> being actively involved as a father in my children's lives - as much as humanly possible - hopping in and out of Sydney to care for them and taking them on more grand adventures around Australia during school holidays.
Humans are capable of much more care than seeing their children during school holidays and otherwise "hopping in and out of" their lives.
Otherwise, nice article for the childless IT class. Could be split better though, I did not read it to finish.
He is not childless though! I think his attitude reflects the persistence of the idea that women are the primary parents and men are "providers" and backup.
As a man who became the primary parent as my kids got older I think this is a tragedy. Its not good for women (more work) or men (deprived of fulfilment) or children (less attention from parents overall).
We seem to be able to accept that women are capable of taking on traditionally male roles (especially in the workplace) but not that men can take on traditionally female roles (at home or at work).
I think OP is making the point that you are: the advice works for the Childless IT class, of which the author is not part.
True, I am amplifying the point, not disagreeing and maybe could have worded it to make that clearer.
> Every dollar I don't spend on rent is one that can be reinvested back into my kids lives - both short-term (providing for them / enabling weekend quality time / nice holidays) and long-term (building them a house).
The cope is strong... "I'm really doing all this for them".
If he is not spending on rent, then who pays rent for the kids?
he’s most likely divorced so probably his wife and possibly their stepdad
But he’s probably paying child support so that money is going towards something
Imagine having kids in late-stage capitalism. I'd need boatloads of cope too.
I didn’t rtfa but if he’s really “hopping in and out” of their children’s lives it would be better for them if he would just stay away. The kids could grieve, heal, and move on vs perpetual emotional whiplash.
Context for non-Australians:
Home ownership is the core of Australian national identity[0]. Since the 1990s, government policy has made speculation on residential property extremely lucrative. Mass immigration is used to keep the economy growing (GDP per capita is falling). House-building has not kept pace. Reduced funding for the TAFE (Technical and Further Education) system has ensured an undersupply of tradespeople. In one state, privatisation of building standards enforcement has led to a large number of defective buildings, including high-rise apartment blocks with structural defects.
On the other hand, living in one of the state capital cities is increasingly necessary. The economy has few industries, most of which are dominated by a small number of very large businesses. Despite its reputation, Australian society is authoritarian, and employees are still expected to work from an office five days per week.
The median house price in Sydney is AUD 1.6MM; the household income needed to pay a mortgage on this principal is AUD 350k. The median income in New South Wales (of which Sydney is the capital) is AUD 70k.
Australian manufacturing died when shipping was containerised. There was a time when resourceful Australians invented novel products (the Victa lawn mower, the Hills Hoist clothes line), but now that international airfares are more affordable, those Australians now move to other countries (mainly the UK and the US) before becoming inventors.
Australia exports iron ore and coal to countries that make steel (chiefly China). All of Australia's material culture is imported. Australian agricultural produce is increasingly packaged in China before being sold in Australian supermarkets.
Australia does not have a bright future.
>> Australia does not have a bright future.
> A five-bedroom grand Federation manor at Roseville traded for $6.8 million at auction on Saturday.
> The winning couple, one a teacher and another also working in education, placed a single bid of $10,000 above an opening vendor bid of $6,790,000 to secure the property.
Seems pretty bright to me.
Strange article.
Vans you can live in don't fall from the sky for free. In the long run they might be less expensive than renting, but one would need to do the math on that and have a really close look at the numbers to be sure.
Also, why is he even doing this? To save money so he can build a home for his kids? Where's that home located? In the middle of nowhere? I don't understand the "Why" in this case because it seems like some effort of being able to save money by not living in a flat or a house so he can save money to build a house in the end.
I guess you can do it that way, but if you're able to work fully remote, find a nice place that doesn't cost much and enjoy not needing to fix your compost toilet?!
Well, I guess it's just not for me...
>Also, why is he even doing this?
You can find some of the author's motivations here: https://ghuntley.com/a-new-chapter/
I obviously can't speculate beyond what's in there about the author, but for me, living in a bog standard apartment and working remote to support kids isn't exactly blog-worthy content. I used to live in apartments, and most of the new construction in the US is very cookie-cutter and sometimes depressing.
So, here's what mine would be:
1) a challenging hobby that's useful and more engaging in off-hours than more computer hobbies. Building a livable van certainly seems more interesting than living in an apartment to me.
2) changing scenery at a whim, given the time investment to find a place
3) a van that you can resell or give to your kids
I'd still choose a detachable RV though since it's probably way more comfortable for the price. Sure, I lose out on some options to stay for the night, but that isn't an insurmountable challenge if you can plan and live in a van. Living full time in an RV might also not be blog-worthy though.
