4 ms·

Yeah, go gentrify the locals in some lower-cost-of-living country. You sure 'deserve' it because for some reason you have a 'right' to just immigrate there and

Yeah, go gentrify the locals in some lower-cost-of-living country. You sure 'deserve' it because for some reason you have a 'right' to just immigrate there and buy their housing and sh*t from under their feet.

jodacola 2y ago
I appreciate your frustration, dumbledoren. Your comment speaks to perspectives I could expect to face in another country - thank you. I can only say my personal intent isn't that. I live a simple life. My family has a small, old home. We garden, grow our own food, and are respectful to our environment. I prioritize supporting small, local businesses. I wouldn't want to parachute into another country acting as though I Know Better™ and bringing my "American sensibilities" to another country. If I were to leave the US, I see myself entering another country, hat in hand, knowing fully I'm not better or special, and it's my job to adapt and to respect the culture and country.
- dumbledoren 2y ago
  > I can only say my personal intent isn't that. I live a simple life. And yet you will end up doing that when you move to such a country. Regardless of your intentions. > it's my job to adapt and to respect the culture and country Unfortunately respect and cultural adaptation do not alleviate the effects of gentrification via housing costs and cost of living. It would be less of a problem only if you went to a country and location that has a similar cost of living as where you live now, but then again, that's not really on the table, is it...
  - alpha_squared 2y ago
    > It would be less of a problem only if you went to a country and location that has a similar cost of living as where you live now, but then again, that's not really on the table, is it... This seems to be an assumption you made, but the poster did not imply or state. As someone in a similar mindset to the poster, I'm not looking for lower CoL places, I'm looking for comparable QoL places which ultimately points to Europe or Oceania. We'd be paid dramatically less, which we're okay with, but the QoL would be comparable (perhaps even better when counting social services).
    - jodacola 2y ago
      I understand where they're coming from, though. If I pulled the trigger, it would be to a similar CoL location, but that still gets to their point: if many people do the same, prices go up. Housing availability goes down. And all the knock-on effects that could result in "gentrification." How do I balance that (and all sorts of other things) with my desire to keep my family safe and give my children a chance at a solid future, though? I'm not sure, which is why I feel so much consternation and a need to gather more information to inform how I'll decide to act in the future.
      - dumbledoren 2y ago
        > If I pulled the trigger, it would be to a similar CoL location, but that still gets to their point: if many people do the same, prices go up. Housing availability goes down. And all the knock-on effects that could result in "gentrification." Precisely. You don't need to put gentrification in quotes. It invariably happens. And it gentrifies both the locals and the recent immigrants. > How do I balance that (and all sorts of other things) with my desire to keep my family safe and give my children a chance at a solid future, though? From the dynamics that seem to go around such white-collar immigration for these reasons, there doesn't seem to be a way to prevent gentrification and CoL rise. The only exception may be going to places that sorely lack people, like the American North Midwest - places that not only risk depopulation, but also places that can carry immense amounts of people and are open to development. The majority of the world is not like that. The majority of European population centers are squeezed between river valleys between mountains or short strips of land between the mountains/hills and the sea. And they are already built to hell. The depopulated mountain regions of such places could use some people, but they can in no way handle the amount of emigration that the richer countries seem to be generating. That is one reason why Europe gets higher CoL and gentrification so fast from such immigration. South America fares a little better because it has at least some more space, but it suffers from the same in the end: The desirable locations are limited and the immigrants go to those locations, causing skyrocketing costs. Looking at Asia and Africa, it may be a little better because in certain locations there are vast spaces and major cities that could handle immense amounts of people and could use development, but those don't seem to be popular destinations for such white-collar immigrants. So it again comes back to the US: The 'flyover country' between the coasts in the US is an immense space that is open to a level of development that no other place on the planet can provide. Most of that space seems to be occupied by either unused public land, or by the cattle industry. There was recent research that detailed how the cattle industry sits on top of a gigantic amount of land almost for free despite propping itself up with government subsidies and how it could solve the housing woes of the US and provide unparalleled development. But until citizens, investors and planners start putting pressure on politicians to offset the influence of the cattle industry lobby, that land will keep propping up the cattle industry instead of being used for urban development.
whiplash451 2y ago
What motivates such a rude answer? The parent is genuinely exposing a personal question. Nothing in his post suggests that he would go gentrify a low COL place.
- dumbledoren 2y ago
  > What motivates such a rude answer? Gentrification. > Nothing in his post suggests that he would go gentrify a low COL place Nobody who moves out of the richer countries goes to a richer country. This includes the ultra-rich: Even they move to a place where their money will go much further, even if that is a district in London that they can comfortably afford. So it always ends up in gentrification.

