5 ms·

>having a kid or two and staying in NYC or SF is the ultimate status symbol I understand it's expensive but it reads like you're tied to the city, I'm missing

by atwebb 7y ago

>having a kid or two and staying in NYC or SF is the ultimate status symbol I understand it's expensive but it reads like you're tied to the city, I'm missing the status symbol portion, likely because I'm nowhere near either location. I've seen some of this, people move out because of schools or sports/events for kids specifically. To your point there are definitely more staying put than I would have initially assumed, I like a bit of each. Many suburban homes are massively oversized and have sprawling neighborhoods. Again, personal anecdote, I am seeing a lot of action in suburban governments focusing on connecting neighborhoods and rectifying some of the massive sprawl issues of the 90s by filling in differently and adding connecting trails/sidewalks.

hoodwink 7y ago
I’m not tied to “the city”. In fact, I rather loathe SF and NYC (just finished a 3 year stint in SF). I’m just anti-suburbs. I’m pro-livable smaller cities like Philly, Austin, Denver, Nashville, Portland, Pittsburgh, etc. I’m extremely bullish on even smaller cities as the next wave, but that’s a separate story.
- dajohnson89 7y ago
  could you elaborate on the smaller cities theory?
- ericd 7y ago
  Know any good very walkable (with mixed zoning a la French towns) small cities with reasonable tech scenes in the US and good schools?
- atwebb 7y ago
  I'm from one of those smaller cities. It is not a liveable city without the suburbs for most families, soon it really won't be without generational wealth. A majority of the millennial families are moving to the suburbs (or forced their by increased prices). The downtown areas are heavily skewed towards tourists or the childless/single similar to my previous post. I'm bullish on them too but, then again, there's a financial interest in my having that stance. EDIT: I'm curious what you think is a reasonable salary to live in the downtown/midtown areas of the smaller liveable cities.
lotsofpulp 7y ago
>I understand it's expensive but it reads like you're tied to the city, I'm missing the status symbol portion, likely because I'm nowhere near either location. To be able to swing a suburban lifestyle in SF or NYC, you need to be able to compete with more of the top x% of the population than other places. Or have generational wealth.

by atwebb 7y ago

hoodwink 7y ago

I’m not tied to “the city”. In fact, I rather loathe SF and NYC (just finished a 3 year stint in SF). I’m just anti-suburbs. I’m pro-livable smaller cities like Philly, Austin, Denver, Nashville, Portland, Pittsburgh, etc. I’m extremely bullish on even smaller cities as the next wave, but that’s a separate story.

dajohnson89 7y ago
could you elaborate on the smaller cities theory?
ericd 7y ago
Know any good very walkable (with mixed zoning a la French towns) small cities with reasonable tech scenes in the US and good schools?
atwebb 7y ago
I'm from one of those smaller cities. It is not a liveable city without the suburbs for most families, soon it really won't be without generational wealth. A majority of the millennial families are moving to the suburbs (or forced their by increased prices). The downtown areas are heavily skewed towards tourists or the childless/single similar to my previous post. I'm bullish on them too but, then again, there's a financial interest in my having that stance. EDIT: I'm curious what you think is a reasonable salary to live in the downtown/midtown areas of the smaller liveable cities.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

>I understand it's expensive but it reads like you're tied to the city, I'm missing the status symbol portion, likely because I'm nowhere near either location. To be able to swing a suburban lifestyle in SF or NYC, you need to be able to compete with more of the top x% of the population than other places. Or have generational wealth.