View Full Version : Living like a >>>>
Bum or as the young man and his traveling friends call it, Travelers. My son went through HS with a young man who lived down the road. They say hello and visit now once a year or so when the man (24) comes back through town. The fellow tried working after HS and found it not for him. He is a Traveler he says. He and his friends explain to my son how they do it. They travel with no real material possessions, hitching rides, hopping train cars, sleeping where ever (shelters, homes of those they meet, under bridges). The man tells stories of the cities they have seen. New Orleans he says he eats and drinks well in scavaging for food left on plates (ick).
I actually did not really know people "chose this life". He says it is a large protion of homeless people that choose this life.
I say he is Bum, mooching off society. Yes he does have several food cards from assorted states. I have no issues with those that want to live free of modern society and it material ways, as long as they do not take hand outs. As long as they contribute to the well being of society.
Am I wrong?
I don't think you are wrong. Here are my thoughts. I find it sad to think that there are people who are born with no sense of wanting to own something, or better themselves. Like wanting to work so they can have a roof over their heads (always), and a fridge, so they can open the door and eat and drink what they want (when they want), and when they are cold or wet, they can turn on the heat and warm-up/dry-out. It's called comfort and security, and in order to have these things you have to work for them, so I call people like that, lazy.
As far as lazy people contributing to society, not likely, because even productive people who work towards bettering themselves, seldom find the time (or energy) to contribute to society, aside from being good citizens and doing right.
Just the other day I pointed out a Traveler type guy to DH. I postulated that this guy chose the homeless route because he looked spry and intelligent--he just had a different "look" from most of the homeless guys around. Hey, I didn't really know his situation, but I figured that there was a percentage of men who chose the vagabond existence. Our own PDQ used to take off for months and work day jobs and camp.
From your description I’d say the American definition of the word ‘bum’ fits. A ‘Traverler’ in this area denotes a person or group of persons who come from another state in the summer doing shoddy work, usually painting or roofing, then skip out with the money and no address where they can be contacted before any grievance can be made. ‘Traveler’ also means a temporary journey to a place other than the person place of resident.
This 'bum behavior' is not uncommon in youth for a short period of time, a few months maybe a year but usually a sense of responsibility and maturity kicks in and some sort of direction in life is sought. My nephew just finished a period of time in this 'free style living' but now is on a career path. Being a 'bum' was not his life's goal he just didn't know what he wanted to do and did not feel pressured to do anything until, as his brother says, he 'grew a brain'....words only a brother could say.
I, too, think its something that some young people do for awhile. It gives them freedom to see alot of the country, without having alot of money.
I don't "contribute to society", other than having raised very good/moral children, and trying to be kind to the earth. I'm not a people person. And it does bother me when more gregarious people make it sound like if you're not "producing" something" or "contributing to society", then you're part of the problem.
As far as homeless people, I get the feeling that some of them actually prefer this lifestyle. I think its a need to have full control of their lives. Yes, its not the life we would choose.........but it meets their needs.
I used to think that progress and growth was vital. Now I think its gotten us into alot of trouble.
Someone gave my kids a book when they were little. It was something like "The Dozers" (pronounced do-zers) and it compared people who worked, worked, worked, and produced, produced, produced, with people who didn't. The people who didn't were viewed as lazy and slothful. After awhile, I began looking at this as a rather sad comment on capitalism and the American way.
Sorry to get a bit off-topic.
If your son's friend isn't hurting anyone and isn't taking hand-outs from the government, then I don't think you should worry about it. As has been said, youth sometimes do things like this. I'm sure your son's friend has tons of interesting adventures and stories to tell!
I think it's a matter of perspective. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with choosing a life of having no possessions. But the motivation is what might be questioned. Peace Pilgrim had a motive for doing exactly what this boy is doing. Even Jesus was itinerant.
If we can accept this lifestyle for him, maybe we can learn from him--not that we are going to go homeless, but we might question our own clinging ways.
I think it's a matter of perspective. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with choosing a life of having no possessions. But the motivation is what might be questioned. Peace Pilgrim had a motive for doing exactly what this boy is doing. Even Jesus was itinerant.
If we can accept this lifestyle for him, maybe we can learn from him--not that we are going to go homeless, but we might question our own clinging ways.
