# Where should you live?



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

When you retire, one of the pluses is that you are free to chose where to live. When you're working, access to the job usually dictates where you live. For example, within an hour commute. But in retirement that no longer applies and you can consider other criteria as being more important to you.

Some people want to stay in the house they are in, for many reasons. Some want to sell up and move to a better climate and maybe even in a different country. Some decide to sell up and become a 'full-time' RVer or liveaboard on a boat. Some move from the city to the country or a more recreational area. Some decide to 'down size', sell the house, buy a condo and invest the balance of capital that releases. There is no one right answer but it might be worthwile discussing the pros and cons of each approach.

Speaking from personal experience, I've tried moving country, downsizing to a condo and moving from city to country. All had their pluses and minuses. Moving to a Greek island brought me a better climate; experiencing a different culture; lower cost of living; and in general a whole different lifestyle. On the minus side, the infrastructure was poorer. For example, I wouldn't want to still be there when my health started to deteriorate, there simply isn't the access and facilities that exist in Canada for the elderly.

Downsizing to a condo seemed like a good idea at the time. The thought was that we could come and go as we pleased, just lock the door and go. We also thought it would be a 'move once' answer since you could stay until you got to the stage where you needed assisted living care. Unlike a house where you have maintenance, gardening, etc. to deal with which could get to be too much as you get older. It was indeed easy to just lock the door and take off for weeks or even months at a time. On the downside, you are sharing things and if you are used to having your own house, even some of the small things could be annoying. For example, a neighbour who never held the door (self-closing for fire safety) of their apartment until it closed quietly, but instead just let it bang shut every time they went in or out. Some condos have rules that are intended for the common good which is never 'common', that is they suit everyone. There can easily be rules that suit the majority (not the same thing as 'common') but do not suit you as an individual. For example, allowing/not allowing pets in the building or determining what can and cannot be put on your balcony (no bicycles or hanging laundry). 

Moving from a house in the city to a house in a small town in the country can mean getting a lot more 'bang for your buck' in terms of real estate prices. My experience with the differences in prices from Toronto to a small town in southwestern Ontario is that prices for comparable properties can vary by 3-1. So for example a $450k house in the city can be bought for $150k in the country. What's more, property taxes may be much as lower as well. Property taxes are something I don't think all retirees pay enough attention to. Capital sitting in your house can be left to your kids. Property tax besides being a signifigant number on your annual living costs is money that is gone forever. On the downside of moving out of the city, you generally have to drive a bit farther to achieve the same variety of anything. ie. stores, restaurants, airport, theatres, etc.

What I do think is worth doing is making a conscious decision as to where you will live in retirement, rather than just assuming you will stay where you are. So what was your choice already or what are your thoughts for the future?

By the way, I should say that like many things, I think a decision should be made based on your situation at the time, not based on what your needs might be 10 years down the road. That thinking is what got us into a condo which we sold in 3 years as unsuitable for us while we were still able and preferred to live in a detached house. It's like the bathroom reno we are having done later this year. We are removing a bathtub and putting in a 6 foot walk in shower. People say, 'oh, they will not be as good for resale when the time comes to sell.' That may be true but it is what is best for US now that matters, not what is best 10 years from now.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Good post OldPro, I agree there can be lots of possibilities when retired and some choices may seem right but aren't in hindsight. 



OldPro said:


> So what was your choice already or what are your thoughts for the future?


For me, I'll be staying where I am for the forseeable future but won't exclude extended stays (1-2 months) in different areas of Canada and the US. I've spent the last 10 years doing yearly road trips to different areas just to see which ones interest me and after all that I concluded they are all nice places to visit but I don't want to live there. So this greatly simplifies things for my retirement, home base remains the same for now but as you pointed out, things can change in the future.


----------



## rikk (May 28, 2012)

^ Me too ... I've seen much of the world, there's currently no place like home, which is why I'm here in the first place :joyous:


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

The good thing you have demonstrated is flexibility. When retired people become inflexible, they miss plenty of opportunities. And any decision that you make can be reversed. We have lived in multiple cities and countries. In estates, houses and apartments/condos. All have their pros and cons. There is no panacea.

A couple of friends have 3 houses in 2 countries and 4 houses in 2 countries. Not for us but each determines what works for them. One has a 40' yacht and a 65' yacht. He spends a lot of time maintaining his stuff. We have gotten over the need for stuff to keep us entertained.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

One thing I know is when you think you have a plan for the future something usually happens to make you look at it from different eyes.We are still 6 years away from 'retirement' and being able to leave the country for extended periods of time.Five years ago the plan was a home somewhere warm and two homes in Canada but right now our plan looks like two homes in Canada and we will spend a couple months traveling to a different warm spot and rent there .If our youngest goes to school locally we will keep our current home but if she moves away we will sell this home as I hate to leave it vacate for 6 months of the year .This year we will spend ten weeks at our home in Newfoundland which we hope to have completely renovated by 2017 ,it is tough only doing things in the summer months so this is why it is taking so long.


----------



## RBull (Jan 20, 2013)

Some interesting thoughts particularly from OldPro and kcowan - the folks with more retirement experience. You're confirming my thinking. There's no one fits all solution, live for now with an eye to being flexible in the future, when you might want change..or might have no other choice. 

We moved out of the city to a rural waterfront setting. We're enjoying it a lot for now, in combination with traveling, but who knows what the future will bring.


----------



## janus10 (Nov 7, 2013)

Our plan is to not only downsize, but also leave the GTA and move further away where average house prices are half. Combined, this will end up being a substantial catalyst to feel comfortable with early retirement.

But, that still may be only a 15-20 year solution. Eventually, we may decide the maintenance of a home is more trouble than it's worth and downsize into a condominium or gated community.

We have investigated moving abroad but my wife is against it, no matter how much we are enjoying Hawaii as I type. The reason for us to emigrate would be climate-based, which isn't sufficient when factoring everything else. Instead, our idea is to snowbird for a month during the harshest part of the winter.


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

Having being retired now for several years I can say we downsized and moved across the city, I never felt like part of the new community.
After retiring it was my dream to spend winters down south which I did for two years but I've become bored with that and would rather just take off for a few weeks at a time.

Just moved back to the community where my kids were raised and it just feels more like home. 
I know two couples that moved away from the city after retiring and were fine for 12 years and in the past year have moved back for medical reasons.

I could handle country living part-time but my wife would not even consider it.
I do have a 17 foot travel trailer that I park in the Okanagan spring and fall as my getaway place. 

