Encouraging live aboards

[dwedeking2]

I paid $20,000 for the boat. Insurance is $200 a year. I rent a mooring ball because the anchoring conditions are poor here, that's $5,000 a year. I couldn't live on land for the same price.

Having the ability to untie a line and be able to be in a new location/city/country within a few days can't be priced.

I have noticed that those that move on to a boat solely for financial reasons rarely last. There are a lot of little inconveniences that go with boat life.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

I paid $20,000 for the boat. Insurance is $200 a year. I rent a mooring ball because the anchoring conditions are poor here, that's $5,000 a year. I couldn't live on land for the same price.

Having the ability to untie a line and be able to be in a new location/city/country within a few days can't be priced.

I have noticed that those that move on to a boat solely for financial reasons rarely last. There are a lot of little inconveniences that go with boat life.

Let’s agree the purchase price is irrelevant and is only relevant where the nation state is not prepared to help put a house over your head and your family. That’s an abomination as proper “ shelter “ should be a universal right.

Certainly I’ve never seen boat insurance fully comprehensive cheaper then house insurance

$5000 is similar to my marina fees , I’ve nothing of comparable size on costs associated with my primary residence

Given living costs ie food etc are similar and taking into account heating radically different sized accommodations , utilities are par for par typically cheaper for houses as they are often subsidised in one form or another.

So I’m all in favour of voluntary live aboard. I mean I do it. But I’m totally against any generalised perspective that suggests it’s an alternative to conventional housing especially for those in financial trouble.

[boatman61]

Exactly.. you wanna live on a boat where the swarms go expect to pay a fortune.. go to the places less popular and the price goes down..
Fig da Foz is cheap because the only out country boats that stop are on their way to the Algarve or heading N back home where prices are higher.
Personally being based here just 2 days from the hordes to the S and 2 days from the peace & beauty of the Galician ria's is hard to beat.. Gib/Tangier/Costa del Sol is just 4 days away and the Ballearics just 9 days.
Well worth €2000/year for a base..

[dwedeking2]

I live in a place where the government doesn't pay for housing, unless you want to live on a cot in a dorm like situation. so purchase price is important, especially if you don't want debt.

And I agree from a long term investment point owning a house has been a financially better route. A lot of the working poor are only thinking month to month, and removing the asset appreciation factor you can get by cheaper in a boat in certain locations.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

I live in a place where the government doesn't pay for housing, unless you want to live on a cot in a dorm like situation. so purchase price is important, especially if you don't want debt.

And I agree from a long term investment point owning a house has been a financially better route. A lot of the working poor are only thinking month to month, and removing the asset appreciation factor you can get by cheaper in a boat in certain locations.

I accept that,
but a far better long term outcome is to advocate for a proper social housing programme rather then arguing people should buy derelict style boats as a substitute for poor housing policy.

Secondly housing finance is available whereas depreciating asset finance is very difficult for the poor to access

Of course situations exist around the world where access to housing is difficult and people live in shanty towns and so forth. But again this is an abject failure of the social welfare system and on water substitute “ housing “ is no alternative, irrespective of some rich folks with a YouTube account suggest.

[JoetheCobbler]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Let’s agree the purchase price is irrelevant and is only relevant where the nation state is not prepared to help put a house over your head and your family. That’s an abomination as proper “ shelter “ should be a universal right.

Certainly I’ve never seen boat insurance fully comprehensive cheaper then house insurance

$5000 is similar to my marina fees , I’ve nothing of comparable size on costs associated with my primary residence

Given living costs ie food etc are similar and taking into account heating radically different sized accommodations , utilities are par for par typically cheaper for houses as they are often subsidised in one form or another.

So I’m all in favour of voluntary live aboard. I mean I do it. But I’m totally against any generalised perspective that suggests it’s an alternative to conventional housing especially for those in financial trouble.

