Help I can't become a digital nomad, I have too much stuff
fireshouter.substack.comI’ve been around Digital Nomads for a long time and I’ve been working digitally and remotely for periods of time most of my life.
The sense of eradication Nomads are looking for can bite you back quite bad. This is something seldom discussed in DN circles, especially by hyper-positive (or toxic positive) digital Bromads of the “I dropship therefore I’m an Internet Entrepreneur” variety. Digital Nomadism is also very often a form of postcolonial and Western privilege. A lot of DN-targeted content focuses on the individual radical choice of going against the typical societal expectations (settle down, get a house, own stuff). What they mostly miss is how this choice is made possible by the inequalities between the West and the rest of the world.
That said, I still regard Digital Nomadism as a positive movement that could benefit from a bit more self-criticism.
I suspect in the next 5-10 years there's going to be a big backlash against people from western countries exploiting their economic privilege by living in developing countries.
I've lived in various mostly developing countries for the past 7 years, and I'm not one to get hung up on the "white privalege" that's currently talked about in the west, but it is hard not to feel guilty at times at the tremendous advantages I have with a western salary and background while living here. And that's before even considering the rampant fetishization of white men in some countries that results in endless dating opportunities. It doesn't seem far removed from the colonial past.
I've been to Thailand and Singapore and I don't know what you mean about fetishization. If anything it was embarrassing being white and was pleasant when you were ignored.
> I suspect in the next 5-10 years there's going to be a big backlash against people from western countries exploiting their economic privilege by living in developing countries.
What kind of backlash are you thinking of? When I think of a digital nomad, I'm thinking of a rich white kid spending their money in a holiday destination year round.
It's international gentrification isn't it? Replacing facilities that locals would use with Western style overpriced apartment rentals, overpriced coffee, and overpriced, insufficiently spicy food.
Some digital nomads chafe at being charged "farang prices"(foreigner's prices) but the alternative is that locals are priced out.
Rent, property and living prices being adjusted to the purchasing power of the western visitors driving the original low income population away from whichever region gets more popular.
Its similar to what I call hipsterization. Rich and privileged persons moving to an undeveloped area they deem cool, fancy cafes are opened and real state prices skyrocket.
FYI, hipsterization is called "gentrification" by most people talking about the phenomenon of original communities being displaced by an influx of wealthier workers (and they are, by and large, hipsters in the areas where I've seen it first hand)
Its not always a phenomenon anymore, afaik it's a known tactic for developers now
This. I don't think they are seeing as taking advantage of something. I am pretty sure they are seen as tourists.
Yes, the locals who work in industries that directly benefit from the influx of foreign spending love it. The criticism will come from a few directions I think:
1. The same people who are highly concerned about economic inequality and "social justice" within western countries today.
2. Locals of developing countries who do no benefit from the foreign spending or are even hurt by it (e.g., middle or upper class locals who lose their relatively privaleged status to foreigners).
3. Local men who see foreigners as "stealing" their women.
4. Governments trying to secure tax revenue of those dodging.
Isn't it more rich kid working in a country, possibly very successful, without paying local taxes?
Without paying local income tax. Local sales tax (if any) is still being paid.
This. Tbh I think most Nomads would be glad to adhere to some form of "nomadic" taxation system, contributing to the communities they're visiting. This would require a massive coordination between so many different countries with different interests. I don't think we'll achieve anything like this in our lifetimes.
>Digital Nomadism is also very often a form of postcolonial and Western privilege. A lot of DN-targeted content focuses on the individual radical choice of going against the typical societal expectations (settle down, get a house, own stuff). What they mostly miss is how this choice is made possible by the inequalities between the West and the rest of the world.
It's something that came about as a result of domestic inequalities. Digital Nomads wouldnt be anywhere near as common if property/rents werent sky high back home.
It feels a bit wrong to emphasize privilege for things that also come about as a lack of privilege.
> Digital Nomads wouldnt be anywhere near as common if property/rents werent sky high back home.
The vast majority of digital nomads I’ve seen absolutely /do not/ have money problems. They’re all really well-off with good safety nets.
Moreover, potential lack of privilege in their home countries is not really comparable to the massive privileges that come with this kind of nomadism.
I'm not saying that they all cant afford housing but that given the relative costs digital nomading seems like the better option.
I did it in my 20s with a view to avoiding inner city rents. Probably with inflation adjusted 1950s property and flight costs I would not have done it.