I think it could be a hard sell trying to convince a spouse to give up a lifestyle they like. 
Job access never had anything to do with where I lived.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

_Where should you live?_ Where we've been for the last 35yrs I expect - same house we bought the year we got married and raised two kids in. Small, but never felt too crowded even with the kids (4-level split w/ rear walkout & well utilized space, and like the location). Just spent the last 4 years renovating the interior and re-landscaping outside for low maintenance - even have a flower garden to plant me in when the time comes  Spent the last month massively de-cluttering. We've already traveled extensively so that itch is not too troublesome, but we are in a position now to travel where and when we want. Family are important, so as long as visiting from here is easy as anywhere else, we figure why move.


----------



## IFITSTOBEITSUP2ME (Mar 6, 2015)

We'll travel extensively, probably via RV mainly, but our homebase will be wherever our youngest daughter and her family end up. Right now it looks like they will be taking over the main family acreage her daddy built, when we retire in the next 3 years. To us all, our time together as a family is priceless, that's just how we all roll, as did hubby and I with my parents when alive. She has a house 2hrs south of us bought to attend Uni, but she spends 4 out of 7 nights a week at the family residence, as well April through end August, and month of December. Her fiance lives permanently with us here for the past 3 years, whereas if he wanted to he could go stay at her house weekends (LOL). We think they like our cooking!! Or is it our doing their laundry and all the cleaning? Hmmmm.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Around here, a lot of people sell their detached single family home and buy a townhouse condo. 

Probably more than 90% of the "condos" is of the townhouse variety, including more upscale linked homes. Not many folks here buy apartments.

It seems like a good situation for most people............still have privacy and a yard, but have less outside maintenance to look after.

Most retired folks I know want to stay close to their families, and have abandoned their previous retirement plans of a sunny location or foreign land.

For better or worse it seems pretty well a set in stone progression for most people.

Sell the big house and buy a townhouse condo. Sell the townhouse condo and move into a retirement home. Move out of the retirement home into a nursing home.

Even the people I know who have lots of money to spend don't seem particularly interested in a whole lot of variation from what everyone else is doing.

They just get a nicer townhome.....move into a nicer retirement home.........and into a private room in the nursing home.


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

You know sags, I think you've kinda hit the nail on the head with people not being interested in a lot of variation from what everyone else is doing. Reading the responses, I kinda feel like it all sounds pretty boring. Even though I outlined the usual choices, I think I was hoping to read some radical/unusual/exciting alternatives that some people might have in mind or have done.

You know, like spending 6 months a year in Arizona looking for the Lost Dutchman Goldmine in the Superstitions; selling up and buying a one way ticket to X and seeing where the wind blew them from there; buying a piece of land and trying their hand at living off the grid, Planning to build a house out of empty beer bottles at the rate at which they could consume the contents, etc. I did the one way ticket to X and let the wind blow me for 15 years after I retired but to be fair, I was single and only 43 which no doubt makes a difference. But surely there are some people who retire at 55 or 65 who take the 'road less travelled'. I think the problem is that there are really only a couple of dozen regular posters on this forum and that's just too small a sample to draw from.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

Can't speak for everyone obviously, but it could also be that many of us in the 60'ish age range did the radical/unusual/exciting when we were younger and don't feel the need to revisit? I know we have travels and stories that the kids will never find pics for


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Well how 'could be' do you think 'many' have been OMO? I'd say that most people have never done anything very radical/unusual in their lives. But it all depends on from whose viewpoint you are looking. Some people consider trying food from another country to be a daring thing to do. When I was living in Greece I met quite a few people who thought living in a 'foreign' country was something they could never imagine doing. Just too 'radical' for them.

So no, I don't think many did the radical/unusual/exciting when they were younger or ever will. In fact, I don't think most who have done anything that most would consider radical/unusual, actually think they did anything radical or unusual. They just did what came naturally to them. It's like studies on entrepreneurs. Studies on how successful young entrepreneurs perceive risk vs. 'normal' people. Going in, the thought was that they would find that these people were not as 'risk adverse' as the norm. In fact, what they found was being 'risk adverse' actually had nothing to do with it. What they found was that these people did not perceive high risk at all in what they were doing. I think those that do radical/unusual things whether before or after retirement are the same in that they don't perceive any great risk or perceive it as being radical/unusual at all. But just as entrepreneurs make up a small percentage of all people, those who do radical/unsual things of any kind are a small percentage of all people.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Maybe people with the thirst for adventure aren't the kind of people interested in a financial forum ?

My dad had a real sense of adventure, and with little money to support it he did the best he could.

In tents and later an old van, he explored almost all of the US States and Canada.

I remember when I was a youngster and dad had a few extra dollars come in to the home. He was already packing for a trip with anyone who wanted to go.

Investing for his future didn't even occur to him.

We never had the money to pay to visit amusement parks or tourist attractions, so we got along by hopping the fence or visiting in offseason when they were closed.

We got a few things from the grocery store and slept in the car or tent.

Wondering if we had enough gas money left to get home was part of the adventure.

Sometimes dad put the car into neutral and coasted down hills to save gas..........a real confidence builder for us.

But we never worried, we were used to doing a lot of walking if need be.

As I said at dad's memorial...........it was the best of time for us kids. 

Many of our happy memories were bundled up in those trips.


----------



## Davis (Nov 11, 2014)

OldPro said:


> ....selling up and buying a one way ticket to X and seeing where the wind blew them from there.... I did the one way ticket to X and let the wind blow me for 15 years after I retired but to be fair, I was single and only 43 which no doubt makes a difference.


Sigh. That is exactly what I would do if I were single. I just don't think it would suit Spouse's worldview though. He needs the stability and security of home. Having said that, our plan is to finish work next year at 50/51, and have enough money in the budget to travel six months a year, so I think I will get quite a bit of adventure in before the knees wear out completely. Taking a couple of three-month trips a year is not the same thing as a one-way ticket and no plan, though.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

We sold our place in Toronto and are moving to a small town nearby. We hope we will like it there (all signs point to yes) but are renting just in case. 

Husband's dad owns a condo in Spain, which we are likely to inherit 1/3 of. If that happens, we will try spending 4 months each winter in Spain.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OldPro said:


> You know sags, I think you've kinda hit the nail on the head with people not being interested in a lot of variation from what everyone else is doing. Reading the responses, I kinda feel like it all sounds pretty boring. Even though I outlined the usual choices, I think I was hoping to read some radical/unusual/exciting alternatives that some people might have in mind or have done.


It's all a matter of perspective, even though many may not sell their primary homes I don't think you can say their life is boring, in other words, it may seem boring to you but not to them.


----------



## My Own Advisor (Sep 24, 2012)

Spudd said:


> We sold our place in Toronto and are moving to a small town nearby. We hope we will like it there (all signs point to yes) but are renting just in case.
> 
> Husband's dad owns a condo in Spain, which we are likely to inherit 1/3 of. If that happens, we will try spending 4 months each winter in Spain.


Spain is great, we loved it there when we visited and would love to back again. Can I fit in your suitcase?!