> but for me, living in a bog standard apartment and working remote to support kids isn't exactly blog-worthy content.
I think there are easier and far less restricting ways to have something to blog about.
> 3) a van that you can resell or give to your kids
A van that's been lived in for a few years probably won't have that much resale value and it's not exactly the best thing to inherit (his kids would probably either have their own van by the time they get the inheritance or have decided against that lifestyle).
I guess it's fun if you're content being a Nomad. But I'm with the grandparent, this lifestyle is probably just not for me.
Author works fully remotely and lives in a van to save on rent. This is not an easy life and it took a while to get used to it (took 3 years to feel comfortable). He also bought a parcel of land to build own house.
My naive question is why didn't he buy or rent a place in an inexpensive area further away from the Adelaide as a step-up to building own house instead? He could still work remotely, have a place to bring his kids to, not spend 3 years on settling to a lifestyle he doesn't seem to enjoy other than a savings vehicle, etc. etc. An honest question.
If he is not living with the kids, then his wife does all the kids care? and pays rent for the kids?
Also, why would the kids and wife want to go and live "nowhere" when he builds his dream house, don't they live an ok life where they are and don't need to relocate to a lifestyle that's not theirs?
> and pays rent for the kids?
The way I read it it's implied that they split up [0], so the (former) wife would need to pay rent either way.
[0] He also mentions getting custody as a target in an earlier post.
Because this lifestyle has nothing to do with freedom, but with fear.
Once this house is done all those problems will resurface and changing places because it was, once again, one beer too much is not an option anymore.
Stuff you see with preppers all the time: fear, shame and cloaking trauma self-medicating with lots of liquor "a large pint" and "a couple of cans". But actually it's just fear.
I can relate from my past crisis years, but those problems, also with finding a place and money in general, vanish once you stop drinking to "solve" your problems and stop running away.
> Because this lifestyle has nothing to do with freedom, but with fear.
What do you presume the author is afraid of/running away from?
Genuinely curious, I have a hard time imagining the mindset you see these people in.
What am i reading? Listen to yourself. Youre speaking like youre able to see into peoples minds and into the future. Put your feet on the ground. Youre talking about nothing
Author is living in a van in australia - he could as well instead of living rent free just living rent cheap but moving to Indonesia/Philippines/Vietnam, be in similar timezone, pay 400usd for rent, save on expensive gas in Australia and have still much more comfortable life.
$400 a month or $400 a week?
Does anyone proof read blogs any more?
One off comments, fine, but if you’re going to the effort to publish something on a blog?
This isn’t a typo, this is a difference between 400 and 1700.
I am not an Aussie but I asked an AI and it told me that weekly and fortnightly rent payments are common in Australia. Also see the ABC news story and the post on X which seem to confirm this is rent due weekly.
Correct, this isn't a typo. Perhaps you should hold your one-off comments to a higher standard before you publish them.
I think they are referring to the room with a glass bathroom cubicle in it. Linked ABC article says $400 / week, blog post says $400 / month.
The author mentioned they were having a few beers, I think we should give them a break. I understood what they were saying.
The thing that the parent implicitly pointed out is that a typo would be a different category of error and the comparison doesn't make much sense [0]. A more correct phrasing in the grandparent would have been "this is not a minor mistake". At least that's my interpretation.
[0] Although you could argue that typo is an example of a minor mistake and used as such, making it a valid comparison.
when i lived in a van i spent twice as much per month repairing it as i had on renting my san francisco apartment, largely due to cluelessness. nowadays i would surely spend less, but it is not free
>when i lived in a van i spent twice as much per month repairing it as i had on renting my san francisco apartment
I just straight-up do not believe that dollar amount, lol
You had to have bought a terrible van and went to a terrible mechanic that was maliciously breaking things so you'd come back for that to happen. Vans are work horses and usually simple compared to regular consumer vehicles.
i did buy a terrible van (a vanagon from 01983 whose new owner has dubbed it calypso and made it into a wonderful van), and although some professional mechanics did make some mistakes that broke things worse, i'm pretty sure they weren't malicious. more important is that i was a terrible mechanic and didn't know how to recognize or manage when things were going wrong
simple, it certainly was. it was so simple it didn't have water cooling or an oil temperature gauge, and having to rebuild the engine twice in three months (due mostly to overheating) was a big part of why it was so expensive
Why is the office in the living room/dining room/kitchen?
This article raises many more questions than it answers lol
I would just rather make more than enough to cover the rent in a nice place to live.
These comments were so depressing to read i made an account just to say this. Good on you OP for going and trying something cool. Build that house, take your kids on adventures, live your best life. These comments all splitting hairs, ignore them, they know not what they say. You deserve to enjoy your life how you see fit. This world is your birthright, feel no shame to be drunk on your dreams. We're all the same.