Yes, lifestyle is a continuum, and people who travel without possessions are on one end of the continuum with and people who work all day until they drop dead for the purpose of collecting and maintaining stuff/place in community are on the other end. Where do I want to be? I aspire toward the traveler end but in reality am firmly planted at the other end.
ApatheticNoMore
3-8-12, 11:12am
New Orleans he says he eats and drinks well in scavaging for food left on plates (ick).
eating off plates is extreme in ickiness yes, but dumpster divers (of food) and so on are actually just rescuing food that would otherwise go to the landfills. They scavange waste (of an incredibly wasteful society). It's an ecological niche really, and should be seen as such, it's only natural ...
I actually did not really know people "chose this life". He says it is a large protion of homeless people that choose this life.
I say he is Bum, mooching off society. Yes he does have several food cards from assorted states.
Yea I can see where you are coming from, he's using charity or welfare otherwise intended for people really genuinely in need. It's a good point. Although on some level I'm not convinced my daily commute to work doesn't do more damage to society than this does (the carbon, the climate change, heck more if you want to really look at it).
I have no issues with those that want to live free of modern society and it material ways, as long as they do not take hand outs.
difficult to do and sadly getting harder all the time.
As long as they contribute to the well being of society.
truely very few people really contribute to the well being of society even in terms of volunteering and so on, much less in any vastly significant way. It's more than most people have time for. The assumption that work is automatically a contribution to society is dubious. It's quite possible the bums actually contribute more, they have the TIME I'd think, but few people really have that motivation maybe (and if they spend every minute thinking about unmet material need, well then they can't contribute much either).
I don't think you are wrong. Here are my thoughts. I find it sad to think that there are people who are born with no sense of wanting to own something, or better themselves. Like wanting to work so they can have a roof over their heads (always), and a fridge, so they can open the door and eat and drink what they want (when they want), and when they are cold or wet, they can turn on the heat and warm-up/dry-out. It's called comfort and security, and in order to have these things you have to work for them, so I call people like that, lazy.
If they just choose to live without these things, I don't call them lazy, I call them people with different values. Comfort and security is nice and all but the price is obvious. For most people it's 40 plus years of working a job they have no particular interest in. It's a very heavy price. Having to go day after day after day to a job you'd rather not go to, that doesn't necessarily stimulate your mind, much less appeal to your heart, to secure these things. Why it's almost enough to make a person ... rethink security :)
Yes, lifestyle is a continuum, and people who travel without possessions are on one end of the continuum with and people who work all day until they drop dead for the purpose of collecting and maintaining stuff/place in community are on the other end. Where do I want to be? I aspire toward the traveler end but in reality am firmly planted at the other end.
likewise
One point I said to my son on his friend was, everyone wants a clean bed to lay in, healthy food, soap and a shower and teeth are nice too. But perhaps that is just me wanting those things. When this young man shook my son's hand he said "thanks for your contibution" meaning government support.
I'm a little confused ctg, why do you think his statement meant government support?
oh, I guess I missed that in your original post. I would disagree with them doing that.
Like, CathyA, I, too, missed the food-stamp bit in your post, so that in itself changes things as to how I feel about people like that.
Mind you, if the Welfare system in US, is like ours in Canada, then it doesn't provide him with much anyway.
ApatheticNoMore
3-8-12, 12:48pm
Maybe it makes sense as a society to pay people not to produce stuff. I mean isn't it over-production that is destroying the world? You could say that no, it's over-consumption that is destroying the world. But really aren't those two inseperable and in fact two sides of the same coin? Of course it's physically impossible to have overconsumption without overproduction. But also is it economically possible to have overproduction without overconsumption? Doesn't the market have to be cleared?
But why should Travelers get to be the ones not working and not me? For one thing they are willing to put up with the hardship of a welfare system that really doesn't provide much. So no guts, no glory :~). But a more serious answer: it doesn't really make sense, a better answer would be better, work sharing or something.
Originally posted by Ctg492.
When this young man shook my son's hand he said "thanks for your contibution" meaning government support.Let him have his laugh now, we'll have ours later...
I think it's a matter of perspective. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with choosing a life of having no possessions. But the motivation is what might be questioned. Peace Pilgrim had a motive for doing exactly what this boy is doing. Even Jesus was itinerant.
If we can accept this lifestyle for him, maybe we can learn from him--not that we are going to go homeless, but we might question our own clinging ways.
