5 ms·

And we care about these "relatively few cities" because by now these are some of the most productive areas in the nation. Low density and unaffordability in the

And we care about these "relatively few cities" because by now these are some of the most productive areas in the nation. Low density and unaffordability in these places makes the problem of income inequality even worse, while not even letting these areas be as productive as they could be via increased density combined with great quality of life.

scarface74 7y ago
Productive for who? To think that “quality of life” for everyone means living on top of each other is also myopic. True, people may earn less in smaller areas but the cost of living is much lower.
- magduf 7y ago
  The cost of living isn't that much lower, only housing costs are. There's more to cost-of-living than housing, and you aren't going to get food, cars, etc. significantly cheaper in low-cost areas, and in fact, many things can cost more because of the added transportation costs. Finally, those smaller areas with very low CoL usually don't have many jobs or opportunities. There's a reason people are flocking to cities, and have been for well over a century.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    You’re minimizing housing cost as both how large of a percentage of budget item it is for most people and how drastically different housing costs are in most of the country compared to the west coast. I live in metro Atlanta - not exactly a small town with a lack of opportunity. You can buy a 2800 square foot house for less than $200K not to far out from the city center. But there are a lot of people who go years without ever going into the actual city of Atlanta and live and work in the burbs. My wife and I just bought a house two years ago in the northern burbs - a brand new build, 3100 square feet, 5-3-1/2 with a large office and all of the trimmings for less than $350K - 5% down because that’s what the builder asked for. A similar house the large west coast tech hubs would go for well over a $1.25 million. As far as jobs, I’ve lived here for two decades and have never had a problem finding a software development job. Despite what people on HN seem to think, the rest of the country is not some vast wasteland where people live in poverty.
    - ls612 7y ago
      Minneapolis is really the same way. The twin cites have a very bimodal distribution. There’s high density in the two downtown areas and the corridor between them, but a good portion (most?) of the office jobs are actually located on the 494/694 ring. So you have lots of 2nd ring suburbs with good commutes for most of their residents. And we aren’t space constrained in any way by geography so construction keeps suburb house prices reasonable. But the city does need a bit more, especially with the growth of all of the universities.
    - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
      >Despite what people on HN seem to think, the rest of the country is not some vast wasteland where people live in poverty. I'm perfectly happy to let them keep thinking that.
- davidw 7y ago
  If you don't want to live in a city, don't. But trying to play 'suburb' in an area where many people would like to live is pretty conceited, and does cost a ton of money: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/05/the-urban-housing-crunch-costs-the-us-economy-about-16-trillion-a-year/393515/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/05/the-urban-housing-cru...
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Well. Maybe I would like to live in the center of Manhattan. That doesn’t mean that it’s the city’s responsibility to make that happen.
    - davidw 7y ago
      The very least they could do is not actively try and prevent it though. Which is exactly what places like Palo Alto do.
      - sokoloff 7y ago
        Some people, including myself, think that it's reasonable for the residents of Palo Alto to have more say over the local policies and goings-on in the town than non-residents.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - scarface74 7y ago
        Why? Why shouldn’t residents be able to decide the living characteristics of their own city? There is plenty of land in the US. If prices are too high to afford to live there, residents will start moving and businesses move with them or vice versa. More businesses will start expanding to lower cost of living areas.
      - masonic 7y ago
        There's acres and acres of completely undeveloped land in Stanford. Why do they get a pass? And they continue to build a disproportionate amount of square footage that is not housing, worsening the housing shortage in the area.

scarface74 7y ago

Productive for who? To think that “quality of life” for everyone means living on top of each other is also myopic. True, people may earn less in smaller areas but the cost of living is much lower.

magduf 7y ago
The cost of living isn't that much lower, only housing costs are. There's more to cost-of-living than housing, and you aren't going to get food, cars, etc. significantly cheaper in low-cost areas, and in fact, many things can cost more because of the added transportation costs. Finally, those smaller areas with very low CoL usually don't have many jobs or opportunities. There's a reason people are flocking to cities, and have been for well over a century.
- scarface74 7y ago
  You’re minimizing housing cost as both how large of a percentage of budget item it is for most people and how drastically different housing costs are in most of the country compared to the west coast. I live in metro Atlanta - not exactly a small town with a lack of opportunity. You can buy a 2800 square foot house for less than $200K not to far out from the city center. But there are a lot of people who go years without ever going into the actual city of Atlanta and live and work in the burbs. My wife and I just bought a house two years ago in the northern burbs - a brand new build, 3100 square feet, 5-3-1/2 with a large office and all of the trimmings for less than $350K - 5% down because that’s what the builder asked for. A similar house the large west coast tech hubs would go for well over a $1.25 million. As far as jobs, I’ve lived here for two decades and have never had a problem finding a software development job. Despite what people on HN seem to think, the rest of the country is not some vast wasteland where people live in poverty.
  - ls612 7y ago
    Minneapolis is really the same way. The twin cites have a very bimodal distribution. There’s high density in the two downtown areas and the corridor between them, but a good portion (most?) of the office jobs are actually located on the 494/694 ring. So you have lots of 2nd ring suburbs with good commutes for most of their residents. And we aren’t space constrained in any way by geography so construction keeps suburb house prices reasonable. But the city does need a bit more, especially with the growth of all of the universities.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    >Despite what people on HN seem to think, the rest of the country is not some vast wasteland where people live in poverty. I'm perfectly happy to let them keep thinking that.
davidw 7y ago
If you don't want to live in a city, don't. But trying to play 'suburb' in an area where many people would like to live is pretty conceited, and does cost a ton of money: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/05/the-urban-housing-crunch-costs-the-us-economy-about-16-trillion-a-year/393515/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2015/05/the-urban-housing-cru...
- scarface74 7y ago
  Well. Maybe I would like to live in the center of Manhattan. That doesn’t mean that it’s the city’s responsibility to make that happen.
  - davidw 7y ago
    The very least they could do is not actively try and prevent it though. Which is exactly what places like Palo Alto do.
    - sokoloff 7y ago
      Some people, including myself, think that it's reasonable for the residents of Palo Alto to have more say over the local policies and goings-on in the town than non-residents.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - scarface74 7y ago
      Why? Why shouldn’t residents be able to decide the living characteristics of their own city? There is plenty of land in the US. If prices are too high to afford to live there, residents will start moving and businesses move with them or vice versa. More businesses will start expanding to lower cost of living areas.
    - masonic 7y ago
      There's acres and acres of completely undeveloped land in Stanford. Why do they get a pass? And they continue to build a disproportionate amount of square footage that is not housing, worsening the housing shortage in the area.