I wouldn’t do it. I don’t manage my time well when I’m not working, so being idle has no appeal to me. I have minimal interest in luxury- as long as I have blue skies and enough money for a good burrito now and then, I’m happy. Added to that is that travel is my passion. To lose that would be to lose everything.
New Mexico.
I’d probably be cool with the state of Hawaii. I might be persuadable down to Oahu. That said, I’m surprisingly okay with not moving around much. I think it might be from so much time at sea, where your world is confined to the area between the bow and the stern.
I’m one of those people who is perfectly content to be at home for long stretches, but then if something happens where I can’t leave–say the car breaks down or there’s a terrible snowstorm–suddenly the most important thing in the world is to GET OUT.
Essentially, there is no way even the loosest restriction wouldn’t make me crazy. Um. Crazier.
About 100 acres of wilderness, bordering 1 large body of water.
The city of Chicago and its immediate suburbs.
Someone else summed it up perfectly for me:
One of the whitewater paddling meccas, maybe Costa Rica. Eastern Tennessee, Rockies, Pacific northwest, West Virginia. Any one would be fine. CR has the warmest climate so probably there.
Around 10 square miles, small college town or suburb. I could probably handle smaller if I had enough cool people (my close friends) near enough to visit regularly.
I’d have to turn him down. I make enough that I can live comfortably as long as I stay employed (whereas taking the option would guarantee it, I guess). To me, added “luxury” would be about material goods or paying people to come do work for me, and I can’t see that I’d trade that at all in order to be trapped in a meaningful confined space. But as long as we’re talking about entire continents, I guess I could manage with North America.
Wouldn’t do it. Traveling is one of my primary pleasures in life, and there’s no amount of luxury that would be so alluring as to make me give that up.
Anywhere by a lake with good bass fishing and a house walking distance of that lake with a good internet connection and a top of the line computer. I’d also need UPS to ship shit to me. Maybe not shit but stuff…
49 states. I’ll skip Alaska.
Seconded.
I could probably be happy with a single city, provided it was somewhere warm and beachy.
Nothing smaller than eastern MA. It’s got pretty much everything I need except relatives, and I’m rich enough to fly them in.
If I were fabulously rich I would want to fly and hunt all the time. I’d probably be pretty happy with Idaho, Alaska, Wyoming, and Montana but what if I wanted to go pig hunting or go back to Lake Powell?
I’m tempted to say I’d confine myself to the United States but then I’d never see New Zealand and I’d never get to visit Canada again. My gilded cage is way too large to be competitive.
Florida-Georgia-North&South Carolina-Virgina-Maryland-Pennsylvania-The Non-Existent State of Delaware.
I think I could go as small as New Zealand.
(I’d just have to hope that Auckland becomes a little more cosmopolitan over time)
Isn’t the whole point of luxurious wealth to be able to jetset off wherever you want? If someone were to tell me I could live in opulence forever, and then added, “But you have to stay in Denver,” that would put a damper on the whole thing. It might be tempting considering I don’t spend that much time out of the country anyway, but knowing that I couldn’t ever leave wouldn’t please me.