I did the big house, three cars, long crappy commutes in traffic, and no visible nature other than manicured lawns. No matter how much nice stuff I put into my house, or how nice my car was (I _did_ love my enormous Lexus!), it wasn't satisfying.
For me, it was less about "going against" and more about "escaping from".
Of course we have Western privilege. But when I travel, I'm not being an ass and throwing money as I step on locals. I meet locals, eat at local places (as well as touristy/western). From my experience, it seems my presence is welcomed and appreciated. My Western privilege is providing additional income and opportunities for locals. I also avoid the obnoxious DN-bros, because in general I dislike any bro-culture (or overt superiority complex people).
Being a digital nomad is not that hard as to be unattainable for non-western people. Well, it depends what you consider "the West" to be.
> can bite you back quite bad
Curious to hear what you mean by that?
Ask any digital nomads, and if they're not "bromads" they'll be usually ok to admit that they've experienced - at least at one point - a specific form of depression, mostly due to having to deal with all that comes with a self-imposed nomadic life (fleeting in-person relationships, lack of a stable community, lack of feeling "rooted", finding out how hard it becomes when you have to deal with serious health issues, and so on).
On the other hand, many expats I know are more impressed with overseas health care compared to the reputation of it back home.
Can you share some specific places you've heard good things on?
Maybe too specific to be helpful, but I’ve heard France is a good place to pass a kidney stone, and India is a good place to recover from tropical illnesses.
If you have family, check in before you give the heirloom toy away, your brother or sister may kill you if they're harbouring dibs on it.
I am still not forgiven for throwing away one half of Johnsons dictionary, the one with the "oats" joke despite it being mostly damaged, beyond repair and unsellably filthy.
I'm writing this looking at a 15th or 16th C wooden stool my mother rescued from a skip. Kondo would have done for it when Chippendale or Sheraton were alive if not before. Now I have a 21st century flat with 21st century life and a 500 year old oak stool I still use to change light bulbs.
Sure but modern stools are designed to break to make you buy another, so you'll save money in the long run. They don't make them like that anymore. You'll be able to pass it down to your grandkids one day.
Old stools broke as well, but the ones that broke don't exist any more. Only the really good ones remain.
A good example of survivorship bias. I'm sure there's 70 year old IKEA furniture out there too.
I think anyone CAN make a good stool like that if they can find the materials and some hand tools, it's just that nobody can be bothered and nobody wants to pay someone to put in the effort. Or that nobody has access to tools and/or a space to do the work. There does seem to be a bit of a renaissance in woodworking though.
I commonly find second hand IKEA sideboards in teak here in Sweden, mid-century design is still sought after and nicer IKEA furniture from the 60s/70s sells for quite a mark-up.
My office desk is an IKEA butcherblock beech top on IKEA legs, our former dining table. A wedding gift from my mother 33 years ago. I think 70 is entirely plausible. One good sandbank and re-oil and it's good for 40 more.
Ikea was founded in 1943, so there is not 70 year old Ikea furniture anywhere.
1943 was 79 years ago, so theoretically there might be?
Jokes aside some IKEA stuff really is pretty good quality and lasts decades. Other stuff is cheap crap but you don't have to buy the cheap crap.
bad news: 1943 is more than 70 years ago. (probably still almost true though)
Damnit. That's what I get for responding at 5am.
Most of the really good ones have broken too: The ones that remain have been lucky.
some of that luckiness is probably due the tree. what we need to do is breed a second generation of especially lucky stools from the same stock.
1. germinate new oak trees from genetic material recovered from lucky stool (1-20 years, say) 2. tend to trees as they mature (40 years) 3. fell trees, craft new generation of stools. (~1 year) 4. use stools until only a handful of lucky stools survive (500+ years) 5. iterate
if all goes to plan, by year 2600 or so the third crop can be underway
We look at something old and think "They don't make them like this..."
No, we make them better. That old thing is lucky to have survived - most things we've made in the past broke. Wood? Oh, yeah, that'll dry out and crack and break in ways that it is easier to buy something new - or buy large woodworking tools. And honestly, if you are worried about long-lasting furniture, be more choosy and spend money for quality.
Also worth mentioning that old furniture was made for a different lifestyle and housing and isn't always as useful as modern furniture is.
I don't think I want to go back working on a laptop on random furniture. I did it for almost two years, and as soon as I got a bigger place I bought two desks, a big giant chair, 32" monitor, fancy keyboard, external webcam, mic, etc etc - and I love it.