:+1:
In addition to what Catherine said, there are people in this world who just don't fit in. We used to give them a diagnosis ("Borderline Personality" back in my psychotherapist days) and drugs and put them in mental hospitals. I think it's disgusting that our American culture is so intolerant of those who are different that they were once stigmatized as "crazy" and locked away. There are individuals who appear to be normal in intelligence who simply cannot cope with the world around them.
I doubt this is a permanent situation for this young man. But how is it that rich kids tour Europe for years after college and we think nothing of it? Let an ordinary kid explore the world and he's a bum!
Yes, lifestyle is a continuum, and people who travel without possessions are on one end of the continuum with and people who work all day until they drop dead for the purpose of collecting and maintaining stuff/place in community are on the other end. Where do I want to be? I aspire toward the traveler end but in reality am firmly planted at the other end.
And of course some people who live and travel without possessions may have spent much of their lives working and living in a home filled with many possessions. Only to find it unfulfilling and bothersome - a ball and chain full of worry and concern for their possessions rather than a life of freedom and joy. I think Peace Pilgram and Jesus and Buddha - as well as the many traveling mystics and wisemen through out the ages - are a good example of why the home life isn't for everyone. However, I do agree that being self sufficent and self supporting, rather then dependant on the government or other people, is the only way to go to be truelly free. There are bums - people living off the toil of others, which sounds like the OPs "Traveller" - and there are people who choose an unconventional life of self-supported homeless wandering for other purposes. This doesn't mean they are living "rough" so to speak, just that they may choose to not be attached to a permanent home and possessions.
Spartana AKA The Wandering Waif by friends :-)!
I have no problem with this young man's choices.
I know a lot of young people who are traveling right now. I think it's good for them.
Here in NZ, there's even a holiday scheme for it (though they just changed it). It used to be you could get a work/holiday visa, which allowed you to come into the country and work your way through. Due to the economy, they now have to have $5k in order to get the visa to prove that they can come and go. :) Nevertheless, I have several friends who do this.
They stay in one place for a bit -- such as byron bay, australia -- working at coffee shops, cafes, hostels, or wwoofing. They travel around the area, see what they want to see and do what they want to do, and then move on to the next place. They also sofa-surf, and utilize soup kitchens.
I know others who are "tramps" -- which is another form of traveller, similar to the Into the Wild kid. It is a chosen lifestyle, and most of them choose to only use services as they need to. And they do a lot of scavenging (such as eating food off of plates), which I might find repugnant but it isn't necessarily or inherently. And after all, there is dumpster diving.
One of my friends is a squatter. This is how he chooses to live. He has a trust fund, so eventually he'll probably stop, but for now (at age 35 or so) and single, he basically goes from place to place teaching yoga. He'll get a gig here or there, and hitch hike to get there, and then find an abandoned place and move in. He'll dumpster dive to make it comfortable, and he buys his food at each meal. He usually buys a smoothie for breakfast, a hot lunch (because of lunch specials) and $1 sushi for dinner with $2 miso soup. He doesn't often have power in his place, but he'll use a camp stove to make tea, and an oil lamp for light.
Another friend of mine lives in his car -- which he sees as his little monastery. It's a hatchback. He basically gave up everything except what he can keep in his car -- and he also teaches yoga.
Another friend of mine currently lives in a very small caravan with his wife and two kids. it's a camper. it has a small kitchen, no toilet, and 3 beds (a full for the parents, two twins for the kids). the kids beds are also benches and there's a table that folds out -- so it is the living and dining room as well. He's an acupuncturist and she's a homeopath -- both work. they are living on a friend's land (in their back yard) and they use their friend's toilet as their toilet. I don't think they pay rent to this friend, but I don't know. They probably can afford it. They grow a lot of food in the friend's yard (which everyone shares), and then pay for food as well (he also fishes and they forage).
There are lots of different ways of life out there.
Sad Eyed Lady
3-8-12, 9:10pm
I guess I have always kind of romanticised this lifestyle if it is by choice. It seems to mean complete freedom and the willingness to live in a way that many of us cannot imagine in order to have it. And, if they should receive some support through the government I see that as no worse than some who sit home in front of a big screen TV, eating junk food, scratching off lottery tickets, smoking cigarettes, and cracking open another 6 pack. Sorry if I am stereotyping here, I am just making a point. If both are given the same "handout" but one is out seeing the world and broadening their thinking and views rather than limiting what could be, then I think the "traveler", "bum" or whatever we may call him/her, is living a richer life that in some way does contribute even if it's only through the stories they may share of their experiences!
