Good Destinations in Event of Global Economic Depression?

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by sctpc

1/3 that can not include maintenance , docking ect I would say it costs 1/3 more to cruse in a sustainable way corect me if im wrong.

It costs lees to cruise than to live life on land. Remember the docking costs are not real because you never really need to go to a marina often at all. Only for water and fuel. Water being the most often.

Its far less than what iot takes on land to live. The problem, of course, is that one isn't earing income by working while cruising. The income comes from savings, investments etc.

As for a 'sustainable ' way you mean finacially? Not green?

In the end you will find you will spend all the money you can allocate to cruising... and much more if you had it

[DWT]

Quote:
"Then there is this idea that we each only have so much time. And time is our most valuable commodity. "

I would guess that this statement drive me more then worring about a total breakdown of our finacial system. The wife is having her health issues and I am asking her "how much time do you have". It really makes one stop and think. Do we get...while the getting good and we're still be able to do it, I say YES.

Also said : "The boat is the destination not the place" is good.....so good I'll be saying just that to my wife this morning.

[osirissail]

Originally Posted by sctpc

1/3 that can not include maintenance , docking ect I would say it costs 1/3 more to cruse in a sustainable way corect me if im wrong.

- - A decade ago Cruising World Magazine did a survey of active cruisers tallying up everything they spent money on while cruising - everything. Food, fuel, marinas, boat costs, medical, air travel, etc., etc. The were able to see 3 different lifestyles which were categorized as economy, middle, and well-off.
- - Economy was characterized by a young couple living a "backpack" style of life on the water. No marinas, always anchor, always eat on board, use feet or busses to tour, no air trips home - you get the idea. They came in back then at around US$11K/year. Middle lifestyle included one or two nights after a long passage at a marina to clean up then anchor out plus a trip per year by air back to see the "kids." Occasional meals ashore and some organized tours occasionally. The average ages were in the 45-55y.o. The average total costs came in at about US$20K per year. The "Upper" lifestyle afloat included long marina stays, lots of meals ashore, two trips home by air, and other "nice" things. This category came in at US$30K per year and comprised mostly "over 60" cruisers. *These were all mono-hull cruisers as Cat's were not big back then. And these cruisers - actively cruised the world, not simply lived on a boat in one place and never went anywhere.
- - The magazine roughed out that it would take 3 times as much money to live the same lifestyle on land. Obviously, cars, condo's, lawn, shopping malls, working expenses and extra medical bills due to the psychological stresses of living on land accounted for a major portion of the difference. This survey was for "full time" live-a-boards not seasonal or occasional live-a-boards.
- - Updating for the differences between now and a decade ago will probably add 10% to the economy group; 25-30% to the middle group; and may 50% to the high end group.
- - My personal experience over 7 years in the Caribbean full time and talking about the subject with other full time cruisers in each category indicates these numbers adjusted for inflation are quite realistic. I am in the "upper" category and with a 40 y.o. old boat am very comfortable on $35-40K (after taxes). And that includes replacing stolen dinghies and motors.
- - Which category you end up in is primarily determined by MARKJ's post - you will spend as much as you have available to spend. So before you set sail, determine which category is for you and set up the revenue stream to support it.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by osirissail

- - Unfortunately it takes money.....

- - If you wish to retire you need a steady revenue stream to support yourself.

- - I suspect your wife knows that you do not have sufficient equity yet to support yourselves. And she has (?) a good job and in today's job market that is "money in the bank" literally.

Actually, we could do it financially. Not rich but not poor either. And my job makes more than hers. But that is not the point. People who really want to do it - do it, they make it happen.

Originally Posted by osirissail

- - - - Seasickness, unless severe, is easily treated with Scopolamine, turgeon, or other remedies. However, living together 24/7/365 and liking it, is not something you can take any pills to make work. Your partner and you have to really like being up close and personal with each other most all the time.

