Is Remote Working Causing an Exodus to the Exurbs? (apnews.com) 118
Last year 30,000 people moved into central Florida's Polk County — more than to any other county in America. Its largest city has just 112,641 people, living a full 35 miles east of the 3.1 million residents in the metropolitan area around Tampa.
But the Associated Press says something similar is happening all over the country: "the rise of the far-flung exurbs." Outlying communities on the outer margins of metro areas — some as far away as 60 miles (97 kilometers) from a city's center — had some of the fastest-growing populations last year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Those communities are primarily in the South, like Anna, Texas on the outskirts of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area; Fort Mill, South Carolina [just 18 miles from North Carolina city Charlotte]; Lebanon, Tennessee outside Nashville; and Polk County's Haines City... [C]ommuting to work can take up to an hour and a half one-way. But [Marisol] Ortega, who lives in Haines City about 40 miles (64 kilometers) from her job in Orlando, says it's worth it. "I love my job. I love what I do, but then I love coming back home, and it's more tranquil," Ortega said.
The rapid growth of far-flung exurbs is an after-effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the Census Bureau, as rising housing costs drove people further from cities and remote working allowed many to do their jobs from home at least part of the week... Recent hurricanes and citrus diseases in Florida also have made it more attractive for some Polk County growers to sell their citrus groves to developers who build new residences or stores...
Anna, Texas, more than 45 miles (72 kilometers) north of downtown Dallas, is seeing the same kind of migration. It was the fourth-fastest growing city in the U.S. last year and its population has increased by a third during the 2020s to 27,500 residents. Like Polk County, Anna has gotten a little older, richer and more racially diverse.
The article points out that in Anna, Texas, "close to 3 in 5 households have moved into their homes since 2020, according to the Census Bureau."
But the Associated Press says something similar is happening all over the country: "the rise of the far-flung exurbs." Outlying communities on the outer margins of metro areas — some as far away as 60 miles (97 kilometers) from a city's center — had some of the fastest-growing populations last year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Those communities are primarily in the South, like Anna, Texas on the outskirts of the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area; Fort Mill, South Carolina [just 18 miles from North Carolina city Charlotte]; Lebanon, Tennessee outside Nashville; and Polk County's Haines City... [C]ommuting to work can take up to an hour and a half one-way. But [Marisol] Ortega, who lives in Haines City about 40 miles (64 kilometers) from her job in Orlando, says it's worth it. "I love my job. I love what I do, but then I love coming back home, and it's more tranquil," Ortega said.
The rapid growth of far-flung exurbs is an after-effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the Census Bureau, as rising housing costs drove people further from cities and remote working allowed many to do their jobs from home at least part of the week... Recent hurricanes and citrus diseases in Florida also have made it more attractive for some Polk County growers to sell their citrus groves to developers who build new residences or stores...
Anna, Texas, more than 45 miles (72 kilometers) north of downtown Dallas, is seeing the same kind of migration. It was the fourth-fastest growing city in the U.S. last year and its population has increased by a third during the 2020s to 27,500 residents. Like Polk County, Anna has gotten a little older, richer and more racially diverse.
The article points out that in Anna, Texas, "close to 3 in 5 households have moved into their homes since 2020, according to the Census Bureau."
Yes. Obviously. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's fuck all around and you have to drive a lot to do anything or see anyone.
You might not mind that or not want to see anyone, but you asked why and plenty of people want to do things and see people and don't especially relish driving.
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently you're wrong, because the article states these areas are the fastest growing areas in the country.
Re: (Score:2)
Both can be true at the same time.
And sadly, our children, who we have basically put under ho [medium.com]
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:4, Insightful)
That article is relating how parenting has changed....it isn't the neighborhood it's the parents refusing to allow kids to go out and play on their own away from home like I did when I was a kid.
This is going to happen whether in an urban city or suburb...I'd still argue the suburb would be safer.
Parents are way too paranoid these days....sad.
I'm SO glad I got to grow up when I did....free to roam and play with friends and no fscking cell phone to keep tabs on me. We actually started earning and learning independence at a young age.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't: [thewalrus.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I'd trust a reference from Canada whilst talking about the US.
