Reply to Real talk about the city’s economy, federal buildings leases, and telework impacts

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Real talk about the city’s economy, federal buildings leases, and telework impacts"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
+1. People who live in DC often take a very narrow-minded view of the suburbs and think that they're just full of people who would live in DC but are priced out. The truth is that many of us are totally happy in the suburbs, and we really only come into DC for work and don't find anything about DC to be particularly enjoyable. I'm sure this is true of other major cities as well; not everyone has bought into the idea that you can't have an exciting and fulfilling life if you don't live in a city.[/quote]

Suburbanites are parasites on host cities. Film at 11.[/quote]

Perhaps you should tell our employers to pay us enough to live there then. Given the cost of housing in DC, this isn't an "avoiding property taxes" thing.

[/quote]
The amount of money that I would need to be paid to live in DC in an equivalent safe neighborhood on a large lot on a quiet, tree lined street would be unconscionable. In any case, where I live the infrastructure and government services are much better so even if I was paid enough for the equivalent lifestyle it would not be an equivalent exchange. Particularly since it is vastly more convenient to get around and shop.[/quote]

LOL, how many people (especially younger people) can afford to have a "large lot on a quiet tree lined street" anywhere?  Most cannot afford to buy a home in the suburbs anyway, if you have one and can afford one this doesn't make it reality for everyone.  Many people will have to resort to apartment living, and apartment living is objectively nicer in urban grid setting in the city vs. in the suburbs if you reduce crime and homelessness. [/quote]

There is a reason that Howard County is growing as fast as it is. Others just leave the region entirely and move to the south or southwest. The people who would otherwise be the middle class tax base can afford a single family home with a yard if they move out far enough and the are increasingly willing to do it. DC is left with those wealthy enough to stay, those young enough to not care yet, and those too poor to leave. [/quote]

There will always be people moving in and out. Wealthy have more than one home, they will stay, can afford it.  Young will always come and go, they are transient.  Some will move away and a new crop will take their place.   Why is the trend of younger people getting settled and leaving for cheaper suburban/exurban homes supposed to be surprising these days?  [/quote]
Do you want to know what the real problem is? It is a demographic issue. DC greatly benefited from this huge cohort of Millennials flocking to cities and based its entire private sector economy, built environment and tax base around the presumption that this would continue indefinitely. Instead, what is happening is exactly as you point out, they are reverting to traditional behavior. However, it is such a large cohort that it will cause significant disruption and the city is not ready for it nor has come to terms that it is happening. Bowsers revitalization plan presumes that the remaining Millennials who are 30-45 years old will stay without understanding that they need to change to accommodate household formation and families and that there is a huge cohort of Gen Z behind them that will add to it. It makes zero sense as a strategy and from this perspective it looks like a city run by addicts who think that there is always another fix and will keep chasing that fix until they hit rock bottom. The reality is that the population of the city will not be appreciably increasing any time soon. In fact, the population growth of the whole USA is slowing.[/quote]

People who enjoy urban amenities have fewer options than those who don't care much about this, always had been the case. Those who care about it have to pay $$$$ for urban mansions if they want space and yards, or have to compromise and live in apartments and rowhomes if they want to stay.  None of this is new.  [b]If they don't care[/b] to live in the city they buy a home and move, and if they cannot afford anything in DC metro to their liking and don't care to stick around here they go to cheaper metro areas.  But the list of these affordable metro areas is shrinking because of the recent huge waves of people relocating there.  It's not longer a bargain to move if you insist on living in the nice safe areas close to amenities.

Eventually sizable SFHs may become unaffordable for anyone who isn't top 1% if they want amenity rich connected areas.  Most younger people without inherited homes will have to adjust their expectations and start considering higher density housing to raise their families (like many are already doing in NYC).  Or they will have to love to live on rural land or economically depressed metro areas, which are still comparatively inexpensive.  Given increase in immigration even if our birthrates fall we aren't looking for increase of affordable SFHs any time soon.  We are looking at increase in density.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics