We lived in London for over a year just after we got married. While there, we saw Oxford and Paris, and I got to go to Lagos, Portugal. I wish I could go back in time and make us travel more while we were there. At least Ireland and Scotland. But in reality, we were poor, and we were lucky to take the trips we did.
I'll be 30 in 2012, so that gives us three years to plan an amazing birthday trip for me. I just picked that date because three years seems like enough time to save, not because I think 30 deserves any kind of special treatment. Really, it should be ignored. These late twenties have been hard enough. I think I'll never get any older than 29 anyway. I refuse.
So after throwing darts at the maps in our heads, we decided on either Italy (possibly to include Vienna as well) or Fiji.
Two completely different trips there-- one full of culture and food and history, not to mention walking and catching trains, the kind of vacation you need a vacation after, or the other consisting of sitting on a beautiful beach and having a native bring me fruity drinks, the most adventurous day being a slow, wandering hike to a picnic at a waterfall.
So which will it be? I'm torn, completely torn. I feel lucky to have this choice at all, but I want to make the right one. I feel like we'd be copping out if we went for Fiji, like we're "wasting" money going to sit on some beach when there are perfectly fine beaches 6 hours from here. But not tropical, lush, exotic beaches. But I also don't want to be completely exhausted after our trip, plus I've seen Italy, and although I'd love to go back, maybe I should see something I haven't seen first? But my husband's never been there and I know he'd love it. And if we could add Vienna and possibly Prague...
I'm just glad it's really going to happen. I'm going to open a new savings account today.