She is gradually getting over her motion sickness. About equal amounts are psychological and not. Try convincing a psychoanalyst her sea sickness is all in her head!

Originally Posted by osirissail

-- - There are recipes for convincing her to never set foot on the boat again and recipes for gradually getting her to love the boat and lifestyle. That takes work and intelligence on your part.
- - If you two really like being around each other ....

Ahhhh! Now we have the crux of the matter, intelligence on my part. A lacking commodity. I left it somewhere, I can't remember where, but somewhere between my glasses and my patience.

[osirissail]

- - The full time cruising lifestyle is not for everybody but for those who can do it, IMHO it is the best lifestyle on this planet. You will be amazed and awed at the community and comradeship of the people both men and women. My hints and suggestions are only offered to help set yourself to fully participate with the least amount of complications and outside pressures that might drag you back into your previous world.
- - It is rewarding and glorious lifestyle for a single-hander and double glorious for a fully participating couple. Having a fully participating partner magnifies the experiences and joy of this lifestyle. Even if you can only do it for 6 on / 6 off it is worth it. However, it is a radical change from the "work world" you have known most of your life and it does take a couple of years to "wind down" to a pace where stopping to smell the roses and sipping sundowners with new and old friends fully kicks in and thoughts of your "past life" drift into oblivion. When that happens you don't want to "have to" go back to your old life because of financial or other limitations.
- - But as many, if not all others have said, go any which way you can before you get to a point in life where you cannot go. When the time is right for YOU, only you can make the decision.

[hpeer]

Osirissail,

All good words and advice. I have taken up to 6-weeks off and can see the glimmer of your vision in the distance.

But back to the main topic of the thread - Destinations in event of global meltdown (I don't want to hijack the thread) my point was that, taken in the larger picture, the BOAT or LIFESTYLE itself can be seen as the destination. As a destination a boat has many advantages, not the least of which it is mobile.

We don't know how a meltdown will unfold. Having a good boat provides you with options in the future and pleasure in the meantime.

[osirissail]

I think your words are truer than even you think ->>> Destinations in event of global meltdown<<<< - is double true. Financial meltdown or global warming meltdown - either way being on a floating boat able to move to new locations and - rise and lower with the ocean tides or market conditions is a very good place to be.

[hpeer]

Bumping the thread for interest.

Seems like a good time to revisit this idea given the changed state of the economy, H1N1, and recent events at Copenhagen.

Are people still thinking in terms of some meltdown, be economic, medical, or environmental? Are you more or less secure in your current situation? Does having a "bug out boat" still make sense?

[Amgine]

My response remains the same - it's nice to have a boat. If things meltdown, I'd sail up the coast into the BC jungles, dropping the hook in one or another of my favourite spots near enough to 'civilization' to resupply but far enough to give me some warning if the loons break out.

It's not really about sailing away from 2012 disaster-movie-porn situation. It's like having the cabin in the woods where you know you *can* get away, even if you never have to, and it's loads of fun to just load up and take off for a while to practice - or more honestly to just load up and take off for awhile.

[Laidback]

South East Asia,
Anchorages by the thousand Free. Restaurants inexpensive with good food near the Anchorages. Healthcare not expensive. Boatworkers available everywhere at very reasonable cost. Internet cafes for those that need to call back home $00.30 cents US per hour. Lovely people.
S.E.A in the above context means Malaysia Thailand, Philippines and Indonesia.

[MoonlightShadow]

Originally Posted by Amgine

My response remains the same - it's nice to have a boat. If things meltdown, I'd sail up the coast into the BC jungles, dropping the hook in one or another of my favourite spots near enough to 'civilization' to resupply but far enough to give me some warning if the loons break out.

It's not really about sailing away from 2012 disaster-movie-porn situation. It's like having the cabin in the woods where you know you *can* get away, even if you never have to, and it's loads of fun to just load up and take off for a while to practice - or more honestly to just load up and take off for awhile.

Amgine's words are fundamental. It's all about enhancing our ability to better survive in a range of different scenarios.

