Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 323 posts

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#21

Post by twobyfour »

colek42 wrote: post #4
nxsynonym wrote: post #2

While the rising cost of housing is an easy target, why not put the pressure on the companies that are driving the influx of workers and out of control cost of living? If tech companies are drawing people into cities and forcing out those who keep the city itself operating, why not have them subsidize and improve public transportation? Lower income housing? Encourage more remote work or move their headquarters out of…

why not have them subsidize and improve public transportation? Don't they do this already with property and state income taxes?

The taxes that states and municipalities are giving them breaks on in order to lure them into the region?

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#22

Post by nxsynonym »

PopsiclePete wrote: post #7

So why do we keep commuting for jobs that don't really require our physical presence? It was a long hard battle for me to be able to work from home, and yes, I sometimes do miss out on face-to-face interaction, but going to the office 2 instead of 5 days a week is still a huge win - I'm not in a car out there, making traffic worse for you . You're welcome. Can we please solve the supposed "interaction" problem with s…

This seems like the most logical solution. I think the issue is that the people who are impacted the most by these long commutes are workers who can't physically work remotely. The people who work for companies that could implement it, generally live close enough that the commute doesn't bother them in the first place.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#23

Post by asadlionpk »

PopsiclePete wrote: post #7

So why do we keep commuting for jobs that don't really require our physical presence? It was a long hard battle for me to be able to work from home, and yes, I sometimes do miss out on face-to-face interaction, but going to the office 2 instead of 5 days a week is still a huge win - I'm not in a car out there, making traffic worse for you . You're welcome. Can we please solve the supposed "interaction" problem with s…

The thing is we are not there yet. But this will eventually happen either by VR-like presence or just async style work (culture requiring less realtime interactions by design)

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#24

Post by mudil »

Liberals like to talk big about the public transportation, but when it comes time to deliver they follow the unions' script that results in exuberant costs (to build the system and to run it) and extremely poor performance. And as a result the average folks and the poor suffer the most.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#25

Post by Analemma_ »

nxsynonym wrote: post #2

While the rising cost of housing is an easy target, why not put the pressure on the companies that are driving the influx of workers and out of control cost of living? If tech companies are drawing people into cities and forcing out those who keep the city itself operating, why not have them subsidize and improve public transportation? Lower income housing? Encourage more remote work or move their headquarters out of…

There are so many misconceptions in this post...

> why not put the pressure on the companies that are driving the influx of workers and out of control cost of living?

What do you hope to accomplish with this "pressure"? That these companies hire fewer people?

> Lower income housing?

Housing costs are one of those nasty problems where throwing money at it just doesn't work (and I'm saying this as a democratic socialist whose proposed solution to most problems is "tax the rich in order to throw money at it"). Imagine if big tech companies pledged a billion dollars or whatever to build a bunch of housing units. What would happen? This: other developers would pull back on new construction, because the pledge would throw a wrench in the supply/demand, and you'd be right back where you started.

The correct solution is upzoning and, to be blunt, disenfranchisement of NIMBYs.

> If tech companies are drawing people into cities and forcing out those who keep the city itself operating, why not have them subsidize and improve public transportation?

Most of the big ones do: they offer a lot of incentives to not drive, including paying for employees to take public transport or offering shuttle buses (which at least keep them out of cars).

> move their headquarters out of the city centers?

They aren't in city centers: 4 of the Big 5 (Apple, Google, Microsoft and Facebook) are all headquartered in suburbs. Only Amazon is headquartered in a city center.

> It seems crazy to me that people get driven out of their homes by real estate developers who re-develop due to tech-wages.

Why does that seem crazy? It's just supply-and-demand.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#27

Post by ceejayoz »

rhizome wrote: post #19
turtlebits wrote: post #8

A little misleading as she needs to catch the train at 4am. Still, an almost 3 hour commute is brutal.

Misleading? Do you not include layovers in the time it takes to travel somewhere? Most people do.

The article says she gets up at 2:15 but doesn't have to leave home until 4:00. As it's generally possible to get ready for work in less than 105 minutes, the "2:15 Alarm" bit highlighted in the headline is a little misleading.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#28

Post by cbhl »

nxsynonym wrote: post #12
andrewjl wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't an issue of tech companies forcing anyone out. Bay area municipalities and NIMBY property owners have created a hostile regulatory environment for property developers, leading to a lack of new housing coming onto the market and driving rents upward.

True, but new housing wouldn't be needed if there wasn't such a high influx of people moving into the Bay area. Sure tech isn't the only player in the game, but they're surely one of the biggest. If less people were moving there for high paying jobs - rent wouldn't rise as quickly or as drastically.

Municipalities can choose that! But they don't, because the tax revenues from having jobs there is too lucrative.

Every year, you'll see parts of the bay area add xx,xxx new jobs but only x,xxx new homes.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#29

Post by sp332 »

rhizome wrote: post #19
turtlebits wrote: post #8

A little misleading as she needs to catch the train at 4am. Still, an almost 3 hour commute is brutal.

Misleading? Do you not include layovers in the time it takes to travel somewhere? Most people do.

But she likes to take her time and have coffee. She keeps the lights low and the house quiet and Zen-like. “I just can’t rush like that,” she said.

When the second alarm goes off at 3:45 — a reminder to leave for the train in 15 minutes — her morning shifts from leisure to precision.

She could get up somewhat later to catch her train.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#30

Post by __sha3d2 »

I was going to come in here and talk about how this strikes me more as a personal choice than a symptom of a systemic problem (i lived well in SF on $60k, and I mean for fucks sake Stockton? that is aggressively far. There are many great closer options.), but who cares.

This woman seems to have a really peaceful existence. It would be nice to have such relaxing routines in my own life, especially in the face of stressful realities like a long commute on public transit. It makes me want to develop the fortitude that this woman exercises every single day.

Post reply on HN