I guess I feel that if someone is "traveling" to learn new experiences/life styles/try new places and things and such, all while supporting themselves, then go for it. I too find those people so interesting and full of adventure. I have read so many blogs about people who "hit the road" or visit/work/live in X amount of cities a year for the experience. Write a book or a blog so we all can learn from it. Sadly this man has no thoughts of work or doing these things, just staying once step ahead of the local law. Not many of us want to see people sleeping under bridges. Yes he has been in jail a few times.
If someone was planning how to live off the public assistance without thought of the future and not Traveling, say living in an apartment, we would look at them differently. As it does not sound as adventurous, sounds lazy.
I guess I feel that if someone is "traveling" to learn new experiences/life styles/try new places and things and such, all while supporting themselves, then go for it. I too find those people so interesting and full of adventure. I have read so many blogs about people who "hit the road" or visit/work/live in X amount of cities a year for the experience. Write a book or a blog so we all can learn from it. Sadly this man has no thoughts of work or doing these things, just staying once step ahead of the local law. Not many of us want to see people sleeping under bridges. Yes he has been in jail a few times.
If someone was planning how to live off the public assistance without thought of the future and not Traveling, say living in an apartment, we would look at them differently. As it does not sound as adventurous, sounds lazy.
I agree with this.
It's much different working while on the road or working, saving up, and traveling for a while before going back to work. But always being on the road AND being on the dole, not working? Nah, that's lazy!
ApatheticNoMore
3-9-12, 4:01pm
working, saving up, and traveling for a while before going back to work
Would be nice but then after they get back and are interviewing for a job how does one actually answer the question: SO .... why haven't you worked for a year? Ha good luck answering that one and not becoming one of the long-term unemployed *untouchables*. So I would tell all Travelers to travel while they are young and irresponsible, because there may never be a second chance. American culture is not one that really accepts it as being ok for people to take time off working.
"There's no way out of here, when you come in you're in for good
There was no promise made, the part you've played, the chance you took"
I think it might be easy enough to answer.
I would probably say something about how I'd always wanted to travel the world, so I saved up and took X amount of time off in order to do it, and now that I've finished with that and want to get back to a "normal" life, I'm looking for work in my field again.
I might also talk about how my travels have improved certain skills -- like the ability to adapt under pressure, to work with a variety of people from different backgrounds and perspectives, as well as the ability to handle a great deal of "risk" and "not-knowing" that might come to bear on certain projects and make it possible for you to "hold your center" while others might be panicking under the stress.
There are lots of things that travel brings us -- and if part of your travel also involved something like wwoofing -- which is a form of volunteering -- you could talk about how working on organic farms broadened your horizons, taught you many new skills, as well as how it affected your outlook and work ethic.
All of which an employer might find very beneficial.
I traveled for two and a half years, no trace of me, and didn't have a problem re-entering the job market (I was a wage earner at the time) I get the sense from this guy that he's not exactly going to be looking for a nice safe suit job in middle management.
But I earned my own way in between accepting offers to stay with folks. I gave back as I traveled. That's important to me. {shrug}
I think it's also an age thing. If your in your 20's and doing it, you're young, adventurous, seeing the world and having fun. If you're 40 and doing it, you're a bum.
We all live off of public assistance. The roads, the schools, fire & police protection, are all available to each of us no matter what we do or don't pay. The dude driving down the public road to rob the corner store is using the roads with the same rights as I am. His kids can go to the public school.
The very little bit that these travelers use in food stamps is a drop in the ocean next to the public expenditures for war. I would much prefer my tax dollars goes to feeding a human being than killing him.
I do not think it's kind or fair to cast stones...
word, redfox. i'm really tired of spending money one wars.
Redfox, separating war and public assistance for a moment.
Why should someone who is "capable" of earning a living, be it picking beans or being a CEO be able to get assistance? I guess I would have never compared roads to Food Stamps, that is an interesting comparable.
The very little bit that these travelers use in food stamps is a drop in the ocean next to the public expenditures for war. I would much prefer my tax dollars goes to feeding a human being than killing him.
I do not think it's kind or fair to cast stones...
