4 ms·

"I've recently quit a job that required a 2 hour+ commute (4-5 hour total)." The job did not require that. This individual chose to live in an exurb.

kilbuz 5y ago
Or San Francisco.
ecshafer 5y ago
Some other more empathetic reasons: 1. They live in one city, and received a job in another. 2 hours would be Philadelphia to DC or NYC for example. But they can't get a more local job (those don't exist, they can't land them, etc.) 2. They can't move for some reason. Their partner can't get another job. Their children are in a school and they don't want to move them until they graduate. Their parents are family are nearby and they must be near them, medical issues are possible, elderly, etc. 3. They just really love where they live 4. They Can't afford to live.
- deanCommie 5y ago
  4. is likely not true - software positions at worst are decently middle class. 3. is an argument against empathy. they made their choice to prioritize where they are living over commute. That's exactly OP's point. 1. again, if they choose not to relocate then the commute is their responsibility not the job's fault. 2. is the main point i now have a lot of sympathy for now that I have kids. Kids benefit from continuity and uprooting your whole life for one of the partner's jobs is somewhat selfish. But even in that situation, I feel like the onus is still on the person - they are choosing their kids over their commute. The commute isn't for the job. The commute is for the kids.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    Hopefully this isn’t from delusions but there ARE SE positions with very bad pay especially when what class you eligible for depends on where you live. Software positions at worst can be lower class.
  - xjlin0 5y ago
    4. is actually true -- in certain SF bay area it probably needs 2 dev salaries to get a house now.
    - chitowneats 5y ago
      I fail to see how this is at all relevant to whether or not we should return to in person work. If the Bay Area truly is unlivable, that strikes me as a local political concern. A place with that much wealth surely could have built more housing, infrastructure, etc, but the local population chose not to. Either vote with your feet or live with the consequences of the life you and your neighbors chose.
    - deanCommie 5y ago
      "getting a house" is not the minimal threshold for success.
aksss 5y ago
Maybe "I recently quite a job/quality of life balance that necessitated a 2 hour+ commute". Modifying one of those (ideally the job half) to eliminate that commute is a great choice if available.
chrisseaton 5y ago
How do you know they live in an exurb? Maybe they just live in a town two hours away? Why do they live in that town and work in another? Maybe they have family or social responsibilities that force it - I don't know and neither do you.
- chitowneats 5y ago
  It's absolutely the most likely scenario. I'm making a point.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > It's absolutely the most likely scenario. I don't think so. I know many people who for example wanted to keep their children in the same school so commute for a new job. I don't know anyone who commutes through two hours of suburbs. Where is that even possible? Los Angeles maybe? > I'm making a point. Well what is it?
    - chitowneats 5y ago
      People in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, L.A. etc, get themselves into these situations by buying new construction on the edge of the city thinking that the traffic on the expressways can't possibly get any worse. They then realize several years later that it has, in fact. The open secret is that their lifestyle choices are what's causing it. My point is that you are not entitled to both your McMansion enclave and your cushy software engineering position at Big Corp. Denser development (in the U.S.) is necessary and would be achieved if people were willing to pay for it and vote for it. Instead, they do the worst possible thing, which is imagine they can live a pseudo-bucolic existence and not be members of the urban center, or at least old growth dense suburbs, that actually support the jobs they want to have. Is this pathology uniquely American? No, but arguably we invented it and have taken it to the most extreme level.
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        You've got absolutely no idea what kind of home this individual lives in or their personal situation or why they're commuting that far. You're criticising them for something you've imagined.

kilbuz 5y ago

Or San Francisco.

ecshafer 5y ago

Some other more empathetic reasons: 1. They live in one city, and received a job in another. 2 hours would be Philadelphia to DC or NYC for example. But they can't get a more local job (those don't exist, they can't land them, etc.) 2. They can't move for some reason. Their partner can't get another job. Their children are in a school and they don't want to move them until they graduate. Their parents are family are nearby and they must be near them, medical issues are possible, elderly, etc. 3. They just really love where they live 4. They Can't afford to live.

deanCommie 5y ago
4. is likely not true - software positions at worst are decently middle class. 3. is an argument against empathy. they made their choice to prioritize where they are living over commute. That's exactly OP's point. 1. again, if they choose not to relocate then the commute is their responsibility not the job's fault. 2. is the main point i now have a lot of sympathy for now that I have kids. Kids benefit from continuity and uprooting your whole life for one of the partner's jobs is somewhat selfish. But even in that situation, I feel like the onus is still on the person - they are choosing their kids over their commute. The commute isn't for the job. The commute is for the kids.
- Jcowell 5y ago
  Hopefully this isn’t from delusions but there ARE SE positions with very bad pay especially when what class you eligible for depends on where you live. Software positions at worst can be lower class.
- xjlin0 5y ago
  4. is actually true -- in certain SF bay area it probably needs 2 dev salaries to get a house now.
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    I fail to see how this is at all relevant to whether or not we should return to in person work. If the Bay Area truly is unlivable, that strikes me as a local political concern. A place with that much wealth surely could have built more housing, infrastructure, etc, but the local population chose not to. Either vote with your feet or live with the consequences of the life you and your neighbors chose.
  - deanCommie 5y ago
    "getting a house" is not the minimal threshold for success.

aksss 5y ago

Maybe "I recently quite a job/quality of life balance that necessitated a 2 hour+ commute". Modifying one of those (ideally the job half) to eliminate that commute is a great choice if available.

chrisseaton 5y ago

How do you know they live in an exurb? Maybe they just live in a town two hours away? Why do they live in that town and work in another? Maybe they have family or social responsibilities that force it - I don't know and neither do you.

chitowneats 5y ago
It's absolutely the most likely scenario. I'm making a point.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > It's absolutely the most likely scenario. I don't think so. I know many people who for example wanted to keep their children in the same school so commute for a new job. I don't know anyone who commutes through two hours of suburbs. Where is that even possible? Los Angeles maybe? > I'm making a point. Well what is it?
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    People in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, L.A. etc, get themselves into these situations by buying new construction on the edge of the city thinking that the traffic on the expressways can't possibly get any worse. They then realize several years later that it has, in fact. The open secret is that their lifestyle choices are what's causing it. My point is that you are not entitled to both your McMansion enclave and your cushy software engineering position at Big Corp. Denser development (in the U.S.) is necessary and would be achieved if people were willing to pay for it and vote for it. Instead, they do the worst possible thing, which is imagine they can live a pseudo-bucolic existence and not be members of the urban center, or at least old growth dense suburbs, that actually support the jobs they want to have. Is this pathology uniquely American? No, but arguably we invented it and have taken it to the most extreme level.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      You've got absolutely no idea what kind of home this individual lives in or their personal situation or why they're commuting that far. You're criticising them for something you've imagined.