Leaving DC for a lower COL area

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

dc metro, sure. But dc? NO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

dc metro, sure. But dc? NO.

Exactly this. D.C. has firm boundaries and a small footprint. Just like San Francisco which is why prices are what they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

dc metro, sure. But dc? NO.

Exactly this. D.C. has firm boundaries and a small footprint. Just like San Francisco which is why prices are what they are.

I don't get the point? Every city, even Dallas, has older more urban areas. Some are bigger than others. City borders are arbitrary. A lot of DC is SFH, after all. In some cities those same SFH would be in suburban towns, in other cities within the city limits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

There's a lot more to America than Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee.

But even in those areas the unemployment rate ain't bad and there's jobs. It may not be the type of work you do but there are jobs. There are sizable upper middle classes and professional classes in those cities. And people move in and out of those cities all the time.

This is really the key though. Of course jobs exist or these cities would not have populations. That doesn't mean anyone can move there and find one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

Yeah right. Dallas has Deep Ellum, Bishop Arts, Lower Greenville, Uptown ...areas with as much walkability as anything you'll find in the District. And several have a funkier vibe than the
manufactured cool of many gentrifying DC neighborhoods. And yeah ...it's hot. But you can also sit outside on the patio in February and don't have to dig out from a blizzard every other year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

dc metro, sure. But dc? NO.

Exactly this. D.C. has firm boundaries and a small footprint. Just like San Francisco which is why prices are what they are.

I don't get the point? Every city, even Dallas, has older more urban areas. Some are bigger than others. City borders are arbitrary. A lot of DC is SFH, after all. In some cities those same SFH would be in suburban towns, in other cities within the city limits.

LOL City boundaries are only arbitrary in places with sprawl and an inability to rein in housing - making their broader stock cheaper as a result.

Tell NYCers Manhattan is an an 'arbitrary' boundary and get laughed in your face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Problem with lower COL areas is that the job market is not as robust. Yes, "everybody" know someone who moved to Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee and found a good position and cheap housing but there is nowhere near the opportunities found in growing areas. Also, lower COL places tend to be insular. You are competing with people who went to local schools, married someone from there, and will never leave there. They pick their own when an opening occurs.

That's ...wrong on just about every level. Dallas and Houston are the same size as DC, with an even better economy, record low unemployment rate and much better COL. I've lived in both and wouldn't describe either as "insular." People are pouring in from other states. And the idea a company like Toyota or AT&T is picking executives based on the neighborhood they grew up in, that's just ludicrous.

SInce when are Dallas and Houston = Cleveland/Detroit/Milwaukee?

Dallas and Houston have incredible economies but are very hot and 100% sprawl. No charm, history, or walkability.

You know, 90% of the DC metro area is basically sprawl. 95% of people in all these cities live similarly enough. Day to day. Work, home, school, some stuff on the weekends, and in a very suburban environment.

The cohort that lives in nice old urban or old fashioned suburban areas like Chevy Chase or Takoma Park or NW DC is a very small minority of the larger DC region population. And there are equivalents in all the other cities too.

dc metro, sure. But dc? NO.

Exactly this. D.C. has firm boundaries and a small footprint. Just like San Francisco which is why prices are what they are.

I don't get the point? Every city, even Dallas, has older more urban areas. Some are bigger than others. City borders are arbitrary. A lot of DC is SFH, after all. In some cities those same SFH would be in suburban towns, in other cities within the city limits.

LOL City boundaries are only arbitrary in places with sprawl and an inability to rein in housing - making their broader stock cheaper as a result.

Tell NYCers Manhattan is an an 'arbitrary' boundary and get laughed in your face.

That doesn't help your case, Manhattan has a physical (water) boundary...but Manhattan is also only one borough, most of the others DO have arbitrary boundaries.

[Anonymous]

The underlying issue here is that DC neighborhoods generally suck compared to nice neighborhoods in other cities. Sure, the prices are inflated for economic reasons but there isn’t a single neighborhood with the overall appeal of Roland Park in Baltimore, the Fan in Richmond, Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Outremont in Montreal, the Louisville Highlands, the Back Bay in Boston, any number of NYC neighborhoods, etc.

Deep down, everyone in DC knows this, which is why some get so incredibly defensive when other areas, especially those with lower COLs, are identified as alternatives. They are so afraid that the emperor’s lack of clothes will be openly discussed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The underlying issue here is that DC neighborhoods generally suck compared to nice neighborhoods in other cities. Sure, the prices are inflated for economic reasons but there isn’t a single neighborhood with the overall appeal of Roland Park in Baltimore, the Fan in Richmond, Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Outremont in Montreal, the Louisville Highlands, the Back Bay in Boston, any number of NYC neighborhoods, etc.

