A new chapter – full-time working from a van in a forest
ghuntley.com
ghuntley.com
I don't think I am cut out for a permanent #vanlife, but it sure sounds like a cool arrangement if you have the proclivity to handle all that it entails. My wife and I plan to do slow travel when our kids go to college. Move every year or so with a light load while learning different cultures.
Would love to hear more about the financial aspects of #vanlife... from my perspective, I reckon you save a bundle.... but I could be wrong.
Sadly in my country, our rental laws are still firmly stuck in the "quarter-acre" dream of the 1960s, where renting was only something you did at university before shortly buying your first house with a tiny deposit and a Government backed home loan.
These days as house prices rocket, only now are changes being made to tenancy laws to give tenants some more security. Back in my renting days, I had to move 4 times in 5 years because the landlord wanted to move in, or they sold it, or the farm my cottage was on had been sold and the new owner wanted it for workers, etc.
So here, at least, owning removed a significant amount of stress for me - I know I'll still be living here in 5 years, I haven't been able to say that until now.
How does this prevent you from going on a trip? I don't understand. Mind to elaborate a bit?
Try saving to much on home maintenance and you risk damaging your property, lowering it’s value in the future. Owning a home is expensive, it’s still a sound finacial choice, depending on country and so on, but it has a running cost.
The problem many home buyers face is that it has become normal to go deeply into debt to buy and maintain a house, so it is not like they pay rent into their own house ownership account which slowly accumulates reserves for costly maintenance. A house costs twice as much as its sale price and if one has to go into dept to buy it in the first place, one is not middle class.
Back in Boomer-Days a middle class worker could buy and maintain a house, provide for a family with multiple children, pay for their education and still have money left to go on vacation. Today two working parents can't do the same, instead children go into debt to finance their education and fathers live in their cars in googles parking lot.
A house that old will often have developed a few minor leaks in its lifetime. It's been subject to a lot of weathering. Probably it was put in without any felt underneath, as was normal at the time. Maybe the nails have weakened from rust. Many lofts are a bit damp, due to condensation as the roof is of course cold. So often the battens holding the slates will be a bit tired as well.
You spend a few years with strategically placed plastic tubs catching drips, then a once-a-decade storm comes along, you lose several slates at once, and it's time for a new roof.
Around here (Norway) a lot of houses have shingles on the roof - typical lifespan ~20 years or so. On the upside, it is simple to replace.
Next step up being corrugated steel, though mostly it is shaped to look like tile. IIRC you can expect to get 30-40 years out of one.
Proper tile - lifespan depends greatly on the quality of the tile, but around here (west coast, lots of crap weather) the limiting factor tends to be the nails used to hold the tiles in place.
Anecdotally, my father in law and I redid a slate roof last laid in 1917 last year. The nails had all but rusted away, and only the sheer mass of the slates held them in place. We redid it using marine grade stainless screws, part of me is a little peeved that I won't ever know how long it lasts - but I fully expect it to last way more than 100 years. Was fun to etch a couple of small plaques for my far-off descendants to read, though. We put them under the first couple of slates you'd need to remove when redoing the roof. :-)
When you get your pay, put aside money first and save for dedicated budgets.
Decide what budget you think is required in each slot.
Example: I want a house saving for min $30000 for unexpected and expected maintenance.
I want a minimum of $8000 for vacations.
Etc
Then, save as much as you can into those accounts until you reach their goal and then keep saving into them, but maybe lower the amount.
In the beginning (and if your out in time, this will be while you're DINKing) it might be rough, but it will be easier as your buffers stabilize.
When fixing the house, don't steal money from your travel buffer. And absolutely never take money from house buffer for travels. :-)
I think a lot of people spend way to much on luxury, like eating out or having three movie streaming services instead of none or one. And then they realize that "oops, no money left for savings this month neither"
Survival, savings, higher standard, then luxury, not the other way around.
It’s honestly a pretty good deal. Oh and we have a 25% VAT on everything, so your price is basically just what I have to pay in VAT.
What alternative timeline is this?
Source: Frequently happened to me when I rented.
Currently I can be given 2 months notice at any time.
