4 ms·

The US is a huge place, and your experience, though not unique, isn't how everybody here lives. Before I started working from home full time I had a 15 minute

The US is a huge place, and your experience, though not unique, isn't how everybody here lives. Before I started working from home full time I had a 15 minute bike commute. There's a friendly coffee shop across the street. I can walk to the grocery store. There's an awesome microbrewery and restaurant across the street.

luckydata 7y ago
Most people. I lived in Ann Arbor, quality of life was a smidge better (horrible food compared to California, bad climate, very high property taxes, horrifying roads...) but jobs for a tech worker were really few and far in between. Let's face it, if you don't find a remote job (and they are still difficult to find) then your reality is probably a lot more likely to look like mine than yours. The US is a lot more car dependent than any other place on earth, like it or not.
- scruple 7y ago
  Even then... I have the full-time remote job. The prospect isn't getting the remote job, it's hanging onto it _for the rest of my career_. I still live in SoCal, despite desperately wanting to leave it behind, almost entirely because I feel compelled to live near a strong tech / job market for the job security that it provides myself and my family.
  - njepa 7y ago
    I would say largely the same, but mostly put the emphasis on housing. Capital isn't regional anymore, meaning housing largely goes for whatever people dare to sign for. This makes it a lot harder to live a more modest life. Disproportionately hurting smaller cities since being cheap is part of what they have/had going for them. Basically if housing was significantly cheaper for a decent quality of life, rather than mostly just somewhat cheaper, job security would be less of a concern.
- jlarocco 7y ago
  No argument from me that most of the US is car dependent, but I will contend that it's a personal choice. I've only been working remote for 5 months - before that I biked to work for 10 years. In fact, I still do all of my errands, shopping, etc. by bike. No doubt it's not as easy as in some European cities, but it's a possibility for people who prioritize it.
  - Broken_Hippo 7y ago
    I've never lived in a place where going without a car was remotely feasible - at least not in the US. I've lived in Norway for some years, and do not drive. First and foremost, lets be clear: I lived in small to medium-sized towns in the midwest. Two towns had taxi service, and one had a limited bus service. The town with taxis only... well, those taxis weren't reliable. You couldn't pre-order a taxi to go to work and the waiting time could be anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours. They weren't cheap: Taking a taxi to a minimum wage job would usually cost an hour of work. Living outside of the small towns was no picnic without a car: You couldn't ride a bike on the shortest route, and it took more time. Biking was often unsafe: You were expected to use the road much like a car. Except lesser. All of the places had a lack of continuous sidewalks to walk on and drivers that rarely slowed down for you. Pedestrians have the right of way in name only. Not to mention... distance. In the small town, I tried walking everywhere for a while. I could not buy clothes outside of dollar general. Lots of things weren't possible to find in town. I was lucky enough to have a grocery store: Good thing, too, because there was a 20 minute drive to the towns with larger ones. IN the larger cities, most residential areas were kept away from the areas with commerce. Wal-mart did not have sidewalks leading to it in one town. IF you do it despite all of this, you still have to have the right job. Retail is going to expect you to be clean and dry when you get to work. SO will a restaurant. Some of these places have little to zero break room and no safe place to keep a bicycle or your helmet. Oh, yeah: In almost all of these places, you were expected to only walk during "normal" hours. IF you walked to a 24-hour store at 2am or home after getting off work at 3am, you drew police suspicion, doubly so if you are young, look poor, a minority. Some jobs won't hire you if you don't have a car or steady transportation. Walking and cycling did not count. And sure, all this is still technically a choice, but not much of one. You have to reach a level of privilege before you can do this stuff safely and reasonably - at least in the states.
TulliusCicero 7y ago
Nah, he's right. US cities are, on average, really, really bad for walking, for biking, and for public spaces for gathering. Living in Munich now it's like night and day compared to the different parts of the US I lived in. But you don't have to take my word for it, the numbers bear this out. Walk mode share in Germany's biggest cities are ~4x as high as NYC, which is the US' most walkable major city. That's a bigger gap than the difference in GDP per capita between the US and Portugal. Compared to Germany, your average US city's walkability is a dumpster that fell off a train wreck, then got set on fire and shot into the sun. It's really that big of a difference.
- wink 7y ago
  Funny that you mention Munich. I've lived here my whole life and I've never had a "neighborhood bar" where I'd be inclined to go in, and my standards are not very high. I think the social life is very much targeted around a few neighborhoods where there's a bar or restaurant every 200m and outside of them you maybe have a handful of passable ones. That said, walking in general is no problem, there's just not much interesting (besides parks) in reach. But I've never lived in the city center. It feels like a small town unless I take the bike 10-20min towards the city centre.
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    Yeah, Munich is like the opposite of a party city. Quiet, functional, stable, boring. If you're looking for fun, it's an awful choice. Literally right as I was typing out a response, a conversation sprouted up in my work area where someone was complaining about the shitty pub scene in Munich compared to Seattle, haha. > That said, walking in general is no problem, there's just not much interesting (besides parks) in reach. I'm not thinking of things that are particularly interesting, mostly just errand-type stuff. In most US residential neighborhoods, commercial activity is banned, so the only things within walking distance are parks and schools, maybe a library if you're lucky. Oh, I guess churches too. In contrast, near the outskirts of Munich in a relatively quiet neighborhood, I'm also within easy walking distance of a few bakeries, a few grocery stores, my local bank branch, my dentist's office, a drug store, a post office, there's a few small fitness centers, a book store, a locksmith, a florist, couple of clothing stores, a shoe store, a few hotels, and a few restaurants. All small examples of their categories, to be sure, but useful nonetheless. And it's not just the distances and destinations, it's the design. I could go on if anyone's interested, but the street design in Munich (and really Germany as a whole, from what I've seen traveling around) is vastly more walk-friendly than pretty much anywhere in the US. Like, my parents pointed out that a new shopping center near where they live in Santa Clara, CA (which is steadily becoming more dense and mixed-use, albeit more slowly than I'd like) is technically within walking distance. But, they admitted that they never actually walk there, even though both are into walking for exercise. They likely don't even realize, but there's an obvious reason for the this: the way there just doesn't feel comfortable for walking. I know the route well, and the streets and intersections just don't make it feel good.