Two very different places...
Re: (Score:2)
That article is relating how parenting has changed....it isn't the neighborhood it's the parents refusing to allow kids to go out and play on their own away from home like I did when I was a kid.
This is going to happen whether in an urban city or suburb...I'd still argue the suburb would be safer.
Parents are way too paranoid these days....sad.
I'm SO glad I got to grow up when I did....free to roam and play with friends and no fscking cell phone to keep tabs on me. We actually started earning and learning independence at a young age.
It's not just parents over-sheltering their kids. It's also the government. A mother in Georgia was arrested for "child endangerment" because her 10 year old walked less than a mile to a store alone [go.com]. That's ridiculous. At that age my friends and I were walking to places farther than that. In the attempt to protect our kids, we're smothering them to death.
Re: (Score:2)
A mother in Georgia was arrested for "child endangerment" because her 10 year old walked less than a mile to a store alone [go.com].
This is INSANE.
Re: (Score:3)
Apparently you're wrong, because the article states these areas are the fastest growing areas in the country.
The empty areas with no people are growing at a faster rate than the full areas!
If you fill a large chunk of land with low density housing, you still have a trivial number of people compared to a high density area.
Urban planners, inner city media types, control (Score:2)
People moving away from large cities is a direct job and business threat to those that favor ever larger local government.
- Urban planners don't really get to urban plan sparsely populated near rural counties
- Inner / big city media doesn't get readers, viewers and can't get everyone into nice demographic groups like the last 75 years to continue the media's business model
- Big city governments cannot count on ever more growth paying their unfunded pensions, launching liberal city mayors into the state hous
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's fuck all around and you have to drive a lot to do anything or see anyone.
You might not mind that or not want to see anyone, but you asked why and plenty of people want to do things and see people and don't especially relish driving.
The people you claim don’t especially relish driving, are the same people who waste an entire workweek every month commuting to “things”. Including work.
Those who actually don’t relish driving, don’t fucking do it.
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:4, Informative)
Moved to exurb in 2020. While it requires a car... I got a "dream house" for about 30% less than I would have paid "in town." The cost is a 7-mile trip to Starbucks, 20 miles to Costco... and the potential for an hour-long delay returning home due to the surfers or the turtles. I have a grocery store and food trucks within a quarter mile. To go drinking at a bar is 20 minutes on the city bus. The only real pain is it is an hour plus 30 minutes traffic buffer to the airport. It is not what I would have wanted when I was 30, but now it is great!
Re: (Score:2)
To go drinking at a bar is 20 minutes on the city bus.
If you're getting city buses, that doesn't sound very exurban, as generally characterised by not being part of the city area.
Plus also the stores and food within walking distance. Sounds like you live in a small town near a city, rather than an exurb.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, technically city-and-county busses. The route would actually take 2.5 hours to get inot town, but it is important access for peope that work at the two largetst employers in the area, along with connecting multiple villages.
Re: (Score:2)
Next week, we'll have a story about all the people who moved to the boonies and hate it, and are moving back to the Big City for the very reasons you cite.
Again.
Re: (Score:2)
Next week, we'll have a story about all the people who moved to the boonies and hate it, and are moving back to the Big City for the very reasons you cite.
Again.
I must have missed the first one.
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:4, Interesting)
There's fuck all around and you have to drive a lot to do anything or see anyone.
Depends on what you do. Frankly there's fuck all around in most American suburbs too. The American dream seems to be to sleep out in a house with a picket fence, and then "live" somewhere else.
As for "seeing" people these places aren't deserts. There's many people living there. Sure it is harder to move away from friends but you make new ones local to you. There's plenty of opportunity to see people. The small towns often have plenty of facilities as well, so it's not like you're driving over an hour just to go to dinner.
My wife grew up in a country town with a population smaller than the one in TFS and one which was even more remote. Whenever we stayed there we weren't alone, we weren't bored. These places are just as liveable as any other, unless you weekly requirement is to go into a high end Apple store for a chat with a genius.
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, sometimes you have to drive a bit to see your friends, but not always, and you can also turn the car the other way and drive just a bit to a lake or waterfall or mountain trail.
