4 ms·

Staying 3 months vs 2 weeks seems like a very small difference. The other points apply to tourists as well. One could argue 6 tourists each staying 2 weeks con

Staying 3 months vs 2 weeks seems like a very small difference. The other points apply to tourists as well. One could argue 6 tourists each staying 2 weeks concecutively will spend more than a nomad, since they dont spend time working. So in this case the nomad would be worse, since he still takes similar real estate to host, but provides less to the economy. Either way I think it's more useful to consider them together with tourists. Many backpackers are probably indistinguishable from nomads.

safety1st 4y ago
The distinction is only meaningless for you because you've chosen to redefine the term digital nomad. One of the original inspirations for the digital nomad movement was the book Vagabonding: An Uncommon Guide to the Art of Long-Term World Travel, written by Rolf Potts. Long-term (and its gradual side effects) is really the key here. The differences between a DN and a tourist are: 1) The DN spends many months or years on the road, such that the nexus of their personal affairs stops being their home country, residency becomes an issue they have to think about, etc. - this doesn't happen with a tourist 2) The DN's primary income generating activities continue during this period, such that the labor laws of the countries they visit become an issue they have to think about -- again doesn't happen with a tourist I agree that if someone takes a 3 month holiday and works on their laptop during it, they're a tourist. We don't need to use DN to describe those people, they are not really practicing long term travel as Potts described it. The term more accurately describes the growing number of people who are going to another level and really disconnecting from their home country. DNs in this sense spend a lot of money in the countries they visit - it varies widely based on their income and how much of the year they spend traveling, but most of them spend somewhere between $20K-$200K/yr. Even on the low end this is way more money than most tourists spend.

safety1st 4y ago

The distinction is only meaningless for you because you've chosen to redefine the term digital nomad. One of the original inspirations for the digital nomad movement was the book Vagabonding: An Uncommon Guide to the Art of Long-Term World Travel, written by Rolf Potts. Long-term (and its gradual side effects) is really the key here. The differences between a DN and a tourist are: 1) The DN spends many months or years on the road, such that the nexus of their personal affairs stops being their home country, residency becomes an issue they have to think about, etc. - this doesn't happen with a tourist 2) The DN's primary income generating activities continue during this period, such that the labor laws of the countries they visit become an issue they have to think about -- again doesn't happen with a tourist I agree that if someone takes a 3 month holiday and works on their laptop during it, they're a tourist. We don't need to use DN to describe those people, they are not really practicing long term travel as Potts described it. The term more accurately describes the growing number of people who are going to another level and really disconnecting from their home country. DNs in this sense spend a lot of money in the countries they visit - it varies widely based on their income and how much of the year they spend traveling, but most of them spend somewhere between $20K-$200K/yr. Even on the low end this is way more money than most tourists spend.