NYTimes: College educated workers are leaving DC due to high housing costs

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/05/15/upshot/migrations-college-super-cities.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=The%20Upshot

DC lost more college educated workers from 2020-21 than it gained, as people realize that they will fare better in cities with cheaper housing.

[Anonymous]

Young college educated people want to buy homes and build equity. It’s very hard to do that in DC or NYC if you’re not bankrolled by your parents in some manner.

[Anonymous]

I don't blame them for leaving. It's insanely unaffordable. You have homes in the millions located in the far out burbs and even some exurbs. Even if you choose to settle for a far out shack it is overpriced. Not to mention the overall supply of homes is trash.

[Anonymous]

It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

Haha. No, they haven’t caught up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

Yeah the Smithsonian is opening in rural towns and cities nationwide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

Haha. No, they haven’t caught up.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

Yeah the Smithsonian is opening in rural towns and cities nationwide.

25 year olds do not care about museums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

No. I live in a rural town and there is none of the following here or within 90 minutes of me: stores such as Lululemon, Apple, Athleta, Nordstrom, Coach and also Whole Foods, Equinox, Lifetime Fitness, Trader Joe’s, Soulcycle, Justsalad, Sweetgreen and Cava.

[Anonymous]

PP here no TopGolf either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

No. I live in a rural town and there is none of the following here or within 90 minutes of me: stores such as Lululemon, Apple, Athleta, Nordstrom, Coach and also Whole Foods, Equinox, Lifetime Fitness, Trader Joe’s, Soulcycle, Justsalad, Sweetgreen and Cava.

Frankly you’re not missing much by not having these soulless corporate chains nearby. The great thing about a city are its unique offerings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

No. I live in a rural town and there is none of the following here or within 90 minutes of me: stores such as Lululemon, Apple, Athleta, Nordstrom, Coach and also Whole Foods, Equinox, Lifetime Fitness, Trader Joe’s, Soulcycle, Justsalad, Sweetgreen and Cava.

Frankly you’re not missing much by not having these soulless corporate chains nearby. The great thing about a city are its unique offerings.

Unfortunately, we're seeing more and more soulless chains take over the DMV in the all categories the prior PP mentioned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

The article doesn't say that college educated workers are leaving DC for rural areas and suburbs. It says they are leaving DC and environs for other cities.

The people in question want to live in a city, they just want to live in a city they can actually afford. They are not moving to Frederick or La Plata County, Maryland. They are moving to Philadelphia, Denver, Minneapolis, Nashville, etc. -- cities with many of the same amenities as DC but cheaper housing and an overall lower cost of living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

I am kind of a die-hard city person, but things have gotten pretty bad in the past few years with crime and accommodation of homeless people. I really think cities are going to have to get tougher on crime. I hope that we don't just accept this as the new normal. Cities do not have to be this way, but we have allowed it in the past few years. And this is not just in DC. Friends from LA are pretty sad about how bad things have gotten. Same for SF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not just cheaper housing. It’s better schools, less crime and fewer homeless people.

Not to mention rural, towns and suburbs have caught up in terms of dining, gyms and other amenities. You no longer need to live in a city for access to these things.

The article doesn't say that college educated workers are leaving DC for rural areas and suburbs. It says they are leaving DC and environs for other cities.

The people in question want to live in a city, they just want to live in a city they can actually afford. They are not moving to Frederick or La Plata County, Maryland. They are moving to Philadelphia, Denver, Minneapolis, Nashville, etc. -- cities with many of the same amenities as DC but cheaper housing and an overall lower cost of living.

It’s a good thing to have college educated people spreading out across the country. It might help to decrease some of the polarization between red state/ blue state.