This is actually preferable to on the earlier time with this tenancy, where I could be given 2 months notice and also the landlord makes an active decision whether to renew or decline every 12 months.
In fact they always send a no-reason formal eviction notice 3 months before the end of each 12 months renewal as a matter of policy, just to rub it in.
(I would be surprised if that's legal. It seems against the spirit of eviction law where timescales are supposed to begin when a tenant refuses to leave, not months before they are supposed to leave)
On one occasion they did decline to renew, giving no reason. They changed their mind at the last moment after I had a chat with the landlord's property manager. That was a source of great stress for me, not even knowing why.
Eventually I found out. The agency (not landlord) told me, to my face, that they didn't know the why, couldn't get a reason, but the landlord had decided not to renew. But later the landlord's property manager told me that the agency had lied to my face and the landlord did not initiate the decline.
It was the agency who had made the recommendation. I saw it advertised briefly at ~35% raise, so I suspect that was their motivation. These are not rent-controlled, I already pay a substantially above inflation annual raise, so it's not stuck on an ancient rate. If they had got a tenant in to replace me, not only would they have increased their agency fees as a percentage, they would have charged the landlord additional fees for processing a new tenant as well.
Real estate managers are incentivized to change tenants frequently to generate more fees. Sometimes, this also goes against the interest of the landlord as depending on his contract he might need to pay pretty hefty readvertising fees.
My understanding is those fees are no longer legal.
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tenant-fees-act
See the section near the bottom starting "From 1 June 2019, the only payments that landlords or letting agents can charge to tenants in relation to new contracts are:"
Anecdotally, it seems these fees have indeed disappeared, although few people I know now live in rental accommodation in the UK.
In a place such as Oxford or Cambridge you have tons of overseas landlords. Thus, agents are typically extracting fees from them by claiming the tenant has left and the house needs to be readvertised. But, in reality, the tenant wanted to renew the contract. Since they are not on-site, let alone managing the property themselves, it's easy to trick them.
In other words, agents often have a perverse incentive to force a high tenant turnover. Some agents are not like this because they are more ethical, or because they guarantee a minimum income per calendar month. But, on average, it's a very nasty market as you've noted.
In France I was given 2 weeks notice, immediately before Christmas.
The landlord sold the property I was in without telling me, then gave me 2 weeks.
That was difficult as I was booked to fly to the UK in 1 week.
Finding another place to live at Christmas is difficult. Doing everything to process it including moving within 1 week is difficult. Luckily for me, some Mormon friends came to visit, and when I told them my predicament, they did everything to help me move my stuff quickly to my new temporary place. Good people - thanks guys!
In January I had to find somewhere again, because I hadn't been find a suitable long term rental before Christmas.
Edit: actually, I just checked and that's for tenants. If the landlord wants to break the contract to sell the property, it's 3 months for "meublé", 6 months otherwise.
https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F929
3 to 6 month with certified letter before the sale, and can only happen at lease renewal dates (every 3 years).
However, you are talking about things that I don't really have to worry about since it is an apartment. So maybe there is a slight difference here.
The only argument that can be made is that the money you do not spend on your own house is money that could be put into a different investment like the stock market. But in NL renting a place is roughly as expensive as my monthly mortgage payments. So both situations it is money I cannot put in the stock market. Insurance and heating is being added on top of those monthly payments regardless of the option you pick.
The reason it makes sense for landlords is that they have nothing else to do with the money if interest rate is zero or close to it - the alternative is slowly losing it (or higher risk stuff like stocks).
So they slowly build equity while not profiting every month, counting on prices continuing to rise for their long-term profit and if they run several properties you can get economies of scale going for managing them.
However, it's missing something I think is important. In my case we have a £335k home at 1.6% interest which means every year we pay £5000 in interest, but we paying off around £15000 of the principal on the loan. After 10 years we could sell the house, spend the £150k+ (assuming the home value stays the same) we've paid off on a sailing boat and head off around the world or whatever takes our fancy.
If we'd have rented we might have been able to save maybe £200 a month in outgoings. Even invested in index funds it's unlikely to come close.
You certainly paid a tax when you bought your home. I don’t know how it’s called or how much is it in your area, but you have to add that to the cost of what you bought, or deduce it from what you will sell (assuming the home value stays the same).