Big monitor and standing desk -- those are the two things I miss when I travel/work. The monitor can be purchased locally usually and then sold/given away when leaving, but the desk is something I haven't solved yet.
They say "sitting is the new smoking". I work standing, with my laptop mounted on a tripod. The nice thing is that I can often work on my laptop in the garden. Sometimes I do a moderate workout on a stepper if the work doesn't require carefully touchpad / mouse input.
I'm waiting and hoping for a good VR work solution. This would look really stupid, but I can imagine a split keyboard with each half strapped to my upper leg, VR glasses, and... well that's all!
For the last 15 years, almost all of my computer work, gaming, Netflix, etc. stuff is done standing. I find sitting unpleasant now (which makes 12 hour flights a literal pain sometimes). I'm almost never tired standing, even after an entire waking day on my feet.
Same. I'm excited to try out VR for productivity in a few years, when it all matures and the prices mellow out.
I experienced something similar. After working on a laptop for a good part of 2 years, I finally bought a desktop. It felt like I could breathe again.
Desktop isn't a requirement though. I have 38" LG and connect the work laptop to it with just one USB-C cable. That handles power, monitor, mouse, keyboard, webcam, and audio. It's great.
Agreed. I meant more in the sense of a stable and full-blown workstation with a proper screen, keyboard etc. Of course you can also do it with a laptop, if you wanted to (minus being able to upgrade the hardware as much).
True. I have a laptop from work dedicated to work only, so I do have a desktop too for private use. This work out very well with this setup as I only need to switch that single USB-C cable and my monitor + all peripherals are changed from the laptop to my desktop.
I don’t live in the country where I was born, and neither do most of my friends…still our apartments are full of stuff… trinkets, art, rescued furniture… to me it’s part of what makes me feel at home and what makes it fun to stay with others!
There’s this chastising of owning things (‘the things own you’) that comes up every now and again, but I think that could be reserved for when these objects stop being something you cherish and start to be something you consume: fast fashion, consumer electronics upgrade cycles, etc.
In this article not owning things seems to be a prerequisite for a certain lifestyle of hopping around the world with a laptop, but if that’s your thing, why not simply rent out your apartment? It seems unlikely to be something you’d want to do for years on end. Although I’d be curious to see some data on that, digital nomad churn rate.
Apparently most digital nomads don't travel a lot, according to the guy running the biggest digital nomad network [0]
And more nomad stats here: https://nomadlist.com/digital-nomad-statistics
Thanks, interesting stats. The average length of staying in one place 71 days, still pretty short compared to the norm, living somewhere for a few years to forever. The stats don’t really mention how long people keep up this lifestyle though—only that there were no respondents older than 44!
For me it’s hard to imagine living this way because I like to feel connected to where I live, and that takes more time and investment. And I feel it’s better for where I live, because I can get involved in local initiatives, learn the language etc. But I think that’s a common sentiment, that’s why I wonder about how long people tend to do the nomad thing.
I do know plenty of people who have one place as a kind of base station and often end up working in other places for short periods, that might be a nice hybrid model.
I am a "nomad", but I usually stay in one country for an entire year. The reason why most people stay 3-6 months is because of visa restrictions, which forces people to do country hopping. I don't have visa restrictions between Argentina and EU, as I'm a resident of both, and so like to stay in one place for a minimum of a year usually, which is long enough to be comfortable, but short enough not to get bored.
I definitely don't imagine doing this forever though. It's stressful, and disorienting (because social circle changes so often, how things work changes often). I'm 29, and already feel like I could really use a permanent home.
If you read artist’s bios, it’ll often say they’re “based in” a certain place. I’ve always found that a bit pretentious, as if artists don’t simply live somewhere, they need a fancier word. But I’m starting to understand it better, I think they mean having a place that you keep gravitating back to, even if your work and live might take you all over the place. And where you can keep your stuff :)
Good luck with finding your model! These last years must have been an enriching experience whichever way.
This resonates with me. Like GP I find going full nomad too lonely, so I just started experimenting with spending maybe 60% of the year in my “base”, and taking 2-4 week trips here and there. So far so good!
I could not live without various physical hobbies that require workshops full of benches, tools, parts, and materials.
I don't just want to own a guitar and a recumbent trike, I want the hobby of hacking on guitars and bikes.
Even the tools are their own hobby. I don't just want to rent a few hours on a 3d printer, I want to hack on 3d printers.
