9 ms·

I used to live in SF. It was exciting, but also shitty. I felt connected and alive, which was great, but also drained of resources, which really sucked. Oh,

I used to live in SF. It was exciting, but also shitty. I felt connected and alive, which was great, but also drained of resources, which really sucked. Oh, and there were 6 of us, in a 3 bedroom apartment. I had the living room. Yea. I lasted 3 years, until I met my wife, and by then I was ready to move. We did. Now, life in the suburbs, is slow. I feel somewhat disconnected and like I don't really belong to this community. My neighbor is a teacher, not a tech worker. I miss the buzz of the city, the energy. But, I'm saving money, and, working remotely is mostly positive (though I do yearn for office banter more and more). Life I guess, is all about trade offs. Rarely have I found a situation that is entirely positive, or negative. Most, if you look closely enough, are a balance of good and bad. For me now in my life, the reassurance that I will be able to retire some day, is worth more to me than the excitement of the city. That may change... we shall see. If it does change, I'll be lured back to the city for the exact reasons the article states. The city itself, is the draw. There's something about living in an urban environment, for some people, it's just a pace of life more resonant with their existence.

el_benhameen 10y ago
Where did you move, if I may ask?
ido 10y ago
If you're working remotely, there are plenty of cities much cheaper than SF.
henrikschroder 10y ago
> Oh, and there were 6 of us, in a 3 bedroom apartment. This is such a weird American phenomenon, the whole roommate thing. What on earth can make adults choose to share their home with a stranger? Why isn't there intense pressure for building many small apartments, rather than building larger apartments that are meant for roommates? Is it connected to the equally weird college dorm roommate system? Why are people accepting a situation where they live together with someone they don't like? It's such an obvious recipe for misery! Who perpetuates this system?
- branchless 10y ago
  Why: because of the financialization of housing. Why accept it? Westerners don't understand how their economies work to pass surplus value to the non-productive.
  - Anderkent 10y ago
    > Why accept it? Westerners don't understand how their economies work to pass surplus value to the non-productive Why do you think it's a question of understanding, rather than a moral obligation to help others?
    - branchless 10y ago
      The system decides. Charity after siphoning off labour is a poor second. http://savingcommunities.org/docs/george.henry/helpunemployed.html http://savingcommunities.org/docs/george.henry/helpunemploye...
      - Anderkent 10y ago
        How does that connect to your previous statement? Yes, the system (and the people who build and make up the system) decide to distribute wealth to 'non-productive' people. That's a good thing, exactly because charity of the 'productive' people is not reliable.
        branchless 10y ago
        We are talking at cross purposes. The system directs wealth to rentiers, they are non-productive. The rich are the non-productive. The system does not allocate resources correctly, it's totally flawed.
        Anderkent 10y ago
        Then I think you need to talk in specifics, not general statements. When you compare our systems with the 'default' of having no system (i.e. anarcho-capitalism), it seems rentiers (i.e. owners of capital/land) are directed even more resources. So if you blame the system, you kinda have to be specific in what aspects you're blaming and how they could be improved. It's also not necessarily bad that some wealth is directed to rentiers, if otherwise the wealthy would have no incentive to use their wealth productively.
kzisme 10y ago
This comment resonates with me. After leaving university, and moving on to a full time position in a suburb I feel completely disconnected. I didn't attend a ~huge~ school, but the sense of community was there. The lack of this feeling has been hard to explain, but this comment explains it very well. I'm not sure if I will(or can) ever do something about this feeling either.
- kerbalspacepro 10y ago
  i read this as "those commas resonate with me"
  - kzisme 10y ago
    Heh I had originally written "This post", but didn't want anyone to be confused with the OP.
- phil21 10y ago
  > I'm not sure if I will(or can) ever do something about this feeling either Why? Suburban life might be the worst social ill the US has ever faced. If you're starting the mental spiral downward, pick up and move. Plenty of jobs in plenty of cities that aren't wildly expensive, but still are walkable (in certain areas) and have things going on and a normal community. I know some folks thrive in the suburbs, but I really think it's the single worst long-term policy decision any country has made in terms of the damage it did to community and a sense of togetherness. I travel a decent amount now, and I am absolutely amazed at how some supposedly "destitute" communities seem far happier than the faux-rich suburban communities in the US. In my opinion the social stratification and divisiveness we're seeing today (e.g. a lack of a sense of togetherness) is directly due to a generation completely cut off from each other in the pursuit of getting away from undesirables and giant houses. I completely understand folks who would prefer to live in a rural community - but those who prefer to live in the suburbs I just cannot understand. It seems like the absolute worst of both worlds to me.
- not_kurt_godel 10y ago
  > in a suburb I feel completely disconnected Suburbs are fundamentally alienating and isolating in my experience. The physical distance between houses limits the number of people you're likely to meet and interact with in your locale. The need to drive everywhere disconnects you from your surroundings and community, as opposed to walking and biking whose physical aspect creates a tangible connection with your surroundings. Disputes with neighbors over relatively minor issues get amplified by concerns over property values to the point of creating permanent rifts. Freedom of thought and nonconformity are generally viewed skeptically if not outright suspiciously. Strangers are distrusted by virtue of non-residents having no reason to be in the neighborhood, ever. Overall my experience is they foster a cloistered, narrow-minded, distrustful mentality that is intellectually stifling and culturally toxic.
throwasehasdwi 10y ago
I share a similar life story so far. As soon as I graduated I moved to NYC. I loved it, it was the most alive I've ever felt in my life. I lived there for 4 months and every day after work I walked around and marveled at a city so massive and stimulating that it didn't seem real. However, I was soon broke. Defeated, with credit cards maxed out, I got a plane ticket home with my last 300 bucks. I lived in a midwestern suburb for about three years after that, close to home and bored out of my skull after living something like NYC. When I built up some savings and experience I jumped again, this time for what I considered a happy medium between the two lifestyles, to Austin TX. So far so good here. One day I will jump one last time to Silicon Valley, just to see what it's like. From there, having lived in all the places I really want to experience, I'll choose my final destination and settle down there.