Then you also have to deduce all the real estate yearly taxes. And then all the costs associated with the real estate property itself (the ones you wouldn’t have to pay as a renter). Then you’ll have to deduce the real estate agency fees.
Then and only then you can start making some comparisons between buying and renting.
However, there aren't property taxes which you wouldn't need to pay as a renter. The closest thing to my knowledge is council tax but that is the same whether you buy or rent.
On the other hand, I've spent hundreds of pounds on rental contracts, referral fees, unfair deposit deductions etc.
The rental/real estate markets work differently in Austria and Germany and that's (partially) why home ownership patterns in those countries are so different to England's. Vienna and Berlin both have something close to 90% of the population renting rather than owning, and it's not because they are idiots.
There are massive incentives erected to keep renting tenant-friendly in a way that would never fly in a more capitalist country like the UK or the US.
E.g. many large american cities like chicago would have purchase prices similar to berlin but 2-3x the rental prices due to these regulations keeping Berliner rents artificially low.
Trying to actually check my vague memory: if numbeo[0] is anywhere near accurate (I anecdotally believe it's close enough to give you a good rough estimate) Berlin is both drastically more expensive to buy than Chicago (almost 50% more expensive) and drastically cheaper to rent (a bit over 40% cheaper).
Obviously this completely changes your buy vs rent calculous!
[0]https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...
Rent is kept artificially low & safe in Germany via legislation, where as purchasing happens on the free market.
Also culturally Germans are very fiscally conservative and risk averse, it is not as common to take up debt (=mortgage) as in the UK or the US.
Our rent payment is about half what we would pay if we bought. Just look at the last two places I rented: Rent1: $2500/mo Condo next door: $850k. That’s 4K mortgage and 1k HoA.
Rent2: $4100 Equivalent mortgage: $10k/mo
Doesn’t make sense to buy unless you are speculating on housing prices.
My home value has skyrocketed as well, but so has every other home. However, the growth cancels out, I get my home's growth as a sort of discount were I to sell and buy another home. It's called the housing ladder and is key to preserving wealth as your housing needs change and the market gets more expensive.
Your example works in shorter time frames, buying vs renting in a given year or 3. But over the long haul I've only regretted thinking like that in my 20s and not just snatching up a home and land.
It's easier to make a person who will need a house than it is to build a house, and it's extremely difficult to make more land to put a house on.
Edit: grammar/clarity
You don’t know how your landlord got the property you’re renting. He may purely and simply never bought it. Or he bought it when it was costing nothing for him, or on the reverse a lot which prevents him to sell. Or selling it would generate massive tax for him. Or it is a diversification strategy. Etc.
And to say « renting is roughly as expensive as my mortgage payment » to justify to buy is a very common and very bad argument that is built on a misconception of what is at stake.
When you buy a property, being a flat or a house, you have costs associated with it. A lot of them. Costs associated with the purchase and costs associated with the property.
First of all, you’ll have to pay some sort of one-off real estate tax when you buy. Then you will pay all the interests of your bank credit (which are higher the longer is your credit). Then you will pay all on the on-going real estate taxes. Then you will pay all the costs of the property itself (all the on-going things a renter do not have to pay, all the big 5-10 years maintenance tasks like frontage restauration).
So renting is bad only if it is costing more than all those costs during the period, minus the real estate price increase during the period.
I don’t know where you live but in a lot of big cities, it is actually way way cheaper to rent than to buy.
The truth is most people do not really look at the proper numbers when they want to justify to buy a property because there is a lot more involved in being the owner of the place than what people want to admit.
To give you an idea about numbers. My mortgage is around 440k with a monthly payment of +/- 1500eu (includes interest). For the same apartment a 1500eu rent a month isn't unheard of. On top of this you have to pay for electricity and heating yourself and the insurance. When renting the additional tax (e.g. waste or sewer) is also added on top of the monthly payment regardless of buying or renting. The only thing that you have to pay when buying is when things break down, or the so called 'VvE' which is an organisation maintaining the building itself.
So yes I do agree with the statement that it cannot easily be compared, but in the situation of The Netherlands I feel like this is the right choice to make.
