Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t leave pre-kids, wait until your kids are in one of the 2000 student cut-throat schools*50 of them in the dmv.
Stressful and total crapshoot applying to colleges around here.

But have fun with all the sports and arts cuts. Only <10% will make the cut! What a place to live.

Well, if you make the <10% in podunk high school, flyover country, it still may not cut it either for an elite college.

This isn’t 100% accurate. Elite schools also care about geographic diversity so it can actually be easier to get in from a state where there are less applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I should kindly point out that the vast majority of people in the DC region drive to work and live a car dependent lifestyle. Hello? Look at the suburbs! Look at the traffic on the roads!

You can have a walkable lifestyle in DC. And you can have a walkable lifestyle in other cities too. It’s about how you organize your life.

The D.C. region is not D.C. Just like the NYC region - in other words Newark and Connecticut - are not NYC.

For most people DC is not a walkable environment. Because they can't make it walkable. Their jobs are not that close to metro stops, or they can't live close enough to a metro stop. That's why all this arguing over walkable is silly. It's great it's important to you. But it's not for many other people. And that's what you struggle to understand. It's not the end all be all goal for most people and the decisive factor to be used in ranking cities against other cities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to pay 800k for a townhouse where your packages will get stolen

My packages aren’t stolen. BUT even if they were, I’d choose that over a one hour commute via car. So would most millennials.

Most “second” and “third” tier cities do not come with a one hour commute by car. People in Richmond walk to work. Those cities are less crowded so commute times are null.

I can’t (job here) and don’t want to move to Richmond. I also find it hard to believe that many people in Richmond walk to work.

People in second tier cities all drive to work from the ‘burbs. They drive everywhere because very few live downtown.

This seems like a bit of an oversimplification. I’ve lived in Philadelphia and Chicago and I consider them second tier and both were very walkable. Philly might actually be more walkable than dc.

DP: I think that if Richmond is being called second-tier, Chicago and Philly are first tier. (Either that or Richmond is actually third tier and was miscategorized from the start).

Philadelphia maybe walkable but the upkeep of pedestrian walkaways is laughable. I don't even know if you can consider it still walkable with the potholes, stagnant water, tripping hazards, chunks of broken off pavement all over. Don't get me started on the Jack the Ripper alleys in the city of Brotherly Love either.

Just stop it. Your post is falling into the trap of changing the parameters to justify whatever you're trying to persuade yourself so you're coming across as a screeching fool. Center City Philadelphia is a fabulous place in many ways. And it's highly, highly, walkable. You can easily live in Philadelphia without a car and walk everywhere or use the local rail system. Does Philadelphia have problems? Yes. But it's not Detroit either. It shows you that there are other cities outside DC/SF/Boston/NYC that are highly walkable with a nice quality of life. You do NOT need to live in DC to be in a walkable area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a young decent/highish earning couple (HHI north of 200k) and never considered DC for reasons in this article. Mainly the price. DC is too expensive, not enough space, and doesnt offer a good commute at all. If our jobs werent central do the DC area we would not live here. I love visiting the city, but would never live there.

We're a young high earning couple and never considered VA or MD because we didn't want to be stuck in traffic for most of our lives. It's very expensive here, but we love our house/neighborhood and walkability/accessibility.

Honestly if you love visiting cities but wouldn't want to live in one it probably wasn't the cost pushing you to the burbs. Everything's not for everybody.

DP. Young (how are we defining young here? Under 30? Under 35?) family. We used to live in DC until our HHI increased to $400k and this line of thinking really bothers me. For the amount of money you pay in taxes in dc you should really get more than walkability and the chance at free pre-k (because depending on where you live it’s not guaranteed at your neighborhood school and most folks don’t want to have to travel far for pre k). And add to that that you don’t get representation at the national level. No thanks.

As people have said, it's not for everybody. I've lived in Charlotte and Atlanta. I LOVE DC. People are smart here. There is more to life than a big house. At $700K HHI, I'm happy to pay my taxes here. To each his own.

PP. Who said anything about a big house? And you do know that people in places like Charlotte and Atlanta also pay taxes? My point is you get nothing for what you pay despite the fact that dc is actually financially better positioned than many other cities because it’s not heavily in debt.

I don't see how that's true. I get the same in DC that I got in Charlotte or Atlanta. Quite frankly, the only difference for me is that I get to live around smart people. Yes, Charlotte was easier to live in because it's just an easier lifestyle, but I worked for Bank of America and I was working my ass off. There was no difference work wise. I was the only woman on my team for 5 years. Women generally didn't work at the same level as men. If you don't want to work then I guess that's good.

PP here. And, for the record, they weren't cheaper. They were just as expensive. If I wanted to live in some far out suburb it's cheaper. Hell, I could move to a far out suburb here and it's much cheaper. Plus, taxes were high as hell. The income tax was lower, but every other tax was much higher. Our property taxes in Charlotte made me fall out the chair at closing!

You didn’t know what your taxes were going to be until you were at your closing? That doesn’t sound very smart

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t leave pre-kids, wait until your kids are in one of the 2000 student cut-throat schools*50 of them in the dmv.
Stressful and total crapshoot applying to colleges around here.

