Living in a beautiful but expensive area vs. "settling" and traveling.

nicksta43 wrote: Even though I never have the time to do any of it, the area I live in has all of the outdoors stuff available very close to home. The cost of living isn't high and we have no state income tax. Hiking, fishing, mountain biking, canoeing well basically anything you'd want to do outdoors is less than an hour away from me. The views are beautiful too.

It's a nice place, i've been down there many a time. But there's no home office there and i'd want bigger mountains.

Wife and I were watching "Hawaii Life" yesterday. Should have switched channels.

Vacation is a week. Where you live is the rest of the year. Live where you are happy.

Bobzilla wrote: Wife and I were watching "Hawaii Life" yesterday. Should have switched channels.

No racetracks close to Hawaii.

Yeah, I'd probably sell all my cars, ship the motorcycle and never drive a car again! lol

I lived in javkson Wyoming for about 3 years, about 100ft from a ski lift the whole time. While the views, snowvoarding, etc were amazing, it was in thr middle of NOWHERE and crazy expensive. Not only that, unless you worked in tourism/hositality, you were SOL in terms of a job. Not to mention during the dead seaspn it seemed like there was about 15 people that inhabited the town. Education? Forget about it unless you take online classes. Everyone was an alcoholic, and the closest big city was SLC. Denver was really nice, but also in the middle of nowhere. Its a big enough city by itself, but to go anywhere you basically took a plane as theres really not much within reasonable driving distance. Phoenix and san diego sucked.

That was just a quick off the top of my head. I could talk for hours about where i lived. I will NEVER live back in California or anwywher near a beach again, too. I like it here. I can drive to a bigger city within a couple hours, all year long its nice, and cost of living is extremely reasonable. I dont mind saving up for a couple months to take a vacation somewhere else, and at least i know in the fitire if i have kids theyll get a decent education and near my family. I grew up without family within 700 miles so I really apprec having family nearby.

I live in one of the most backwards boring towns on the planet. I do that because my family is from here, I have some things to finish up from my dad's estate, it's cheap and has at least one decent school system which is why I picked the house I'm in. I can also make decent money which allows me to save for the next part of my plans:

Once the kiddo is out of school my options will open up and soon I will live in the mountains, dammit. That's where I've always wanted to be. Being close to racing is going to play a big part in where I move.

So I guess what I'm saying is that your choice will be dependent on both current circumstances and your long term plan.

conesare2seconds wrote: Vacation is a week. Where you live is the rest of the year. Live where you are happy.

Yep, this is my opinion. The girlfriend is pretty big on traveling, but lets face it, if you are an adult settling down with newborn kids, you won't be traveling the world very much except for those special occasions where you can foist the womb goblins on the grandparents for a week a year.

Of course, our neighbourhoods are waaaaaaaaaay different than yours up here. We don't have the extreme swings and segregation of the rich/poor as a typical US city does. So I could live in the "ghetto", knock two houses down to build a nice house, and probably not even really worry about the neighbourhood. I wouldn't, but I could.

Also also, I don't think one negates the other. It sounds to me like the idea is that you are spending SO much money on one that the other isn't possible... which means you are probably not in a financial position to really do either (aka live within your means).

HiTempguy wrote:

conesare2seconds wrote: Vacation is a week. Where you live is the rest of the year. Live where you are happy.

Yep, this is my opinion. The girlfriend is pretty big on traveling, but lets face it, if you are an adult settling down with newborn kids, you won't be traveling the world very much except for those special occasions where you can foist the womb goblins on the grandparents for a week a year. Of course, our neighbourhoods are waaaaaaaaaay different than yours up here. We don't have the extreme swings and segregation of the rich/poor as a typical US city does. So I could live in the "ghetto", knock two houses down to build a nice house, and probably not even really worry about the neighbourhood. I wouldn't, but I could. Also also, I don't think one negates the other. It sounds to me like the idea is that you are spending SO much money on one that the other isn't possible... which means you are probably not in a financial position to really do either (aka live within your means).

Who are you talking to?

I'm not sure what to say about the ghetto thing, either... That's just... weird and not entirely sure what it had to do with anything.

I like where I live. Is it paradise on earth? Nope but it has plenty of good riding roads, affordable, close to public transportation, family is nearby, breweries nearby, beach is under two hours away, not too far from plenty of big cities for trips. It checks most boxes and plenty of opportunities for smaller one or two day trips. I like traveling the world but also seeing things that are closeby that are off the beaten path that some people might miss or drive by.

Swank Force One wrote:

HiTempguy wrote:

conesare2seconds wrote: Vacation is a week. Where you live is the rest of the year. Live where you are happy.