Edit: Although, if you (or anyone) disagrees with it I am curious to know why.
But I’m just saying that there is a general assumption in most discussions around buying versus renting that buying is always better. It’s not.
It’s the general argument « when you buy you don’t throw your money out the window ».
In reality you do throw money out the window when you buy, only differently, and I’m highlighting the numbers people usually do not take into account when they make their comparison.
Comparing mortgage payments and rents is usually not the good way to do that, because the costs when you buy are only partially monthly based.
One other number I didn’t mention above: real estate agency fees.
So mortgage_interest * (1-T) + property_taxes/12 * (1-T) + home_expenses/12. Compare that to rent payment.
Do you not have any nagging thoughts about renting though? Because I went the exact opposite way. I was always super stressed when renting, because I knew that at the end of our contract the landlord could tell us to leave. Especially when we were on a monthly rolling contract, my stress about this was probably 10/10.
Now that we bought a house I sleep well - if anything goes wrong I can probably repair it myself, in case of appliances I can buy second hand ones cheap or again, try the repair myself ...and for things I can't repair myself(ie - boiler) I have insurance for. It's about 10x less stressful than renting to me.
Luckily this can't happen in most of the EU. Even if the contract say X years you can't throw people out after the contract runs out unless you are moving in yourself.
Asset inflation is great when you hold assets, but the husing bubble is one of the ways the establishment pulled the ladder up from the Millennials and later.
For me the nag was about all the thing we wanted to do to the house but couldn’t because it was a rental.
To each their own I guess - there are fair points for both approaches. Do what makes sense financially and keeps you happy / less worried :)
That's unlikely, if the rented space is part of a complex. The complex repairs are amortized across all the units. The issue is about cost per square footage. Given you don't have to pay for the same square footage (not the full lot, only the space your unit and parking occupies) it's almost always lower.
Also, they can’t both be pretax and deductible. The former, the money never shows up on taxes at all, the latter they show up as a subtraction on taxable income.
But it may make more sense to buy real estate to rent out to others and live somewhere else for rent.
If a company holds a few apartments (and getting rid of non-paying renters can be tricky in some jurisdictions) then you can deduct interest payments, repairs etc.
If you live in your own house I don't know how much you can deduct mortgage payments. And if you need a new roof then you have to pay for this by your after tax income salary. Big difference.
I am eyeing a loft in an EU country. I wish I had the money to buy it, renovate it and making loft apartments out of it. One I would rent for myself (from my company).
Another situation would be if your company is financing the apartment directly with pre-tax money that didn't make a round-trip as income, though that's quite a different situation than most rentals, and may be a big no-no (or may be acceptable in your jurisdiction - no idea).
Landlord has 100k rental income. To make it simple, he has to pay 30% tax too. But he has now another bisness expense of 40k for the roof, so he gets only 60k income. Not he pays 30% income tax on that, so he has only 42k left. But this is 12k more than you because the roof was a business expense.
(As The Cars might say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mjTpZk3Ao)
If they bought it 20% down and want to cash flow for a goal of 8% cash on cash, that's another type of return on investment. If the property value tracks inflation, their return is probably closer to 20% yearly.
Also they can shelter that income through depreciation, mortgage interest, expenses, etc.
Many (most?) rentals in my area (in Scandinavia) is not for-profit and get cheap loans to build. Just like the utility company (electricity, heat, water, fiber). You can get permission to improve and if it is good for the environment you get some of the money back if you move out.
Now the little repairs that were due during these years (in 3 different downtown apartments) always went like this: I tell the landlord that something needs to be fixed, they tell me to call someone (or sometimes they send someone they know) and I pay for it, get the invoice which we then deduct from the rent next month. No extra profit made on the repairs. You can say that it is priced in the rent, but then that's the rent (which will be subject to competition). Yes, obviously they are looking to make some meaningful return on their investment. Whether that's higher than the mortgage's interest rate depends a lot on when they actually bought the property. But in an equilibrium the two should be pretty close because if they start to diverge too much people will either stop renting or they will stop buying apartments (and do the other).
So financially, unless the mortgage is much more expensive, buying is a better decision.