I suspect my wife and I will have decisions to make once our house is paid off. 

Keeping working, stay where we are?
Work less, stay where we are?
Work less, downsize?
Work less, move?
Other....


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Spudd said:


> We sold our place in Toronto and are moving to a small town nearby. We hope we will like it there (all signs point to yes) but are renting just in case.
> 
> Husband's dad owns a condo in Spain, which we are likely to inherit 1/3 of. If that happens, we will try spending 4 months each winter in Spain.



When retired, I was thinking about going for long term vacations during our winter months (2-3 months) to South Spain, France , Portugal etc. 
Now when we visiting Europe....we don't have enough time....rushing from attraction to attraction... Renting condo for couple of months somewhere in Cordoba or Malaga should be interesting , as with perfect European railroad system , you can travel a lot...


----------



## Daniel A. (Mar 20, 2011)

OldPro said:


> You know sags, I think you've kinda hit the nail on the head with people not being interested in a lot of variation from what everyone else is doing. Reading the responses, I kinda feel like it all sounds pretty boring. Even though I outlined the usual choices, I think I was hoping to read some radical/unusual/exciting alternatives that some people might have in mind or have done.
> 
> let the wind blow me for 15 years after I retired but to be fair, I was single and only 43 which no doubt makes a difference. But surely there are some people who retire at 55 or 65 who take the 'road less travelled'.
> [/COLOR]
> ...


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Davis, when you write, "Taking a couple of three-month trips a year is not the same thing as a one-way ticket and no plan, though.", I don't see it that way at all.

You are probably thinking about travel in the way you have become used to thinking about it as most people do. You decide where to go and then book air and hotel for that time period. Forget that. There is no rule that says you must 'plan' a trip to anywhere. All you HAVE to plan is where to start.

When I took my wife on our first trip together from the UK to mainland Europe, it was for 3 weeks (she was still working) and all I booked was the ferry across the Channel. You can 'no plan' any amount of time. It's as easy to find a place to stay the night in most of the world as it is if you drive the highways of N. America. You don't need to pre-book everything. I have yet to have to sleep on a park bench because I couldn't find a room to rent.

My wife was quite nervous about having no real 'plan' and no hotels pre-booked. She had never done that before like most people. But she trusted me and so off we went. After a few nights in France we arrived in the little town of Meiringen, Switzerland. I had a look at my Lonely Planet guidebook and picked the Hotel Baer to try. I asked to see a room (it's normal to ask to see a room first in Europe) and then booked in for 4 nights. We had a view of the Alps from our window and the fresh from the farm yogurt at breakfast was the best my wife had ever tasted. On our third day, my wife said, 'I love it here, I don't want to leave yet'. So I went to reception and asked for another 2 nights which was no problem. That was when the light bulb went on for my wife.

Having no plan and nothing pre-booked means you are free to stay as long as you want or leave as soon as you want. Since then, my wife absolutely hates to pre-book anything. If you think about it, it is totally illogical to try and decide before you go to a new place, how long you will want to stay there. How can you possibly know how much time you will need to see/do what interests you there? 

On a trip to the USA, I took my wife to a small place in the desert I have been visiting on and off for over 30 years. Since she had never visited a desert region before, I don't know how she would like it but I knew she liked hiking and I knew how much I liked the area and so hoped she would to. Again, no pre-booked room. When we arrived I found that a new Inn had opened and decided to give it a try. It was great and we enjoyed going hiking, etc. for 4 days there. Then we headed to Las Vegas as my wife like most people wanted to see Vegas. We checked in and I asked for 3 nights. After one day my wife said, 'it's nice to see but I've seen enough. Get me out of here. I want to go back to Borrego.' So we checked out and drove back to the little town in the desert. I had figured on heading towards Santa Fe and Taos from Vegas but that idea just went out the window. She knew where she wanted to be and had not spent enough time in yet and so back we went. Other places got visited on later trips. 

One thing I have learned about travel is that no matter how many places you visit and how much time you have, you will never visit them all or have enough time for them all. When people say, 'I have 3 months and want to visit 30 places, so I PLAN to spend 3 days in each', I just think that's crazy. That's called 'ticking it off the list'. What you get out of 3 days in each of 30 places is not necessarily going to be more than what you would get out of 1 place for 90 days. It is what you DO with each day that determines how well spent your time was. People often use the phrase, we want to see as much as possible'. But they confuse the word 'much' with the word 'many'. They are not synonymous. The way to see/do as much as possible is to spend your time IN places, not in BETWEEN places. So in travel, like many things, less is more. The less you move the more you see/do. Move only when you have seen/done everythig that is of interest to you in a place. Since you can't now beforehand how long that will take, pre-book nothing. 

Travel can be as simple or as complicated as someone chooses to make it. I prefer simple. You may have a fixed amount of money available or a fixed amount of time available but that is all that is fixed. Buy a ticket to A. Stay in A till you are ready to move on, then decide on where B will be and go there. Repeat until either your maximum time or money is gone, go home.


----------



## janus10 (Nov 7, 2013)

My wife asked me last year that if she was not in my life what would I do in retirement. I told her that I would likely move to Europe, or maybe New Zealand or Australia.

But, I would rather stay in Canada with her than be without her anywhere else.

She was born and raised in a developing country so she knows the challenges. That's one reason why she doesn't want to think about moving to a country where she won't feel safe and have access to the simple things that make her happy. She grew up in fear of being assaulted or even killed in the night because of where she grew up. That is something I can not comprehend in my sheltered life.

With our blended family (3 kids from previous marriages) and the first grand child on the way, and all of her kids, siblings and remaining parent living in the GTA, I know that this part of the world will make her happiest. As I recently read, and I assume especially for women, it is the social network which is very important when one retires. She doesn't give herself enough credit to make new acquaintances, so there is that reluctance to move too far from the area where 2/3 of her life have been spent.

I'm quite different in terms of geographical attachment, and this has only been enhanced due to six years of heavy international travel for business. Ironically, I'm emotionally closer to my family than she is to her own, yet my family is far away. That's why I don't feel the need to remain here, but I'm also happy to stay if that is what she wants.

Maybe I will be like these grandparents we have noticed recently that get so much more joy than they can remember when they were a parent.


----------



## OnlyMyOpinion (Sep 1, 2013)

janus10 said:


> ...Maybe I will be like these grandparents we have noticed recently that get so much more joy than they can remember when they were a parent.


Almost a certainty - you get to have fun with them, feed them treats that you're not supposed to, and then give them back when they start to get cranky


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Your life may be more boring than you know life has a way of beating many of us up,raising kids, going to work.


 It's a fact! Life of many Canadians is pretty boring... Immigrants are different


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> I told her that I would likely move to Europe, or maybe New Zealand or Australia.





> That's one reason why she doesn't want to think about moving to a country where she won't feel safe and have access to the simple things that make her happy.