I think it's an ethical question, and I don't want to judge the travelers, but I do have an opinion on the ethical use of taxpayer money. How does the law read? If the law reads that EVERYONE below a certain income line is eligible for food stamps, then I guess they'd be entitled ethically and legally. However, if the law was created as a safety net for people who have no other means (which includes the means to feed themselves), then taking taxpayer money with no intention of trying to feed themselves is unethical and maybe illegal. But, I have no idea how the law was written.
As for me, I would consider it unethical to take taxpayer money if I had the ability to earn my own food money, because in my mind, I'm taking away from someone in real need.
But I've observed that there are tons of people who really believe, really believe, that if they can get away with the handout, that makes it right. I have a family member that works a seasonal job and every November he goes on unemployment , with absolutely no intention of getting a winter job--and there are usually tons of Christmas jobs available. Now it's March, and we ask him, when are you going to call in and find out when they need you for work? And his reply is always, are you kidding? Let them call me. I'd rather stay on unemployment. He has two arms and two legs and a brain. Is what he is doing unethical? Illegal? Does that make him a thief, lazy, or smart? It makes me mad because I'm thinking, I'm working MY butt off, so should you, but that's not a legal argument that holds water. It's not even a moral argument.
What about the woman who won the million dollar lottery and continued to collect food stamps after she bought a house and car. She said she thought because she's not working she's entitled to it. We might say that's wrong and ridiculous, but I think it's legally ambiguous. I don't know.. now I'm interested in looking that up.
The times we are in perhaps and sounding really old, in 1980 I can only think of one person I knew who got any type of assistance. Now sadly I can count and count those I know closely, distant, through someone else. I can only think of One that is Unable to actually work. I think and just my opinion, maybe too many get help if I can keep counting and I know I am not alone.
goldensmom
3-13-12, 8:19am
We all live off of public assistance. The roads, the schools, fire & police protection, are all available to each of us no matter what we do or don't pay.
Really? Speaking only for myself, I pay thousands of dollars in property taxes per year for my share of those services. And thousands of dollars in property taxes for services that I do not use, i.e. schools, community colleges, public transportation, senior services and many more.
Really? Speaking only for myself, I pay thousands of dollars in property taxes per year for my share of those services. And thousands of dollars in property taxes for services that I do not use, i.e. schools, community colleges, public transportation, senior services and many more.
Of course you do, as do I. However, neither of us could afford to pay the entire bill. I sure as heck could not pay for the sidewalks, streets, traffic lights, etc. by myself. It's public infrastructure, publicly financed, and we each benefit no matter what we pay into the system.
And, we both benefit from supporting services we don't directly use, like schools, since an educated populace reduces crime, etc. (Debate & lamentations about the state of education today an entire other worthy topic!) I am very glad Senior Services exists today so that if/when I need it, it will be in place. Etc.
We all live off of public assistance. The roads, the schools, fire & police protection, are all available to each of us no matter what we do or don't pay......
I think the proper distinction is that most of us contribute to the public assistance resources and some of us live off them.
I find it hard to accept the notion that I'm getting public assistance through the roads I travel when I'm paying both state and federal (highway use) taxes on the fuel I use to navigate them. Also, considering the several thousand dollars in property taxes I pay every 6 months, I'm paying for my share, and more, of local resources rather than simply using "public assistance".
Perhaps it's simply a matter of perspective.
goldensmom
3-13-12, 9:54am
I think the proper distinction is that most of us contribute to the public assistance resources and some of us live off them.
I find it hard to accept the notion that I'm getting public assistance through the roads I travel when I'm paying both state and federal (highway use) taxes on the fuel I use to navigate them. Also, considering the several thousand dollars in property taxes I pay every 6 months, I'm paying for my share, and more, of local resources rather than simply using "public assistance".
Perhaps it's simply a matter of perspective.
Nicely stated. That is the perspective I am coming from. I worked for the public welfare program for years and know much that I could live without knowing so I am sure that influences my reaction to the word 'all'.
There's a difference between public infrastructure and public assistance. Public assistance is something of subset of public infrastructure in that as a society we have more or less agreed that there is a common good in not allowing people to starve or be homeless. However, that public assistance does not benefit us corporately beyond a minimal level of political stability as well as ethical peace of mind. The greatest benefit of public assistance goes to the individual receiving it.
Roads, schools, wastewater treatment plants, parks, etc do benefit us corporately since without them our economy, society and governance would suffer. It's hard to parse out who gets the greatest benefit. Some individuals benefit more than others - an owner of a trucking company benefits more directly from the Interstate system than I do but then again she is paying more in gasoline taxes. There is not quite the same disparity between corporate and individual benefit with public infrastructure as there is with public assistance.