This is the biggest reason I don't know how people live without a vehicle. How do you get to the wilderness, like the places no public transit will ever run?
Re: (Score:3)
The average car payment is now $700 a month and that's not even getting into insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is the biggest reason I don't know how people live without a vehicle. How do you get to the wilderness, like the places no public transit will ever run?
The only people without a vehicle are those without drivers licenses. I own no car but I'm not without a vehicle. Between car sharing apps and Sixt rental being at the next metro station over I always have the ability to get whatever vehicle I need for the situation I find myself in, be that a trip to the wilderness, or a truck to move house. When I lived in Australia I used to go camping on K'gari (formerly Fraser Island) twice a year, it's a place only accessible with a proper 4x4 (not that shitty thing A
Re: (Score:2)
These days I actually wonder what you mean by "places no public transit will ever run". It's a concept foreign to me now that I live in a country with an incredibly well connected public transit system.
Perhaps we have different definitions of wilderness.
I've never owned a 4x4 in my life. Didn't stop me spending most of my annual leave in a place that needed one.
Same reason I don't own an airplane.
Re: (Score:2)
No we don't. Personally I don't live in a country with true wilderness, but that doesn't change my example of Australia. A place you can only get to with a 4x4 and a ferry with no roads, no mobile, no nothing. And yet I went there. Without ever *owning* a 4x4.
If you *live* in the wilderness you need to own a car. If you *go* to the wilderness you don't. There's an entire service industry out there that exists purely to lend you the vehicle you need.
Sidenote: I'm on Avis's website right now since I'm about t
Re: (Score:2)
If you *live* in the wilderness you need to own a car. If you *go* to the wilderness you don't. There's an entire service industry out there that exists purely to lend you the vehicle you need.
I live in the city. I visit the wilderness all summer long. Renting a car would be a PITA. But by all means you do you.
I suspect you don't have a pilots license so you may have missed the point
I don't but learning to fly a real plane instead of MSFS is on my bucket list. I still won't own a plane of course. Like cars people who own planes tend to use them regularly.
Re: (Score:2)
There's fuck all around and you have to drive a lot to do anything or see anyone.
Fun fact: you'll likely spend MORE time in transit in a city if you want to "see anyone" than in an exurb. There's a really helpful site that lets you plot isochrones: https://www.geoapify.com/isoli... [geoapify.com] - try playing with it, compare the distance you can cover by car and by transit within 30 minutes.
Transit is basically a trap. It's incovenient, slow, and useless.
Re: (Score:2)
Fun fact: you'll likely spend MORE time in transit in a city if you want to "see anyone" than in an exurb.
Depends on your city. You can travel longer distances faster from an exurb, but there are fewer people around. Also, you basically need to go to someone's house, since they aren't amenity rich rather than meet in the middle, which effectively doubles the distance.
Plus if you like a drink and your court ordered interlocked ignition is working properly, well that's not so good.
Transit is basically a trap.
Re: (Score:2)
Transit is basically a trap. It's incovenient, slow, and useless.
In America, sure. Well except New York. And some bits of SF. Also surprisingly some of Carrollton, TX.
Depends where in NY too. Manhattan? Great. Central and southwest Brooklyn? Not bad. Lots of northeastern Brooklyn and Queens, not so much, unless you really like late, overcrowded buses. And the thing with getting anywhere from LGA. JFK is better, but I think a respectable argument can be made that the best transit-connected airport in New York is in Jersey.
Chicago is actually fairly well done. The trains go directly to the airports, connecting through downtown, with relatively safe and moderately c
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on your city.
Nope. It does not hold even for New York City as a whole, although Manhattan is an exception. A stunning example: commutes in Greater Houston Area are faster than in _any_ large European city.
Plus if you like a drink and your court ordered interlocked ignition is working properly, well that's not so good.
I don't drink, so not a problem for me. But even this problem will soon be solved by self-driving taxis.
In America, sure. Well except New York. And some bits of SF. Also surprisingly some of Carrollton, TX.
It's true everywhere. Cars are fast, although they can't work in dense cities for everyone. The fix: don't build dense cities.