Does she think that Europe, New Zealand or Australia less safe than Canada?!


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> 'I have 3 months and want to visit 30 places, so I PLAN to spend 3 days in each', I just think that's crazy. That's called 'ticking it off the list'. What you get out of 3 days in each of 30 places is not necessarily going to be more than what you would get out of 1 place for 90 days.


 I don't agree... I spend a lot of time planning our travel ...depends on attractions we want to see, i will book certain number of nights in the area.... I don't want to waste time loking for accommodation


----------



## Jorob199r (Sep 4, 2014)

My wife and I love adventure and the outdoors. We plan on mimicking this couple in this website http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?doc_id=13050


----------



## janus10 (Nov 7, 2013)

gibor said:


> Does she think that Europe, New Zealand or Australia less safe than Canada?!


I guess I wasn't clear when I said her fear came about from growing up in a developing country BEFORE she came to Canada. She loves how safe she feels here. But, we considered other developing countries for awhile, even visiting Panama, but she feels more strongly that she wants to be close to family and friends.


----------



## janus10 (Nov 7, 2013)

gibor said:


> I don't agree... I spend a lot of time planning our travel ...depends on attractions we want to see, i will book certain number of nights in the area.... I don't want to waste time loking for accommodation


I certainly understand the appeal of doing what you want when you want when traveling abroad as Old Pro suggested (which is eerily similar to what many of us hope retirement is about). Personally, I get satisfaction about planning a trip as the anticipation itself is quite uplifting.


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Daniel A, I disagree with, "life has a way of beating many of us up". Life doesn't beat anyone up, either you beat yourself up or allow others to beat you up, life is totally indifferent about you.

Gibor, planning or winging it is a choice. If I write that 90 days in one place can be as good or better use of time than 3 days each in 30 places, to rebut that point you would have to show how 90 in one place is NOT as good or better than 3 days in 30 places. Simply saying you pre-plan 3 days in a place does not equal a rebuttal of the point. When I write that you cannot KNOW beforehand how much time you need in a place, in order to disagree with that, you would need to say how you do KNOW beforehand how much time you will need in a place. 

As for wasting time finding a place to stay, that dog don't won't hunt either. I do not waste time finding a place to stay any more than you waste hours online trying to find the best hotel to pre-book. Just as you employ what you feel are efficient methods to pre-book, I as a long time 'winger', employ efficient methods to find a room without pre-booking. I've been 'winging it' for 50 years. Do you really think I haven't learned and developed ways of doing that efficiently?

For example, someone might arrive at a train station in Geneva at 2pm and take a taxi to their pre-booked hotel. They check-in, drop off their suitcase and go out for a little exploratory stroll around the area. They find a sidewalk cafe and decide to enjoy a coffee or glass of wine while peoplewatching the world passing by. They return to the hotel around 5pm.

I arrive at the train station and throwing my bag over my shoulder stroll down the street to a sidewalk cafe. While sipping my wine and peoplewatching, I tell the waiter/owner that I am looking for a room. He calls his cousin/friend who shows up 20 minutes later in his car and then joins me for a glass of wine. Eventually, he drives me and my bag to his/friend's hotel and I check-in. It's 5pm. How is the first way any better than the second way?

I was responding to Davis who was indicated a desire to wing it but seemed to think she couldn't wing it for 3 months. Obviously, she can if that is what she wants to do, just as you can plan if you wish. There are always pros and cons to any choice. I simply value the pros of winging it and see signifigant cons in pre-planning everything. 

Now you're talking Jorob. Obviously, trying to pre-plan a trip of that length quickly proves the plan will not last beyond the first few weeks at most. Research is fun and having a general idea of what direction you will travel in is fine but the longer the time period involved, the less likely any plan will remain intact. There are simply too many unknowns and also opportunities that may come up that will result in a signifigant change in plans. Long term travel is not like a 2 week vacation. Tourists plan a tour (hence the name tourists) while a traveller plans nothing. Or as Paul Theroux said, " “Tourists don't know where they've been, travelers don't know where they're going.” 

Janus, the word research is not syonymous with the word planning. Which is it that gives you satisfaction and anticipation? The research on where you will go and what you will do or the planning of hotel bookings?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Personally, I get satisfaction about planning a trip as the anticipation itself is quite uplifting


 Very true! Now, I'm in process of palnning our summer trip to France, I booked already flight, car rental, 4 accommodations in different cities (again after doing research about appealing attractions in every region)... and in free time planning attractions (by my priority ) we want to visit.... 
I have even different 3 options on driving from accommodation to accommodation (ex. Bourges to Sarlat), will do presentation to my wife and decide which route to take , as there are different attractions on the way 



> She loves how safe she feels here.


 I understand  , my point as that in AUS, NZ or NED as an example, you won't feel less safe...however, being closer to family is a valid reason  I just don't want to lose my OHIP, to deal with extended stay visa requirements etc ....so just thinking about long-term vacations....


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> to rebut that point you would have to show how 90 in one place is NOT as good or better than 3 days in 30 places. Simply saying you pre-plan 3 days in a place does not equal a rebuttal of the point. When I write that you cannot KNOW beforehand how much time you need in a place, in order to disagree with that, you would need to say how you do KNOW beforehand how much time you will need in a place.


It NOT as good because I wouldn't be able to see places if I split my trip (and life is too short to see all places I want soendin 90 days in one). I do extensive research and know how many days I need to stay in specific place ... also I know "must see" places for us and "maybe nice to see" , so I have some flexibility....
I travelled like this in half of thw world and prefer it.... Only one time we didn't do prebooking when we went to Oregon only me and my wife (without kids)
, it was OK, but still would prefer pre-booking...
And imagine you are coming to country where practically no one speaks English?! For example . we've been to Czech republic... even in Prague not many speaks English, but in places like Karlovy Vary or Olomouc ....practically every town we visited) , very very few spoke English... Good thing we know Russian  Would like you to try to find place on spot there . 



> I do not waste time finding a place to stay any more than you waste hours online trying to find the best hotel to pre-book.


 i better do it at home than during travel...
For long-term travel it can be different... this is why I plan, for example, to prebook 1 accommodation for several months



> Obviously, trying to pre-plan a trip of that length quickly proves the plan will not last beyond the first few weeks at most.


 probably, so far I was planning trips mostry for 2-3 weeks and in 85-90% of cases it stayed intact ...


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OldPro said:


> ... How is the first way any better than the second way (pre-planned versus winging it)?
> ... There are always pros and cons to any choice. I simply value the pros of winging it and see signifigant cons in pre-planning everything.


Where there is a choice & experience ... it's up to whomever and their preference.