luckydata 7y ago

Most people. I lived in Ann Arbor, quality of life was a smidge better (horrible food compared to California, bad climate, very high property taxes, horrifying roads...) but jobs for a tech worker were really few and far in between. Let's face it, if you don't find a remote job (and they are still difficult to find) then your reality is probably a lot more likely to look like mine than yours. The US is a lot more car dependent than any other place on earth, like it or not.

scruple 7y ago
Even then... I have the full-time remote job. The prospect isn't getting the remote job, it's hanging onto it _for the rest of my career_. I still live in SoCal, despite desperately wanting to leave it behind, almost entirely because I feel compelled to live near a strong tech / job market for the job security that it provides myself and my family.
- njepa 7y ago
  I would say largely the same, but mostly put the emphasis on housing. Capital isn't regional anymore, meaning housing largely goes for whatever people dare to sign for. This makes it a lot harder to live a more modest life. Disproportionately hurting smaller cities since being cheap is part of what they have/had going for them. Basically if housing was significantly cheaper for a decent quality of life, rather than mostly just somewhat cheaper, job security would be less of a concern.
jlarocco 7y ago
No argument from me that most of the US is car dependent, but I will contend that it's a personal choice. I've only been working remote for 5 months - before that I biked to work for 10 years. In fact, I still do all of my errands, shopping, etc. by bike. No doubt it's not as easy as in some European cities, but it's a possibility for people who prioritize it.
- Broken_Hippo 7y ago
  I've never lived in a place where going without a car was remotely feasible - at least not in the US. I've lived in Norway for some years, and do not drive. First and foremost, lets be clear: I lived in small to medium-sized towns in the midwest. Two towns had taxi service, and one had a limited bus service. The town with taxis only... well, those taxis weren't reliable. You couldn't pre-order a taxi to go to work and the waiting time could be anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours. They weren't cheap: Taking a taxi to a minimum wage job would usually cost an hour of work. Living outside of the small towns was no picnic without a car: You couldn't ride a bike on the shortest route, and it took more time. Biking was often unsafe: You were expected to use the road much like a car. Except lesser. All of the places had a lack of continuous sidewalks to walk on and drivers that rarely slowed down for you. Pedestrians have the right of way in name only. Not to mention... distance. In the small town, I tried walking everywhere for a while. I could not buy clothes outside of dollar general. Lots of things weren't possible to find in town. I was lucky enough to have a grocery store: Good thing, too, because there was a 20 minute drive to the towns with larger ones. IN the larger cities, most residential areas were kept away from the areas with commerce. Wal-mart did not have sidewalks leading to it in one town. IF you do it despite all of this, you still have to have the right job. Retail is going to expect you to be clean and dry when you get to work. SO will a restaurant. Some of these places have little to zero break room and no safe place to keep a bicycle or your helmet. Oh, yeah: In almost all of these places, you were expected to only walk during "normal" hours. IF you walked to a 24-hour store at 2am or home after getting off work at 3am, you drew police suspicion, doubly so if you are young, look poor, a minority. Some jobs won't hire you if you don't have a car or steady transportation. Walking and cycling did not count. And sure, all this is still technically a choice, but not much of one. You have to reach a level of privilege before you can do this stuff safely and reasonably - at least in the states.