Cars also were a great equalizer in the US, a person with a car can access more business
Re: (Score:2)
A stunning example: commutes in Greater Houston Area are faster than in _any_ large European city.
That sounds unlikely. Possibly your top speed is higher (though extraordinarily unlikely). Possibly your average speed is higher, but the distances you need to go are on the whole greater. Plus if you're not commuting by motor vehicle, then there are never any traffic jams. Busses vary depending on how much cities like to prioritize the convenience of a single occupancy vehicle over a 100 person bus.
I don't dri
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds unlikely.
GHA average commute is 26 minutes. Berlin is 32 minutes, London is 45 minutes.
Busses vary depending on how much cities like to prioritize the convenience of a single occupancy vehicle over a 100 person bus.
The average bus occupancy is 15 people in the US.
Plus you know trains are faster than cars. Let's say you're going from London to Slough (which is just outside the M25, but pretty much continuous urbaness all the way. That train hits 125mph, and doesn't get stuck in traffic. The 25 mile journey takes 17 minutes.
You forgot to account for the transit time (walking to/from the station) and waiting for the train. Buses also have shitty average speed due to the need for constant stops. And if you space bus stations further, people have to walk longer, negating the time savings from sparser stops.
Cars are the great equalizer to those that can afford them and legally drive them. For everyone else, they are the great divider. Plus the US is weirdly bad at public transport.
EVERY country is bad at transit. It sucks universally. And yes, cars don't work for alcoholics, chil
Re: (Score:2)
I mean... having done the same google searches you've picked the highest estimates for Europe and the lowest for Houston. Anyhow it's also expensive to move because in the UK house sales are taxed unlike the US, so there's substantial financial pressure to eat a longer commute rather than move.
The average bus occupancy is 15 people in the US.
Then buses should certainly get priority by a huge margin.
You forgot to account for the transit time (walking to/from the station) and waiting for the train.
Cars get st
Re: (Score:2)
I can't remember if you live in the US or not...I kinda don't think so?
If not...you may not really be familiar with much of the US....in that if you live outside of the urban cities, you're only choice is NOT rural.
The suburbs have nice neighborhoods, shopping, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't remember if you live in the US or not...I kinda don't think so?
I do not, but I have done.
If not...you may not really be familiar with much of the US....in that if you live outside of the urban cities, you're only choice is NOT rural.
Yep, it's the 'burbs. As distinct from both rural and small town.
The suburbs have nice neighborhoods, shopping, etc.
They're almost exclusively zoned for single family residential builds, so anything useful is a slog away by car. This is bad for traffic, because cars are
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's fuck all around and you have to drive a lot to do anything or see anyone.
I have no idea how old you are, but most men don't want "fuck all around" when they're older. Most guys my age that I know don't actually like going out that much and value the peace and quiet of the country, or as close to it as you can get. You sound like a young man, because that's how I was when I was young. I wanted to be "near it all", the center of social stuff (which back then meant things like the Movies, restaurants, amusement parks, shopping, etc). I've definitely reached the Get off my lawn sta
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:4, Insightful)
You can afford more home and more land further out, so why not?
Because it doesn't fit the narrative that people need to be caged like rats in cramped, overcrowded blocks of concrete, such as this [boredpanda.com], with high temperatures because of lack of greenspace. The narrative doesn't foresee people wanting to walk out their back door onto grass or lay out under their trees, which helps to keep temperatures down, and not bump into their next door neighbors every time they open the door.
Re:Yes. Obviously. (Score:5, Informative)
While I'm sure you'll find a lot of people agreeing with your stance, would it also not be like that current pace of life is deemed not fun anymore? Living an hour, or one and a half hour of a large(r) city, it would seem to me, not insurmountable.
But you'll have more room to do your thing. See more "untamed" nature happening around you on your lot. Having space to stroll around. Or have the whole family over and that not resulting in lots of infighting as everyone doesn't need to be in each other's proverbial hair.
Now, city life and having almost anything in walk-able distance has its own charm. I happen to like that, but I sure wouldn't want to impose that on anyone who wouldn't like that.What I like about the walk-able concept is that there is a lot less external headache to deal with. And even though it may not seem like it, it is actually a lot less noisy too.