On the other hand, where winging it to get a hotel on the US interstate has worked well over the years - trying to do the same during the "March Madness basketball tournament", in the heart of where multiple teams were competing did not work at all (despite driving 130 miles before giving up), compared to having a reservation.


Cheers


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OldPro said:


> When I write that you cannot KNOW beforehand how much time you need in a place, in order to disagree with that, you would need to say how you do KNOW beforehand how much time you will need in a place.


It pretty easy most times to determine amount of time needed in a place, of course depending on what your goals are. I research and plan out my road trips and generally have a good idea of how much time each stop will take. As an example, if I plan on stopping at a US national park I'll research the main attractions there and figure out how much time I need, generally not difficult to do. I will say that my trip planning is not fixed and I have extended stays on occasion skipping areas ahead based on what I've found when I arrived at a destination.


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

I've had this discussion re planning or not planning many times on travel forums. The objections and reasons for not winging it are always the same. Not wasting time finding a place is one. Yet when given an example of how it does not necessarily mean you walk around for hours looking for a hotel, that rebuttal is ignored without acknowledging that the objection was shown to be not valid.

Instead what you now write gibor is, "i better do it at home than during travel". Do what at home? I do not waste time looking for a place to stay at home or on the road. There is nothing 'better' you can do at home, end of story in terms of which wastes more time finding a room.

Eclectic writes, "where there is a choice & experience...it's up to whomever and their preference." I totally agree with that statement Eclectic. Now let's agree on what constitutes 'experience' and 'preference'. Gibor writes, "so far I was planning trips mostry for 2-3 weeks and in 85-90% of cases it stayed intact". That to me does not indicate 'experience' of winging it and therefore the ability to develop a 'preference' between the two. This is what I usually find on travel forums, people who will defend how they do something as being best, WITHOUT the experience of the alternative on which to have developed a preference. 

Most people have limited experience if any, at winging it. I understand that most people pre-plan things. But that does not mean most people are in a position to argue the merits of one vs. another. In fact, it means most people are NOT in a position to argue one vs. the other. You might as well argue that baseball is a better game than basketball when you have never played basketball. 

I wrote, "There are always pros and cons to any choice. I simply value the pros of winging it and see signifigant cons in pre-planning everything. " If you read that statement, in it I acknowledge there are pros and cons (winging it will not do well if you try to turn up somewhere during a major event like 'March Madness' as you suggest) and go on to state that I PREFER the pros of winging vs. the cons of pre-planning. So pointing out a con like a major event on a specific date, does not mean you should 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' Eclectic. The question is does ONE negative like you point out, outweigh all the other possible positives of winging it. I say no.

The primary reason for my saying no is the simple fact that is not really arguable that you can KNOW beforehand how much time you will need in a given place. Yet here we have cainvest apparently saying just that. Or is he? " if I plan on stopping at a US national park I'll research the main attractions there and figure out how much time I need, generally not difficult to do." Well no, I don't think that's arguing you can know beforehand really. You may be able to make a pretty good guess many times. But that does not mean you will guess right every time does it? It does not argue that you KNOW how much time you will need, it only states you believe you can guess correctly 'most' of the time. See the difference? So what happens when you get it wrong? The answer is that most people who have pre-planned their time will stick with their plan and as a result spend too long or too short a time somewhere. If you wing it, you NEVER get it wrong. See the difference?

So cainvest, you may get it right 90% of the time, I get it right 100% of the time. Which is better in that regard? That is one of the pros of winging it and pre-planning will always have to acknowledge the possibility of getting that wrong, just as I must acknowledge that showing up somewhere without a reservation when there is a major event going on (Eclectic's March Madness) will make it difficult to find a room. Saying, "It pretty easy most times to determine amount of time needed in a place" is not ALL the time, it's 'most' at best. I prefer to get it right every time. 

I have no objection to anyone who wants to pre-plan a vacation. That's up to the person, but I do object to anyone trying suggest that it is somehow better than winging it. I will defend your right to be wrong to the death but I will not agree with it, that would just make the 2 of us wrong.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

oldPro i'm with you on travel style & i'm glad to see you married a girl after your own wanderin' heart.

in french voyaging like this - on a whim & a spur of the moment - is sometimes called aller à la dérive. I've never been able to find out exactly how to translate the part of the boat that's known as the dériveur. it's definitely not the rudder. But it has something to do with drifting with the winds & the tides.


----------



## steve41 (Apr 18, 2009)

OldPro.....Why don't you tell us what you REALLY think?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OldPro said:


> So cainvest, you may get it right 90% of the time, I get it right 100% of the time. Which is better in that regard? That is one of the pros of winging it and pre-planning will always have to acknowledge the possibility of getting that wrong, just as I must acknowledge that showing up somewhere without a reservation when there is a major event going on (Eclectic's March Madness) will make it difficult to find a room. Saying, "It pretty easy most times to determine amount of time needed in a place" is not ALL the time, it's 'most' at best. I prefer to get it right every time.


So am I understanding this correctly that you do no research or trip planning ahead of time? By this I mean, look to see what things of interest might be around the area you're going to be in and not where you'll spend the night.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

?? it's not ok to fail translation now & then?

steve you're an old salt, can u tell us what is the dériveur on a sailboat?


----------



## CalgaryPotato (Mar 7, 2015)

OldPro, reading your story in this thread as well as others on here is fascinating. However I think the one thing that you may be aware of, or may not be, is that you're probably not the average person in terms of many psychological things. That isn't a bad thing... it's a very good thing.

But what you consider freedom, many/most people would consider stressful to the point where they wouldn't be able to enjoy themselves. I mean even the simple premise that retiring early will bring more happiness for everyone is very misleading. I know many who've retired and hated it, as they don't have a life full of hobbies (or a willingness to take on new ones) such as yourself. The structure of day to day life brings fulfillment to many people. 

The thoughts of going on a vacation without a fully detailed plan on how to spend their time would send many of us into full scale panic attack, let alone the idea of travelling for months on end without a concrete plan. Again, the way you do things is great, and an inspiration to those who are similarly inclined. But for some planning vs. winging it, is better.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Do what at home? I do not waste time looking for a place to stay at home or on the road


 Doing research at home... what attractions I want to visit, which location will be the best to visit those attractions and suitable accommodation for us (for example we prefer appartments/houses with full kitchen, in hot countries with A/C) and checking reviews... are you sure that at coffee shop when you ask , you will get good accommodation with fair price?! and won't get some "junk" that owners couldn't rent otherwise? I'm not! Recently I booked accommodation in Sarlat .... we wanted to visit Dordogne , so I did research (and asked exprerts on TA) what is the optimal location to visit major attractions in the area 
Also, as I mentioned, i don't know how many languages you speak.... but not too many countries where you can negotiate anything just speaking English.... I CDG I couldn't negotiate even with "private" taxi driver, as he didn't know 1 word in English...


