Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't have lights or flashlights on in the van after dark. That's how people spot you sleeping there. Get a female urinal and a short haircut, to avoid public restrooms.
Many areas have laws against living in a parked van, so keep moving.
His son started out on a cross country trip by bicycle. He didn't even make it out of the state, and as far as anyone knows he hasn't been found. Human nature can suck sometimes.
It has been done, somewhat recently - 1990s. There was a woman from Vermont who was disabled and did the whole van living thing. Her posts used to be titled something like "Wendy Usually Wanders" Regrettably, she quit blogging because people were getting increasingly crazy. Perhaps if you search the internet archives you might find some of her old posts.
Such a lifestyle has never been particularly safe, and there is a BIG problem now with the price of fuel, but if one was traveling from safe spot to safe spot with known arrival times, it likely could still be done.
Heat, cooling, cooking, refrigeration, and decent bedding are the main issues. Toilet and shower come up real quickly. One error is thinking that the 12 vt. power from a van is unlimited. It is not, and is designed to support the needs of the vehicle and maybe one or two very small accessories.
My ex and I did this for a couple of months in California back in the early 80's. We went down to Mexico for a while as well. We had a camper, fishing poles and a battery operated TV for entertainment. We also had plenty of money. We spent a lot of time in campgrounds, but without them keeping clean was a challenge. It was fun for a couple of weeks but it got old pretty quick. I like my creature comforts too much I guess.
It strikes me as kind of ironic that although people are saying this vagabond way of life is the free and easy way and the typical nine to five is not, from these posts and the other thread being referenced, to me it appears to be the other way around.
With your nine to five, you put in your time, you are free to do whatever after. And you can afford to without worrying about where your next meal is coming from, if the roof over your head will be there the next day or whether or not you will be able to afford to fuel it. And you can leave it to do what you want knowing you can be pretty certain it will be there when you return. To me that is freedom.
This "free roaming" seems to be a heck of a lot of work to achieve the goal of becoming a free spirit. At least for me it would be. I am not knocking it for those to whom it appeals. I just cannot see the freedom in the uncertainties of always having to look out for the basic necessities let alone the dangers of a woman traveling alone in these times.
But to each her own. And again I wish her luck. I just can't see where that is being free. To me it's just being tied down to a whole new harsh set of rules for a different way of living.
It strikes me as kind of ironic that although people are saying this vagabond way of life is the free and easy way and the typical nine to five is not, from these posts and the other thread being referenced, to me it appears to be the other way around.
With your nine to five, you put in your time, you are free to do whatever after. And you can afford to without worrying about where your next meal is coming from, if the roof over your head will be there the next day or whether or not you will be able to afford to fuel it. And you can leave it to do what you want knowing you can be pretty certain it will be there when you return. To me that is freedom.
This "free roaming" seems to be a heck of a lot of work to achieve the goal of becoming a free spirit. At least for me it would be. I am not knocking it for those to whom it appeals. I just cannot see the freedom in the uncertainties of always having to look out for the basic necessities let alone the dangers of a woman traveling alone in these times.
But to each her own. And again I wish her luck. I just can't see where that is being free. To me it's just being tied down to a whole new harsh set of rules for a different way of living.
There is a steep price today to be free. That much is true.
OD
I was compelled to respond because I am surprised at how negative some of the
feedback has been. I'm female and I wonder if ALL the negative comments are only
because you are female. I think if you plan ahead and start out with some money, you'll be fine.
Most of my travelling has been hitchiking throughout Africa when I was 26-28. I rarely travelled alone, but I met lots of women who did. I carried a Mace Gun and that gave me comfort. I never had to actually use it though I showed it twice when I felt a little threatened. Unfortunately, I had to carry cash with me, so I had a money belt that I wore under my clothes at all times even when sleeping. I had a decoy wallet with a little money that I planned to hand over if it came up.
I have spent a little time driving through the US, Canada, and Mexico. There are some very cheap camping options throughout the USA. I also think it would be safe to camp in Walmart parking lots. I don't know anything about the organization, but couchsurfing.org seems to be a resource to find couches to stay on throughout the world.