For people like me with no desire to have kids and minimal ownership of furniture and toys, renting is nice.
I've always wanted to be a renter for life, but recently I also have been thinking about buying some land in upstate New York or in the outskirts of some European city and building a livable structure like an A frame or a geodesic dome.
I do think urban housing prices are insane. My rental units were in the suburbs, and now I have vacation rentals in Southern Utah instead. So the rent price ratios made sense. In denser cities, the landlord would have to out like 50% down just to break even on the mortgage. Yes, they may be cash flowing, but just barely, and the nuance is they put a massive down payment. It just depends on location.
For those who need a general rule of thumb comparing rent vs mortgage, there's the 5% rule: https://www.pwlcapital.com/rent-or-own-your-home-5-rule/
I lived out of a minivan and then a larger fan for 2.5 years while writing software and loved it.
It was one of the most freeing and enriching experiences of my life, and was so much better than living in a stationary building.
I traveled all around the country and was still able to remain productive. In fact, I was more productive and motivated, because my life was actually interesting and different day-to-day.
It was sometimes uncomfortable, especially in the beginning when I learned the ropes, but nothing too bad. (This is in the U.S., where it's safe to do in majority of places.)
In my gradual cutting of monthly upkeep expenditures I had to give it up in favor of more detached living, but it was great, and I would do it again if I didn't have to do paid work to accomplish it.
i don,t think it is missing, it is one of the most frequently asked questions, and also one of the most frequently answered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-DgMYB6L0c
Bathing:
- Sponge bath, external shower hookup, or an internal shower, are common. Using gym / campground / community centre facilities is also frequent, loss of these a major fallout of Covid. Taking a "navy shower" minimises water use. There are recirculating showers (with filters) used by some, and instant-on-demand hot water heaters (used by most). The video shows a bathroom built into cabinets which opens for use, shower curtail is pulled up. Fixed-wall stalls exist but really chew into space, often double as closet space.
- Cassette or composting toilets latter w/ urine diverter, are common. Again, using available facilities is often preferred.
- Winter is easy: a small heater and insulation. Condensation is a bigger worry than cold, especially against the front windshield. Summer heat is generally worse --- keeping a metal box under full sun cool is a challenge. Especially where solar exposure is needed.
Something needs to change. Why screw oneself with a 30 year mortgage, plus property taxes, plus constant maintenance headaches? And deal with shitty HOA too, in some places. Maybe this is a good way to silently protest and force progressive housing policy changes.
With a more remote workforce now on the long term horizon, why not just move to a cheaper city rather completely jumping off the proverbial cliff?
(This comment is coming from someone who is considering van life and I have also spent some extended periods of time working and living out of my vehicle).
Remote work might not be possible for everyone.
Personally, moving to a cheaper city would be my first choice, followed by tiny house.
All of these have pros and cons. But for many people in their 20s/30s, buying a house might never be an option at all, simply because they can't afford it.
Unless progressive policies are implemented, we can expect major housing crisis soon. People want their home's value to continuously increase, they see their home as an investment first - instead of seeing it as a place to live, first.
I dunno what the solution is, but I don't think this situation can continue.
They only are insane if you insist on living centrally in large cities. Which you can't do anyway if you live in a van. So it's hard to give a lot of weight to this prediction.
This is really beginning to concern me. I think we’ve created a fake plastic economy built on face plastic house prices. By stoking the bubble, the purchase and renovation of housing keeps pushing money through the economy.
By constantly remortgaging, new value is “created” which allows people to have a new kitchen, go on holiday, buy a car, extend their house. But it feels like a trick to me. I’m not an economist, but where’s the wealth creation here?
As a result of the forever rising prices, foreign investors buy properties, often leaving them empty. They see the game the government is playing and exploit it.
Feels like the U.K. government doesn’t have a Plan B. They don’t know how to create a strong economy so they turn to retail and the housing market. Surely the wheels have to fall off at some point?
This has been an issue for a long time now. There should have been a crash in 2008/2009 but instead the government in the UK decided to prop up house prices with various schemes. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, for many people, house owners and people looking to purchase, this helped people stay out of negative equity/allowed people to purchase their own home.