TulliusCicero 7y ago

Nah, he's right. US cities are, on average, really, really bad for walking, for biking, and for public spaces for gathering. Living in Munich now it's like night and day compared to the different parts of the US I lived in. But you don't have to take my word for it, the numbers bear this out. Walk mode share in Germany's biggest cities are ~4x as high as NYC, which is the US' most walkable major city. That's a bigger gap than the difference in GDP per capita between the US and Portugal. Compared to Germany, your average US city's walkability is a dumpster that fell off a train wreck, then got set on fire and shot into the sun. It's really that big of a difference.

wink 7y ago
Funny that you mention Munich. I've lived here my whole life and I've never had a "neighborhood bar" where I'd be inclined to go in, and my standards are not very high. I think the social life is very much targeted around a few neighborhoods where there's a bar or restaurant every 200m and outside of them you maybe have a handful of passable ones. That said, walking in general is no problem, there's just not much interesting (besides parks) in reach. But I've never lived in the city center. It feels like a small town unless I take the bike 10-20min towards the city centre.
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  Yeah, Munich is like the opposite of a party city. Quiet, functional, stable, boring. If you're looking for fun, it's an awful choice. Literally right as I was typing out a response, a conversation sprouted up in my work area where someone was complaining about the shitty pub scene in Munich compared to Seattle, haha. > That said, walking in general is no problem, there's just not much interesting (besides parks) in reach. I'm not thinking of things that are particularly interesting, mostly just errand-type stuff. In most US residential neighborhoods, commercial activity is banned, so the only things within walking distance are parks and schools, maybe a library if you're lucky. Oh, I guess churches too. In contrast, near the outskirts of Munich in a relatively quiet neighborhood, I'm also within easy walking distance of a few bakeries, a few grocery stores, my local bank branch, my dentist's office, a drug store, a post office, there's a few small fitness centers, a book store, a locksmith, a florist, couple of clothing stores, a shoe store, a few hotels, and a few restaurants. All small examples of their categories, to be sure, but useful nonetheless. And it's not just the distances and destinations, it's the design. I could go on if anyone's interested, but the street design in Munich (and really Germany as a whole, from what I've seen traveling around) is vastly more walk-friendly than pretty much anywhere in the US. Like, my parents pointed out that a new shopping center near where they live in Santa Clara, CA (which is steadily becoming more dense and mixed-use, albeit more slowly than I'd like) is technically within walking distance. But, they admitted that they never actually walk there, even though both are into walking for exercise. They likely don't even realize, but there's an obvious reason for the this: the way there just doesn't feel comfortable for walking. I know the route well, and the streets and intersections just don't make it feel good.