And part of it is what public schools are doing to our kids. My 6 year old is required to sit outdoors to eat her lunch in 40ish degree (F) weather, and is not allowed to socialized. My 5 year old has to wear a mask 7 hours a day against an illness that doesn't kill kids. I'm at my wit's end with these school administrators. Hoping to be in Wyoming in 6 months' time.
Americans are rethinking where they want to live
121–130 of 645 posts
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#122This makes sense; as generations come of age in this country there has always been a shift in where people live based on the advancements in technology. From the early days of trains allowing living outside city centers, to the invention of the automobile and subsequent suburban sprawl with the interstate system, it would follow that the internet and remote work would change how we live. As demographics change, so do…
The automobile, refrigeration, radio, and the telephone all blossomed in the 1940s and early 50s. They were also factors in urban sprawl.
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe maybe not. A lot depends on what happens next. The assumption here is that people are moving out of urban areas and then not commuting back in. If that really is the case, unlike in the commuting form of suburbanization, then service businesses will follow those people, if they are allowed to. This would be a great outcome, but it depends on a lot of assumptions.
While I agree we don't really know, I think it is quite likely to have a negative effect. Take, for example, these comments, which are full of people who have left NYC, a place where you can function entirely without a car, and moved to places like Texas and Florida, where you, for the most part, cannot. Sure they might not be commuting anymore (which was likely by public transit anyway), but they are now driving sev…
This seems like a sample bias. Even if lots of people here who have moved used to commute by public transit, the reality is that most people commute by car. Reducing commuting is generally a very good thing.
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#124I sure am. I live in San Jose (which resides in the Bay Area). Here’s why I am leaving. - $2,700 per month for a 500 sq/ft apartment. - Homeless people everywhere the moment I step foot out of my apartment. - Smells like urine on many sidewalks. - Literally half of the buildings are vacant or abandoned (in downtown). - Human feces on sidewalks and entrance to buildings. - Political and ideological homogeny. Keep your…
you don't have to move that far to escape all that. Plenty of areas an hour away from San Jose that are nice and a lot cheaper (still more expensive than Texas or Florida, sure).
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#125My family and I decided to stay on the north side of Chicago, a very high cost of living location, despite no longer needing to head downtown every day for work. Why not move outside of Chicago where our cost living would be substantially lower? * We wanted to keep our kids in the same school, which is walking distance. * We like being walking distance to the grocery store, doctor's offices, etc. * Our kids can walk…
No offense, but presumably your parents did the same thing when they had you for similar reasons. This is simply what happens when you have kids.
However, there are separate but related trends which the articles points out:
- The south's quality of living has drastically increased over the last 20~30 years
- People aren't seeing state localized benefits from high state taxes (IMHO Illinois might the worst tax:benefit ratio in the country)
- Work from home acceleration has accelerated lower cost of living with high quality of life centers (see -> the south)
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#126My family moved out of NYC during the pandemic. We have a young kid and a dog - so finding a spot which had more space was imperative (given that both our gigs were remote). The few factors for us : * Is the neighborhood family / kid-friendly ? * Is it comfortable ? * Does it have space ? * Does it have some of the conveniences of a city (not a cut-off remote suburb) We moved to TX to be closer to family and it check…
Does "kid friendly" for you include a means for your child to operate independently of you in the time between "go play outside" age and driving age? I ask because I grew up in a suburb where I had the equivalent of a small urban park's playground in my back yard, but the time between that playground being useful and when I could drive were terrible for me and for my parents (who had to drive me to almost anything I wanted to do) and would have been worse if I weren't able and interested in walking/biking 3 miles to the library or train station.
I was so very jealous of my friends who lived in more urban areas who could walk home from school and do things independently of their parents at 12 rather than 16+.
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe maybe not. A lot depends on what happens next. The assumption here is that people are moving out of urban areas and then not commuting back in. If that really is the case, unlike in the commuting form of suburbanization, then service businesses will follow those people, if they are allowed to. This would be a great outcome, but it depends on a lot of assumptions.
> If that really is the case, unlike in the commuting form of suburbanization, then service businesses will follow those people, if they are allowed to. That would require these areas to be zoned for mixed business/residential, which very few suburbs are.
Yes, I didn't say explicitly, but this is what I meant by "depends on a lot of assumptions". It will require different regulatory thinking for this to work out positively.
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#128COL/SOL in California is appalling. SOL continues to degrade here to the point where certain parts of Bay Are (Oakland, Hayward) look more like Syria than first world nation. Trash is everywhere, even in nicer neighborhoods. Not a single park here in East Bay without encountering a homeless person. And, then I meet people here that continue to defend 1) Food is amazing 2) SF sucks! Oakland is the best place ever 3) W…
Okay, but you have to understand, when you say things like "Oakland == Syria" it's incredibly hard to take you (and the people who make complaints like this) seriously.
I can walk four blocks and buy, like, 19 different lattes. I can walk two blocks and get on a train that takes me to downtown SF in 18 minutes. In a 10-minute drive I can get to literally any cuisine the world has to offer, and it's fucking delicious. These are not amenities available in third-world countries (or, I might add, in many cities in the U.S., at least not at this density and quality).
Do I see homeless people on the way? Yeah. I live in the Bay Area, an area going through a horrifyingly serious homelessness crisis. Parks are bad. The encampments under and along the highways are massively depressing.
But there's not rubble in the streets. Families are not starving to death in their homes. People are not being gunned down against walls.
Shit is bad right now, and I am afraid it's going to get worse before it gets better. But let's not pretend it's a third-world country. That helps neither your cause nor mine.
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#129It bodes poorly for the environment if people are increasingly moving from denser cities to sprawling suburbs. This is in many ways a self-inflicted problem of high-cost cities, but it should be a national priority to reverse this trend.
It's always crazy to hear that suburbs are cheaper. Dense living inherently requires less infrastructure and less transportation, so it should be considerably cheaper. It's only through the subsidisation of suburbia and the low supply/high demand of high density urban areas that this is the case. Car centric suburbs aren't just terrible for the environment, terrible for safety and terrible for transportation; they're…
It's clear that, because people view housing as an investment, supply and demand increases the value of city housing (often to levels that seem ridiculous).
Can you elaborate on the subsidisation of suburbia? Are there tax provisions that advantage them?
Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live
#130It bodes poorly for the environment if people are increasingly moving from denser cities to sprawling suburbs. This is in many ways a self-inflicted problem of high-cost cities, but it should be a national priority to reverse this trend.
I'm not so sure it's mostly about high-cost. The people who have new freedom due to increased remote work opportunities can probably afford the city. I think it's more likely that they are moving for quality of life reasons. I know that's true for me. Also, we've just been through (and might still be in) a pandemic. I'm very glad I didn't need to use public transportation for the past couple of years.
I don't think the city is fixable for people who don't want to live in a city.