A 21-year-old computer science graduate with a remote job faces the eternal millennial dilemma: take six months to travel through Europe and Asia now, or stay put and build career stability?
The digital nomad community's response was overwhelming: travel. But is that advice always right?
"No one on their deathbed wishes they'd worked more," one commenter offered - the kind of wisdom that sounds profound until you're 35, underemployed, and watching peers who focused on their careers buy homes and build retirement savings.
The generational tension here is real. Previous generations built careers through face time, office politics, and steady progression up corporate ladders. The digital nomad lifestyle promises something different: work from anywhere, live everywhere, optimize for experiences over possessions.
But these aren't just competing philosophies - they're competing economic realities.
The case for traveling now:
- You're 21 with minimal responsibilities (no mortgage, no kids, no elderly parents requiring care) - You have a remote job already - many graduates don't - Energy and flexibility peak in your 20s - Six months won't derail a tech career in a hot job market - Life gets more complicated, not less, as you age
The case for staying put:
- Building career capital early compounds over decades - Apartment leases, professional networks, and momentum matter - The job market shifts unpredictably (what's hot at 21 might be saturated at 22) - Remote work policies are tightening - that permission might not exist in a year - Travel is always possible later; optimal career timing windows are narrow
What's often missing from both perspectives? Nuance about what kind of travel and what kind of career.
There's a massive difference between: - Six months backpacking while maintaining your remote job vs. quitting to travel - Traveling to party vs. traveling to learn languages/skills/cultures - Delaying a generic entry-level job vs. turning down a rare opportunity
The recent graduate's specific situation tilts toward travel: they have a remote computer science job in 2026 - a strong position. Six months of maintained employment while traveling isn't a "gap" - it's working remotely, which is literally the job's design.
But the broader advice - "always travel when young" - deserves skepticism. For many recent graduates, the immediate post-grad period is crucial for career establishment. Industries like finance, consulting, law, and medicine reward those who grind early. Even in tech, the difference between joining a rocket ship startup at 22 vs. 23 can be millions in equity.
The smartest response in the thread came from a nomad who'd done both: "Take the trip, but treat it professionally. Maintain your work quality, build your skills, make it a strategic career move - not just an escape."
That framing matters. Work-travel isn't career delay if you're genuinely working, learning, and growing. It becomes delay when it's six months of hangovers in hostels with occasional Zoom calls from noisy cafes.
The final consideration? FOMO works both directions. You can have FOMO about travel experiences - or FOMO about career opportunities. The only real mistake is making the decision based on which FOMO is louder rather than which aligns with your actual priorities.
For this 21-year-old CS grad with a remote job: the path seems clear. Take the trip. But make it count. Work effectively. Learn languages. Build projects. Return with skills, experiences, and stories that make you more valuable, not just more well-traveled.
For everyone else asking this question: the answer depends on your specific job, your specific trip, and your specific goals. The only truly bad choice is making no choice at all and drifting into whatever requires the least courage.
