5 ms·

> The lifestyle is very hard, even if you make a lot of money, because the public transportation is insufficient to cover everything you want to do in your life

by TomVDB 8y ago

> The lifestyle is very hard, even if you make a lot of money, because the public transportation is insufficient to cover everything you want to do in your life. Public transportation is the limiting factor in determining what you want to do in your life... even if you have a lot of money??? Once I had enough money, I bought a house 20min from work, 15min from an excellent park for mountain biking, 25min from SJC and 45min from SFO. All of that can be done by car much faster than public transportation ever could. Whether or not this is sustainable for a large population is a completely different discussion. But your premise is flawed.

johan_larson 8y ago
Yeah, I don't know why anyone would tie themselves to public transit in the US if they had a decent job. US public transit is for people too old, too young, or too poor to have a car, and for people commuting into very dense areas that it is impractical (too expensive) to bring a car into.
- trophycase 8y ago
  Owning a car is expensive and a pain in the ass, walking to the station every morning is good for you, you can read/relax on a train whereas driving in traffic is a nightmare.
  - vonmoltke 8y ago
    > you can read/relax on a train whereas driving in traffic is a nightmare You have obviously never had to rely on New Jersey Transit.
- baby 8y ago
  Driving is the worst. I want to be able to walk everywhere, or at least being able to take public transit.
  - johan_larson 8y ago
    That's fine. But there aren't a lot of people like you, and only a few places in the US are a good fit for that kind of lifestyle. It really only works in the densest hearts of the biggest cities, like New York and Chicago, and the odd college town or retirement community. There are reasons why 90+% of US households (and some 97% of households that include a worker) have a car.
    - baby 8y ago
      Yeah. That's why I've been sticking with large cities. I've never needed car so far.
baby 8y ago
> Once I had enough money, I bought a house 20min from work, 15min from an excellent park for mountain biking, 25min from SJC and 45min from SFO. Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? > All of that can be done by car much faster than public transportation ever could. driving? eww
- jeffFrom18F 8y ago
  > Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? 1. Most of the BigCos are in the south bay and riding a bus an hour+ gets old after a while. 2. I'm guessing you don't have kids?
  - Bahamut 8y ago
    Not to mention housing is cheaper in the South Bay, and the South Bay tech companies generally pay significantly better than the SF ones.
- TomVDB 8y ago
  > Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? I don't regret a second of living 5 years in NYC. And I still have one friend there who, 15 years later, still lives that same life of partying until 2am, fancy restaurants, and whatnot. It sounds very exhausting. The vast majority of my friends back then have moved to the suburbs. Good schools for kids, a nice house in a quiet neighborhood with a garage for the minivan to drive those kids to cross country meets during the week or to go camping during the weekend in the summer and ski in the winter. The point of living in the Bay Area but not in SF is that I can have a nice house with a large garage for my hobbies: the fumes of a laser cutter or the noise of a table saw wouldn't go well in a tiny apartment. Or that I can live close to some of the best semiconductor companies in the world, something that's not even available in SF. That, if needed, there are tons of similar companies in a radius of a few miles. Or that I can drive 15min to my local park for 45min of mountain biking in the morning and still arrive at work before 9:30am. Or the weather: I still occasionally forget a warm sweater when I go to SF in the summer. Have you considered that people in their early thirties might have different priorities in life than those who are 50? Maybe you should?

by TomVDB 8y ago

johan_larson 8y ago

Yeah, I don't know why anyone would tie themselves to public transit in the US if they had a decent job. US public transit is for people too old, too young, or too poor to have a car, and for people commuting into very dense areas that it is impractical (too expensive) to bring a car into.

trophycase 8y ago
Owning a car is expensive and a pain in the ass, walking to the station every morning is good for you, you can read/relax on a train whereas driving in traffic is a nightmare.
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > you can read/relax on a train whereas driving in traffic is a nightmare You have obviously never had to rely on New Jersey Transit.
baby 8y ago
Driving is the worst. I want to be able to walk everywhere, or at least being able to take public transit.
- johan_larson 8y ago
  That's fine. But there aren't a lot of people like you, and only a few places in the US are a good fit for that kind of lifestyle. It really only works in the densest hearts of the biggest cities, like New York and Chicago, and the odd college town or retirement community. There are reasons why 90+% of US households (and some 97% of households that include a worker) have a car.
  - baby 8y ago
    Yeah. That's why I've been sticking with large cities. I've never needed car so far.

baby 8y ago

> Once I had enough money, I bought a house 20min from work, 15min from an excellent park for mountain biking, 25min from SJC and 45min from SFO. Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? > All of that can be done by car much faster than public transportation ever could. driving? eww

jeffFrom18F 8y ago
> Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? 1. Most of the BigCos are in the south bay and riding a bus an hour+ gets old after a while. 2. I'm guessing you don't have kids?
- Bahamut 8y ago
  Not to mention housing is cheaper in the South Bay, and the South Bay tech companies generally pay significantly better than the SF ones.
TomVDB 8y ago
> Coming to the bay to live far from SF? What's the point? I don't regret a second of living 5 years in NYC. And I still have one friend there who, 15 years later, still lives that same life of partying until 2am, fancy restaurants, and whatnot. It sounds very exhausting. The vast majority of my friends back then have moved to the suburbs. Good schools for kids, a nice house in a quiet neighborhood with a garage for the minivan to drive those kids to cross country meets during the week or to go camping during the weekend in the summer and ski in the winter. The point of living in the Bay Area but not in SF is that I can have a nice house with a large garage for my hobbies: the fumes of a laser cutter or the noise of a table saw wouldn't go well in a tiny apartment. Or that I can live close to some of the best semiconductor companies in the world, something that's not even available in SF. That, if needed, there are tons of similar companies in a radius of a few miles. Or that I can drive 15min to my local park for 45min of mountain biking in the morning and still arrive at work before 9:30am. Or the weather: I still occasionally forget a warm sweater when I go to SF in the summer. Have you considered that people in their early thirties might have different priorities in life than those who are 50? Maybe you should?