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

The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 136 posts

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#121

Post by pascalxus »

hahamrfunnyguy wrote: post #73
pascalxus wrote: post #28

Its fun to dream about the future. But, a dream is all it'll ever be. how does anyone expect to build this stuff, when we can't even build regular housing, anywhere near the amount that is required to match demand. The only way, I can see this being built, is if new cities are created. These cities need to be populated by employers first: once that's there, most people that works there will find housing there too. I…

There's plenty of cities already! I live in a smaller city, for me there is a good amount of employment options and stuff to do. I have a decent sized lot, have a 20 minute commute by bike (to the burbs!) and have plenty of places to eat within a 10 minute walk. It is very affordable here, and there is plenty of housing to boot. I was able to buy a house my first year out of school. It was about 25% of my paycheck at…

What city?

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#122

Post by noetic_techy »

As a millenial who lives in an east coast HOA controlled suburb, the biggest thing about modern suburbs that bothers me, especially HOA controlled ones, is the need for useless grass and manicured shrubs that require constant upkeep for purely ascetic reasons. I would love to see more fruit trees and vegetable gardens. It brings a lot more joy and peace of mind.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#123

Post by eastWestMath »

burntsushi wrote: post #113
eastWestMath wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically you like to live in the suburbs for antisocial reasons, and you your argument against the research showing suburbs are an ecological disaster boils down to "nuh-uh".

I didn't make any argument against any research. I stated my own personal desires which run deeply contrary to the desires grafted on to me by the OP. Also, none of what I said had anything to do with being antisocial.

You said you don't want to play nicely with others, I don't know how much more explicit you could have been.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#124

Post by eastWestMath »

amigoingtodie wrote: post #103
eastWestMath wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So basically you like to live in the suburbs for antisocial reasons, and you your argument against the research showing suburbs are an ecological disaster boils down to "nuh-uh".

Not that I agree completely with the original comment, but I, too, feel like when visiting a 'city', I am competing for resources. I do not enjoy this adversarial feeling.

I guess it's adversarial if you want resources all to yourself. But something like a basketball court is easily shared.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#125

Post by burntsushi »

eastWestMath wrote: post #123
burntsushi wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't make any argument against any research. I stated my own personal desires which run deeply contrary to the desires grafted on to me by the OP. Also, none of what I said had anything to do with being antisocial.

You said you don't want to play nicely with others, I don't know how much more explicit you could have been.

I didn't say that generally. My main point was clearly that I don't want to live in a shared space. I'm otherwise happy to place nice with others! (There is plenty of evidence online that I do, in fact, play nicely with others.) Anyway, it's pretty clear to me that you're going to misinterpret anything I say in the worst possible light, so I think we should stop this thread.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#126

Post by ido »

brianwawok wrote: post #117
ido wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule of thumb is for housing to be up to 1/3 of your net pay, not 20%.

Whos rule of thumb is that, the banks? I am below 10% and this is after a pay cut (i.e. its not because I make 500k).

google for any budgeting guidelines and you will repeatedly see 1/3 net pay for housing mentioned. Here (Germany) landlords will decide letting you rent their property based on that ratio.

Consider that since even in the US houshold medien income is $59k (gross) per year, spending 10% for housing (unless you already outright own) is not tenable for most families.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#127

Post by dagw »

paulddraper wrote: post #62
alkonaut wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said that too. And I'm not a millenial but a 70's kid. And then I had kids of my own and now I can't imagine not having a car to stuff the kids into, or a big backyard so I don't have to walk to the park with them to play. It's not like I wan't to drive everywhere, it's just the tradeoff I'm happy to accept in order to have a house with a big backyard for the kids to play in. So this is nothing new. People have alw…

And a car is darn convenient for a family-sized weekly grocery trip.

And a car is darn convenient for a family-sized weekly grocery trip.

Agreed. However the only reason I have to make "family-sized weekly grocery trip" is because there is nowhere within easy walking distance for quick daily grocery trips.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#128

Post by brianwawok »

ido wrote: post #126
brianwawok wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whos rule of thumb is that, the banks? I am below 10% and this is after a pay cut (i.e. its not because I make 500k).

google for any budgeting guidelines and you will repeatedly see 1/3 net pay for housing mentioned. Here (Germany) landlords will decide letting you rent their property based on that ratio. Consider that since even in the US houshold medien income is $59k (gross) per year, spending 10% for housing (unless you already outright own) is not tenable for most families.

1/3 is the MAX allowed by any sane landlord / bank (though I think some go as high as 50% for renting at least).

If your household income is 60k gross, your net should be north of 50k (figure at least 2 adults, maybe some kids, your tax burden will be lowish). 10% of 50k gives you $416 a month. Where I live (Indiana), that can get you a mortgage payment on a house that cost about 110k (say 15-20k down). That is totally reasonable. In my town you can get a solid 3 bedroom house with a yard

(First random result I pulled up from my city: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2612-Southridge-Dr-South-... )

I think most people spend far too high a % of their money on housing. Sometimes you can't help it (say, fresh out of college, moved to NYC for a big job). But a lot of people can, and still make bad choices.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#129

Post by ido »

brianwawok wrote: post #128
ido wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

google for any budgeting guidelines and you will repeatedly see 1/3 net pay for housing mentioned. Here (Germany) landlords will decide letting you rent their property based on that ratio. Consider that since even in the US houshold medien income is $59k (gross) per year, spending 10% for housing (unless you already outright own) is not tenable for most families.

1/3 is the MAX allowed by any sane landlord / bank (though I think some go as high as 50% for renting at least). If your household income is 60k gross, your net should be north of 50k (figure at least 2 adults, maybe some kids, your tax burden will be lowish). 10% of 50k gives you $416 a month. Where I live (Indiana), that can get you a mortgage payment on a house that cost about 110k (say 15-20k down). That is total…

3br with a yard will probably cost >€500k even in the remote suburbs around here. I think your case is particularly low priced for a city with a reasonable amount of jobs.

Re: The Suburb of the Future, Almost Here

#130

Post by jsemrau »

alkonaut wrote: post #112
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised you don't have better delivery options in the US, in the UK the main supermarkets all offer good internet ordering.

I have excellent delivery options but I want to see what I'm buying so I very much prefer driving to the grocery store. Even if 90% of the products are of the kind you can buy without seeing (detergents, canned foods etc) the stuff I need to see like fresh fish/fresh meat etc is so important for what else I'll need. I could probably get a lot of the recurring purchases delivered but I'm not going to shop for grocerie…

But then if you follow this line of thought you can deliver the bulk and go only to the grocer for the smaller, easy to carry purchases. So, maybe, there is no need for the car anymore?
Post reply on HN