are taxed on the fair market value of
those goods.
But are backyard exchanges of garden produce, or household
goods, or helping hands considered “business?”
Both tax agencies have ruled inconsistently on this matter. “Is there a profit intent?” they ask. Well, if you consider that you got rid of
something of little value to you but of greater value to someone else, and in
exchange the opposite was true, then that could be considered a profitable
transaction. But where is the business
component?
For the most part, government turns a blind eye to such
elementary transactions, and therein lies the opportunity for the industrious
minimalist. Bartering and trading of
goods and services is a fantastic way to minimize owning or possessing items
that you rarely use, but occasionally need.
Community spirit and the honest, fair exchange of goods cuts costs, cuts
ownership obligation, and is a very efficient use of resources. And, it is an
act of independence, not dependence, that has operated successfully for
thousands of years.
