This doesn’t mean they’re moving to the middle of nowhere. Likely places like Philly, Providence, Richmond, Baltimore, Charlotte, Nashville, Pittsburgh and
Columbus that all have some semblance of city amenities like Whole Foods, public transit, “luxury” brand new apartments, walkability and Amtrak stop, but are relatively affordable.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

+1 it's called tier 2 cities -- smaller density than NYC, LA, but still a city, and more affordable.

Young people generally don't want rural, or small suburb. They want lively, but also affordable. Those second tier cities are way more affordable than the big cities.

They start out affordable, then the get popular and become unaffordable. Once upon a time, Seattle was the affordable alternative to SF. Denver attracted tech from the bay area, now it's one of the most expensive cities in the US. The same goes for Austin. Nashville is undergoing the same thing now.

+1. DC prices are actually slowly converging toward the national average; we're one of the only high-cost cities that is building remotely enough to keep up with demand. In the long run, out-migration will slow, because the cost savings from doing so are getting smaller and smaller over time.

Also, no one should be using 2020-2021 statistics to make any point unless that point is specifically about the pandemic. Obviously, young educated people left DC disproportionately in 2020 because they didn't have to go into an office and they are more likely than in most cities to have grown up somewhere else. They moved in with their parents, but we already know that they've moved back out, and that DC gained population from 2021-2022. This article is old news.

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.

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.

+1 it's called tier 2 cities -- smaller density than NYC, LA, but still a city, and more affordable.

Young people generally don't want rural, or small suburb. They want lively, but also affordable. Those second tier cities are way more affordable than the big cities.

They start out affordable, then the get popular and become unaffordable. Once upon a time, Seattle was the affordable alternative to SF. Denver attracted tech from the bay area, now it's one of the most expensive cities in the US. The same goes for Austin. Nashville is undergoing the same thing now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that this is a good thing and hope that it continues to the point that employers in these overpriced cities - looking at you fed gov - pay enough so that people can stay.

Healthcare worker here - my perception is that fed workers make more plus they get pensions which are unheard of in the private sector world. Is this not true? A coworker recently jumped ship from the hospital to a federal job for these reasons.

It depends. GS workers top out at 183k. Most make a lot less than that. Financial regulators, certain IT classifications, and medical classifications can make a lot more

So at top level positions, people could make more in private sector... but middle level positions, seems Fed pay is better, especially if you get a pension?

It depends on what you consider midlevel. To me, that's GS 12 or 13 and most of them are going to make around 120k

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.

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.

dp.. but they usually end up in already blue areas, and with gerrymandering, it's not going to move the needle that much as far as politics.

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.

+1 it's called tier 2 cities -- smaller density than NYC, LA, but still a city, and more affordable.

Young people generally don't want rural, or small suburb. They want lively, but also affordable. Those second tier cities are way more affordable than the big cities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that this is a good thing and hope that it continues to the point that employers in these overpriced cities - looking at you fed gov - pay enough so that people can stay.

Healthcare worker here - my perception is that fed workers make more plus they get pensions which are unheard of in the private sector world. Is this not true? A coworker recently jumped ship from the hospital to a federal job for these reasons.

It depends. GS workers top out at 183k. Most make a lot less than that. Financial regulators, certain IT classifications, and medical classifications can make a lot more

So at top level positions, people could make more in private sector... but middle level positions, seems Fed pay is better, especially if you get a pension?

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.

I live in a rural setting and nearly all of that is within 45 minutes - which, where I am, is about 15-20 minutes past the nearest thing.

Who wants to drive 45min each way to go to TJ? That's my weekly grocery run which is 10min away.

I live in the burbs, and all of that is within 15min from me.

My teen kids, 20/30 something yr old nieces/nephews want a big suburb, not rural and not big city.

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.

I live in a rural setting and nearly all of that is within 45 minutes - which, where I am, is about 15-20 minutes past the nearest thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that this is a good thing and hope that it continues to the point that employers in these overpriced cities - looking at you fed gov - pay enough so that people can stay.

Healthcare worker here - my perception is that fed workers make more plus they get pensions which are unheard of in the private sector world. Is this not true? A coworker recently jumped ship from the hospital to a federal job for these reasons.

It depends. GS workers top out at 183k. Most make a lot less than that. Financial regulators, certain IT classifications, and medical classifications can make a lot more

Anonymous wrote:Yes, housing is expensive in DC, but 2020-2021 was also prime pandemic. Lots of the great things about living in a city were not really that great at the time. With many restrictions at the time and the opening up of telework, a number of people who would have been happy to live in more urban areas in smaller apartments decided to move.

It will be interesting to see if there is a return or increase in 2023 of people moving back now that city amenities are more open and accessible.

Ding ding ding - this is a big one. And even now, many places are switching to virtual work or hybrid work permanently and we have yet to see the permanent impact of this. We are looking to move out of the city because two parents who didn't work remotely at all now both work for companies that embraced hybrid work. Two of us home together on conference calls in a tiny rowhouse where we don't even have desk space other than our kid's desk isn't cutting it anymore, but was fine pre-pandemic.

Anonymous wrote:I think that this is a good thing and hope that it continues to the point that employers in these overpriced cities - looking at you fed gov - pay enough so that people can stay.

Healthcare worker here - my perception is that fed workers make more plus they get pensions which are unheard of in the private sector world. Is this not true? A coworker recently jumped ship from the hospital to a federal job for these reasons.

Yes, housing is expensive in DC, but 2020-2021 was also prime pandemic. Lots of the great things about living in a city were not really that great at the time. With many restrictions at the time and the opening up of telework, a number of people who would have been happy to live in more urban areas in smaller apartments decided to move.

It will be interesting to see if there is a return or increase in 2023 of people moving back now that city amenities are more open and accessible.

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.

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

25 year olds do not care about museums.

x10000000

Nailed it.

I think that this is a good thing and hope that it continues to the point that employers in these overpriced cities - looking at you fed gov - pay enough so that people can stay.