jodacola 2y ago

I appreciate your frustration, dumbledoren. Your comment speaks to perspectives I could expect to face in another country - thank you. I can only say my personal intent isn't that. I live a simple life. My family has a small, old home. We garden, grow our own food, and are respectful to our environment. I prioritize supporting small, local businesses. I wouldn't want to parachute into another country acting as though I Know Better™ and bringing my "American sensibilities" to another country. If I were to leave the US, I see myself entering another country, hat in hand, knowing fully I'm not better or special, and it's my job to adapt and to respect the culture and country.

dumbledoren 2y ago
> I can only say my personal intent isn't that. I live a simple life. And yet you will end up doing that when you move to such a country. Regardless of your intentions. > it's my job to adapt and to respect the culture and country Unfortunately respect and cultural adaptation do not alleviate the effects of gentrification via housing costs and cost of living. It would be less of a problem only if you went to a country and location that has a similar cost of living as where you live now, but then again, that's not really on the table, is it...
- alpha_squared 2y ago
  > It would be less of a problem only if you went to a country and location that has a similar cost of living as where you live now, but then again, that's not really on the table, is it... This seems to be an assumption you made, but the poster did not imply or state. As someone in a similar mindset to the poster, I'm not looking for lower CoL places, I'm looking for comparable QoL places which ultimately points to Europe or Oceania. We'd be paid dramatically less, which we're okay with, but the QoL would be comparable (perhaps even better when counting social services).
  - jodacola 2y ago
    I understand where they're coming from, though. If I pulled the trigger, it would be to a similar CoL location, but that still gets to their point: if many people do the same, prices go up. Housing availability goes down. And all the knock-on effects that could result in "gentrification." How do I balance that (and all sorts of other things) with my desire to keep my family safe and give my children a chance at a solid future, though? I'm not sure, which is why I feel so much consternation and a need to gather more information to inform how I'll decide to act in the future.
    - dumbledoren 2y ago
      > If I pulled the trigger, it would be to a similar CoL location, but that still gets to their point: if many people do the same, prices go up. Housing availability goes down. And all the knock-on effects that could result in "gentrification." Precisely. You don't need to put gentrification in quotes. It invariably happens. And it gentrifies both the locals and the recent immigrants. > How do I balance that (and all sorts of other things) with my desire to keep my family safe and give my children a chance at a solid future, though? From the dynamics that seem to go around such white-collar immigration for these reasons, there doesn't seem to be a way to prevent gentrification and CoL rise. The only exception may be going to places that sorely lack people, like the American North Midwest - places that not only risk depopulation, but also places that can carry immense amounts of people and are open to development. The majority of the world is not like that. The majority of European population centers are squeezed between river valleys between mountains or short strips of land between the mountains/hills and the sea. And they are already built to hell. The depopulated mountain regions of such places could use some people, but they can in no way handle the amount of emigration that the richer countries seem to be generating. That is one reason why Europe gets higher CoL and gentrification so fast from such immigration. South America fares a little better because it has at least some more space, but it suffers from the same in the end: The desirable locations are limited and the immigrants go to those locations, causing skyrocketing costs. Looking at Asia and Africa, it may be a little better because in certain locations there are vast spaces and major cities that could handle immense amounts of people and could use development, but those don't seem to be popular destinations for such white-collar immigrants. So it again comes back to the US: The 'flyover country' between the coasts in the US is an immense space that is open to a level of development that no other place on the planet can provide. Most of that space seems to be occupied by either unused public land, or by the cattle industry. There was recent research that detailed how the cattle industry sits on top of a gigantic amount of land almost for free despite propping itself up with government subsidies and how it could solve the housing woes of the US and provide unparalleled development. But until citizens, investors and planners start putting pressure on politicians to offset the influence of the cattle industry lobby, that land will keep propping up the cattle industry instead of being used for urban development.

whiplash451 2y ago

What motivates such a rude answer? The parent is genuinely exposing a personal question. Nothing in his post suggests that he would go gentrify a low COL place.

dumbledoren 2y ago
> What motivates such a rude answer? Gentrification. > Nothing in his post suggests that he would go gentrify a low COL place Nobody who moves out of the richer countries goes to a richer country. This includes the ultra-rich: Even they move to a place where their money will go much further, even if that is a district in London that they can comfortably afford. So it always ends up in gentrification.