But have fun with all the sports and arts cuts. Only <10% will make the cut! What a place to live.

Well, if you make the <10% in podunk high school, flyover country, it still may not cut it either for an elite college.

If you don’t leave pre-kids, wait until your kids are in one of the 2000 student cut-throat schools*50 of them in the dmv.
Stressful and total crapshoot applying to colleges around here.

But have fun with all the sports and arts cuts. Only <10% will make the cut! What a place to live.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a young decent/highish earning couple (HHI north of 200k) and never considered DC for reasons in this article. Mainly the price. DC is too expensive, not enough space, and doesnt offer a good commute at all. If our jobs werent central do the DC area we would not live here. I love visiting the city, but would never live there.

We're a young high earning couple and never considered VA or MD because we didn't want to be stuck in traffic for most of our lives. It's very expensive here, but we love our house/neighborhood and walkability/accessibility.

Honestly if you love visiting cities but wouldn't want to live in one it probably wasn't the cost pushing you to the burbs. Everything's not for everybody.

DP. Young (how are we defining young here? Under 30? Under 35?) family. We used to live in DC until our HHI increased to $400k and this line of thinking really bothers me. For the amount of money you pay in taxes in dc you should really get more than walkability and the chance at free pre-k (because depending on where you live it’s not guaranteed at your neighborhood school and most folks don’t want to have to travel far for pre k). And add to that that you don’t get representation at the national level. No thanks.

As people have said, it's not for everybody. I've lived in Charlotte and Atlanta. I LOVE DC. People are smart here. There is more to life than a big house. At $700K HHI, I'm happy to pay my taxes here. To each his own.

PP. Who said anything about a big house? And you do know that people in places like Charlotte and Atlanta also pay taxes? My point is you get nothing for what you pay despite the fact that dc is actually financially better positioned than many other cities because it’s not heavily in debt.

I don't see how that's true. I get the same in DC that I got in Charlotte or Atlanta. Quite frankly, the only difference for me is that I get to live around smart people. Yes, Charlotte was easier to live in because it's just an easier lifestyle, but I worked for Bank of America and I was working my ass off. There was no difference work wise. I was the only woman on my team for 5 years. Women generally didn't work at the same level as men. If you don't want to work then I guess that's good.

PP here. And, for the record, they weren't cheaper. They were just as expensive. If I wanted to live in some far out suburb it's cheaper. Hell, I could move to a far out suburb here and it's much cheaper. Plus, taxes were high as hell. The income tax was lower, but every other tax was much higher. Our property taxes in Charlotte made me fall out the chair at closing!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a young decent/highish earning couple (HHI north of 200k) and never considered DC for reasons in this article. Mainly the price. DC is too expensive, not enough space, and doesnt offer a good commute at all. If our jobs werent central do the DC area we would not live here. I love visiting the city, but would never live there.

We're a young high earning couple and never considered VA or MD because we didn't want to be stuck in traffic for most of our lives. It's very expensive here, but we love our house/neighborhood and walkability/accessibility.

Honestly if you love visiting cities but wouldn't want to live in one it probably wasn't the cost pushing you to the burbs. Everything's not for everybody.

DP. Young (how are we defining young here? Under 30? Under 35?) family. We used to live in DC until our HHI increased to $400k and this line of thinking really bothers me. For the amount of money you pay in taxes in dc you should really get more than walkability and the chance at free pre-k (because depending on where you live it’s not guaranteed at your neighborhood school and most folks don’t want to have to travel far for pre k). And add to that that you don’t get representation at the national level. No thanks.

As people have said, it's not for everybody. I've lived in Charlotte and Atlanta. I LOVE DC. People are smart here. There is more to life than a big house. At $700K HHI, I'm happy to pay my taxes here. To each his own.

PP. Who said anything about a big house? And you do know that people in places like Charlotte and Atlanta also pay taxes? My point is you get nothing for what you pay despite the fact that dc is actually financially better positioned than many other cities because it’s not heavily in debt.

I don't see how that's true. I get the same in DC that I got in Charlotte or Atlanta. Quite frankly, the only difference for me is that I get to live around smart people. Yes, Charlotte was easier to live in because it's just an easier lifestyle, but I worked for Bank of America and I was working my ass off. There was no difference work wise. I was the only woman on my team for 5 years. Women generally didn't work at the same level as men. If you don't want to work then I guess that's good.

DC is too crowded, no one goes there anymore... Yogi Berra would have been proud...

Haven’t read all the comments, but I read the article. It strikes me as rather pointless. People are never going to stop moving to DC unless the government relocates and jobs completely dry up. Similarly, people are increasingly mobile, so they’re going to move from one place to another in search of an ideal mix of weather, traffic, job opportunity, COL, etc.

What did stand out were some of the quotes, which reinforce the mindset that people from the coasts are snobs. Stuff like, “Who knew you could get a job in Atlanta? Delta and MailChimp are headquartered there!” And “Turns out there’s some fun stuff to do in Nashville!” Like people in those cities need someone from NY or LA to move in and verify that it’s possible to have jobs and go to concerts there.