> By constantly remortgaging, new value is “created” which allows people to have a new kitchen, go on holiday, buy a car, extend their house. But it feels like a trick to me. I’m not an economist, but where’s the wealth creation here?
I'm not sure remortgaging is creating new value. All money is loaned into existence, remortgaging is just creating new debt secured on your home. It still has to be paid back. People could still get loans, just not perhaps at the same favorable rate.
There has been a lot of money printing over the past 10 years or so, I think rising house prices are a natural result of that. I think it's more of a case of decreasing purchasing power of the £ in your pocket, rather than homes rising in value. Have a look at this chart when house prices are compared with gold[0]. It's also a function of the availability of loans, since now you can borrow cheaply over long periods, this increases the total amount people are able to borrow, as it's much easier to service the debt.
What's more surprising to me is that we're not really seeing inflation in other areas of the economy, such as wages or consumer goods. Inflation has been surprising low since the crisis of 2008/2009.
“Value” in quotes because it isn’t, as you said.
Regarding inflation: I think house price rises have been stoked by the stamp duty trick once again, but agree that there may also be a bit of inflation mixed in.
The reason we’re not seeing general inflation yet is the extra money supply has yet to leave bank accounts and move through the consumer economy. After things open up, we should see that money being spent and a short term boom, then as demand rises prices will respond and we’ll see inflation. At least according to Keynes, who in retrospect just seems to be more and more correct.
Wages won’t rise at the same pace because employers will exploit inflation, the trade unions are weak, and the govt doesn’t care - 120K dead and the Tories are seven points ahead, reality doesn’t matter in U.K. politics.
If the housing market crashes 30% tomorrow it'll bankrupt everyone who signed on for a 30-year mortgage in the last 10 years, unless they've overpaid substantially. Very few leveraged first time buyers who bought since 2008 own their homes yet.
UK retail is just wrecked. Even before the pandemic it wasn't great.
Why would you expect to only pay for the price of building it?
There is also a lot of value in land itself, the view from it, the infrastructure around that land, what other people (And businesses, and schools, airports, restaurants, etc. etc. etc.) live there in close proximity. What laws are in place on that general part of earth... There is so much more at play here than "cost of building it".
Housing has become a principle (and one of the largest) asset classes. The things that make it suitable for investing are precisely the same attributes that make it inaccessible, especially to the young, poor, old, and otherwise disadvantaged.
Flyover-state housing may be affordable by SF / New York / LA / Chicago standards. It's often not affordable to locals themselves.
And services (data, power, food, support, healthcare, education) are often far below standards typical on the coasts / near major metros.
Lack of regulation in places without rigid building code enforcement can also make it hard to find people who aren't hacks (if you can find people at all) in construction.
There's a lot less restaurants, and they are all the same, and grocers tend not to stock quite as much variety, so those are more true.
Education and healthcare are a lot more variable. I expect having to travel further tends to be the biggest difference in healthcare.
The issue with power has more to do without outages. In urban areas, these may last a few hours, excepting major incidents (hurricanes, earthquakes). In rural regions, outages may span days, even weeks. Outside the US (or outside mainland US, as in Puerto Rico), even longer.
"Services" includes retail and technical capacities -- whether it's local computer repair or someone who knows how to do basic cabling. Again: cities offer a much more diverse economy, with far more specialties than rural regions do. This may not be debilitating, but it is a factor to consider.
I think you're combining the worst of opposite ends of the spectrum here. When services are lacking, the prices are cheap too. You can live in a disconnected shack in a depressed rural area for practically nothing today too, just like (many more people did) in the past.
Prior to that, I spent 2 years on a motorbike living out of hotels and rentals all over Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.
I am lucky to have a job and a life that was already remote.
In normal life, I think that's a much _simpler_ approach than being out in the forest. We were never far from a water source or a hardware store in case of emergency, which came in handy more than once.
I hope it continues to work out for them!
If you are in East Coast U.S., I may be able to find you a shower.
It's about people in American with similar situations who decide to go off grid. And like the OP are a bit older, not necessarily the hippie type.
The movie is quite stark and realistic. A mix of documentary and drama. And it starts Frances McDormand from Three Billboards, who is excellent in it.