...Some individuals benefit more than others - an owner of a trucking company benefits more directly from the Interstate system than I do but then again she is paying more in gasoline taxes....
On the corporate side, things are evened out more by permit fees. The owner of the trucking company must pay annual fees to each state they are licensed to travel through.
mtnlaurel
3-13-12, 11:23am
Maybe there should be a Hobo License?
I paid a hobo's license for him/her today, if they had one. I lost a $20 bill biking through the bridge area in town :( I take my phone out and hold it if needed and guess my $20 fell out. I hope one of the people resting puts it to good use. I tried telling myself someone needed it more then me today.
mtnlaurel
3-13-12, 12:23pm
I haven't followed the ins and outs of this thread.... but here are some snapshots of my life and others around me that I base my opinions on Traveler lifestyle on:
- I used to live in a SE mountain town that was on the Traveler Circuit and when some well-bred looking hippie kids tried to sell me some poorly nourished puppies out of their junked out Caddie (that their grandmother had probably left one of them and then the other 5 had gommed onto the ride)... that didn't sit well with me. Granted at the time I looked pretty much as they did, I was just on my way to my college class that I was paying for myself by waiting tables - since I had a few years earlier pushed the silver platter that had been given to me away by dropping out of my fully paid nice university so I could go 'find myself' (in a bottle of wine- thank God I escaped and continue to do so a day at a time) and 'live the dream'
- dear friend's little sister asking for money outside of dear friend's band gig, little sister didn't know his band was playing there that night
when little sister confronted, "I was just being open to the Universe"
Dear Friend, "No you weren't, you were panhandling"
- My mom ran with the real deal back in 60s/70s/80s and she just ended up footing the bill all the time
I just have a problem with The Kids outfitted in their Patagonia gear from the folks asking for handouts. It bothers me.
And as with most things I have to check myself and say 'Hey MtnLaurel. Stop Being So Harsh'. I never felt like anyone should underwrite my travels and that when I walked away from my pretty little life, I was out on my own.
On the positive side - I have worked my way across the country and had AMAZING experiences and met wonderful people and done fantastic things. Ours really wasn't the Traveler Life, but the Seasonal Resort Worker life --- people taking breaks from the rat race (or rejecting rat race altogether) to do things they loved and enjoyed. It worked for me because it's about all I could manage to do at the time as a barely-functional practicing alcoholic. And I was in the minority as a person with a serious substance abuse problem, most were fantastic athletes or seekers. Most people we used to run with have full careers now and families... whether they stuck with the mountain life/surf life or they returned to "Reality".
As for me, I would consider it unethical to take taxpayer money if I had the ability to earn my own food money, because in my mind, I'm taking away from someone in real need.
I share this viewpoint. I'm one of those idealists who believe that taxpayer-funded aid of any kind should be given only when there is a true need....and then (except for situations like a permanent disability) it should be a temporary situation, and coupled with training and other forward-thinking assistance that helps the person never need it again. Very, very hard to set empirical standards for this, though, I recognize. Which is probably why there is so much abuse. I don't believe people are bad; I simply believe some people are opportunistic - if it's there, and without strings, that particular segment of the population will avail themselves of it. Welcome to the human race.
The halos are held up by horns on some.
Some individuals benefit more than others - an owner of a trucking company benefits more directly from the Interstate system than I do but then again she is paying more in gasoline taxes.
And you, and all of us, actually benefit just as greatly from the interstate system (and all the other systems you mentioned) as the trucker because we are all able to receive needed goods and services that the trucking Co. provides. Without that interstate system, we'd be paying a much higher cost for the things we need because the cost to deliver them would be more.
I am also a person who ses a VAST difference between public tax money going to infrastucture, and tax money going towards public assistance. One is to provide things and services that EVERYONE can benefit from, and the other is to provide a temporary benefit to help the needy regain a better position for themselves in the future by providing for their basic needs. An able-bodied person receiving such tax-payer supported benefits should be looking for a job, not using that money to "travel and enrich their lives". Now if you want to give ALL people, irregardless of their incomes and job situation, tax payer money so we can ALL quit work to "travel and enrich our lives" - then I'll be the first in line for that social program - ethics be damned :-)! Until then, those of us who choose to travel rather then work should do it on our own dime.
