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

Americans are rethinking where they want to live

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 645 posts

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#411

Post by yurishimo »

Tycho wrote: post #87

I've been thinking about what gives big cities their edge. Why some even become global hubs for particular industries. Two reasons are clearer to me now than they were in the past: - Lifestyle advantages of living amongst specialists: people can outsource various chores/tasks/jobs/errands to local specialists who can complete them much more efficiently. For instance imagine if your village doesn't have a plumber and…

I think your specialist comment here rings very true. Talk to anyone who grew up on a farm in a small town. Those people are often their own plumber, electrician, construction worker, mechanic, etc on top of their normal jobs!

There was a discussion societally around millennials (men in particular) not being as "handy" as their parents, but specialization of those parents is largely the reason. Sure, my dad might have learned how to use a table saw as a teenager in shop class or how to change his car oil from my grandpa, but I only had an art elective available (no shop class option) and my parents were too busy to justify changing oil at home for our econobox cars when the jiffy lube down the street would do it for $40.

Now is that a problem for society? That has yet to be proven, especially when you factor in the rise of online teaching through mediums like YouTube. My dad might not have taught me anything handy, but my internet "dads" on YT have taught me many things beyond even what my own father knows. It's a trade off and I don't see us reverting as a society anytime soon.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#412

Post by yurishimo »

0_____0 wrote: post #222
willis936 wrote: post #156

Visit Texas or Florida first. I've lived in Texas and visited Florida many times. I've also visited San Jose. TX and FL are hell compared to CA. I don't care for CA either, but that's because of cultural (coastal) differences. The NorthEast is heaven on Earth.

As a recent transplant from SF Bay to Greater Boston... I'm inclined to agree. It's actually cheaper in my neighborhood than it was in East Oakland, and I can walk to almost anything I care about, incl. work, friends, pub, gym, grocery. Massive quality-of-life upgrade, assuming you're OK with freezing temps in the winter, and humidity and bugs in the summer.

There are humidity and bugs in Texas and Florida too, and even more so! If you're lucky, Texas will get another snow-pocalypse too if that tickles your fancy.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#413

Post by yurishimo »

hunterb123 wrote: post #247
willis936 wrote: post #156

Visit Texas or Florida first. I've lived in Texas and visited Florida many times. I've also visited San Jose. TX and FL are hell compared to CA. I don't care for CA either, but that's because of cultural (coastal) differences. The NorthEast is heaven on Earth.

Both Florida and especially Texas are too large for such a blanket statement. Weather-wise, Central East Texas is perfect if you survive August and September. Austin (suburban outskirts) and Dallas (Plano & Frisco) are nice. Houston is way too humid. North East US is way too cold, I like a 70F winter.

You won't find a 70F winter in Dallas... you'll be lucky for high 60s in the deep winter months. Most weeks are more in the 50s. That said, given how climate change is progressing, it tends to be warmer until January, so if you just want the nice temperatures for your holiday plans, then it's a decent option!

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#414

Post by mrkstu »

hunterb123 wrote: post #247
willis936 wrote: post #156

Visit Texas or Florida first. I've lived in Texas and visited Florida many times. I've also visited San Jose. TX and FL are hell compared to CA. I don't care for CA either, but that's because of cultural (coastal) differences. The NorthEast is heaven on Earth.

Both Florida and especially Texas are too large for such a blanket statement. Weather-wise, Central East Texas is perfect if you survive August and September. Austin (suburban outskirts) and Dallas (Plano & Frisco) are nice. Houston is way too humid. North East US is way too cold, I like a 70F winter.

Yep- though I'm leaving to be closer to family, Austin suburbs are a nice in pretty much every axis other than commute, which hasn't been an issue since going remote.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#415

Post by vel0city »

mindfulmore wrote: post #405
vel0city wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you don't know if the water is poisoned I can't speak for all of Texas, but my water district has high quality water standards. I look at the reports published from time to time, they're well below EPA and TCEQ limits for contaminates. Perfectly clean water here. Sure, there's areas of pollution in the state but there's pollution that happens in the Northeast as well. > if the power will stay on I forgot the fact p…

> I forgot the fact power failures only happen in Texas No, but only Texas repeatedly ignored federal advice to fix their power grid which directly resulted in children literally freezing to death. Texas's state government is too focused on insane abortion laws and locking down a ruling white minority class through gerrymandering, voter suppression, and empowering election officials to throw out election results.

If you're worried about freezing to death the Northeast is definitely not the place to go. Far more people die from hypothermia in the Northeast every year than in Texas, even without having a massive pretty much unprecedented storm. And yes, this storm in February was way worse than the storm a decade ago.

I do agree with you though about the priorities of the Texas government. I don't agree with and vote against a lot of those idiots.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#416

Post by politelemon »

mypalmike wrote: post #188
politelemon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The driving aspect is the main thing that kills any daydreaming I do about moving to the Scottish Highlands. It doesn't stop the daydreaming, however.

Inverness might be a reasonable middle ground between the remoteness of the Highlands and the walkability of a city.

Thank you! I was mulling Inverness and looking a bit closer, it does seem like a bit of both.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#417

Post by arrosenberg »

criddell wrote: post #341
jacobolus wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few of the wealthiest suburbs in the country are enclaves of people who rely economically on the city but don’t want their property taxes to pay for poor people’s amenities and services, so carve out a separate municipality. Cities want to re-absorb these, because the current setup is grossly unfair. This is not representative of suburbs in general. Many suburbs, especially older ones whose infrastructure construct…

After asking this question I started reading more about it. The biggest subsidization is about mortgage interest tax deductions. I never thought about that as a subsidy, but I suppose it is. They should end it.

Yes, and in California Prop 13 is an even bigger distortion.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#418

Post by diveanon »

TurkishPoptart wrote: post #410
diveanon wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your germ factory kids can still spread it. How are we still having this conversation 2 years in?

How are we still pretending that people who've received the vaccine (which should really be labeled a prophylactic) can't spread or contract the virus?

[flagged]

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#419

Post by jedberg »

TurkishPoptart wrote: post #409
jedberg wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your child doesn't wear a mask to protect your child, they wear a mask to protect others. While they may not feel very strong effects from the virus, they can pass it on to other who will. FWIW our district is considering removing the mask mandate at school as soon as we reach 80% vax rate among the students, so hopefully your nightmare of making your child wear a piece of cloth will end soon.

Your district is going to remove the mandates when pigs fly, I'm sorry to say. The "nightmare" is really about continually-shifting goalposts and the false promises of administrators. The funny thing is that those figures won't be reached, thanks to parents with enough common sense not to inoculate their kids with something they don't need. If the parents are vaccinated, let the kids alone. If the parents aren't vacc…

> continually-shifting goalposts and the false promises of administrators

Ever since the vaccine came out our county has said that mandates will go away as soon as we hit 80% vaxxed and community transmission is low, as defined by the CDC. The goalposts haven't moved. We're almost there too -- we have 79.4% of all residents vaxxed, but transmission is still "substantial".

> thanks to parents with enough common sense not to inoculate their kids with something they don't need.

That's not how vaccines work. You get vaccinated to protect both yourself and others. We still vaccinate for polio even though it's basically been eradicated, because if we didn't, it would come back.

Luckily I live in an area where people are mostly educated and believe in science, so our child vax rate is already at 64% fully vaxxed for the county, despite the fact that you could only be fully vaxxed as of last Thursday.

Re: Americans are rethinking where they want to live

#420

Post by jedberg »

milkytron wrote: post #388
jedberg wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dense living inherently requires less infrastructure and less transportation Not really. Firstly, it costs a lot more per square foot to build a high rise than a single family home. Secondly, it costs a lot more to maintain it (elevators need constant maintenance, you can't just run to Home Depot to get replacement drain parts, etc.). And the infrastructure costs more to maintain -- running power to a high rise req…

> And the infrastructure costs more to maintain Wouldn't this be addressed by economies of scale? If you have 400 people living in a building, even if the complexity of the infrastructure is greater, isn't it more efficient than having 400 single family homes? Not that one can directly replace another, but I'm talking about the number of people being the constant. > The main impact comes from needing less transport o…

> Wouldn't this be addressed by economies of scale?

It would seem not. It's hard to find data, but a good proxy is condo fees for high rise condos vs low rise condos. Typically the high rise condo fees are higher than the low rise condos in similar areas, when the offer similar amenities. And usually condo fees are true cost representations, because the residents control the spending of their own money, so it's not a profit area for the owner, like the rent is.

Which means by proxy it's more expensive to maintain a high rise than a low rise complex.

Post reply on HN