That said, this lifestyle has absolutely no appeal to me. What do you do when you get older? I mean much older? Is a 70 year going to be lugging propane tanks around and doing odd jobs for food? There needs to be some sort of plan, doesn't there?
Good question. That’s a thing. People have this grey nomad ideal and when they reach that age they sell up everything and buy a big rig, only to find that at age 70, it’s difficult to drive such a thing. Particularly if they’ve never reversed a trailer before.
This is why you can buy second hand rigs that are 12 months old that are hardly used, cheap.
My dad has been 100% sedentary since his 60s. He's now 71 with the mobility of a 90 year old. His father was a military man who kept a strict exercise routine till his 80s. He looked (and performed like) 55 at 75. Designing a lifestyle that forces you to move and lift heavy things is a really good idea.
both are good when done properly
The real limiting factor is when the furnishings, flooring, cabinets, appliances, all that stuff wears out. Manufactured housing in general has this 20 to 40 year depreciation, because we don't pretend as a society that they're an appreciating asset. Its ridiculous that we treat stick built houses (as opposed to the land they are built on) that way; houses have major maintenance costs over time as well. It's just easier with manufactured housing of any type to, instead of: new roof, new HVAC, a kitchen renovation, new flooring, etc etc, just.. defer maintenance on those items as practical and then replace the whole thing or do a major midlife overhaul. (The latter does require a "home base", so doing vanlife long term does require finding places to settle down occasionally - this lifestyle is much easier for people who have families and/or friends with single family detached homes in suburban or rural areas they can crash with sometimes.)
I'm not sure they did, their situation looks precarious to me.
This lifestyle is incredible and life-changing, and shouldn't be discounted by anyone who's looking for a change.
Do these citizens in these countries think these laws around divorce are fair?
While this doesn’t seem like a difference, it has major implications in pretty much all aspects of life.
Whatever opinions you have about divorce law aside, it's a simple fact that if housing was already a difficult expense, it gets much harder when one family becomes two.
Working from home is a long sought boost for everyone. Places like Sikkim, or Ladakh, unspoiled parts of Nepal and Sri Lanka are ideal for remote work.
The problem is that there is no demand.
Use a friends address...
This is a zero-sum view. I've recently observed it becoming more popular online. True to form, the simple take misses all of the nuance.
On one hand there are people decrying the horrible conditions for housekeepers sending remittance from the Gulf. On the other there are economically troublesome analyses like the above.
Politicians don't care about taxing corporations that they like. You'll see them do the whole dance against Big Oil or Walmart or whatever, but when it comes to Big Tech, boy do they love their Apple toys and Google Internet.
With wireless coms, weird real estate fluctuations.. new vehicle designs too it might become a new form of nomadism.. are we becoming snails ?
It’s ABSURD how much money you need to pay for a 2 bedroom apartment.
Anywhere 1.5 hour drive north or south of Sydney and still within 20 minute drive from the ocean is minimum $AUD800K.
If you want to buy in Sydney proper it’s $AUD1M minimum unless looking at something in need of serious renovations.
The government does nothing to stop the bubble. Rivers of dubious Chinese money flooding in and lax lending practices combined with reduction after reduction in the interest rates.
The current government in Australia is hijacking the next gen’s future with bad environmental policy, foreign dependency of the education sector and a housing bubble that never ends.
To the OP, please come and visit Hopetoun VIC, free camping at the lake, you would love it here
Perhaps I will try it again in a few years with my wife this time.
Caravans don't have any of those downsides, but I guess people make it work?
It probably has something to do with being born in Brazil/RJ, where hugging everyone is the norm.
Thank you, Geoff, for writing about your experience. It made me happy to see how you pulled through the difficult times, and living better than ever.
I've read mixed reviews on whirlpool and other forums.
I understand minimum latency is 650ms. What's that like for videoconferencing?
Presumably I'd need an articulated dish so I can recalibrate every time I stop. Anyone had any experience with those? They cost about $2000. Can they be secured, or are they likely to be ripped off from time to time?
We use Viasat at our farm and it's acceptable but kind of slow and has a long ping. I'm really itching to get starlink which they've projected will be available at our place later this year.
This seems very expensive. How do you set up the monthly plan more efficiently?
Also, any cool stories to tell about power maintenance? I see you have giant solar panels but wonder if they're enough for your daily workload - do you have enough power at night?
Sorry if you've answered these questions before, I'm new to your blog!
* the solar panels deliver average ~200W for 8hrs per day, 1.6kWh total
* OP has average 50W power draw while working, 8hrs per day, 0.4kWh total
* OP has lighting requirements of ~20W, 4hrs per day, ~0.1kWh
I guess he's probably fairly comfortably net positive for electrical power. In my experience the solar panel estimate is reasonably conservative, although I've experienced some extended periods of very bad weather where my panels produce less than 5% of their rated maximum (in the UK- not Aus!).
I basically travel from activity to activity. Right now I'm skiing. As the snow recedes, I intend to take some time learning to paraglide. Then climbing season will begin. Circumstances permitting, I'm hoping to spend time in Scotland and Norway (in particular) over the spring and summer months, perhaps Greece/Corsica/Sardinia/Spain/Italy (unsure) before winter, then likely the Alps somewhere.
I'm not much of a city dweller. It's not that I hate cities, they have their charms, it's mostly just that the things I most enjoy don't exist in them. My job is reasonably flexible and living in a van allows me to be closer to the things I love to do: skiing, climbing, running/hiking (off road), especially. Typically I'll do one of those for 2-4 hours per work day, and much of the weekend. Because I guess you may wonder: I find this makes me happier and gives me more motivation in general, which, anecdotally, has a positive impact on my work.
A little more background: I work an average of 40hrs/wk; I have no children; minimal financial responsibilities; I live in the van with my partner, who works ~20hrs/wk, also remotely.
And if you're in tech, you probably know more people in tech than you know accountants/doctors/lawyers/chemical engineers/business owners.
I'm not sure how my wife and I will go long term, but living in campervan has always been a dream - so only one way to find out! :)
Can someone explain this? Is OP suggesting that the typical working life is 100 years?
Also 8 hrs is closer to half one's waking hours so that's either another math error, or a mistaken inclusion of the word "waking" (actually he used "awake"), or he works part-time.
At the moment I just sit on the bench seat with my laptop on my lap, but it’s slowly taking its toll on my posture.
Any advice?
In the interim, try to put a pillow on your lap, and your laptop on the pillow. Try to tense your core a little in general, and especially if you feel discomfort in your back. You'll probably need to maintain the tension for a little while. I find this avoids or alleviates my discomfort- but is probably not a _good_ solution.
This is terrible for the thermals. You should never put a laptop on a surface that restricts airflow between the surface and the laptop.
Basically, there's where you, your butt, monitor, keyboard, mouse, peripherals (printer/scanner, camera/audio gear), power, net, hardware, and any materials (books, suplies, etc.) go. Thermal management. Security.
Laptop or desktop system?
A swivel front seat (driver, passenger, or both), may be the best chair option. It's already there, adjusts to height/tilt, and is comfortable for long periods. Alternately a fold-down / jump seat.
Alternative bed / garage configurations may free up interior space, at a convenience cost. A Murphy, folding, or convertible bed especially.
Fold-out work-surface / stowable monitor next. Support for keyboard, mouse, tablet. A swing-arm monitor doubling as a video display, cabinet or roof mounted.
Easy access to anynecessary materials. Ability to get in or out.
Other seating or lounge space (bench, bed, stool, outside chairs) can be used with laptop, tablet, or possibly a wireless keyboard & mouse with monitor swung out, as an alternate workspace for variety.
CPU, storage, and networking kit can be built-in or mounted to cabinet or rack space, but will likely require airflow / cooling. Utilising or protecting from outdoor ambient conditions may assist.
Then there's sorting out where other amenities / services / systems / storage go (food prep, cooking, cleaning, bathing, toilet, sleeping, cloths, gear, electric, fuel, fresh & waste water, etc.)
I can imagine this going really wrong
There's plenty of ready-made options, they're just not using the "vanlife" brand on their blog posts.
[ETA: Removed content of unpopular comment]
Yes, the world is full of problems, but we don't need to stop living our best lives and writing about them just because someone, somewhere is living worse.