Originally Posted by robow

If you're not homeless, or a hippie bound for a commune, you must be doing it for a cause or charity, right?

Originally Posted by Machka

You know that you could be quite well off and still homeless. I don't understand why people equate the word "homeless" with "poor".

When Rowan and I have been homeless, we've been reasonably comfortable financially. And when I was going to University a few years ago, rent was very high in that city, so many of the students were "homeless" ... they migrated between friends' couches. I did a bit of that then too for a few weeks. It was a good way to save a bit of money.


And what is "homeless" anyway? At what point does a person become defined as "homeless"? There are so many variables.

A person who owns a house might not be considered "homeless" ... but what if that person rents the house out for a year, and goes to travel the world. That person no longer has a "home", and is therefore "homeless", but that person could be bringing in a reasonable sum from the rent, and could dwell in that house again when the year is up.

Originally Posted by spinnaker

Have you ever been asked for your ID by police?

Originally Posted by Machka

Well ... I've been asked for ID (passport) when going through customs etc. at the airports I've passed through, but that's policy these days. They ask the same of everyone.

Originally Posted by contango

I guess there's a big difference between someone who is technically "homeless" in that they voluntarily chose to give up their home to go touring, and someone who is "homeless" in the sense they would dearly love a roof over their head but for some reason are unable to find one.

It's the same difference between someone who is unemployed in the sense they are looking for work but can't find work, and someone who is technically unemployed because they left their six-figure job two days ago and don't start their new six-figure job until next week.

Originally Posted by spinnaker

No this was just a random stop at the train station. I guess I looked suspicious.

Do they now stop you at borders withing the EU?

Originally Posted by jowilson

If people thought that I was homeless, I would ask them how a homeless person could afford a bike, bike trailer, panniers, food, helmet, spare tires and tubes, tools, clothing, backpack, pump, camera, and most of all, the education to know where the hell I am and also to not judge people.

Originally Posted by Machka

In fact, some border crossings were less dramatic than provincial or state border crossings in North America or Australia.

Originally Posted by spinnaker

I like taking pictures of border crossings.

Originally Posted by Machka

Yes, and I have a bit of trouble using the same word for both meanings because the two meanings are so different. ... semantics, I know.

Personally, for your second defintion of "homeless", I'd probably use the word "destitute".

Originally Posted by fietsbob

One difference: touring cyclists dont stay in the same place .

Originally Posted by Blindhog

I am fairly new to cycling (4 years) and touring (8-9 minitours of 2 to 9 days total lifetime) and have wondered about other tourers' experiences about how we are perceived by the "non-cyclists" we encounter during our trips.

Since I live in North Florida and tour mostly North Florida and South/Central Georgia, my experiences could easily differ a lot from those in say, New England or West Coast, especially those who frequent the Adventure Cycling routes. The Deep South is not generally plugged into the cycling culture, even though the TA passes through my hometown of Tallahassee. When I vary north or south from that line, I am a very rare bird. I have encountered fewer than one touring cyclist per week on the road, for instance. (Regardless, even before getting into cycling, I could always spot a touring cyclist and tell the difference from a bike rider who cycles out of economic necessity.

My experience is that on tour I am almost always assumed to be a "homeless guy." Though I have changed from a mountain bike qand improvised panniers to a "real" touring bike (Jamis Aurora Elite) over the years and have taken on the "look" of a tourer (front rack, four panniers, helmet, cycling shorts, Screaming Dayglow Yellow shirt) I believe that a high percentage of restaurant staff, passing motorists, hotel owners and fellow campground residents think I am homeless, with all the connotations that involves.

Once, while napping before putting up my tent, I was given a can of soup by a kind soul in Georgia who asked when I had last eaten. I quickly realized what the thought was and did not protest/correct the assumption for fear of embarrassing my benefactor. On another trip, I was approached by a state park ranger who admitted that neighbors had called the park offices to report that "a man had just checked in on a bike, with no camper or car or anything!" The ranger was friendly and somewhat apologetic but it provided insight nonetheless. Also last week, a waitress who had just seen me ride up on a couple grand worth of gear and bike, still took me for someone homeless just out wandering the land.

Anyway, I have not been mistreated, run off, etc. That is not the issue -- all my interactions have been fine and only rarely have I even been honked or gestured at. Still I would prefer to avoid being feared or mistrusted. It also could be a negative should I ever need to hitchhike due to injury or a major repair situation. The waitress I referenced volunteered she didn't think that most people would pick me up in those cases (I didn't press her on the "why" of this statement.)

So -- do any of you experienced tourers find yourselves assumed to be homeless? If so why do you think it happens -- lack of the public's familiarity with touring? your appearance? your location? And what impact if any does it have in being welcomed, treated well, getting the desired accomodations, directions, etc?

Originally Posted by staehpj1

He had a social security check every month, a debit card, and a lot of nice gear...He used his daughters address for mail...I'd say he qualified as homeless by just about any definition...He liked the food at the Apache Gold Casino so he had been staying in their campground for weeks...I had a couple meals with him in the casino...He treated me to dinner and I bought him a meal the next day...He seemed happy to have someone to talk to for a change. He was a nice guy and interesting to talk to.

Originally Posted by jowilson

Doesn't sound homeless to me... He sold his home voluntarily, and I'd say homeless people were either forced to do so, or made bad choices and lost their home. He had a debit card with money, stayed at a campground for weeks, bought you a few meals, and was retired (hence to social security check) so he obviously had a job before he went on his tour. You might want to change your definition of homeless.

Originally Posted by fietsbob

One difference: touring cyclists dont stay in the same place .

Originally Posted by saddlesores

that's just political correctness. can't call bums or vagrants or crack-heads naughty things.
might hurt their self-esteem.

Originally Posted by staehpj1

but I will stick with homeless as a definition of his current lifestyle. I probably would not have used that term if I met him in the first year or even two of his trip. I do not apply that term to be judgmental, but think it is accurate. When someone lives in a tent for 10 years with a sign saying he is walking across the US, but essentially is no longer really making progress toward the coast any more, the homeless label starts to fit.
To be fair he probably wouldn't use that label, so maybe I shouldn't either. That said I think most folks who had actually met him probably would call him homeless.

Originally Posted by contango

In response to Machka's post, technically I'd agree that "destitute" is a more appropriate word although generally whenever I've heard someone talk about someone being "homeless" it's not used in a context of someone who chose to give up their home so they could go on an extended tour without having to pay the mortgage while they were gone.

Originally Posted by contango

I don't see it as anything to do with political correctness, merely a differentiation between people who are in a situation through circumstance and people who are in an apparently comparable situation through choice.

It really is no different to the way I went to the unemployment office......blah, blah.