3 ms·

It never ceases to amaze me that people seem to be under the impression that there's no good jobs anywhere that isn't the coast. Oh well, I guess we silly flyov

It never ceases to amaze me that people seem to be under the impression that there's no good jobs anywhere that isn't the coast. Oh well, I guess we silly flyovers can just keep this affordable and comfortable living situation to ourselves.

ntsplnkv2 8y ago
You've missed my point, or perhaps I wasn't clear enough, from parent: > The other thing people were more willing to do in the 1940s was move to where they could afford to live. Where can you move today that offers affordable living and a good, steady job? Lets say you were on the expensive east coast and wanted a cheaper, more affordable place to live, with work. You'd consider Pittsburgh or Detroit, maybe. Both tick the boxes - affordable, plenty of good, union jobs, enough to own a home and build a family. Does Pittsburgh fit that bill today? The answer is unequivocally no. Sure, housing prices are down compared nationally - but the last 10 years have seen a boon in housing prices here. Flipping is happening like crazy. Rents have increased. But wages have not - because cost of living adjustments punish employees in places like Pittsburgh. I assume you're coming from a tech perspective. It's easy for that to skew your PoV. Think of it as the lay person. It's a much riskier prospect today. Pittsburgh is one of the worst cities in the country for retaining recent college graduates (Pitt, CMU, Duquesne, etc). Why? The job market simply isn't large enough.
- deadmetheny 8y ago
  Pittsburgh is a single city, though. There's a fair number of cities that do fit that bill - Des Moines, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Omaha, Cincinnati, etc etc. Pittsburgh is in an awkward point where it's trying to become more of a tech hub, but the jobs haven't started popping up to actually fill that void quite yet. I am coming from a tech perspective, but most of my friends and family are not. Their stories aren't wholly dissimilar - those of us who were in tech could afford homes faster than those who are not, but most everyone who is aiming to achieve that goal isn't having a problem doing so around here.

ntsplnkv2 8y ago

You've missed my point, or perhaps I wasn't clear enough, from parent: > The other thing people were more willing to do in the 1940s was move to where they could afford to live. Where can you move today that offers affordable living and a good, steady job? Lets say you were on the expensive east coast and wanted a cheaper, more affordable place to live, with work. You'd consider Pittsburgh or Detroit, maybe. Both tick the boxes - affordable, plenty of good, union jobs, enough to own a home and build a family. Does Pittsburgh fit that bill today? The answer is unequivocally no. Sure, housing prices are down compared nationally - but the last 10 years have seen a boon in housing prices here. Flipping is happening like crazy. Rents have increased. But wages have not - because cost of living adjustments punish employees in places like Pittsburgh. I assume you're coming from a tech perspective. It's easy for that to skew your PoV. Think of it as the lay person. It's a much riskier prospect today. Pittsburgh is one of the worst cities in the country for retaining recent college graduates (Pitt, CMU, Duquesne, etc). Why? The job market simply isn't large enough.

deadmetheny 8y ago
Pittsburgh is a single city, though. There's a fair number of cities that do fit that bill - Des Moines, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Omaha, Cincinnati, etc etc. Pittsburgh is in an awkward point where it's trying to become more of a tech hub, but the jobs haven't started popping up to actually fill that void quite yet. I am coming from a tech perspective, but most of my friends and family are not. Their stories aren't wholly dissimilar - those of us who were in tech could afford homes faster than those who are not, but most everyone who is aiming to achieve that goal isn't having a problem doing so around here.