One of the differences between the sixties when my sister and her friends traveled the highways that I mentioned earlier and today was that many were doing it. They would meet other travelers on the road and share food, shelter and stories. It made them feel less alone. And there was safety in numbers. Since there were four of them traveling together, often one or the other had a friend or relative in a city where they could stay for a night or two.
Also in those days, you didn't have to call ahead to secure a spot in camping grounds and unlike today many were free; no camping fees. Parking lots of large chain stores were not locked up and patrolled at night. I saw a documentary on TV about homeless people who tried to park overnight even for one night in unchained lots and were told to either move on or face being jailed. Parking overnight pn side streets sleeping in your van can be a hassle. You never know when a cop will knock on your van and tell you to move on because a resident complained. Things were a lot more free and easy in the "old days".
One thing that still exists though that I would take advantage of is hostels. They are inexpensive, safe and good places to stay. Most every town has them. And B&B's are all different price ranges.
Oh and one more thought. I mentioned the OP first posted in the Oregon forum. It is advisable that if you are going to undertake a journey such as this to steer clear of places such as this where there are an abundance of homeless and out of work people who are searching for a means to earn a living. It will make the quest for the trading of skills for shelter or food all that more difficult.
Last edited by Minervah; 12-23-2012 at 02:55 PM..
Reason: Added thought
It strikes me as kind of ironic that although people are saying this vagabond way of life is the free and easy way and the typical nine to five is not, from these posts and the other thread being referenced, to me it appears to be the other way around.
With your nine to five, you put in your time, you are free to do whatever after. And you can afford to without worrying about where your next meal is coming from, if the roof over your head will be there the next day or whether or not you will be able to afford to fuel it. And you can leave it to do what you want knowing you can be pretty certain it will be there when you return. To me that is freedom.
This "free roaming" seems to be a heck of a lot of work to achieve the goal of becoming a free spirit. At least for me it would be. I am not knocking it for those to whom it appeals. I just cannot see the freedom in the uncertainties of always having to look out for the basic necessities let alone the dangers of a woman traveling alone in these times.
But to each her own. And again I wish her luck. I just can't see where that is being free. To me it's just being tied down to a whole new harsh set of rules for a different way of living.
Nobody said being "free" was easy. Nobody said that it was less work than a 9 to 5 job. If it were, more people would be doing it. I suspect the motivation certainly isn't laziness. She didn't ask where the local welfare office was. Anyone who wants to be free (as in having some one else foot the bill for your lunch) AND lazy can do so easily in our current political/social climate.
The idea of being "free" in the sense being discussed here is more along the lines of being free from the machine (modern way of life, aka, corporatism) or collective, not the idea of a "free lunch." Because we all know there is no such thing--someone always pays for that lunch, whether in time or money. For instance, would you rather spend 2 or 3 hours foraging for wild plants for lunch, or work in the corporate machine for a few minutes to fund lunch (but also be tied to that corporation)? Well... it depends on who you are and what your goals/philosophies are. I know I would choose the former. As you said, to each her/his own. Different strokes for different folks.
Nobody said being "free" was easy. Nobody said that it was less work than a 9 to 5 job. If it were, more people would be doing it. I suspect the motivation certainly isn't laziness. She didn't ask where the local welfare office was. Anyone who wants to be free (as in having some one else foot the bill for your lunch) AND lazy can do so easily in our current political/social climate.
The idea of being "free" in the sense being discussed here is more along the lines of being free from the machine (modern way of life, aka, corporatism) or collective, not the idea of a "free lunch." Because we all know there is no such thing--someone always pays for that lunch, whether in time or money. For instance, would you rather spend 2 or 3 hours foraging for wild plants for lunch, or work in the corporate machine for a few minutes to fund lunch (but also be tied to that corporation)? Well... it depends on who you are and what your goals/philosophies are. I know I would choose the former. As you said, to each her/his own. Different strokes for different folks.
I see your point. Yes for me it would be the corporate machine because I did that and it never bothered me. I enjoyed working for the corporations form which I was employed. I guess I never felt tied but that by putting in my time at the corporation, I could then be free to do whatever I wanted when I wasn't there. I guess I don't get the concept of tied to them. Maybe you feel that way about your job and if you do I am sorry for you because that's not a good way to feel about a place to which you have to go every day. I hope you can fix that. I am not being sarcastic or anything I really mean it.
Maybe this should be moved to the philosophy forum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