History has repeatedly demonstrated that your Marxist style dependance on the state for your existis contrary to the successful society and economy

It's contrary to man's nature to hold one's own interests formost.
Here in the USA, individual freedom,the ability to succeed or fail is highly valued and quite literally the basis upon which the capital system is functioning.
Capitalism has raised millions of people from poverty and continues to.
Marxist/ socialist governments all have failed, continue to and place millions in poverty and death.
Subjects require " leaders" free Men elect representatives to do their bidding,not dictate their existence.
It's clear this eludes you.
And it's also clear you will continue to "yell" your opinion repeatedly, and never consider the possibility that you are incorrect.
Because you " know".

[Mike OReilly]

Wow... a lot of narrow, absolutist thinking here. Not even sure what this thread has become, but I am sure it will be closed soon thanks to all the political, My Way Is the Right Way, demands.

In the real world, the answer to whether a floating home is cheaper than a land home is: It Depends. It depends on where you are, what you need, and what other social/economic supports are available (if any).

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Because making people pay absorbitant feee to be educated is an abomination In any wealthy developed country. Most countries subsidise third level from the public purse that’s right and proper

The US student loans were both morally wrong and unsustainable hence it’s easy right to write them off

Of course, basic economics will tell you the fees are high because of the loans...Lots of money (from easy loans) chasing limited school slots and prices go up.

If you want to have govt run and supported higher education, be honest and state that. Handing out huge loans for underwater basket weaving degrees, is not helping the student or society and ultimately created the question of do we pass off the loans that the students agreed to pay back onto the tax payer.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by JoetheCobbler

History has repeatedly demonstrated that your Marxist style dependance on the state for your existis contrary to the successful society and economy

It's contrary to man's nature to hold one's own interests formost.
Here in the USA, individual freedom,the ability to succeed or fail is highly valued and quite literally the basis upon which the capital system is functioning.
Capitalism has raised millions of people from poverty and continues to.
Marxist/ socialist governments all have failed, continue to and place millions in poverty and death.
Subjects require " leaders" free Men elect representatives to do their bidding,not dictate their existence.
It's clear this eludes you.
And it's also clear you will continue to "yell" your opinion repeatedly, and never consider the possibility that you are incorrect.
Because you " know".

Sorry European states are extremely successful and are not based on Marxist dogma , stop with the “ bumper sticker “ discussions.

It’s not Marxist dogma to ensure your population is cared for medically , educated and housed

The US is an outlier and cannot be regarded as better or “ normal “

I’ve seen poverty in the US you don’t see in disgraceful failed third world counties. This is one of the wealthiest countries , it should hang its head in shame in places. I was shocked at the living conditions I saw.

Clearly “ robber baron” capitalism has completely failed in the US resulting in the need to cancel nonsensical student debt ,etc etc , medical poverty is a disgrace in a modern society. One only has to look at bidens plans to see what needs to be done.

Simply because you let people sink into poverty does not make you “ free” true freedom doesn’t exist in the US no more then it exists elsewhere.

I didn’t bring US politics into this thread you did. I merely stated basic human rights are medical care , education and housing . This has been accepted all over Europe Australia , Canada , Japan , etc. only the US remains an outlier. At least certain trends in the US suggest change is afoot. A more caring society is a good start.

Outliers are not good indicators for arguments

In European states , various schemes exist to help the poor access housing , including state aid, shared equity, social housing etc.

This is only right and proper.

Shunting the poor onto derelict boats is an abomination for any wealthy country. It should be in no way encouraged

Financially secure people who chose a reasonable liveaboard lifestyle is a fine choice, it’s largely extremely limited as a percentage of population and is largely contained in warmer climes.

[goboatingnow]

To return to the title

Livesboards that can maintain a reasonable boat in a secure location are fine , it’s a voluntarily lifestyle.

That’s very different to “ encouraging “ liveaboards as some alternative to land housing for the poor. That’s manifestly wrong.

[Shanachie]

The reason working people live aboard in the Keys is it is a chain of small islands that have become overcrowded due to poor planning by local and state governments.


There is no land to build worker housing because it is so expensive that most homes cost in the millions. Heck, rundown trailer homes cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.


In the '70s and early '80s, the Keys were primarily a destination for Floridians who wanted to endure the four- or five-hour drive down U.S. 1. Fishermen and other working people lived there.


