Two weeks ago, y’all considered whether you would prefer to know your life’s purpose or to never have money worries again. As many of you noticed in the comments section, money was the clear, unanimous winner.
Several people commented that knowing their life’s purpose or plan would take the joy and the fun out of exploring and determining one’s own journey. And while I agree with that logic, I also think I interpreted the question a little differently than many of you. I thought knowing one’s life purpose had more to do with a generalized thumbs up from the universe whenever a choice or decision was made. Like say, for instance, when I decided to seriously pursue this writing gig, it would have been helpful to know if this is where my talents truly lie. (*Note to self: make sure universe has my address, email, cell phone number, Facebook page, and Twitter account so I don’t miss the affirmative sign…)
Then again, experimentation, trying new things, and taking on different challenges while not knowing how it all turns out can be part of the fun.
In the end, I decided to go with the money option, too. I have no shortage of ways I could spend it and not having to worry about it ever again would be so freeing. I could spend more time doing the things I love (like travel and writing) without stressing about money any further.
And now, on to this week’s question…
Would you rather
get to travel outside of your own country to a place you’ve always wanted to see, but with only enough money for barely adequate accommodations and food
– OR –
have to stay in your own town or city with more than enough money to spend on doing all the things you’ve wanted to do but could seldom afford?
***
Which will it be, intrepid readers? Will it be the siren call of adventure to lands far away even though you won’t have the funds to spend on anything other than food and a place to stay? Or will you choose to explore your hometown to the fullest? Sit, sip, and share your thoughts. I always love to hear from you.
on ,
Gloria Richard said:
Quick decision. Short answer.
I would rather stay in my hometown with adequate funds for adventure. A Staycation. There are many things I don’t take the time to experience, many
shenanigansactivities in my extended back yard as yet unexplored.I’ll use my
imaginary world thinkingPower of Expectation to picture myself in those faraway lands one day — when time and budget get the nod from the Universe.on ,
Tami Clayton said:
There’s a lot to be said for fully exploring one’s hometown. I’ve lived here for nearly 20 years (already?!?!?) and I’ve only scratch the surface of all there is to do.
on ,
Kim Griffin said:
I would stay, but I would build a large estate and fly my loved ones in often. They would have a rockin’ place to vacation and we could hunt for adventure around here together 🙂
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
Clever idea, Kim! Bringing the adventure to you. Well done. 🙂
on ,
Ellen Gregory said:
Is there a time period on this? Because if it’s for like a week or a month or even a year, then I’d go the ‘stay at home’ option, because he thought of trying out all the top restaurants in Melbourne makes me salivate… but if it’s indefinitely then I would choose the other, because I’d rather do some travel than none at all. Capice?
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
The question’s parameters are limited only by your imagination. Given that, it sounds like you would travel abroad. Where would you go?
on ,
Julie Farrar said:
I agree with Ellen. I’d rather see someplace new on the cheap than never leave home.
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
I love that you say that, Julie, given that you’re in France right now (right?). There are tons of free or cheap things to do when traveling abroad. I’d bet I could stay pretty entertained on a small budget, too.
on ,
Elizabeth Fais said:
I’ve lived in the same area for 26 years, and while the San Francisco Bay Area has many wonderful restaurants and no shortage of fabulous places to go and see … I’m satisfied with my explorations to date. I would much rather go to one of the many European destinations I’ve longed to experience.
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
Being somewhere new is an adventure all it’s own even if you don’t have money for fancy meals or excursions, isn’t it?
on ,
Suzanne Stengl said:
I’ve already been to lots of faraway places. They were fun to see and explore. But the best part of going there, was coming back HERE!
So I will choose the Staycation. And I also like Kim’s idea of building the large estate and flying everybody in 🙂
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
I’m glad you and Kim will both be building big estates for guests like me to come crash in when I just happen to be in your neck of the woods. 😉
on ,
Liv Rancourt said:
I just got back from a week in Lake Chelan, where we stayed in a motor home and generally had a blast. My take-home message from that trip was that I need to travel more. My new dream might be to travel the country in a motor home – and heck, I bet they even have them in Europe, so I could go there, too. If “only enough money for barely adequate accommodations and food” included money for gas for the accommodations and the monthly fee for my iPhone, I’m there!
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
YES. Travel more. I heartily support you in this new endeavor. You can totally travel Europe in a motor home. I myself prefer to see it by train. It’s the stubborn, vintage romantic in me that likes to journey by rail. And if we happen to be there at the same time, you could swing by the station to pick me up before we see the sights. 🙂
on ,
Marcia said:
Right now in my life I’d go with lots of money and stay local. My parents are at the age that if I do any out of state trips, I go see them in Arizona. It would be nice to afford all the lovely things Eugene, Oregon has to offer! Exotic travels on a small budget ….at a later date.
on ,
Tami Clayton said:
Yes, it would be nice to fully explore all that the area has to offer. And with all of that money, you could do some pretty sweet things. 🙂