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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.