In this week's video, I talk about an American woman who moved to the Veneto and now regrets the move.
One of the things that struck me about her story was how much she needed Italy itself to work economically.
She needed a job there.
I wouldn't.
And the more I think about that difference, the bigger it seems.
If you need Italy to employ you, you're dealing with the language professionally, getting credentials recognized, finding work, earning enough locally and figuring out whether the career you had somewhere else translates.
That's a huge part of the move.
I would arrive with that part largely handled somewhere else.
That probably changes the cities I should be looking at too. If I don’t need to optimize around a local job market, I can care more about things like social life, healthcare, airport access, walkability and whether I actually enjoy being there in February.
But then I started thinking about what Italy would still have to provide.
Could I actually make friends there?
Would my Italian eventually be good enough that normal errands, appointments and conversations stop feeling like work?
Would I like an ordinary Tuesday there?
What happens in November, when there's no vacation energy and I'm just living my normal life?
Could I navigate healthcare without feeling lost every time something came up?
Could I develop routines and relationships that make the place feel normal instead of perpetually foreign?
Those questions have almost nothing to do with whether I can earn money in Italy.
And none of them gets answered because I can afford to be there.
So financially, yes — I think my version of this would obviously be easier.
The rest of it?
I don't know yet.
And increasingly, that's the part I'm interested in figuring out.
— Joe
Subscriber question: If you've moved to another country without depending on the local economy for your income, what turned out to be harder than you expected?