And forget my vintage computers, those are right out. They need shelves full of irreplaceable ancient spare parts, and acessible not off in storage.
Tourism is nice for a while but to be a tourist barely sampling your own life perpetually?
Yep. Digital nomad lifestyle is basically impossible if you're interested in vintage electronics. Spare parts or machines are sometimes extremely difficult to re-purchase, or even outright impossible to obtain.
I somewhat agree about the storage unit. I've certainly spent far more on my storage unit over several years than the value of all the stuff that's in it. On the other hand, it's kind of nice having a safe place to store various things which have some sentimental value. It's also a good way to figure out what things you actually need in your life. Has something been sitting in storage for 2 years and you haven't missed it? You don't need it!
If you live in a house with a garage that has a lot of stuff stored in it, you could do the same calculation and find that the money paid to the mortgage per square foot of garage is more than the value of the things stored in it. Or if you have a full basement with maybe 100 sq ft of stuff stored in it.
But there's also a value in having those things available when you want them. And value in simply having the utilitarian flexible space for projects.
I know a number of people who have like a 650 square ft condo and maybe a 90-110 square foot storage unit, and the actual amount of junk and clutter they own is far less than people living in 1800 square foot houses with two car garages in the suburbs.
I can totally relate to these observations:
1) We recently moved from a 80m² flat to a ~145m² house, plus 50m² of basement (860 -> 1560+540 sqft). We had a lot of stuff but it fitted well. Now the house is already equally full with things, but the only non-house-related item we got that takes up more space than before is the super automatic coffee maker. Thinking about it, this is because the actual living rooms did get only marginally bigger: A lot of the additional space is "hidden" because now each of us has a room of their own instead of a shared office. Which, for us and our relationship, is a tremendous boon.
2) Most of things we rarely use derive their value from being available on-demand. Especially for maintenance and repairs: When we rented a flat, all these tasks were the duty of our landlord. Now owning an older house of our own means we have to do that, and often having the proper tools & materials available is a huge boon. The most bulky item: The ladder for cleaning the roof rails. And then there is about a palette of various building materials I still need for all the necessary repairs/maintenance/improvements that we need to do.
Exactly. People underestimate how important availability is, to put it in IT terms.
Perhaps the clearest example of this is Uber, where it's not guaranteed to be available at all in your area at a time of your choosing, but the pre-booked cab service that costs 2x more will near-flawlessly arrive on time, every time.
You must have never been hit with an acute attack of the "I need a Nokia N95 to fax cable to get something done" syndrome. 2 years is a while, but some things have a usage frequency much longer than once every 2 years.
I keep stuff in my storate unit largely because it's a cheap way to declutter my owned flat. A lot of my hobby retro tech is something I'll end up repurchasing at some later point anyway (except in worse condition and for far more than I would want to spend on it), so that's another argument.
I've lived through minimalism brought about by moving every few months for a project, and I still miss some stuff that I had to throw away or that got lost. Some important things like documents that could have been filed better, some emotional stuff like mementos and souvenirs, and of course photos as negatives and CDs that were taken before digital cameras and cloud storage.
The article contains a quote about using Craigslist to "store" your stuff. A friend of mine is a scientist and just lives wherever she can get a project. She once joked that she uses Ikea to store her furniture. It's so cheap, she just buys it whenever she moves into a new city or country, then sells/donates when she leaves, then arrives and buys again.
Put it all in storage, beyond what you can take on a plane.
Forget to pay the bill. Problem solved.
Slightly left of topic, but the use of "nomad" in the context of "too much stuff" would be better described as 'asceticism'.
Traditional nomadic life was about entire communities or extended families (rather than individuals), usually carrying their entire home and possessions with them either on travois or animals and/or carts, and travelling between home sites as the seasons changed or the food source moved.
In current times it's not too challenging to carry one's entire digital possessions in a back-pack if you trust to there being an always-on quality network connection, but it'd be far more comfortable to kit out a mobile home, caravan, recreational vehicle, boat, or similar, if you want basics with you such as favourite clothing, personal items, and physical documents.
A challenge of this minimalisation is overcoming built-in obsolescence of most digital devices that often leads to collections of older 'stuff' kept 'just in case', as well as connectors, adapters, wires, and other bits. Oh, and avoiding buying 'convenience' single-purpose devices.
Having Siberian Huskies I once tried to figure out if I could live off the back of a sled and have the huskies be my means of transport. The sled would have needed to be 5 meters long and about 2 tall so I abandoned the idea!