Honestly this sounds like a dumb way to save money - as a lifestyle choice, sure, who am I to stop you.
The problem with this is that average amenities - ability to cook your own food, wash your clothes, access to electricity, water, internet is not a given when you have a van, and you might need to accept more time consuming, less effective, more costly and less reliable alternatives. And if you consider time being money, you can quickly end up in the red.
And not to mention vans, which are expensive to buy, run and repair.
I'm pretty sure if he decided to move 100km away from his chosen tech hub, he could rent a property dirt cheap.
The advantage of a van is that intra-continent travel becomes trivial.
There's no need to plan anything or prepare baggage or get used to sleeping in different places or pay anyone or deal with any businesses or setup camping gear: you just input the destination in the satellite navigator, drive there and can go to sleep as usual at any time (and potentially you can even find on BlaBlaCar/similar someone willing to drive the van for you in exchange for a free ride).
idk I’d get rather sad if I lived in a van, especially when living in a home is a possibility
> not really caring that much about the cost that much because so far this month because
...
> I'm half a pint into authoring this blog post
...and it shows!
yeah, no way him changing places so much has anything to do with being a drunk ass to everyone around.
The human race is hopeless. Listen to yourselves. This banter is so pointless. Let the man dream and share his life story ffs
Honestly I think digital nomads the least able to properly remote work due to their unreliable setups... WFH is a modern way toward a practical Distributism, being nomad or "owning nothing" is the very opposite.
A blanket statement like that doesn’t have much value.
“Digital nomad” labels a wide range of lifestyles and people and professions. Some may have unreliable setups and struggle to work remotely. Others may have perfectly good setups and no problem making a good living. Some live off savings, passive income, or retirement checks and don’t need to work at all.
Most digital nomads are in major cities with modern internet and own nice laptops, Mac Minis, etc.
I’m not sure what you’re imagining the difference is between my AirBnB condo and the one I previously rented — but I am curious.
Great. Now we just need a guide on "How to convince your wife to live in a caravan".
I've been thinking about this problem and I've identified several sub-problems which need to be solved first in order to set the stage for a solution:
1. Identify and leverage flaws in the socio-economic system as narrative-fodder to destabilize civil society.
2. Wait for it to devolve into war, nuclear threats, etc... To make cities unappealing.
3. Now, the caravan option looks increasingly better, relatively speaking. Repeat from step 1.
Easy peasy. This is way easier than becoming a multi-thousandaire and buying a house. I'm an entrepreneur so I always go for the shortest-path solution.
violets are blue
So you basically perpetrate visa fraud. How nice of you. Hopefully these are at least issued for doing business and not as tourist visa. Ah you don't need to answer.
This is perfectly legal and the government of Thailand is well aware of this practice (I believe it is only allowed for air entries). The US and the Schengen zone both have limits on stays within a six month period which effectively eliminates this practice and the Thai government could do the same if they wanted to stop this.
They're not doing this, but a lot of people abuse the system to enter on a tourist visa and then do work while there, which isn't legal.
The last time I worked earning money was 2.5 years ago. Not sure what I'm doing that is fraudulent. Can you please explain?
I think they assumed you worked. Which tbh wasn't a bad assumption given the article.
I don't understand. Do they change countries when their tourist visa is about to expire? And work under a tourist visa (thus fraud)?
By living in a van.
Which has upkeep costs due to living in it, and the occasional overnight parking expenses and fines.
Cheaper than rental costs (in Australia), additionally Australia has excellent "Grey Nomad" facilities as a very big country relative to a small population (same land area as 48 state mainland US, ~ 25 million pop.).
It's always been a country of swaggies, less so now, but working on the move and camping are in the DNA of many.
But an extremely important question remains: is the van down by the river?
And having an ex, who does pay rent, to look after your children on school nights apparently
I’m sorry but this has got to be satire?
The first time I've seen anybody be jealous of a guy for having an ex wife.
Wait until you hear about people who have kidney stones, then you'll really know you're missing out.
What I mean is that this guy is bragging about not paying rent whilst not doing his fair share of childcare
You – an anonymous poster – probably don't know anything to be making public comments of the family life of this named individual. Your behaviour is on the level of celebrity gossip magazines.
This man might have been kicked out of his own house and had his family taken from him by the courts, and is now struggling to survive and maintain some form of contact with his children. While anonymous hackers gleefully hurl insults at him.
Well, he takes care of them on (some) weekends! What more can a man do? /s
He could go out to the shops for some cigarettes.