5 ms·

In the attractive cities housing is very expensive, even a small place might be out of reach for a family. However, you made me realize that it is of course a

by Tichy 14y ago

In the attractive cities housing is very expensive, even a small place might be out of reach for a family. However, you made me realize that it is of course a choice to live in the city (kind of, depending on job availability), and in the countryside things might be cheaper. Actually I wonder if the "one person sustains the family" thing was mainly a thing of the countryside. In Germany there are some cities that are dominated by one big company. If you were around when those companies started, you probably had very good living conditions (good wage because of the successful company, cheap housing because of the countryside). Not sure if such companies even get started anymore these days. Perhaps the IT companies have to go to the cities because IT workers prefer the stimulating environment. Less of a concern for the factory workers of the past? Just a thought off the top of my head, though. Actually the perhaps biggest German IT company, SAP, is one such case of a big company dominating a small city. But it also started quite a while ago already (1972). SAP has it's main base in "Walldorf", a village of 15000 people. I suspect people working for SAP in Walldorf don't have trouble to afford a house.

lotharbot 14y ago
> "In the attractive cities housing is very expensive" I've never found high cost-of-living cities to be particularly more attractive than average cost-of-living cities. I definitely wouldn't consider Oakland (40% higher than US average COL) an attractive city. Certainly not more attractive than Orlando (2% lower than US average COL). But of course, what city we consider "attractive" is also a choice. If one considers Manhattan to be the most attractive because of some particular attribute, then choosing to live in the most attractive space is going to be costly and perhaps out of reach with a single middle class income. But a single middle class income is plenty to live in a comfortable house in a decent neighborhood in Denver, Kansas City, or Dallas, and many people find those places quite attractive.

by Tichy 14y ago

lotharbot 14y ago

> "In the attractive cities housing is very expensive" I've never found high cost-of-living cities to be particularly more attractive than average cost-of-living cities. I definitely wouldn't consider Oakland (40% higher than US average COL) an attractive city. Certainly not more attractive than Orlando (2% lower than US average COL). But of course, what city we consider "attractive" is also a choice. If one considers Manhattan to be the most attractive because of some particular attribute, then choosing to live in the most attractive space is going to be costly and perhaps out of reach with a single middle class income. But a single middle class income is plenty to live in a comfortable house in a decent neighborhood in Denver, Kansas City, or Dallas, and many people find those places quite attractive.