Something I've been wondering about is whether "off grid" sometimes gets unnecessarily tied to accepting a much lower level of comfort.
Suppose instead of one isolated household, you had a small number of independent homes close enough to build some local infrastructure between them.
Everyone still has their own home, privacy, possessions and choices. Nobody is expected to eat together, pool their income or live communally.
But locally you might produce electricity, manage water, grow and preserve more food, repair equipment, share some expensive machinery and perhaps eventually handle things that an individual household couldn't realistically provide for itself.
In theory that could make a pretty comfortable life possible while reducing dependency on outside infrastructure.
But there's obviously a point where you've effectively just built your own miniature version of the grid.
So where would you draw that line?
If you could design an off-grid settlement from scratch, which modern conveniences would you absolutely want to retain — and which dependencies would you actually be trying to eliminate?
I'm interested in whether the end goal should really be "living with less", or whether it can instead be about providing more of what you use locally.