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OldPro said:


> ... Now let's agree on what constitutes 'experience' and 'preference'.


I'm not sure why it's required as something like five years of winging in both directions worked fine before the exception listed.




OldPro said:


> ... I wrote, "There are always pros and cons to any choice. I simply value the pros of winging it and see signifigant cons in pre-planning everything. " ...
> 
> So pointing out a con like a major event on a specific date, does not mean you should 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' Eclectic. The question is does ONE negative like you point out, outweigh all the other possible positives of winging it. I say no.


In the first place ... I wasn't trying to show up during a major event ... I had to deal with what the event did to my winging it. As I stayed winging it for another six years, I'm puzzled as to what is being thrown out. 

The example was meant to point out that one can have experience, overlook or underestimate or not be aware of something and end up in a situation where pre-planning would have helped.




OldPro said:


> ... The question is does ONE negative like you point out, outweigh all the other possible positives of winging it. I say no.


 ... not relevant to me as I was arguing there are some situations or places that pre-planning would have been better. 




OldPro said:


> ... The primary reason for my saying no is the simple fact that is not really arguable that you can KNOW beforehand how much time you will need in a given place ... I have no objection to anyone who wants to pre-plan a vacation. That's up to the person, but I do object to anyone trying suggest that it is somehow better than winging it...



Over on the Hawaii thread, someone suggested using the day one flies into or out of Honolulu to visit Pearl Harbour ... a quick web search shows that:

1) there's only a limited number of tickets made available first come, first serve so if the aim is to visit the Arizona memorial - planning to arrive early is probably more efficient.

2) there's far more than just the Arizona memorial to visit.


Where one arrives at 2pm and all the tickets are gone ... winging it is going to depend on either skipping something where that day is all that is available or doing something different on another day to get tickets.

Where one is interested in most of what's available at that spot ... advance research is going to show that a couple of hours is not going to be anywhere close to enough.


Bottom line is that a "100% winging it" or "100% pre-planning" philosophy does not appear to the way to go, IMO.


Cheers


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Humble, a sailing dinghy (french noun, deriveur) has a centreboard or daggerboard. Are you familiar with the function of a centreboard? It stops the boat from being pushed sideways by the wind. Derive as a verb means to get something (derive it) from something else. In the case of sailing, you get(derive) movement from the wind. In the case of a centreboard, you derive more forward movement rather than sideways movement from having it down. In other words it stops you from 'drifting' sideways. In French, 'derive' translates to English as 'drift'.

The term 'aller a la derive' does not really refer to sailing. Rather than translating it, you need to interpret it. In English it could easily be interpreted as 'go with the flow'. 

A derive, is also a psychogeographical term with the same kind of meaning. "In psychogeography, a dérive (French: [/de.ʁiv/], "drift") is an unplanned journey through a landscape, usually urban, on which the subtle aesthetic contours of the surrounding architecture and geography subconsciously direct the travellers, with the ultimate goal of encountering an entirely new and authentic experience."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dérive

Cainvest, I don't know if you are understanding correctly or not. Research is not synonymous with planning. You can do as much research as you want without doing any planning beyond getting to A. If for example I decide that I want to go and hike in the Swiss Alps which I have done many times in fact, all I do is book a flight to Switzerland and a starting point. So I decide to fly to Basel and hike from there. I can do all the research I want beforehand on hiking routes etc. but I do not commit to a route beforehand and do not book anything. When I arrive in Basel, I check the weather forecast and see that for the next week, the forecast is rain in the north but sunny on the south side of the Alps. So I take a train to Locarno and start hiking north from there rather than south from Basel. I 'go with the flow' in other words or aller a la derive as humble_pie suggests calling it.

Or let's say I decide I want to go to the south of France to try and do some crewing for the summer on a sailboat. I fly to Nice, find a place to stay in Antibes and go walk the dock looking for a boat that needs crew. I have no luck finding a berth but one evening while having a drink in a local bar, I meet another traveller who has a VW camper and is looking for someone to share fuel and campsite costs and is planning to go to Pamplona for the running of the bulls or planning to drive through Italy visiting places along the way and then take the camper on the ferry over to Greece. I like one person better than the other and make my choice. I 'drift' yet again.

Or I decide to drive from Canada to Arizona and do some hiking in the Sonara Desert around Tucson. The drive turns out to be longer and more tiring than expected. So before getting to Arizona I change my mind and decide to stop short in Los Alamos and explore Bandelier National Momument instead. A place I have read about and that interests us but we haven't been to yet. I find a motel and at check-in when they ask how many nights we will stay, I say, 'I don't know. Why don't you book us in for a week and if we decide to leave before that, I will let you know the night before.' After 5 days of hiking each day, we decide to move on and I let reception know we will be checking out the following morning. No problem.

There is no problem is knowing about a lot of places you would like to go and why you would like to go there. Sometimes I might start out to go to A and end up doing just what I thought I would do. Other times as in the examples, something happens that results in doing something else instead. 

I think the problem for most people is that they are used to living life to a plan. Normal life is all about schedules and so when it comes to travel, the natural thing to do is schedule that as well. But I see the major attraction about travel as being about getting away from 'normal' life and schedules. Every morning when you wake up, you are free to say, 'so what do I want to do today' and then do it. Stay where you are or go somewhere else as you please. I don't understand why people want to immediately throw that freedom away by having an itinerary/plan they follow.

As I said, no one will ever get to all the places that interest them, no matter how much time they have. I also believe that the more you travel the more you realize that A is no better than B, it is just different from B. It is what you do in A or B with your time that determines if you used your time well or not. People will say they have a preference or priority in terms of where they want to spend their time. For example, you might say, I absolutely want to visit Bora Bora as they say it is the most beautiful island in the world. I don't want to go to Fiji instead. I would say to you that I had been to Bora Bora and it was beautiful but I do not know if it is the most beautifull island as I have not been to every island in the world and I would have as happily have gone to Fiji instead. Who knows, maybe I would have done something on Fiji that I didn't do on Bora Bora. Who is to say which I would have enjoyed more? It simply isn't logical to say going to Bora Bora because people say it is the most beautiful island in the world would be better. It would just be different.

CalgaryPotato, I understand and agree with what you say. That's why I have said I have no objection to someone saying they want to plan, I just object to them trying to say it is better than winging it. People do not like to move outside of their comfort zone. Planning vs. winging it isn't 'better' Calgary, it's just different.

Having said that though I would point to the example I gave of my wife. The first time I took her on a trip with no pre-booked hotels etc. she was aprehensive as I said. But she trusted me and so was willing to move outside of her comfort zone and see what happened. No different than the first time I got her into a canoe (she can't swim very well). The only way to expand your comfort zone is to do it. You don't have to jump in at the deep end, you can take baby steps if you want. But unless you try, you will never know if it is for you or not. 

