Anonymous wrote:
I think it's a shame that people limit themselves to one child so they can live in a small house or apartment in an over-priced area and afford private school if necessary. Having siblings is a good thing for so many reasons. Most of the folks I know who decided to "stop at one" did so because they're not willing to give up anything for their kids, rather than because they think it's the best environment for a child. Not criticizing. Just keeping in real.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Capitol Hill is the BOMB! We love, love, love our relatively spacious open-plan 3 bed rowhouse with a nice-sized backyard, commute (25 minutes walking door to door) to interesting jobs, our stumbling distance neighborhood park, and the many restaurants and shops within walking distance. And, two GS 15s make plenty of money to send our one child to private school if we decide we're unhappy with our well-regarded (walking distance) public elementary.
Okay, we're very lucky - I admit it! And, a big negative for us is the lack of any family nearer than a lengthy plane ride away . . .
I think it's a shame that people limit themselves to one child so they can live in a small house or apartment in an over-priced area and afford private school if necessary. Having siblings is a good thing for so many reasons. Most of the folks I know who decided to "stop at one" did so because they're not willing to give up anything for their kids, rather than because they think it's the best environment for a child. Not criticizing. Just keeping in real.
And I think it's a shame that you are so stupid, and self-righteous to boot. "Most of the folks I know" who decided to stop at one did so for very sound, very personal reasons that are nobody else's business. Why don't you just stick to hauling your 8 kids around in an SUV in your plastic suburb in your oh-so "real" and enlightened life??
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
I bet that most people, "biotech execs" or not, would rather live closer to where they work. So if someone works at the 270 corridor and their spouse works around there too, why wouldn't they live nearby??
Because it sucks and a reverse commute is manageable so why not live where all the good stuff is? I'm talking about the city in case you are wondering what 'good stuff' actually denotes. Central not Chick Fil-A.
Anonymous wrote:I think it's a shame that people limit themselves to one child so they can live in a small house or apartment in an over-priced area and afford private school if necessary. Having siblings is a good thing for so many reasons. Most of the folks I know who decided to "stop at one" did so because they're not willing to give up anything for their kids, rather than because they think it's the best environment for a child. Not criticizing. Just keeping in real.
Anonymous wrote:Here is what I think of all of the terribly negative people on this post: they are miserable people who would not be happy anywhere. Talk about ungrateful. The location isn't the problem- you are.
Anonymous wrote:Please don't judge me for my toddler's $50 shoes. He has XW feet and the only shoes I can find for him are from Stride-Rite and that's how much things cost there. Since all his other clothes are hand-me-downs and consignment shop finds, can we please hang with you?
And he wore those shoes to watch an amazing parade and to check out the National Museum of Natural History yesterday, which is only 20 minutes from our house.
Love,
DC native
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
I bet that most people, "biotech execs" or not, would rather live closer to where they work. So if someone works at the 270 corridor and their spouse works around there too, why wouldn't they live nearby??
Because it sucks and a reverse commute is manageable so why not live where all the good stuff is? I'm talking about the city in case you are wondering what 'good stuff' actually denotes. Central not Chick Fil-A.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
I bet that most people, "biotech execs" or not, would rather live closer to where they work. So if someone works at the 270 corridor and their spouse works around there too, why wouldn't they live nearby??
Because it sucks and a reverse commute is manageable so why not live where all the good stuff is? I'm talking about the city in case you are wondering what 'good stuff' actually denotes. Central not Chick Fil-A.
Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
I bet that most people, "biotech execs" or not, would rather live closer to where they work. So if someone works at the 270 corridor and their spouse works around there too, why wouldn't they live nearby??
Anonymous wrote:It remains to be seen whether RTC or Tysons, or White Flint will be retrofitted properly. Everything we've seen up until this point has shown that they're incapable of executing. Also, it's a bit of a fallacy to think that tomorrow's "biotech execs" are going to be as enamored of McMansions and sprawl as today's Baby Boomers are.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Capitol Hill is the BOMB! We love, love, love our relatively spacious open-plan 3 bed rowhouse with a nice-sized backyard, commute (25 minutes walking door to door) to interesting jobs, our stumbling distance neighborhood park, and the many restaurants and shops within walking distance. And, two GS 15s make plenty of money to send our one child to private school if we decide we're unhappy with our well-regarded (walking distance) public elementary.
Okay, we're very lucky - I admit it! And, a big negative for us is the lack of any family nearer than a lengthy plane ride away . . .
Uh . . yeah. Sure. Except there is no such thing as a spacious rowhouse on Capitol Hill. If you mean spacious relative to a one bedroom apartment, then OK.
A couple of friends of ours sold their modest sized, but comfortable SF home in Silver Spring to buy a townhouse on Capital Hill. I admit that I was shocked at how little space they had relative to their other house. After about a year, they adopted and moved out to 'burbs for the public schools.
Like an earlier poster said, it all depends on what makes you happy. I'm not sure I could ever be truly happy in a house of less than 3,000 sq. ft. Those smaller houses are just too suffocating.
What's amusing about this post is, I'm sure you think you're needling the city-dwellers who are reading this. But there's certainly no jealousy here. I learned a long time ago that the more spiritually impoverished and aesthetically degraded the neighborhood, the bigger you want your house to be. If you're living in a suburban cul-de-sac, it makes sense you'd want a massive house.
Do you realize that this description fits quite a few neighborhoods in the District proper?
I think that point is arguable; I'm assuming you're referring to some housing project like Barry Farm or Potomac Gardens, but even these places have a real sense of community, unlike the vast majority of places we've thrown up since the mid-sixties. But at least you're only a five minute CaBi ride away from somewhere nice. Plus you *can* ride your bike from Point A to Point B without being mowed down by an endless torrent of streaming car traffic.