This concepts invites a lot of what is good from life outside of the city into the city. Definitely not all good things, but more than you would expect.
Now I'll stop ranting on about that concept. Life out of the city slows down to a much more manageable pace. That usually results in more piece of mind and not enough people dare to put a price on that for their own sake. Or perhaps even acknowledge that it has a value.
What I expect is happening, is that the pandemic and remote working made a lot of people realize that piece of mind is much more valuable to them than they initially thought.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that if someone starts taking about "the narrative" and aren't engaging in literary criticism they might be a bit of a dingus.
Aaaaand well you appear to have decided that the only two possible choices are the sprawl of American suburbs turned up to 11 or the closest we have to mega city one.
I do not live in an apartment block like that or indeed an apartment at all. But also I live in walking distance of shops, good public transit. How every dies that work??
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
The burbs are soulless and lonely and the peak of inefficiency.
Why would I want so much house that my precious spare time is wasted on maintaining it?
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
Come visit my neighborhood. After everyone leaves for work at places like Microsoft, the landscapers and maintenance crews descend upon the place. I don't think many of the people living around me have ever picked up a rake or pushed a mower.
Re: Yes. Obviously. (Score:2)
You probably wouldn't. Some people like maintaining a homez though. Even take pride in it. And not having to step over junkies to get In and out is just a bonus
Re: (Score:1)
You can afford more home and more land further out, so why not?
Or just, afford any home! I'm a teacher, and a few years back had offers at a few elite independent schools. Most of them were in downtown of large cities. Couldn't possibly afford to live even with 30 minutes of the schools that were in Dallas or Baltimore. I would have totally ended up in places like Anna or Ennis if I chose Dallas, and... maybe somewhere in Pennsylvania had I chosen Baltimore?
It's a trap (Score:1)
Remote jobs are more common now, but they're not infinite. I've seen plenty of folks trapped in my shitty town back when I lived there, and moved to a bigger city for work. There's a reason why big cities draw people.
The problem is our transportation network. It's not capable of supporting the population
Re: (Score:2)
High density housing provides enough density for effective mass transit, walking and bicycling all of which are several orders of magnitude more space efficient than cars. You need a better transportation network which means something other than cars.
The car companies won't let us have that (Score:2)
Without a major political realignment we are stuck with cars as our main form of transportation. And that means people are going to block high density housing because our transportatio
Re: (Score:2)
A bunch of Europeans are complaining how it's happening over there.
Possibly: the car lobby with its capture of the press is strong here. After ~60 years of relentlessly pro-car legislation where anything that prioritises any other transport under any circumstances is branded a "war on motorists". Cyclists are of course a particularly favourite group to demonize, and it has been so relentless and so continuous that it's become part of the "truth" and even elements of the left wing press indulge in it.
I can'
Re: It's a trap (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or afford a house at all.
Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:5, Interesting)
HOAs are great! You guys will love them! Imagine the worst most awful people on Nextdoor and now give them power to fine you and even repossess your home. You'll love it!
Now... Home prices in the awful inner scary cities with no HOAs to protect your home values should drop aaaaaaaaany day now....
Re: Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know what an HOA is, do you.
That's okay. Don't google it. It's really best you don't know.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, at least condo/apartment boards make some sense. You are actually sharing spaces. HOAs exist only to give Karen's power over their neighbors. ... and racism. Of course suburban HOAs literally exist as a way to legally continue racial segregation.
Re: (Score:2)
Either way, if you aren't on your HOA's board (condo or suburban neighborhood) you are a fool.
Re: Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:2)
What are you nattering on about? There are plenty of houses in the suburbs being sold without the onerous requirement of a tyrannical HOA. The last two homes I have purchased are literally 10 minutes out of town and have no HOA. I refuse to consider any property that has an HOA.
Sure thereâ(TM)s an HOA in those developments where every third house is the same and theyâ(TM)re all built like shit by the lowest bidder. But that is not the only option out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:2)
Home prices in the awful inner scary cities with no HOAs
The city council effectively becomes your HOA.
Re: Hove fun with those HOAs! (Score:2)
City councils have to follow a lot more restrictive laws. HOAs basically don't.
It's hard to get away from HOAs (Score:2)
Hell, mega corps are taking over trailer parks.
And that's before you talk about NIMBYs. You can't really have high density housing when cars are involved. Build a 500 unite apartment where everyone needs a car and suddenly you've got all those people trying to go to work at once. NIMBYs know that so they fight against high density housin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only difference between a good HOA and a bad HOA are the people on the board. All it takes is the neighbourhood busybody to sneak their way onto the board and then drive everyone else out to replace them with other neighbourhood busybodies.
And you know the people - the one person on a street with too much time on their hands who complains about everything and everybody. HOAs are magnets for people like those who then get on the board and then start issuing fines and eve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
HOAs? There are homes without them.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Tennessee, it was fairly trivial to find homes without HOAs. "Please don't show us any properties with an HOA; We think it reduces the value by 50% or more." should be the end of it.
You're paying your realtor, aka Buyer Broker, a massive pile of money at closing. It is completely reasonable to set hard requirements and enforce them. If it's not, find someone else to take your 3%.
Re: (Score:2)
Condo strata councils are *much* worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Repeat after me, "A home is not an investment"
I hope you don't advise real people.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps we don't actually disagree though, a home is theoretically not a "short term" investment, though till you die is a bit over the top. Over the long term however real estate has performed very well. Not as good as the stock market, but you get a house to use so that is a bonus. Much of most peoples wealth when they retire, including mi
Re: (Score:2)
Lets talk percentages. What percentage of people do you really think can make good decisions about when to buy and sell a home? I would argue that that's well above the capabilities of the average person because that requires spending time learning the issues of buying and selling a home.
Possibly, but also consider for the vast majority of people buying a home is an alternative to renting (discounting couch surfing, mom and dads basement, or encampments, seriously). Renting is generally a pretty poor long term economic strategy so as long as you can afford your mortgage you are already ahead by a lot.
I asked several AI's, how many people went bankrupt due to not being able to pay their mortgage. They seemed to agree that during the housing crash, it was in the 500,000's per year. As for current estimates, some say as low as 50,000 to as high as 200,000.
Lets talk percentages. What is that as a fraction of total mortgages?
What do you think the percentage of people who lose money on real estate is? I think it could be quite high.
This is a predictable side effect of buying a house you can't afford. Don't do that.
According to this page, something like 40% of people went bankrupt due to medical debt.
That is a well known result of the US
Re: (Score:2)
Renting makes great economic sense. Renting allows one to move where one can make the most money from their career. Renting allows one to live where it's always most affordable or where ever you feel will best help your quality of life.
It is impossible to know if you are the same AC who was just expounding the virtues of living in the same place forever. Are you also a landlord perchance?
including when adjusting for inflation and people who didn't even make a lowly 2% compounded return (a return you can often get from FDIC insured CDs with near zero risk).
That is 2% more than you get by renting.
These people were often living paycheck to paycheck before they incurred medical debt.
That is sad. Medical care here is (mostly) not tied to income so I can't relate.
My life nor yours is relevant to what the average person does and why it's a bad idea for them to buy real estate.
Agreed. Because purely anecdotally I know lots of people who own their homes and can only think of one person who has lost theirs. Some of them are noticeably house poor to be sure, but that is a choice. In any case it is almost uni
Re: (Score:2)
When you don't own a home, you should take advantage of the perks of renting.
From personal experience I don't think there are many perks to renting, especially lately with rent being one of the major contributors to high inflation.
One of the virtues of renting is moving where it's cost effective and or taking advantage of better employment opportunities for your career by moving.
Lots of people do that and buy homes along the way. Moving to bigger nicer ones as you build up equity. The younger you start the more equity you will have as you get older. Or you can pay off your landlord's mortgage instead, then your rent is almost pure profit for them. Cha ching.
nor does it detract from my statement that profiting from real estate is not something an average person should do.
It is something the average person does. All the time, successfully.
It is the crime and parking, stupid... (Score:1, Interesting)
One reason for urban flight is simple. Fewer drug-crazed people trying to kick down your door to rob your place, or come after you. Especially with the latest Tik-Tok craze of trying to kick down people's doors for views. Do you want your children playing near piles of syringes, or growing up with the word "strays" meaning bullets as opposed to a random puppy? Since many US cities do nothing to deal with crime, if not defunding police in order to ring a dinner bell for addicts to come and take up resid
Re: (Score:1)
Especially with the latest Tik-Tok craze of trying to kick down people's doors for views.
Must be a localized thing. In a lot of places in the US, you do that and the last thing on the video would be the bullets about to pierce your chest.
Re: (Score:1)
How about Elvis shaking his hips on tv, scandalous!
exodus (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: exodus (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>If you live close to people you have to somewhat do what they want you to do.
Yep. I'm in my 4th home since I stopped living with my parents many decades ago. Every place has been a bit further from the city with a bit more space between me and the neighbours than than the one before it.
The closer your neighbours, the more potential for friction. Life's too short to be dealing with everyone else's crap interfering with your personal time in your personal space.
Reverse exodus already happening (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or there is actual supply, unlike pretty much everywhere except Florida and Texas.
Needs more growth boundaries and government restricting expansion of government services and utilities.
Re: (Score:2)
Great (Score:3)
Great! Let's bring new life to small town USA.
Re: (Score:2)
We've got choices, and that's good (Score:5, Insightful)
So not everyone wants to live in high density urban areas? People value different things? And they're able to act on their values? Good.
Re: (Score:2)
This is exactly what I like to point out when people do that "But everyone needs space! And cities suck!"
Just like there are people who want their 100 acres and to never see another person, there are also family's like mine where we adore the city. We've lived in suburbs, we've lived rural, and we've lived big city, and I will take the city every single time over anything else. In fact when we look at maybe moving we only even look at cities larger than our current one.
Which is fine, choices are fantastic
Risky move (Score:2)
I hear stories about those who bought a 2 hr commute away from the office during the pandemic. Some were told by upper management that full remote work was for reals here to stay. They made life affecting choices based on wishful thinking. Since then, employers have put on 3 and 4 day in-office mandates and have recently started to enforce them.
The exurbs look less attractive unless you have an apartment in town (a pied-à-terre) to bunk for a couple of nights and a salary to afford that.
Re: (Score:2)
Other reasons (Score:2)
Not sure how true this is in the USA, but in Canada far-flung exurbs are about the only place near a major city where housing is remotely affordable. It's a trap, though... we're building massive car-dependent sprawl in a completely unsustainable way, and in 20-30 years time when all the infrastructure needs replacing or repairing, we're going to be in a huge financial hole. At that point, either the exurb property tax rates will skyrocket or they'll be left with crumbling infrastructure and become awful
Re: (Score:2)
Suburbs are not Exurbs (Score:2)
I think people need to be clear that there are really three categories here;
small towns which are down the road from a city and have their own urban area,
suburbs that are attached to a large city and have local shopping centers etc
and exurbs which are rural development that is not attached to any urban amenities - aka house in the country.
The responses here seem to conflate all three. But they each have their own character and problems. What is shared is the hollowing out of urban areas with establish
Congratulations 'Murica! (Score:2)
They're the worst places in the world to live because they have all the worst features of both suburbs & living in the countryside & none of the benefits. If you have an active mind &/or want a social life, don't go anywhere near these places.
Re: (Score:3)
Well that’s a bit sexist. Are there no dangerous women too?
Re: White Flight - to escape the Democrat-caused C (Score:2)
There is no such thing as a dangerous woman. Only dangerous men. That is why women choose the bear over the man. Men are evil. Stupid and evil. The mainstream media and social media tell us so.
Pay no mind to the growing list of women educators getting arrested for having sex with their underage students and absolutely do not make note of the sentencing disparities between men convicted of the same crimes.
No, no. Men bad. Women good. Got it? Good. Glad we got that sorted out.
Re: White Flight - to escape the Democrat-caused C (Score:3)
Re: White Flight - to escape the Democrat-caused C (Score:2)
Nope. The migrants are all driving pickup trucks with gardening equipment around my town. The sucessful ones will see their grandkids going to better colleges than yours will attend.
Re: (Score:2)
Exurbs have bigger gardens to maintain, win win.