Personally I believe that a portion of the Australian outback (and any other country with room for it) should be set aside for people who want to live hunter-gatherer lifestyles. The primary purpose would be to stop the Australian Aborigines from complaining about the whole European-settlement thing (as in "fine, you want to go back to the way things were before? Here ya go!") but it would be open to anyone of any race who felt like living there. Only two conditions:
a) Nothing goes in except the people who want to live there, who can take nothing except a loincloth and one day's food supply.
b) Nobody comes out except by giving two months' notice (this stops people from being able to leave to get medical treatment).
We could start with a few thousand acres and let it grow if it actually becomes popular.
On point (a), really?!? Is that what the natives there wore? That sounds rather unkind of you.
Of course anyone going onto my hypothetical reservation would take with them a lot of knowledge unavailable to the true stone age folks, but not much can be done about that.
As for clothing, a loincloth would be on the modest side:
Source: Jared Diamond covers this in "Guns, Germs and Steel". Excellent book.
Others (like Robert Wright (and me!)) think that civilization meant net net gain, even if we lost some really important things.
I don't mean to say that civilization is evil. I only mean to say that it looks like we want some of our own lifestyle back, and it looks like we're steering the ship that way.
So yes, there comes a tipping point where agriculture becomes the most attractive option, and when that happens, humans begin the sequence that causes them to lose a few important things and gain a lot of great things.
And strangely, it looks like we're getting some of the things we lost back.