There has been much talk on the thread about sufficient funds to support a cruising lifestyle, but, in the event of global meltdown, income from investment funds and the like would probably not exist, or be so low as to not provide sufficient return to live on. In these circumstances, we would "sail with what we have got" and could not even rely on the value of currency/cash/cash at bank being accessible resources. Hopefully, a true disaster scenario like that will not exist - but it could. In those circumstances we could probably survive for between six months and a year in totally self-sufficient mode.

However, there are a number of alternative sets of circumstances of lesser overall import, than the total collapse scenario. In the Eastern UK, flooding is one such issue, then we have viral threats, and so on and so on. The boat comes out as the most accessible and secure venue for most of us, in most of these circumstances.

When revisiting potentialities as hpeer enquires, I cannot see an overall difference from when the question was first asked. At that time, I had in mind economic collapse, but the wider remit was taken in with many of the posts. While we have not seen a total collapse, we, in Britain, are very far from being out of the woods, so-to-speak.

While the worst may never happen, I must admit, that I thoroughly enjoyed the mental process of planning for it. A boat that was as self-sufficient and environmentally friendly as possible (by necessity) in terms of energy, water-makers, solar panels, LED lighting, food preservation and stowage, was a good target in it's own right. I learned a lot from the exercise, and it was fun to do. What better excuse can you have for spending so much time down the boat!!! Not only that, but I was taught a mass of new stuff from the posters on this site, and made some new friends. Brilliant stuff. Thanks to all.

As for a specific destination? I still don't have one. But the beauty of it is, that in a boat we have a mobility that our "on land" lifestyles does not permit. We can move around. Follow the cruising grapevine, and go to the most suitable places, as, and when, we want. Or need...

[sneuman]

The big problem, at least for me, is how you manage to meet lubberside obligations in the interim (for me, a 13-year-old presumably college-bound kid, exwife, boat payments for 2 more years, etc.) and save enough to build up a cruising kitty.

[osirissail]

One rather overlooked aspect of "global meltdown" or "world disasters" is that they are not world-wide. Being from a major frontline first world country it is natural to assume that the rest of the world does not exist. All the "end of the world" movies only show northern hemisphere, mega cities being "wiped out." Reality is a different matter. The southern hemisphere, even in an all out nuclear war would have little affect on the southern half of the world - there is little down there that anybody would want to bomb and the equatorial wind barrier/separation keeps a lot of the residue from migrating south.
- - So having a sailboat, ready and able, is a great plan. As others said recently, you can use Mother Natures free propulsion system - the winds - to get south away from the crazy folk. In ancient (30 year ago) movies, it always the mega cities that meltdown first as they cannot support themselves with food, fuel, and heated shelters. Being out in the "boondocks"/ outback or whatever was the survival strategy. You could garden/farm/gather natural fuel just like our colonial great/great grand parents did.
- - It is much easier in a sailboat as all you need to do is head far enough south and away from 1st world countries and other over-crowded population centers and live quite nicely with fishing, a little garden in the jungle, and some wild jungle animals. A real Robinson Crusoe type life.

[HHNTR111]

I think that we won't have a universal "meltdown", but rather a relative decline. The worst case is something like the movie "Waterworld", where warlords dominate and people cluster for mutual protection. I think being able to go away from the major population centers and find "back waters", where you can help the community and not be noticed by the crazies is attractive to me. We can go anywhere, but the skill is picking the place to go.

[hpeer]

it always the mega cities that meltdown first as they cannot support themselves with food, fuel, and heated shelters.

The "heat" thing is, I think, underestimated by people who want "doomsteads." It costs a lot to live in the temperate climes.

Not that the South is all peaches and cream, but with a boat you at least have a choice.

Elsewhere folks are still worrying about a second wave of financial stress as the second wave of bad mortgages kick in and the stimulus wears off. I'm thinking that, with the depressed boat prices, now might be a good time to buy.