What you might be doing I think... is making the assumption that technology, 'things' like gadgets or better cars and modern medical health is central to human life. Yes, life would objectively improve if you have those, but if I have to work 60 hours a week doing something I don't really care about, then is that really a good trade-off? I think the answer is not the same as yours for everyone.
Again, the central aspect of this topic is agency. Do people choose to live that way, where they live it? And how many would choose a different lifestyle if given the same opportunities as everybody else?
Yes, you can live a happy life as a nomad without any access to technology. That isn't the topic of this conversation.
I have by now traveled pretty much to all the continents and at this point smartphones and internet are ubiquitous. They are litterly now throwing away working second hand ones in developing nations.
a) to partake in that lifestyle
b) has the tools to reach that lifestyle when starting outside of it
Doesn't matter if you are talking about North Korea or the United States. And yes, you can find abject generational poverty in the United States as well.
The fact you could post your comment puts you in the top 40% of the world (roughly 60% don't have internet access).
If you have internet from a mobile phone, you are roughly in the top 50%.
Are you really looking outside your bubble of comfort?