Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I dunno, wanderlust doesn't afflict everyone, and having a stable routine matters to some folks.

It's not necessarily about travel, though.

I actually enjoy working, but there's something deeply unsatisfying about the 9-5 5 days a week grind. It's just so... inflexible. It consumes you; particularly if you specifically have to live somewhere for it (e.g. SF, London) and so you're tied to living there for good or bad.

It really sucks. I used to work maybe 11-6 5 days a week, so 35 hours a week. I’ve got a new job now. I work 4 days a week about 5 hours a day. I show up around 1pm and finish up around 6. There’s zero time pressure on the project and we’re probably going to open source what we’re doing. Having three day weekends every week is a game changer. I’m hiking, seeing friends, working on projects, doing some major cleaning...

Seriously, the “full time” schedule sucks. I was extremely lucky to be able to get out but if you’re wondering... yes it makes a huge difference. It’s worth every minute saved.

I think this is obvious. If you can get the same salary in 20 hours that you previously made in 35, no sane person will opt for the 35 (I hope).

Well I’m not getting the same salary. I intentionally negotiate for hourly so I can come and go as I please without feeling like I owe anyone anything. But I did negotiate an hourly increase so I’m still paying all my bills and saving.

Most people opts for keeping doing 35 hours (or many more) for twice the salary they previously made in 35.

One thing I do like about the 9-5 grind is the consistency.

I know when I'm working, and I know when I'm not. Yes, it's inflexible, but it's also predictable. I don't need to work at night, or on the weekend, I don't miss important events in my loved ones' lives because I'm away on a work trip.

I would like more flexibility in my ability to take time off (it was a really nice day yesterday and I wanted to go to the forest), but I enjoy the security and stability I get. Running a business, or contracting, or any kind of hustle isn't really how I want to live my life. I've got enough stress and other shit going on in my life, having 40 hours a week where I can switch all that off is actually quite nice.

I would argue that those people have not yet wandered, and don't know what is possible in life.

I have not studied this scientifically, but my experience is that the more places a traveler has been, the greater their desire to explore.

I think it is a bit paternalistic to assume that people who don't want to wander the world just haven't done so yet.

I love having my stable job, getting to come home and spend time with the wife and kids after every work day, and knowing they have a stable life where they aren't having to move schools or worry about constant change.

People are different.

How possibly could that concept be paternalistic? Is it just men that have a desire to travel and find their place in the greater environment/world? Why not women also?

Nobody says that you cannot have stability. But clearly you are in a stage of life that I have passed through. (Although, I did take my kids to a very new environment when they were 10-ish, and they got to experience snow skiing as a regular Friday activity, and hiking and mountain biking in good weather in the non-winter months.)

If your energy is focused on your family, and you are happy, and your job doesn't make you feel like your talents are wasted, then great! That's enviable. But it doesn't have anything to do with people who have experienced travel wanting to do more of it. It's a bit saying there's no value in trying foods other than what you grew up eating.

I meant paternalistic as in 'assuming you know what is best for someone else', not anything to do with gender.

My issue with the original comment was the assumption that the ONLY reason you wouldn't want to wander is because you haven't done it enough. Some people have wandered, and just aren't drawn to it.

This goes for any statement like that; "If you don't like x it is just because you haven't had a good one" or "You only like y because you haven't tried x yet"

People have different preferences, and it is not always simply because of lack of experience or knowledge... people like different things.

Fair enough. Age and life situation is also a major element in the consideration. Traveling as a child is different from traveling as a parent of small-ish children, and those are different from traveling solo or otherwise without children.

I think you misunderstand paternalism. It has nothing to do with men v. women: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternalism

I don't see the paternalism in your previous statement either tho.

Ahh thank you. I thought paternal was just related to fatherly, from Latin. I did not realize it had a broader meaning.

People also go through stages or phases. Some day you may be surprised at how you've changed. Or not.

Nope, some people just aren't wired that way. I used to think I was a traveller, but then I discovered I was running from my problems. Not saying that everyone else is the same, but that was just me. I didn't have a desire to explore new places, it was a desire to escape familiar places.

In the end I found a place I liked and I settled down. I still enjoy travelling, but I've got a home and a community and a life here.

There seems to be an asymptote. At some point novelty in places, food, people, experiences in general becomes increasingly rare. Everwhere and everyone seems just like that other place or person. Novelty as a drug has downregulation problem. And also, not everyone is wired to be novelty seeking as hard as that is for us to imagine. They even found one of the genes for it.

What you describe depends greatly on the level of interaction and relationship building that the traveler does with the people they meet in their travels. Obviously at one end of the spectrum there are travelers who remain insulated from locals while traveling, and at the other end of the spectrum there are those who integrate and even become connected romantically or otherwise with locals.

I would venture to guess that some people who travel thrive on the connections and relations they make along the way. Chances are I've only met those types of travelers, because the opposite type was busy in the malls?

Like anything else, if you've done a LOT of one thing (say you've traveled 100+ countries, tasted everything, learned 2-3 extra languages), then maybe you get bored with travel for the sake of travel. Even still, that cannot be as mundane as spending the same period of time at one job in the corporate world.

I'm not a 100+ country taveler; I'm a 10+. And for me, meeting nice people and experiencing new foods is my lure. But once I get someplace, exploring the architecture, sampling the music and local culture, and meeting other travelers to share stories are the attractions. Likely 10 years from now I'll care a lot more about stuff that involves less travel.

So to your point, yes there is probably an asymptote. I bet it's far beyond what most people have experienced. And without being too peace-hippy-ish, I would argue that the more people get out and meet others from distant lands, the less conflict we would have globally. It's much harder to say the Chinese are evil Communist thieves when you've met a number of really great, kind, thoughtful Chinese people. (I just use this as an example.)

People don't like traveling that much, people just like fantasizing about it. So the more realistic expectations you have the less you will care about travels. It can be hard to separate these two at first, especially with all the social pressure that we should like traveling, but ultimately it is mostly just a chore.

> The anticipation of travel was a more powerful driver of happiness than anything participants experienced overseas or conjured up in post-trip nostalgia.


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact