The real barrier to sustainable living on a budget isn't information - it's time and capital.

Buying in bulk (cheaper per unit but higher upfront cost), growing food (requires space, tools, knowledge), fixing things instead of replacing them (requires skills and patience) - these all make environmental sense but demand a resource that broke people don't have in abundance.

I think the more honest framing is: sustainable living on a budget means accepting lower consumption across the board, not trying to optimize *how* you consume. Eat less meat not because of grass-fed pasture rotation theories, but because meat is expensive. Buy fewer clothes, period. Fix things because you can't afford new ones.

The paradox is that this kind of living - less consumption - is the most sustainable, but it's not usually a choice. It's what poverty looks like. So when we talk about "sustainable living on a budget" as an aspirational thing, we're often asking people to voluntarily adopt the practices they'd need out of necessity.