el_benhameen 10y ago

Where did you move, if I may ask?

ido 10y ago

If you're working remotely, there are plenty of cities much cheaper than SF.

henrikschroder 10y ago

> Oh, and there were 6 of us, in a 3 bedroom apartment. This is such a weird American phenomenon, the whole roommate thing. What on earth can make adults choose to share their home with a stranger? Why isn't there intense pressure for building many small apartments, rather than building larger apartments that are meant for roommates? Is it connected to the equally weird college dorm roommate system? Why are people accepting a situation where they live together with someone they don't like? It's such an obvious recipe for misery! Who perpetuates this system?

branchless 10y ago
Why: because of the financialization of housing. Why accept it? Westerners don't understand how their economies work to pass surplus value to the non-productive.
- Anderkent 10y ago
  > Why accept it? Westerners don't understand how their economies work to pass surplus value to the non-productive Why do you think it's a question of understanding, rather than a moral obligation to help others?
  - branchless 10y ago
    The system decides. Charity after siphoning off labour is a poor second. http://savingcommunities.org/docs/george.henry/helpunemployed.html http://savingcommunities.org/docs/george.henry/helpunemploye...
    - Anderkent 10y ago
      How does that connect to your previous statement? Yes, the system (and the people who build and make up the system) decide to distribute wealth to 'non-productive' people. That's a good thing, exactly because charity of the 'productive' people is not reliable.
      - branchless 10y ago
        We are talking at cross purposes. The system directs wealth to rentiers, they are non-productive. The rich are the non-productive. The system does not allocate resources correctly, it's totally flawed.
        Anderkent 10y ago
        Then I think you need to talk in specifics, not general statements. When you compare our systems with the 'default' of having no system (i.e. anarcho-capitalism), it seems rentiers (i.e. owners of capital/land) are directed even more resources. So if you blame the system, you kinda have to be specific in what aspects you're blaming and how they could be improved. It's also not necessarily bad that some wealth is directed to rentiers, if otherwise the wealthy would have no incentive to use their wealth productively.

kzisme 10y ago

This comment resonates with me. After leaving university, and moving on to a full time position in a suburb I feel completely disconnected. I didn't attend a ~huge~ school, but the sense of community was there. The lack of this feeling has been hard to explain, but this comment explains it very well. I'm not sure if I will(or can) ever do something about this feeling either.

kerbalspacepro 10y ago
i read this as "those commas resonate with me"
- kzisme 10y ago
  Heh I had originally written "This post", but didn't want anyone to be confused with the OP.
phil21 10y ago
> I'm not sure if I will(or can) ever do something about this feeling either Why? Suburban life might be the worst social ill the US has ever faced. If you're starting the mental spiral downward, pick up and move. Plenty of jobs in plenty of cities that aren't wildly expensive, but still are walkable (in certain areas) and have things going on and a normal community. I know some folks thrive in the suburbs, but I really think it's the single worst long-term policy decision any country has made in terms of the damage it did to community and a sense of togetherness. I travel a decent amount now, and I am absolutely amazed at how some supposedly "destitute" communities seem far happier than the faux-rich suburban communities in the US. In my opinion the social stratification and divisiveness we're seeing today (e.g. a lack of a sense of togetherness) is directly due to a generation completely cut off from each other in the pursuit of getting away from undesirables and giant houses. I completely understand folks who would prefer to live in a rural community - but those who prefer to live in the suburbs I just cannot understand. It seems like the absolute worst of both worlds to me.
not_kurt_godel 10y ago
> in a suburb I feel completely disconnected Suburbs are fundamentally alienating and isolating in my experience. The physical distance between houses limits the number of people you're likely to meet and interact with in your locale. The need to drive everywhere disconnects you from your surroundings and community, as opposed to walking and biking whose physical aspect creates a tangible connection with your surroundings. Disputes with neighbors over relatively minor issues get amplified by concerns over property values to the point of creating permanent rifts. Freedom of thought and nonconformity are generally viewed skeptically if not outright suspiciously. Strangers are distrusted by virtue of non-residents having no reason to be in the neighborhood, ever. Overall my experience is they foster a cloistered, narrow-minded, distrustful mentality that is intellectually stifling and culturally toxic.

throwasehasdwi 10y ago

I share a similar life story so far. As soon as I graduated I moved to NYC. I loved it, it was the most alive I've ever felt in my life. I lived there for 4 months and every day after work I walked around and marveled at a city so massive and stimulating that it didn't seem real. However, I was soon broke. Defeated, with credit cards maxed out, I got a plane ticket home with my last 300 bucks. I lived in a midwestern suburb for about three years after that, close to home and bored out of my skull after living something like NYC. When I built up some savings and experience I jumped again, this time for what I considered a happy medium between the two lifestyles, to Austin TX. So far so good here. One day I will jump one last time to Silicon Valley, just to see what it's like. From there, having lived in all the places I really want to experience, I'll choose my final destination and settle down there.