> Having Siberian Huskies I once tried to figure out if I could live off the back of a sled and have the huskies be my means of transport. The sled would have needed to be 5 meters long and about 2 tall so I abandoned the idea!
perhaps you just needed a few more huskies. is there anything like a rocket equation for dogsledding? e.g. each husky requires some mass of supplies which must be hauled which implies additional huskies.
Huskies aren't the cause of the ever-growing sled - it'd need permanent shelter and sleeping accommodation (at least 2m long) because conditions might preclude erecting a tent every night-fall. Then add space needed for storage of potable (drinking & cooking) water, food, cooking equipment, toilet disposal facilities (human & huskies), ropes, winches, and tools for getting out of trouble and making repairs (so also spares for harnesses, sled, etc.) ...
Once you analyse what is required to be truly self-sufficient and self-reliant, even for short periods of time, the amount of equipment needed is quite surprising.
In settled life many of those things are externalised costs or can be obtained on-demand.
I'd still love to give it a go at some point - but would need to move to Alaska to do it (Only rain and mud in the UK!)
I don't think it would necessarily have to be all that humongous: Have your tent permanently erected on the sled, on top of the supplies. Not necessarily fully erected; spread out and attached at the bottom (probably / preferably on a rigid floor above the supplies down on the bottom of the sled), but collapsed down on top of the floor or supplies. Perhaps with a solid(ish) "lid" for a roof and collapsible textile only for the walls. Keep your sleeping bag and hammock and other use-every-night stuff in the tent, above the floor or other supplies. If you go with a rigid floor you might sleep on that; if not, you'll have to go with a hammock (which is probably preferable anyway).
Sounds like an idea for Randall Munroe's next book.
Very good point. We’re talking about the values of expats, who demand reliable power and networking. The values of true nomads are different. In my experience, the amount of stuff true nomads have is nontrivial if you count the herd of livestock. And minimalist expats would find nomadic culture extremely traditional.
My take is that we’re talking about minimalist expats here. While they value 21st century conveniences, they don’t value how those conveniences are maintained.
Maybe the symbolic necessity to become a digital expat destination is an Apple store. Which rules out a number of continents.
Getting rid of stuff "properly" can be an overwhelming challenge.
I know I can live with just two backpacks. So now I have a lot of decent/nice/expensive stuff that I don't really need but don't really know how to get rid of properly (without great effort).
If I could find a reliable person or service who would try hard to find a good home/buyer for each of my items, I would happily give up 50% of whatever money was collected. But I just don't have the time or motivation to try to list and sell all my stuff.
Forcing me to seriously condense my physical possessions was one of the best things to come out of my stint as a nomad.
My whole life fits into a few boxes and I don't aim to change that until I buy a house that is explicitly the house I want to die in. Even if I rent an apartment or buy a house to stay in a city for a few years, I'm keeping to my "it has to fit in a 5x5 storage unit" or be cheap enough that I'm okay to give it away or leave it when I move.
This is not really practical for many, but buying a place, keeping your s̶h̶i̶t̶ stuff and renting out the place is also a viable option.
If properly planned and resourced, this is a pretty easy option.
"in the future you'll own nothing and be happy"
No thanks.
It's like, one needs to have stuff to survive, make nice food, do interesting things and create stuff?
I met my first “digital nomad” a while back. I have considerably less stuff than he does. Does that make me a digital nomad?
My philosophy is merely that I hate clutter and kipple.
I don't understand the snarky feigned confusion around the term "digital nomad". If you move around while working online for extended periods of time, you're a digital nomad.
I usually just tell people "I travel while working with a startup remotely" because I'm aware of the term's reputation, but it seems to be an apt description to me.
I think the problem is when you add a label to a lifestyle like this it becomes an aspirational cult and ideological thing. Or something to aspire to at the very least.
It is after all just a circumstance. I know many people who would classify for whom this is just normal life and entirely unworthy of labelling themselves under some status banner.
No one can win against kipple, except temporarily and maybe in one spot.
I've developed a methodology of throwing it away on receipt :)
But eventually you'll die or go away, and then the kipple will again take over. It's a universal principle operating throughout the universe; the entire universe is moving toward a final state of total, absolute kippleization.
if there is an afterlife and (joy of joys) it is some kind of personalised hell, maybe anyone with the discipline to methodically dekipple during their life finds themselves trapped in a pile of said kipple