3 ms·

Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles, assuming you're gainfully employed and the city has a functioning real estate market. It sounds li

Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles, assuming you're gainfully employed and the city has a functioning real estate market. It sounds like there's a lot of office space just waiting to be converted into housing.

Tade0 2y ago
> Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles Never heard of that ever being the case, especially if you take into account living space, which is at a premium in cities. Recent example from a friend of mine: he's selling his 62m2, two bedroom apartment in a city of 650k to buy an absolute castle of 200m2 in the suburbs that also has a separate garage. He's got two children, but could give each one a room even if he had five.
- relaxing 2y ago
  You’re assuming upper middle class living standards.
  - Tade0 2y ago
    I need to ask where exactly do you see that?
    - relaxing 2y ago
      You’ve never heard of cities being cheaper. Well you would if you heard about poor people living in cities. You know, like in the bad part of town. They can’t do that in the suburbs, because the suburbs are deliberately constructed without the infrastructure that enables cheap living in the city.
      - Tade0 2y ago
        They're not actually living cheaply - just in poverty. Different thing altogether. They can't do that in the suburbs because there's hardly anything for rent there and they don't have the credit score to buy anything. My reasoning is as follows: -Real estate per unit area is more expensive in the city - that's a given. -Groceries are 30-50% more expensive because again - real estate is as well and that pushes up the price of everything. On top of that you have logistics to deal with, as you need that truck to reach the store somehow. Sure, in the suburbs you have to drive everywhere and maintain your property, but there's financial flexibility in that - you don't need the newest, most gas guzzling car or to renovate the whole place every 7 years or so. All the fathers of 4+ children that I know are in agreement that they wouldn't be able to afford having such a huge family in the city. Whoever thought it's cheaper to live in the city must be childless.
        relaxing 2y ago
        You’re assuming upper middle class living standards.
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  Everything they do involves transportation, which will be at a premium compared to an urban setting. That's just costs that directly hit their pocket book, there are others imposed by virtue of being so spread out that are more diffused across him and his neighbors.
jjav 2y ago
> Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles Often? Where is it cheaper, for equivalent lifestyle, to live in a city? Never heard of that. Cities (unless decrepit) are always very expensive compared to the alternatives.
- knowaveragejoe 2y ago
  In the US, it's often mid-tier cities that this crowd don't pay a lot of attention to.
  - jjav 2y ago
    Which cities are these? Where living in that city is cheaper (for equivalent lifestyle) than in its suburbs?

Tade0 2y ago

> Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles Never heard of that ever being the case, especially if you take into account living space, which is at a premium in cities. Recent example from a friend of mine: he's selling his 62m2, two bedroom apartment in a city of 650k to buy an absolute castle of 200m2 in the suburbs that also has a separate garage. He's got two children, but could give each one a room even if he had five.

relaxing 2y ago
You’re assuming upper middle class living standards.
- Tade0 2y ago
  I need to ask where exactly do you see that?
  - relaxing 2y ago
    You’ve never heard of cities being cheaper. Well you would if you heard about poor people living in cities. You know, like in the bad part of town. They can’t do that in the suburbs, because the suburbs are deliberately constructed without the infrastructure that enables cheap living in the city.
    - Tade0 2y ago
      They're not actually living cheaply - just in poverty. Different thing altogether. They can't do that in the suburbs because there's hardly anything for rent there and they don't have the credit score to buy anything. My reasoning is as follows: -Real estate per unit area is more expensive in the city - that's a given. -Groceries are 30-50% more expensive because again - real estate is as well and that pushes up the price of everything. On top of that you have logistics to deal with, as you need that truck to reach the store somehow. Sure, in the suburbs you have to drive everywhere and maintain your property, but there's financial flexibility in that - you don't need the newest, most gas guzzling car or to renovate the whole place every 7 years or so. All the fathers of 4+ children that I know are in agreement that they wouldn't be able to afford having such a huge family in the city. Whoever thought it's cheaper to live in the city must be childless.
      - relaxing 2y ago
        You’re assuming upper middle class living standards.
knowaveragejoe 2y ago
Everything they do involves transportation, which will be at a premium compared to an urban setting. That's just costs that directly hit their pocket book, there are others imposed by virtue of being so spread out that are more diffused across him and his neighbors.

jjav 2y ago

> Cities are often cheaper to live in than suburban lifestyles Often? Where is it cheaper, for equivalent lifestyle, to live in a city? Never heard of that. Cities (unless decrepit) are always very expensive compared to the alternatives.

knowaveragejoe 2y ago
In the US, it's often mid-tier cities that this crowd don't pay a lot of attention to.
- jjav 2y ago
  Which cities are these? Where living in that city is cheaper (for equivalent lifestyle) than in its suburbs?