Would be nice but then after they get back and are interviewing for a job how does one actually answer the question: SO .... why haven't you worked for a year? Ha good luck answering that one and not becoming one of the long-term unemployed *untouchables*. So I would tell all Travelers to travel while they are young and irresponsible, because there may never be a second chance. American culture is not one that really accepts it as being ok for people to take time off working.
"There's no way out of here, when you come in you're in for good
There was no promise made, the part you've played, the chance you took"
My sister has spent the first half of her adult life (until approx. age 37) combining travel with work. She spent a year living in New Zealand. Another year travelling across country. Another year in Europe. 4 summers (May 1 st to Oct 1 st) in Alaska. Several winters living in ski resorts. She never had a problem returning to the workforce (wage-slaver) and often times her employers hired - or rehired - her because she had experiences they felt were of value to the company. She often worked when she travelled (picked kiwi fruit in New Zealand, worked on a cruise ship in Alaska, lift ticket operator at a ski resort, etc...) and often worked for a temp agency when she returned until she had something permanent. She would work a job for several years, lived a simple, frugal debt free life, and rented a room (in very very nice homes or apts with maids, pools, tennis courts, etc..) rather then got her own apt or house in order to save as much money as she could for future travel. She always paid her own way, never took any government money - not even unemployment - and has been pretty much all around the world. Now, after working one job as a security officer for a defense contractor for 15 years - from age 37 to age 52 - she owns her own paid off home(in a SoCal beach community), has no debt, lots of money is savings and retirement, a pension when she turns 55, and is in the process of retirering so she can continue travelling.
So if someone wants to travel long term, I wouldn't let the job issue stop them. There are lots of ways to do it to both earn a living while travelling, as well as afterwards. And while it may be a frugal living, you really don't need much when you don't have a mortgage, can live in very inexpensive parts of the world, eat cheaply, travel cheaply, have no car payments or any debts, and often better medical care in other countries for a fraction of the cost here. One book that I really liked alot was by Paul and Vickie Terhorst called: Cashing in on the American Dream, How to retire at 35. . It details how they quit their well paying jobs, got rid of everything they owned, and became PTs (Perpetual Travellers). They lived in lovely inexpensive furnished apts or houses for several months - even years - at a time in inexpensive parts of the world (Thailand, Argentina, etc..) as well as some expensive places like a year in Paris. They lived on a fairly small amount of money (more than I would need but still less than the average working American) and became really involved with the different cultures and lifestyles, and they often did some side work in addition to their books. It certainly wasn't the "bum" lifestyle of a dumpster diving Freegan, but it was one of many alternative ways to live and travel. One that I am emulating in alot of ways here in the USA.
That's cool stuff spartana.
I think it's largely a matter of how we -- or each of us as individuals -- thinks about these things. If we think that this or that way of life is acceptable -- to us -- then we find a way to do it. Not having possessions, for instance, may be very difficult for some people (myself included), but for others, it may be entirely logical and liberating.
I'll look into that book and pass it along to a few people whom I know might be itnerested. :)
Bum or as the young man and his traveling friends call it, Travelers. My son went through HS with a young man who lived down the road. They say hello and visit now once a year or so when the man (24) comes back through town. The fellow tried working after HS and found it not for him. He is a Traveler he says. He and his friends explain to my son how they do it. They travel with no real material possessions, hitching rides, hopping train cars, sleeping where ever (shelters, homes of those they meet, under bridges). The man tells stories of the cities they have seen. New Orleans he says he eats and drinks well in scavaging for food left on plates (ick).
I actually did not really know people "chose this life". He says it is a large protion of homeless people that choose this life.
I say he is Bum, mooching off society. Yes he does have several food cards from assorted states. I have no issues with those that want to live free of modern society and it material ways, as long as they do not take hand outs. As long as they contribute to the well being of society.
Am I wrong?
IMO this person is doing a lot less harm than the individual who lives 30 miles away from where they work, commutes in every day in a huge SUV all alone, eats meat for lunch and dinner, takes a 20 minute shower back at their McMansion with their 25-showerhead luxury spa, takes airplane trips for vacations 3x/year, has a giant plasma TV in every room of the house that is always on, and has 6 kids, who all start driving their own cars at age 16. Who is really a drain on the planet? I'm not too worried about someone who is traveling around the country, living on the edge. If anything that person can stand as an example that other ways of life are possible - we don't all have to be comsumption-driven.