Then government unwisely decided to "improve" U.S. 1 to make it much easier to get to the Keys. An expanded airport and cruise ships followed. Now, it is inundated with people.


Wealthy people bought out the homes of Crackers who used to live in the Keys because it was no longer difficult to get to. The Crackers moved to north or central Florida.



Go to Key West today and you have 1) tons of tourists 2) a significant number of wealthy people who can afford to spend millions on an old Conch cottage 3) a large number of people on the edge of poverty who work service jobs to cater to 1) and 2).


It wouldn't be that difficult for the Keys to rid itself of the unsightly liveaboard communities. But then, who will cook and serve you dinner in a restaurant? Sell you trinkets in a shop?


Maybe the day will come when another monster hurricane cripples U.S. 1 and returns the Keys to a destination that is difficult to reach and enjoyable once you get there.

[JoetheCobbler]

Originally Posted by Shanachie

The reason working people live aboard in the Keys is it is a chain of small islands that have become overcrowded due to poor planning by local and state governments.


There is no land to build worker housing because it is so expensive that most homes cost in the millions. Heck, rundown trailer homes cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.


In the '70s and early '80s, the Keys were primarily a destination for Floridians who wanted to endure the four- or five-hour drive down U.S. 1. Fishermen and other working people lived there.


Then government unwisely decided to "improve" U.S. 1 to make it much easier to get to the Keys. An expanded airport and cruise ships followed. Now, it is inundated with people.


Wealthy people bought out the homes of Crackers who used to live in the Keys because it was no longer difficult to get to. The Crackers moved to north or central Florida.



Go to Key West today and you have 1) tons of tourists 2) a significant number of wealthy people who can afford to spend millions on an old Conch cottage 3) a large number of people on the edge of poverty who work service jobs to cater to 1) and 2).


It wouldn't be that difficult for the Keys to rid itself of the unsightly liveaboard communities. But then, who will cook and serve you dinner in a restaurant? Sell you trinkets in a shop?


Maybe the day will come when another monster hurricane cripples U.S. 1 and returns the Keys to a destination that is difficult to reach and enjoyable once you get there.

I can agree with your assessment of the economics of the keys, it's a tourist driven region and the only significant business is the tourists, hotels, vacation Etc. Therefore the jobs available are service jobs largely.
The free market controls the prices.
People charge as much as others are willing to pay.
Nobody is "forced" to live in the keys!

A nobody is forced to purchase a trailer for $100,000 in the keys, or be on a boat.
No travel restrictions in the USA

[JoetheCobbler]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Wow... a lot of narrow, absolutist thinking here. Not even sure what this thread has become, but I am sure it will be closed soon thanks to all the political, My Way Is the Right Way, demands.

In the real world, the answer to whether a floating home is cheaper than a land home is: It Depends. It depends on where you are, what you need, and what other social/economic supports are available (if any).

It's fascinating to me to read all the different perspectives and opinions and personal experiences.
Each one firmly anchored in their own perspective.
And although ,to some,it might come off as purporting " my " way is the best.
I actually have come to understand that many paths exist, not better or worse, just different.
I encourage people to find their own paths , I'll do the same.

[GreenWave]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Absolute Nonsense ,

proper countries have rock solid title laws for property ownership.

I own my house freehold . It can never be taken from my possession. I “ own” in 100% and the land under it

Is your home in a place that has property taxes? If so, then the failure to pay those could result in the tax authority taking your house. Extreme YES, Possible YES>

[Rumrace]

A bunch of “ liveaboards “ I’ve met are burning through pops inheritance and telling romantic sea faring stories.
As far as being homeless here the only legitimate reason is mental health. The same reason to take out a mortgage on a boat, mental health. We just endured a less privileged part of the city shame the rest of us. They paid big dollars to advertise on TV their big hospital got fewest donations in the city and what are we going to do about it. doh.
Choosing living on a boat as a long term financial strategy don’t hold water. A home is growth equity. The growth in the Toronto area is not believable. It’s astounding. I broke even selling a SeaRay Sedan I had for 6 seasons. That never happens but strange used boat market. In the same period the average house grew 500,000 in value. ROI in boating is relaxation, fun, sporting, drinking games …