4 ms·

> push you towards the standard of commuting 2 hours or more each day to get to a higher paying job Crazy question but why not invest some of that higher salar

by Swizec 7y ago

> push you towards the standard of commuting 2 hours or more each day to get to a higher paying job Crazy question but why not invest some of that higher salary into quality of life improvements like moving closer to work?

kbenson 7y ago
I think you misread some of my comment. But as for why people don't do that, I think it's often because "quality of life" means different things to different people at different times in their lives. For a single 20-something, moving closer to work, and the much higher cost of living that usually entails can be worthwhile. For a 30-something or 40-something with a family, what kind of worth the spouse does (and whether it benefits from that move monetarily or in quality of live) and what it entails for the children can be much more important. For a single (or mostly single) income household, shaving 2 hours off your commute in exchange for double the cost of living is very hard to justify. There's often a reason they live far enough away to need to commute. For me, as I said, I've never had that commute. I've been very happy working in the tech industry an hour or so away from SF and its surrounding area. What I advocated is not moving closer to work, but working closer to where you moved. If you move to a suburb of SF, if you start looking for work in that area instead of focusing on SF, you might be surprised what's there. It won't pay as much, but theoretically cost of living is already drastically reduced by moving to the suburb, so maybe re-examining what's a good job to look is called for if that commute isn't to your liking.
gowld 7y ago
Because homes are often miserable in the city. You can't renovate your apartment building or clean up all the litter on your block or get rid of the cars driving by. Driving is the price you pay for a nice home.
wonderwonder 7y ago
School zones often play a part in the decision. With massive disparities in funding between even relatively close school zones where you live can have a large impact on your children. So often parents are forced to commute so that their kids can attend a good school. This is very unfortunate and likely a direct result of the way we fund schools in the US, but its reality for many. One could of course argue that more time with their parents is crucial for the child as well and that is absolutely correct. My main concern though is that my kids are safe and well looked after during the time they are away from me though. Now if I was a young single person, I would absolutely choose living in a studio a block from work over commuting an hour each way to a larger house in the suburbs. With kids other factors take precedence. Now I am lucky enough to work remotely and it is indeed the 'bees knees'.

by Swizec 7y ago

kbenson 7y ago

I think you misread some of my comment. But as for why people don't do that, I think it's often because "quality of life" means different things to different people at different times in their lives. For a single 20-something, moving closer to work, and the much higher cost of living that usually entails can be worthwhile. For a 30-something or 40-something with a family, what kind of worth the spouse does (and whether it benefits from that move monetarily or in quality of live) and what it entails for the children can be much more important. For a single (or mostly single) income household, shaving 2 hours off your commute in exchange for double the cost of living is very hard to justify. There's often a reason they live far enough away to need to commute. For me, as I said, I've never had that commute. I've been very happy working in the tech industry an hour or so away from SF and its surrounding area. What I advocated is not moving closer to work, but working closer to where you moved. If you move to a suburb of SF, if you start looking for work in that area instead of focusing on SF, you might be surprised what's there. It won't pay as much, but theoretically cost of living is already drastically reduced by moving to the suburb, so maybe re-examining what's a good job to look is called for if that commute isn't to your liking.

gowld 7y ago

Because homes are often miserable in the city. You can't renovate your apartment building or clean up all the litter on your block or get rid of the cars driving by. Driving is the price you pay for a nice home.

wonderwonder 7y ago

School zones often play a part in the decision. With massive disparities in funding between even relatively close school zones where you live can have a large impact on your children. So often parents are forced to commute so that their kids can attend a good school. This is very unfortunate and likely a direct result of the way we fund schools in the US, but its reality for many. One could of course argue that more time with their parents is crucial for the child as well and that is absolutely correct. My main concern though is that my kids are safe and well looked after during the time they are away from me though. Now if I was a young single person, I would absolutely choose living in a studio a block from work over commuting an hour each way to a larger house in the suburbs. With kids other factors take precedence. Now I am lucky enough to work remotely and it is indeed the 'bees knees'.