First of all, although you may be under 30, many of us here are not. Please make your font size the normal size so we can read it.
Originally Posted by
tandempower
This is a costly option if you live on another continent besides EU. EU governments and publics are not typically welcoming to migration so moving there permanently is not an option for most people globally and so they/we need to work on bike routes where we are allowed to live and work.
If you are under 30 you can go to the EU and get temporary jobs. If you are over 30, and don't live in the EU, you need to get yourself a good job with decent holiday time.
But by posting those links, I'm showing you that these long bicycle routes already exist in many parts of the world.
And not all of us live in the US.
Originally Posted by
tandempower
Nothing except more of whatever they're used to ever appeals to "the masses" only because the very concept of "the masses" is based on discarding anything that isn't immediately appealing to majority. Nevertheless, many people like to travel and would do so more if there was a way to do so affordably without sacrificing paid employment. You should realize that many of these "masses," as you call them, are not thinking beyond the acceptance of whatever norms they currently operate within. If their job gives them 1 week or 2 weeks a year off, they don't question that and consider whether there are ways of organizing economic means to combine travel and work. They just discard the idea as something that will only ever be available to "elites."
Sometimes it is simply that "the masses" like to remain in one spot doing what they are doing. They don't want to move ... they're not even all that keen on travel. It's not that they are pining for a way to combine travel and work ... they're happy doing what they are doing.
And a comment about the 1-2 weeks off a year. In many countries employees have a lot more holiday time than that. That's really short.
But the travel and work you're proposing is just about as restrictive as staying at home and doing nothing. You're proposing that people could travel 100 miles to the next stop, stay there a couple weeks, then 100 miles to the next stop, stay there a couple weeks, 100 miles to the next stop ... all in a line. Can you imagine that through Kansas or North Dakota? You'd have the same scenery no matter where you went!
I'd rather have a permanent home and job in one place, and then have the choice of taking long weekends once a month to travel whatever distance I want in whatever direction I want. And longer holidays to travel further afield.
But if I were to think about an ideal work/travel situation it would be something like this ... I'd work for a company with offices in, say, Bordeaux (France), Victoria (Canada), and Hobart (Tasmania) .... and maybe a few other places like maybe Hualien, Edinburgh, Melbourne, Perth, Calgary, etc.. And then I'd move between those places ... January to April in Hobart, May to August in Victoria, September to November in Bordeaux ... and maybe December in Hualien one year, Perth the next ...... Or something like that. With the usual month+ holiday time in there somewhere, of course.
Originally Posted by
tandempower
The trouble is that each time you solicit a new job, you're at the mercy of the local employer. Having job security that when you arrive, work is waiting would make travel-work less risky.
The risk is part of the excitement ... the adventure. And besides, if you're trying to combine travel and work, you don't want to be working all the time, and especially not working in the same job you've always had.
The appeal of the harvest trail, for example, is that you can work for 6 weeks in one place, then take the next 6 weeks off to travel, explore, lay around the beach or whatever, while making your way to the next location maybe 500 km away, and then pick up a couple month's more work doing something different, and then take several more weeks off, and then pick up another different job for a few weeks.