I have 50 years experience of unplanned travel and the only way to get that experience takes 50 years. My wife still says that if I were gone, she could not do waht we do together. I know that she is wrong in that belief. She could do exactly the same things we do together but I also know I will never convince her of that as long as you has that perception. Only she can change that. I don't expect to change anyone's perception here about travel. But if a seed gets planted with someone and they try a baby step just to see what happens, who knows where it will lead? Imagine the travel industry if everyone stopped pre-booking things. It could unleash a monster. :biggrin:

Gibor, I speak English as my first language and some Greek and French. A few words and phrases in German, Swiss German, Italian and Spanish. All other than French learned 'on the road' rather than in school. I think anyone can do that if they travel. I have never found language a barrier to travel anywhere. That's just a red herring. Use sign language, draw a picture, take a phrase book, find a translator. 

As for your CDG example, try this. Write the name and address on paper and show it to him. He nods, he understands. Put a $ sign and ? on paper and hand him the pen. He will write the answer. If you want to 'negotiate' the price, put a line through the price he wrote and write your preferred price. Hand him the pen.

Eclectic, your Hawaii example of visiting Pearl Harbour assumes you MUST visit rather than simply choose to do something else. If there is no plan, there is no must. All it would mean to me is that I would do something else. You can't use a 'must' to counter winging it. You say the hotels being full for March Madness, 'interferred' with just winging it. In fact what you mean is that IF you didn't wing it but instead wanted to insist on staying in that place, you needed to pre-plan. I agree, IF you chose not to wing it. I would have just gone somewhere else. That is what winging it means.

Winging it may indeed mean you have to change in the afternoon what you set out to do in the morning. So what? Either you are winging it or you are not.


----------



## Jon_Snow (May 20, 2009)

Oh, I quite like this OldPro fellow...breath of fresh air on this forum. Much needed. Stick around please.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Oldpro, we can discuss it for ages...but it all depends on everyone's style of life, mentality etc... How we say in Russian "What is good for Russians, it's death for Germans" .
Your "winging" style of travel won't fit majority of travellers... Yeah, when I was young , after army , maybe I'd go "winging" with my buddies, but with family - no way!
Your examples simply N/A for us.... We stayed for 1 week at Bad Krozingen 2 years ago.... and i selected this place because it was at very convenient location to visit a lot of places from Strasburg and Heidelberg to Lucerne... and yes, I also checked weather, so we drove to Mt. Pilatus when it was good , sunny day and for rainy day we went other places (like SPA - btw excellent at town we stayed).

Just to add... all this "winging' depends a lot on place you travel and season you travel.... Even here, I'd like you to "wiging" normal accommodation at Jasper in August..... or yellowstone national park (I checked once and people book a very few accommodation places 2 years up front)


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Jon_Snow said:


> Oh, I quite like this OldPro fellow...breath of fresh air on this forum. Much needed. Stick around please.


Such people discovered North and South Poles etc.....


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I would strongly recommend against spending too much retirement time in the US. There are horrendous tax consequences. Now that the US and Canadian governments cooperate and share all border crossing information, the US knows exactly how many days you spent in the US. Once you exceed a threshold called the "substantial presence test", your whole tax life gets turned upside down.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> I would strongly recommend against spending too much retirement time in the US.


 Don't plan it at all.... We don't like US & A....


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OldPro said:


> Cainvest, I don't know if you are understanding correctly or not. Research is not synonymous with planning. You can do as much research as you want without doing any planning beyond getting to A. If for example I decide that I want to go and hike in the Swiss Alps which I have done many times in fact, all I do is book a flight to Switzerland and a starting point. So I decide to fly to Basel and hike from there. I can do all the research I want beforehand on hiking routes etc. but I do not commit to a route beforehand and do not book anything. When I arrive in Basel, I check the weather forecast and see that for the next week, the forecast is rain in the north but sunny on the south side of the Alps. So I take a train to Locarno and start hiking north from there rather than south from Basel. I 'go with the flow' in other words or aller a la derive as humble_pie suggests calling it.


Understood, we do pretty much the same thing then. I do make guesstimates on time I think I'll spent in an area but they are not set in stone and as you pointed out, local weather can change plans quickly sending you off to a different destination/activity. I never book a room ahead of time either (though I check locally what's in the area when the internet is available) and rarely have problems finding one, even late at night. The only thing that is usually a hard set time is the ETA to return home.


----------



## janus10 (Nov 7, 2013)

gibor said:


> Don't plan it at all.... We don't like US & A....


You're not supposed to plan. You're supposed to wing it.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

janus10 said:


> You're not supposed to plan. You're supposed to wing it.


OK .... we are not planning winging or swinging into US and A


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OldPro said:


> Eclectic, your Hawaii example of visiting Pearl Harbour assumes you MUST visit rather than simply choose to do something else.


Even if there's a four hour time frame between flights, it's really going to leave maybe two and a half to three hours tops. With Pearl Harbour as the top desired place to see on Oahu - it is pretty much a must see. 




OldPro said:


> ... If there is no plan, there is no must. All it would mean to me is that I would do something else.


Which suggests to me that in this situation ... either you don't care that much to see it and/or have the means/ability to come back at another time. Not everyone is in that situation ... say the traveler has two weeks vacation a year with no idea if or when they might be back.

On one hand, you say that " It is what you do in A or B with your time that determines if you used your time well or not ... " yet on the other hand, you don't seem to like the idea of a time limited traveler ensuring their top choice pans out.




OldPro said:


> ... You can't use a 'must' to counter winging it.


I'm arguing that "winging it" or "planning it" or any combination in between are tools in the toolbox that one should keep an open mind about using. Depending on a variety of factors such as vacation time, means, priority and/or probability of returning, one might be better than another.




OldPro said:


> You say the hotels being full for March Madness, 'interferred' with just winging it ...
> Winging it may indeed mean you have to change in the afternoon what you set out to do in the morning.
> 
> So what?
> Either you are winging it or you are not.