Yep, this is my opinion. The girlfriend is pretty big on traveling, but lets face it, if you are an adult settling down with newborn kids, you won't be traveling the world very much except for those special occasions where you can foist the womb goblins on the grandparents for a week a year. Of course, our neighbourhoods are waaaaaaaaaay different than yours up here. We don't have the extreme swings and segregation of the rich/poor as a typical US city does. So I could live in the "ghetto", knock two houses down to build a nice house, and probably not even really worry about the neighbourhood. I wouldn't, but I could. Also also, I don't think one negates the other. It sounds to me like the idea is that you are spending SO much money on one that the other isn't possible... which means you are probably not in a financial position to really do either (aka live within your means).

Who are you talking to? I'm not sure what to say about the ghetto thing, either... That's just... weird and not entirely sure what it had to do with anything.

I think its the typical "Canada is better than you" rant from him is my best guess. That is the only thing that would make sense of that weird rant. If not.... than I have no idea.

I live in an expensive place and I can say it's totally worth it to come home to something I love as opposed to something I kinda sorta like.

Don't forget the property investment that you do or will have. If you live in Indiana your home will accrue modest appreciation. If you move to a paradise, your housing costs will increase along with your salary but the important thing to remember is that you will want to retire to a cheaper area when you are old and feeble and will not be able to enjoy paradise. When you do retire to a cheaper place that housing appreciation will help you tremendously. Think about the extra money for retirement.

Living in a more popular area almost always means more salary, thus more retirement money plus the appreciation of the housing investment. Combined, those two things allow you to retire to a cheaper area and take all the vacations you want.

beans wrote: I I will NEVER live back in California or anwywher near a beach again,

I grew up at the beach.. literally, we could see, hear, and smell it from the house I grew up in. I tried living in the mountains and hated every minute of it. My goal is not to live near the water again, but to live -on- it.

mad_machine wrote:

beans wrote: I I will NEVER live back in California or anwywher near a beach again,

I grew up at the beach.. literally, we could see, hear, and smell it from the house I grew up in. I tried living in the mountains and hated every minute of it. My goal is not to live near the water again, but to live -on- it.

I'm not a big fan of saltwater or southern california, really. I live about 10 minutes from lake erie and LOVE freshwater. I grew up on lake erie and a big pond at my grandparents in Nebraska during the summers up until I was about 18. I really loved living in the mountains 70% of the time. I like where I live now about 85-90% of the time, especially in the summer.

I really like where we live, it's expensive to live here but where you live becomes part of who you are somehow, how you define yourself. I think it's kind of inevitable.

mattm wrote: Don't forget the property investment that you do or will have. If you live in Indiana your home will accrue modest appreciation. If you move to a paradise, your housing costs will increase along with your salary but the important thing to remember is that you will want to retire to a cheaper area when you are old and feeble and will not be able to enjoy paradise. When you do retire to a cheaper place that housing appreciation will help you tremendously. Think about the extra money for retirement. Living in a more popular area almost always means more salary, thus more retirement money plus the appreciation of the housing investment. Combined, those two things allow you to retire to a cheaper area and take all the vacations you want.

I feel like that needs a big MAYBE (at least for my job).

As a Tech Writer, I've compared what I already make at 31 to other big tech areas. Boston, Austin, Silicon Valley, Portland, Seattle............I would make more money, yes, no doubt.

But I would NOT make up the difference in salary to buy a comparable home within 15 minutes of the city center (or have a MUCH longer commute which goes to quality of life). I would have to spend a much larger % of my income on a home, meaning a 30 year instead of a 15 year, and then with your money tied up in a home, it's not liquid.

I think some of you are assuming that my savings or overall expenditures would be drastically changed in either situation.

Not the case.

Do it. You only live once. God gave us legs so we could migrate. Not sit on our asses for the rest of our lives. It's also the evolutionary reason humans are so damn awesome. Unlike some species, we're not stuck on the rock we're born.

Honestly, if my company had locations in paradise I'd go in a heartbeat. In fact, I may transfer to our retail division to do just that. Unfortunately none of my current experience would translate to selling propane.

So, what did you decide?

Heh, it's gonna take more than a week to decide if i want to uproot everything, give up the only hobby i've had for the last 6 years, and move halfway across the country.

This wasn't a "I'm going to do SOMETHING right now" type thread. This was more about trying to figure out what goals to work towards long term(ish.)

PHeller wrote: So, what did you decide?

F2T ALL THE THINGS!!!!

Well yeah, that too.

PHeller wrote: Honestly, if my company had locations in paradise I'd go in a heartbeat. In fact, I may transfer to our retail division to do just that. Unfortunately none of my current experience would translate to selling propane.

Take lessons from this guy:

then take his job here: