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

The True Cost of Commuting

mrmoneymustache.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 178 posts

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#71

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

melling wrote: post #64
cletus wrote: post #27

The problems with long commutes all revolve around home ownership. People want big houses on big yards. Most can't afford that close to work, which means they make the economic choice to trade the commute time for that "dream". That's fine but the problem is that government subsidizes that dream to a ridiculous degree. Urban sprawl has a huge cost in infrastructure, largely borne by the taxpayer. Low-density urban sp…

There are a couple of places in the US where there is enough population density to make mass transit work. Unfortunately no one wants to spend the money to improve it. Train and bus travel is painfully slow. Commuter rail travel, for example, averages about 30-40 mph, at best. If that doubled, people could commute from "great distances", or simply live 40 miles from a major city and have a 30 minute commute. Is the p…

We need to both change the way we think about what "mass transit" is and spend more $$$ advertising it.

I live in a rural area about 40 miles from Minneapolis, the largest city around here, pop. about 400k. Normally it would take me well over an hour to get there during rush hour, but I recently discovered that there is a bus that can do it in 22 minutes if the schedule is to be believed. The buses can drive on the shoulder, and of course, use the HOV lanes to get there faster than we can.

I found this out purely by accident because it's really not well publicized. I had to go to Mpls and didn't want to deal with parking, so I looked into the bus route and was astounded that it could do the trip from bus depot to downtown in 20 minutes. The bus stop itself is about 15 minutes from my house, so I could be downtown in less than 40 minutes. I can't believe Metro Transit isn't screaming this from the rooftops!

Of course, life being what it is I made it to the bus stop late, missed the last bus in and had to deal with the 1.5 hour drive into the city anyway :-(

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#72

Post by pyoung »

larrys wrote: post #35
dasil003 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My house is two miles away from the office. I still need a car: biking to work in the winter is just crazy. I grew up in Minneapolis, you should check out the bicycle commuting scene where you live. It varies by location, but in Minneapolis I was able to bicycle commute at least 4 days a week all winter long thanks to good plowing of bike paths, studded tires (only occasionally) and substituting a bus ride in right…

"I was about (sic) to bicycle commute at least 4 days a week all winter long" I think you also have to factor in safety. You will inevitably take chances over time and one of those chances could lead to an injury that keeps you from working or gives you lifelong pain. Either from a mistake you make or from someone in a car or bus. (Of course this can happen in dry weather as well...) Statistically you can also use th…

Don't have any stats to back this up, but driving is probably just as unsafe.

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#73

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

fhars wrote: post #66
frossie wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest difference between the US and somewhere like Germany is the price of land. While land can be expensive in certain highly desireable places, it is possible to buy habitable land in the US for what is a derisory amount of money to a European - often less than $1,000 per acre. This drives the cost of home ownership down to levels that can be aspired to by many people. There is a lot of homebuilding as a resu…

Your price for buildable land in Europe is way off. The average price for land that is ready to build on in germany is around 129€ ( http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/In... ), resulting in about $700,000/acre. Towns are quite a bit more expensive.

Ho-lee crap!

Around here, $10k/acre is considered expensive.

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#74

Post by herge »

briancurtin wrote: post #22
dasil003 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My house is two miles away from the office. I still need a car: biking to work in the winter is just crazy. I grew up in Minneapolis, you should check out the bicycle commuting scene where you live. It varies by location, but in Minneapolis I was able to bicycle commute at least 4 days a week all winter long thanks to good plowing of bike paths, studded tires (only occasionally) and substituting a bus ride in right…

For me the biggest part was having a place to change. I commuted rain/snow/shine for almost 2 years straight in Chicago, but I was only able to make it happen because I had a gym membership in the building. Some places around here are (supposedly, so I hear) getting better about having more of a locker room style bathroom to allow for people who ride to work and not be a sweaty mess when they get there.

What did you do to protect your bike against the water and salt in the winter?

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#75

Post by emu »

dasil003 wrote: post #54
emu wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. After reading this I would downvote this article if I had downvotes.

Why? Because you find it irritating that he finds it irritating that some people spend more time cutting others down than trying to improve themselves?

The majority of comments on this post are of the form "his analysis is wrong, because it doesn't take into account factors x, y, and z". That's great --- we're having a civil discussion about the merits of his argument.

Linking to his blog post in this way is tantamount to implying that the commenters on this thread are "complainypants", which I find quite rude. If that wasn't his intention, then he certainly could have done a much better job communicating it.

(This is my last post on this topic.)