The "so what" was extra time driving that was avoided on other trips. As this was the drive back - I'm not sure how the boss would have reacted to "I had a great time winging it but I'll be missing some work but so what?" :biggrin:


Cheers


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

OldPro said:


> ... In French, 'derive' translates to English as 'drift'.
> 
> The term 'aller a la derive' does not really refer to sailing. Rather than translating it, you need to interpret it. In English it could easily be interpreted as 'go with the flow'.
> 
> A derive, is also a psychogeographical term with the same kind of meaning. "In psychogeography, a dérive (French: [/de.ʁiv/], "drift") is an unplanned journey through a landscape, usually urban, on which the subtle aesthetic contours of the surrounding architecture and geography subconsciously direct the travellers, with the ultimate goal of encountering an entirely new and authentic experience."




thanks for explaining what is a dériveur. a centreboard, part of the keel. i never knew.

i think the expression *subconsciously direct[ing] the travellers* is key here. Folks who pre-plan every detail of every day of a journey would tend to be those projecting their own cultural biases onto the foreign landscape & culture which, ostensibly, they were setting out to "discover" in the first place!

it's more interesting to let the landscape & the culture speak with its own authentic voice, or voices. But to hear these, we need to go there first, then sniff the air & hold up a finger in the breeze so as to catch the direction.

oldPro, the way i see it, you actually do have a partial planning mechanism in place, though. You yourself have enough encyclopedic travel knowledge that you don't need guide books or prompts to tell you which way the wind is blowing when you get to lucerne or inverness or cap ferrat or santa fe. For the rest of us, some research ahead of time is a good idea imho. Especially when travelling with children.

still, the best travel experiences i ever had were casual, impromptu or completely unplanned adventures with children. It's wonderful to travel with children, one enjoys the experience multiplied through their eyes as well as one's own.


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

This has now reached the going around in circles phase so I'll leave it at that. We are a long way from the original 'where should you live in retirement' this started with. 

Very few new threads seem to get started here. I'll try to think of another retirement related topic to get people confused about. :biggrin:


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

oldPro may i tell you about option trading. This will also keep the gray cells recharged in retirement :tongue-new:


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

I'm enjoying this thread...I've been to Oahu several times...haven't yet had time to see the Pearl Harbor Memorial.

At any rate the original topic "Where to live" was interesting.

I think too much emphasis is put on staying close to health care in case we get sick...this really puts a leg hold trap on people...there's good health care available around the world ...often very cheap. We never lose our provincial health care although we may get the boot until 3 months after our return. 

Most of us would probably benefit from staying away from doctors in the first place.


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Humble, I tried to send you a private message, your storage limit is full. Briefly, I don't want to spend time options trading. I don't have enough time to do all I want to do already.

Eder, some people think that what they consider a 'must see' must be what everyone else does as well. I have no interest in seeing Pearl Harbour at all. Nor any interest in visiting Waikiki Beach ever. Something being 'popular' with the masses is often enough to turn me off it altogether when it comes to travelling. I've never been to Oahu, I have been to Molokai.

Healthcare does become a concern for some people obviously. While good and cheap health care may be available in many places (but not all), it does need to be a factor in deciding where to live. Take ambulance service as an example. There can be good healthcare available at the nearest hospital and decent ambulance service but living just 5 miles down a country road in winter driving conditions can make all the difference to whether the ambulance can even get to you or not.

It's also fine to stay away from doctor's until you need one. I've always enjoyed good health and can't remember the last time I even took an aspirin. But, I get a physical every year and I'm married to an ex-nurse who watches over me like a hawk. Waiting till you have symptoms you can't ignore is not a good strategy.

Simple answers only work when the issue is simple. Healthcare is not one of those issues UNLESS you are willing to die under circumstances that could have been avoided. There is a risk vs. benefit equation to consider.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

Fair enough, but we don't win a trophy for lasting the longest....reminds me of an old Trooper song...if only I could remember the lyrics...


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

♪ ♫ We're here for a good time
Not a long time
So have a good time
The sun can't shine every day ♫ ♪

-- Trooper


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

i agree it's a jolly thread, even if oldPro keeps trying to extinguish it.

avrex, did we ever manage to tell you what great legs you have, when you published that pic of yourself on a trip last year, standing behind a barrier, i believe it was in a campground somewhere, wearing shorts, sox & sneakers?

the pic ended with the shorts, but one would have to say those legs belonged to a 17-year-old, not a day older


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OldPro said:


> ... Eder, some people think that what they consider a 'must see' must be what everyone else does as well. I have no interest in seeing Pearl Harbour at all. Nor any interest in visiting Waikiki Beach ever...


I usually stick to what I'm interested and might add some based on what people have said. If it's a discussion where I have a different list, I might ask what the attraction is but will point out anything I think might help or that might be overlooked. Bottom line is that each person knows the best what they care about.




Eder said:


> Fair enough, but we don't win a trophy for lasting the longest ...


To me, it depends on the the quality of life ... I don't want to end up in a wheelchair through lack of attention, just as I don't want to be stuck in a hospital room barely hanging on.


Cheers


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> avrex, did we ever manage to tell you what great legs you have, when you published that pic of yourself on a trip last year, standing behind a barrier, i believe it was in a campground somewhere, wearing shorts, sox & sneakers?
> 
> the pic ended with the shorts, but one would have to say those legs belonged to a 17-year-old, not a day older


LOL.
Ya, that was when I wanted to experience RV'ing and rented a Class-C RV for a vacation that I took out west. 
The US Government shutdown caused the closure of the National Parks.

This picture was to show that I was defying layful: the US Government, by crossing the barrier to enter Canyonlands National Park, Utah, during the closure.

@OldPro will like this comment from that post. (Hey, I was winging it :wink


avrex said:


> In the end, it didn't change my vacation too much. I was able to find/discover alternative activities/hikes in the western USA.


Ah, @humble_pie unfortunately those legs aren't so young anymore. 

I'm hanging around the Retirement forum because,
*I dream of a time when I can do, what I want, when I want.* 
(Just like the above picture ).


----------



## OldPro (Feb 25, 2015)

Yes I liked that comment avrex. "In the end, it didn't change my vacation too much. I was able to find/discover alternative activities/hikes in the western USA."

It's funny actually how many people will tell you about some great experience they had that was totally unexpected for whatever reason. In other words, when something happened that was not part of their plan, that was when they got the most out of their time. Still, next time around, they plan and pre-book everything yet again. That seems illogical to me. 

I guess the thinking is, 'that was a one of thing and isn't likely to happen again to me'. My experience is that great things happen all the time when winging it but you have to be open to seeing the opportunities. Plans/itineraries put blinders on you to opportunities. 

Once in the south of France (Antibes), a guy was looking for a fellow traveller or two to share fuel costs for his VW campervan and go to the Running of the Bulls in Pamplona. I actually heard one person respond with something like, 'Wow, I would so love to do that but I have a hostel booked in Rome from Monday and a plane ticket from there to Istanbul next Friday. I CAN'T go.'

That 'CAN'T' was the blinders obviously. What are the chances that someone would make you such an offer again some day? Yet, Rome and Istanbul would still be there next year and every other year thereafter for you to visit. It isn't really so much the plan that gets in the way, it is the pre-booking more than anything that gets the 'can't' thinking happening and the opportunity lost.

Want to really make a planner's life difficult. Take away their watch. When my Brother retired, he put his watch in a drawer and hasn't worn one for the last 15 years. Try doing without your watch for just a day or two. Go on, try a little experiment. You can't cheat and look at the clock on the wall or oven either. :biggrin:


----------