Articles like this seem like they’re written by and for the few naive big-city people who are truly in disbelief that someone might choose a life outside of SF, NYC, or LA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to pay 800k for a townhouse where your packages will get stolen

My packages aren’t stolen. BUT even if they were, I’d choose that over a one hour commute via car. So would most millennials.

Most “second” and “third” tier cities do not come with a one hour commute by car. People in Richmond walk to work. Those cities are less crowded so commute times are null.

I can’t (job here) and don’t want to move to Richmond. I also find it hard to believe that many people in Richmond walk to work.

People in second tier cities all drive to work from the ‘burbs. They drive everywhere because very few live downtown.

This seems like a bit of an oversimplification. I’ve lived in Philadelphia and Chicago and I consider them second tier and both were very walkable. Philly might actually be more walkable than dc.

DP: I think that if Richmond is being called second-tier, Chicago and Philly are first tier. (Either that or Richmond is actually third tier and was miscategorized from the start).

Philadelphia maybe walkable but the upkeep of pedestrian walkaways is laughable. I don't even know if you can consider it still walkable with the potholes, stagnant water, tripping hazards, chunks of broken off pavement all over. Don't get me started on the Jack the Ripper alleys in the city of Brotherly Love either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to pay 800k for a townhouse where your packages will get stolen

My packages aren’t stolen. BUT even if they were, I’d choose that over a one hour commute via car. So would most millennials.

Most “second” and “third” tier cities do not come with a one hour commute by car. People in Richmond walk to work. Those cities are less crowded so commute times are null.

I can’t (job here) and don’t want to move to Richmond. I also find it hard to believe that many people in Richmond walk to work.

People in second tier cities all drive to work from the ‘burbs. They drive everywhere because very few live downtown.

This seems like a bit of an oversimplification. I’ve lived in Philadelphia and Chicago and I consider them second tier and both were very walkable. Philly might actually be more walkable than dc.

DP: I think that if Richmond is being called second-tier, Chicago and Philly are first tier. (Either that or Richmond is actually third tier and was miscategorized from the start).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to pay 800k for a townhouse where your packages will get stolen

My packages aren’t stolen. BUT even if they were, I’d choose that over a one hour commute via car. So would most millennials.

Most “second” and “third” tier cities do not come with a one hour commute by car. People in Richmond walk to work. Those cities are less crowded so commute times are null.

I can’t (job here) and don’t want to move to Richmond. I also find it hard to believe that many people in Richmond walk to work.

People in second tier cities all drive to work from the ‘burbs. They drive everywhere because very few live downtown.

This seems like a bit of an oversimplification. I’ve lived in Philadelphia and Chicago and I consider them second tier and both were very walkable. Philly might actually be more walkable than dc.

I don’t think we are referring to philly and Chicago. Also Philly and Chicago are precar. One can easily live in Chicago without a car and both plenty of housing and commercial is downtown. In newer cities, the commercial and residential are separate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to pay 800k for a townhouse where your packages will get stolen

My packages aren’t stolen. BUT even if they were, I’d choose that over a one hour commute via car. So would most millennials.

Most “second” and “third” tier cities do not come with a one hour commute by car. People in Richmond walk to work. Those cities are less crowded so commute times are null.

I can’t (job here) and don’t want to move to Richmond. I also find it hard to believe that many people in Richmond walk to work.

People in second tier cities all drive to work from the ‘burbs. They drive everywhere because very few live downtown.

This seems like a bit of an oversimplification. I’ve lived in Philadelphia and Chicago and I consider them second tier and both were very walkable. Philly might actually be more walkable than dc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are a young decent/highish earning couple (HHI north of 200k) and never considered DC for reasons in this article. Mainly the price. DC is too expensive, not enough space, and doesnt offer a good commute at all. If our jobs werent central do the DC area we would not live here. I love visiting the city, but would never live there.

We're a young high earning couple and never considered VA or MD because we didn't want to be stuck in traffic for most of our lives. It's very expensive here, but we love our house/neighborhood and walkability/accessibility.

Honestly if you love visiting cities but wouldn't want to live in one it probably wasn't the cost pushing you to the burbs. Everything's not for everybody.

DP. Young (how are we defining young here? Under 30? Under 35?) family. We used to live in DC until our HHI increased to $400k and this line of thinking really bothers me. For the amount of money you pay in taxes in dc you should really get more than walkability and the chance at free pre-k (because depending on where you live it’s not guaranteed at your neighborhood school and most folks don’t want to have to travel far for pre k). And add to that that you don’t get representation at the national level. No thanks.

As people have said, it's not for everybody. I've lived in Charlotte and Atlanta. I LOVE DC. People are smart here. There is more to life than a big house. At $700K HHI, I'm happy to pay my taxes here. To each his own.

PP. Who said anything about a big house? And you do know that people in places like Charlotte and Atlanta also pay taxes? My point is you get nothing for what you pay despite the fact that dc is actually financially better positioned than many other cities because it’s not heavily in debt.