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#76

Post by tomkarlo »

All of this assumes that a 30-something professional couple with two earners can actually both find (and keep) jobs within biking distance of a home they can reasonable afford.

My experience, along with my fiancee, having lived and worked in 3 different major US cities in the past 5 years, is that assumption just isn't reasonable. It's hard enough to find two good jobs in a household in the same _CITY_ right now, much less the 10-15 mile radius of biking. In areas where it might be possible, the cost of housing is so high that it eats up that savings.

Examples 1. New York: Lots of jobs in tight proximity and good public transport, but even in the "cheaper" boroughs, you're still probably paying $250K or more extra for a small family residence. 2. Los Angeles: Cheap housing. Owning less than two cars with two careers? Possible, but very, very difficult. Short commutes? Unlikely. 3. San Francisco: Expensive housing. Expensive car ownership. Jobs spread throughout the peninsula.

Not to mention what happens when you have kids to transport.

What we really need is to lift restrictions on new housing construction in dense urban areas like New York and San Francisco. The only way you can have both high job density and moderate housing prices close together is to allow enough vertical construction to reduce competition for housing to reasonable levels. Until you do that, you're inevitable going to see a large part of the population, especially younger / latecomer families, forced to live away from the job centers so they can reduce housing costs.

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#77

Post by abalashov »

stouset wrote: post #68

It's amazing how many excuses people manage to come up with for how it's impossible for them to follow this kind of advice. Turns out, it's impossible up until the point that you just shut up and start doing it. Sweating is only a problem for most of you because you're unhealthy and overweight. You're overweight because you get no exercise. It's okay: I was too. Then I started cycling to work and lost 50lb. Now sweat…

Sweating is only a problem for most of you because you're unhealthy and overweight

I don't know about that; body chemistries are very different. But more importantly, it sounds like you live in a place with reasonably cool, dry air. Some of us don't have that privilege.

It's good advice, don't get me wrong. I myself lead a largely carless life in -- of all places, rather improbably -- downtown Atlanta, and walk about a mile and a half to work each way, and pretty much walk everywhere else too.

But to think I could bike around here without getting sweaty is a practical impossibility, no matter what condition of fitness or body weight. It's extremely humid, though not quite as bad as the gulf coast. It's just not going to happen. So, I'd suggest for anyone in that set of circumstances to be pragmatic and bring a change of clothes and try to find a place where you can shower at work.

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#78

Post by tomkarlo »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #73
fhars wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your price for buildable land in Europe is way off. The average price for land that is ready to build on in germany is around 129€ ( http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/In... ), resulting in about $700,000/acre. Towns are quite a bit more expensive.

Ho-lee crap! Around here, $10k/acre is considered expensive.

Think you'd have to look at the term "buildable"... the US doesn't try very hard to prevent urban sprawl with it zoning rules. The EU, in comparison, may restrict zoning and in particular restrict the conversion of agricultural land into housing tracts.

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#79

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

smackfu wrote: post #50
Hisoka wrote: post #21

The true cost of commuting is actually the stress that piles on you, bit by bit.. it can contribute to divorce, physical disease, high blood pressure, loneliness, etc. Just ask anyone that has to ride their car into NYC traffic, or even take the crowded subways on a daily basis.

Yes. Around here in CT, it's fairly common to have a one hour train ride commute to Manhattan. Sure it is better than driving, but it still is pretty soul sucking according to my friends who have done it.

It's even worse going the other way because the trains aren't as frequent - or at least they weren't back then.

I used to commute from Brooklyn to Darien, CT. I'd leave home at about 6:00 am and get there just around 8:30. After about 2 months, I'd had enough...

Re: The True Cost of Commuting

#80

Post by rbranson »

bdunbar wrote: post #2

In an earlier life, I lived in the Dallas area. Moving to be near work sounds great, but it would not have been practical. - I lived there for nine years. My average tenure was 18 months for each employer: Laid-off, right-sized, down-sized. Finding a new house for each new employer would have been costly. - One employer was way the heck out by the airport. There were no houses within biking distance. Or not ones I co…

Many employers are able to get away with their location decisions because as the original article states, most people do not prioritize commute mode & duration when they make major life decisions such as where to work and where to live. People have slowly grown accustomed to spending an hour a day in the car, mandatory, so the bar is very low here.

Further, government subsidization of sprawl and predatory suburban towns tend to push buyers towards new construction in exurban areas along interstates. Employers that do attempt to locate close to employees end up chasing the single-family households out to the outskirts, right into a dead end where then everyone must drive. Employers should locate in sustainable, dense, transit-friendly neighborhoods, ultimately giving their employees a choice.

Post reply on HN