Deep down, everyone in DC knows this, which is why some get so incredibly defensive when other areas, especially those with lower COLs, are identified as alternatives. They are so afraid that the emperor’s lack of clothes will be openly discussed.

Shaker Heights - Cleveland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What types of jobs are we talking about here? What are these jobs that are only available in DC?
Some are saying that even if they find a new job outside of DC, their career will be over.
I'm really curious to know what those jobs are.

Two Fed household here. Impossible for us to leave D.C. and have both of us stay in the same field.

This is why I always encourage young people to be careful what they wish for when they take that first dc-centric job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The underlying issue here is that DC neighborhoods generally suck compared to nice neighborhoods in other cities. Sure, the prices are inflated for economic reasons but there isn’t a single neighborhood with the overall appeal of Roland Park in Baltimore, the Fan in Richmond, Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Outremont in Montreal, the Louisville Highlands, the Back Bay in Boston, any number of NYC neighborhoods, etc.

Deep down, everyone in DC knows this, which is why some get so incredibly defensive when other areas, especially those with lower COLs, are identified as alternatives. They are so afraid that the emperor’s lack of clothes will be openly discussed.

You state this as fact, but this is a subjective opinion. I’m not familiar with the neighborhoods on your list except Back Bay, and I'm sure they’re nice, but DC does hold unique charm and appeal for many of us.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/804056.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What types of jobs are we talking about here? What are these jobs that are only available in DC?
Some are saying that even if they find a new job outside of DC, their career will be over.
I'm really curious to know what those jobs are.

Two Fed household here. Impossible for us to leave D.C. and have both of us stay in the same field.

This is why I always encourage young people to be careful what they wish for when they take that first dc-centric job.

Funny. My job is in no way DC-centric. I just love it so much that I moved here and bought two homes (one of which I use as a rental).

It's a gorgeous city, full of intelligent people with abundant greenery, great real estate investments, and a city that is so walkable its insane (having been to Boston/Charlotte/Atlanta - none of them compare in that factor).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The underlying issue here is that DC neighborhoods generally suck compared to nice neighborhoods in other cities. Sure, the prices are inflated for economic reasons but there isn’t a single neighborhood with the overall appeal of Roland Park in Baltimore, the Fan in Richmond, Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Outremont in Montreal, the Louisville Highlands, the Back Bay in Boston, any number of NYC neighborhoods, etc.

Deep down, everyone in DC knows this, which is why some get so incredibly defensive when other areas, especially those with lower COLs, are identified as alternatives. They are so afraid that the emperor’s lack of clothes will be openly discussed.

Shaker Heights - Cleveland

You're arguing that these single, solitary areas in each major city are better than brilliant neighborhoods in D.C.? And yes lol, I'd argue that Capital Hill, Dupont Circle, Logan Circle, Georgetown, and the Wharf far above surpass Roland Park/the Fan/Shadyside/Shaker Heights. For various reasons but the collective whole of D.C. can't be matched unless we're talking about NYC/SF/Montreal.

Enjoy Cleveland though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The underlying issue here is that DC neighborhoods generally suck compared to nice neighborhoods in other cities. Sure, the prices are inflated for economic reasons but there isn’t a single neighborhood with the overall appeal of Roland Park in Baltimore, the Fan in Richmond, Shadyside in Pittsburgh, Outremont in Montreal, the Louisville Highlands, the Back Bay in Boston, any number of NYC neighborhoods, etc.

Deep down, everyone in DC knows this, which is why some get so incredibly defensive when other areas, especially those with lower COLs, are identified as alternatives. They are so afraid that the emperor’s lack of clothes will be openly discussed.

Shaker Heights - Cleveland

You're arguing that these single, solitary areas in each major city are better than brilliant neighborhoods in D.C.? And yes lol, I'd argue that Capital Hill, Dupont Circle, Logan Circle, Georgetown, and the Wharf far above surpass Roland Park/the Fan/Shadyside/Shaker Heights. For various reasons but the collective whole of D.C. can't be matched unless we're talking about NYC/SF/Montreal.

Enjoy Cleveland though.

There are no brilliant neighborhoods in DC with a great urban fabric. None. Each of the places you mentioned has one or more fatal flaws.