Your theory makes great sense on many aspects. I support it your theory 99%, the 1% I differ on is taking what is not earned by a person. Self supporting, working is part of life for everyone I think. I am not judging someone because they choose to limit to only what is needed for material possesions.
Nope sadly his parents will be burying him before his time if he can be ID, from drugs.health.danger.............
That's cool stuff spartana.
I think it's largely a matter of how we -- or each of us as individuals -- thinks about these things. If we think that this or that way of life is acceptable -- to us -- then we find a way to do it. Not having possessions, for instance, may be very difficult for some people (myself included), but for others, it may be entirely logical and liberating.
I'll look into that book and pass it along to a few people whom I know might be itnerested. :)
I think that book is long out of print and may not be something that works for "today's" financial climate since, like YMOYL, they started this in 1984 and they used stocks and bonds to support themselves. They also had high paying jobs before quitting, so saved quite a bit of moolah - by living frugally and simply of course ;-)!. But the core ideas of getting out of the rat race in order to live a dream (theirs being living and travelling in foreign countries) still holds true today. They do have a website - just google Paul Terhorst to find it. Thios is one of them - there are others. www.internationalliving.com/.../Meet-the-IL-Team/Paul-Terhorst
PS for Zoebird - My sister spend most of her time in the town of Te Puke when in New Zealand. She hitched hiked pretty much everywhere on both islands but had a "home base" (and a boy friend) in te Puke.
IMO this person is doing a lot less harm than the individual who lives 30 miles away from where they work, commutes in every day in a huge SUV all alone, eats meat for lunch and dinner, takes a 20 minute shower back at their McMansion with their 25-showerhead luxury spa, takes airplane trips for vacations 3x/year, has a giant plasma TV in every room of the house that is always on, and has 6 kids, who all start driving their own cars at age 16. Who is really a drain on the planet? I'm not too worried about someone who is traveling around the country, living on the edge. If anything that person can stand as an example that other ways of life are possible - we don't all have to be comsumption-driven.
While I agree that "the Traveller" is living a much more eco-friendly life then most employed people, it doesn't mean he still can't continue to live the same way yet be self-supporting - whether by having a job or by choosing to get by with just what he can get on his own - i.e. be freegan, etc... - rather than take public aid when he has no intention of ever becoming self-supporting. Choosing to be completely self-supporting, or having a job, doesn't mean you have to live a consumer-driven life or even one that has a large carbon footprint. You can still choose to be car-less, walk, bike, live in an environmentally friendly home (or tent :-)!), eat low on the food chain, dumpster dive, recycle, etc... and still pay your own way thru this life.
Spartana,
She was in a pretty warm and sunny place. I haven't been to that town, but I know the landscape near-by. :)
It's actually very easy to get around in NZ, and a lot of people hitch-hike. You can also camp pretty much anywhere -- such as the many parking lots along the coast here in wellington. A lot of people rent camper vans (which can be pretty cheap), and tootle around the country. WIthout having to pay camp fees, you can do quite well. It's still expensive all things considered, but it's not bad.
There's also a bus that costs $1 per ride, and you just get on where you want and off where you want. It's mostly used by young people, and has no amenities, and it is crowded, and only runs certain times of the year, and if you miss it, you miss it and have to wait until it comes back through -- but if you happen to catch it, it's quite a deal. But if you don't, you can still hitch all over NZ with very little trouble -- women included.
Basically what we did was work, live simply, and save, and then decided to take this opportunity. Could we live for the rest of our lives on our savings and investments (me at 35)? No. But, I don't mind the work that I'm doing, and neither does my husband, so we do quite well with this lifestyle.
And it's nice. truly. :)
I have a family member that works a seasonal job and every November he goes on unemployment , with absolutely no intention of getting a winter job--and there are usually tons of Christmas jobs available. Now it's March, and we ask him, when are you going to call in and find out when they need you for work? And his reply is always, are you kidding? Let them call me. I'd rather stay on unemployment. He has two arms and two legs and a brain. Is what he is doing unethical? Illegal? Does that make him a thief, lazy, or smart?
It probably makes him a thief. I remember when I was on unemployment that I had to certify each week that I had applied for a certain number of jobs that week and that I had not turned down an offer of employment. And the unemployment office would require that I come for an appointment from time to time where they would verify my job search efforts.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.