4 ms·
> Meh, what you gain in square footage of your house moving in the Midwest, which is what I think you meant by "quality of life", you loose in career opportunit
by bart_spoon 3y ago
> Meh, what you gain in square footage of your house moving in the Midwest, which is what I think you meant by "quality of life", you loose in career opportunities , weather / outdoor activities, quality of food, and cultural enrichment for your children.
Strongly disagree on virtually every point, and this seems to be a common refrain I hear from those seemingly trying to convince themselves as much as anyone why the sky-high cost of living in certain areas of the country is worth paying. Yes, it's true there is more to eat and go do in many HCOL areas in the country, but there are diminishing returns. Perhaps 20 years ago the gap was significant enough to matter. But these days, even in medium sized Midwestern cities there is typically more variety in cuisine, entertainment, and cultural options than the average person can actually utilize. Weather can also be a driving factor, but even some places that are particularly expensive like Seattle or NYC don't have particularly great weather. And with global warming, the Midwest is generally getting less cold in the winter, while HCOL areas like those out west are getting regular wildfires, record breaking floods, and extreme heat waves, so even on this front the gap is diminishing. As for careers opportunity, that seems to be rapidly disappearing with the advent of remote work.
I'm not making the claim that Michigan or Wisconsin are toppling NYC or LA as top destinations for tourism. But there is a difference between a vacation destination and a place to make a living, and it's getting hard to see how some of these HCOL areas in the country make sense given the other options these days, given the cost difference.
- Carrok 3y ago[flagged]
- deepnotderp 3y agoMost cities anywhere, even in red states, are pretty liberal. This is another common HCOL area Stockholm syndrome thing.
- paulryanrogers 3y agoIME it depends on how rural. Larger suburbs are pretty politically blue and culturally accepting where I've lived. A few years ago I moved to the suburb where my great grandparents once lived, then surrounded by farms. Now it's a bustling exhurb with two significant immigrant communities. Within the cluster our kids play at the households have 4 different languages.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ghaff 3y agoYou can also be pretty accessible to a lot of major cities without being close enough to comfortably commute in every day (and paying a big housing premium for a smaller place). I go into the nearest major coastal city semi-regularly but it's not like I'd be going out to restaurants, bars, or the theater every other day even if I lived there.
- spacemadness 3y agoHaving more cultural options than the average person can utilize in a “medium town” is a bit hyperbolic. Maybe your “average person” fits in with that, but your argument seems to be that it’s no loss at all which is very untrue.
- thatfrenchguy 3y ago> Strongly disagree on virtually every point, and this seems to be a common refrain I hear from those seemingly trying to convince themselves as much as anyone why the sky-high cost of living in certain areas of the country is worth paying. I'd argue on the cost of living front that you'd be better off being in a expensive area, because you can always downgrade COL, rarely upgrade :). > But these days, even in medium sized Midwestern cities there is typically more variety in cuisine, entertainment, and cultural options than the average person can actually utilize Frankly, you need to spend more time in the Bay Area / LA or the NYC area with people who like food. The food scene is just incomparable to anywhere else in the US (or my native France). > And with global warming, the Midwest is generally getting less cold in the winter, while HCOL areas like those out west are getting regular wildfires, record breaking floods, and extreme heat waves Those things happen for less than a month a year. Compare that with the climate of the midwest, where it goes from "super cold" to "unbearably hot", with a few months of nice spring/fall if you're lucky. Super obvious if you look at https://weatherspark.com/y/557/Average-Weather-in-San-Francisco-California-United-States-Year-Round#Sections-Humidity https://weatherspark.com/y/557/Average-Weather-in-San-Franci... vs say https://weatherspark.com/y/12083/Average-Weather-in-St.-Louis-Missouri-United-States-Year-Round#Sections-Humidity https://weatherspark.com/y/12083/Average-Weather-in-St.-Loui... . Not to mention the mosquitos. If you never go outside (which frankly is a thing a lot of suburban Americans do), it doesn't matter, but if you're into hiking, sailing, surfing, skiing, or just eating outside on your patio, California just can't be beat. There's a reason you see folks from all over the world moving here and not to Missouri.
- klardotsh 3y agoAs one who fled the Midwest because of the summers (in part, at least), the Midwest warming up isn't even close to the selling point you make it out to be. I'll take shoveling feet of snow every winter over sweating through every layer of my clothing from April to October. The PNW warming up (and the heatwaves you mentioned) is a problem in and of itself, but it's still generally a place where, for 7-8 months of the year or so, I can comfortably wear hoodies and avoid sunburns and swamp ass.
- dreamcompiler 3y agoAgree. Seattle's "bad weather" is overblown. It's livable all year, compared to e.g. Austin which is too cold in the winter and hot as hell in the summer.