we were talking about London, the last time I was there I don't think I went to a restaurant because the street food (korean, mexican, serbian) was just too good and a lot cheaper
on the other hand, yeah, 6 years ago I was in Milano and I was eating like a king, but still I wouldn't say you need 5k euros for a week of London/wherever. Even eating kobe beef was about 100 euros. I couldn't eat like that for a whole year, but for one week? Easily.
Ha you misunderstood.
In Milano of course that figure drops to half of that of London.
First of all, half the budget typically would go to accommodation and those are really spicy. Obviously a lot of people in Europe have friends who already live in such big cities so that alone is alleviated, but location-wise it may not be great, so you'll still need to burn money or time in rides or commuting.
You can definitely go somewhere and enjoy it on a budget. Heck, I've been to Greek islands and stayed with friends and once I paid just 100 euros over 4 days, 40 of which was the cost of the ferry and 20 was just something I decided to buy as a gift. Still managed to see the entire island and have lunch and dinner at a couple of great local places.
The thing is, the majority aren't capable of finding the balance between balance, enjoyment and experience, unless they are the type that goes to picnics or camp at concert venues out in the field.
And I'm always talking about a tourist, which automatically means a first-timer with no attachment or acquaintances in the area.
If you go to London as a first timer and you want to see as much of the the city as possible, you need to select a location to stay where it's safe and convenient to move around. Which typically would mean Marylebone/Fitzrovia, Paddington, King's Cross or Liverpool Street for the most affordable central locations, otherwise you can check Mayfair, Knightsbridge, Kensington and Belgravia. I mean, you can definitely stay in Shoreditch, Notting Hill, London Bridge or somewhere in Zone 2, but you're just be getting the vibe of a rather unique area rather than experiencing the city when you do that. No one says you cannot survive eating on Camden street food and staying in Shoreditch for a week. It'll be cheaper, but you're essentially becoming a uni student somewhere rather than a tourist.
For actual tourism, where rest matters (I wouldn't know about this rest thing, but I can value it
), location matters, speed and efficiency matters, quality matters and having points of interest within walking distance matters, well, you gotta spend big. Otherwise you're going to complain that you didn't like it.
A lot of people when traveling take their habits with them, in a completely alien environment, and then whine that it's not a good place to do whatever they want to do. There are probably more people sharing their habits in that city than they'd imagine, but they've adjusted them to the city. They cannot get to do that.
Traveling as a concept has always been a more niche thing that's subconsciously paired with relaxation and nice fancy experiences that you cannot do at home, and now that everyone can hop on a plane, train or bus and get to another country for a weekend, we're still having that expectation, but most people cannot really "up their game" in a city that's x5 more expensive. And then they realize that the Instagram blog they saw and liked is not even worth it in real life, they blame the city rather than themselves.
I'm pretty sure you
@wera can get around anywhere, it wasn't personal
But I think you can concede that the majority is incapable of accepting the harsh reality of how travel and tourism actually works. There are significant cultural differences.
Best Forum Newcomer
