Is there anything? I still think fully autonomous vehicles fit for public use and purchase are decades away, but as someone already used to public transportation I think if there were some kind of autonomous "Uber" that compared in cost to ownership I'd be down. Especially if there were cost savings and available track days. What would it take for you? Or is it completely non-negotiable?
You have to be kidding. ;)
Death.
Where I live right now, I don't think there's anything. I actually can take Uber rides into the mountains, but they're not cheap. And getting someone to pick me up from some random trailhead would probably be difficult to say the least.
If I lived somewhere with awful traffic and pretty good public transportation like NYC or DC (which I personally wouldn't, but for the sake of the thread), I would consider selling my cars and taking Uber/Lyft when necessary.
Not possible. I value control and autonomy. Ride sharing can't touch that.
Watch the United video again.
Quote from: Rockraven on April 12, 2017, 05:02:39 PM
Watch the United video again.
Do you not fly? Aren't you a plane mechanic? :lol:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 12, 2017, 05:13:07 PM
Do you not fly? Aren't you a plane mechanic? :lol:
I fly a desk. But yeah I flew a lot, but I'm still an in control freak.
Outside of majorly dense cities like NYC where many people already don't have a car, it doesn't make sense and will never happen on a wide scale imo.
Uber is great for certain things but is not gonna replace my car. Also calling uber "ride sharing" for the most part is a misnomer.
Never.
Hell would have to freeze over and ban sledding. No way.
Where I live? No fucking way. Giving up my truck would mean never being able to haul anything, never being able to go off road, never being able to take it camping...fuck that shit. Giving up vehicles is for city folk and city folk only. And my profession, detailing cars, would be super weird if I didn't have my own vehicle.
Hell fuckin no
I could do it where I live, but I like to drive. I would like it if *other* people switched to car sharing, though. :lol:
I think that dynamically dispatched shuttles are the way to go. You get the economies of scale of bus service, with the flexibility of livery pickup. Maybe even better than buses, as vehicles could be added to or removed from the fleet in response to real time demand. Buses are obligated to meet their schedule obligations.
Also, an "autonomous Uber" that's equal to the cost of ownership of your own vehicle is a ripoff. Why would I want to pay the same amount of money for something I can't truly control, is used by other people, and doesn't live in my driveway? Bleh.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 12, 2017, 10:04:56 PM
Also, an "autonomous Uber" that's equal to the cost of ownership of your own vehicle is a ripoff. Why would I want to pay the same amount of money for something I can't truly control, is used by other people, and doesn't live in my driveway? Bleh.
In downtown Seattle, parking is a big additional expense. Parking spots at home add hundreds of dollars to your rent, and parking spaces at your work cost hundreds more. Street parking? $$$ too. :rage:
And doesn't have all the convenience of your own personal storage space for charging cables, packs of gum, work id passes, etc.
Quote from: Laconian on April 12, 2017, 10:07:49 PM
In downtown Seattle, parking is a big additional expense. Parking spots at home add hundreds of dollars to your rent, and parking spaces at your work cost hundreds more. Street parking? $$$ too. :rage:
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 12, 2017, 08:40:06 PM
Giving up vehicles is for city folk and city folk only.
Still, if an "autonomous Uber" costs the same as an owned vehicle's insurance+fuel+etc...still a ripoff.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 12, 2017, 10:10:27 PM
Still, if an "autonomous Uber" costs the same as an owned vehicle's insurance+fuel+etc...still a ripoff.
For sure. Most people who give up personal motor vehicles primarily walk, bike, or use public transit. Uber/Lyft/taxis are more of a supplement.
A bus ride costs, what, 17 cents?
$2.50 during peak hours. A card cuts down on the price by quite a bit.
Quote from: Laconian on April 12, 2017, 11:16:18 PM
$2.50 during peak hours. A card cuts down on the price by quite a bit.
I took UberPool to work because it was $3.70 each way as opposed to $2.25 and cut off 30-40 minutes from the commute and allowed me the indignity of being on a public bus. Totally worth it. Being on a public bus is an atrocity on par with human trafficking.
$3.70 is pretty good.
Quote from: Laconian on April 12, 2017, 11:45:46 PM
$3.70 is pretty good.
Yeah. And I was usually early enough that if I ever had a co-passenger, it was usually another law student.
Quote from: Raza on April 12, 2017, 11:27:29 PM
I took UberPool to work because it was $3.70 each way as opposed to $2.25 and cut off 30-40 minutes from the commute and allowed me the indignity of being on a public bus. Totally worth it. Being on a public bus is an atrocity on par with human trafficking.
Human trafficking? O toughen up
OK so we've established that it wouldn't work for the Ted Bundys of the forum :lol: I kid I kid. But obviously it's better for urbanites. It's also gotta come at a steep discount to car ownership. So how much cheaper are we talking?
I'm not seeing the big deal about convenience. The time between you hailing an Uber to it getting to your door is like 5 minutes. It takes people longer than that to say bye to everyone at a party, let alone get ready for work. Plus once you get to wherever you're going you don't have to deal with parking, which in even a half ass city like Nashville is huge. Shit adds up
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 13, 2017, 05:11:32 AM
Human trafficking? O toughen up
OK so we've established that it wouldn't work for the Ted Bundys of the forum :lol: I kid I kid. But obviously it's better for urbanites. It's also gotta come at a steep discount to car ownership. So how much cheaper are we talking?
I'm not seeing the big deal about convenience. The time between you hailing an Uber to it getting to your door is like 5 minutes. It takes people longer than that to say bye to everyone at a party, let alone get ready for work. Plus once you get to wherever you're going you don't have to deal with parking, which in even a half ass city like Nashville is huge. Shit adds up
A 15 minute commute doesn't seem like a big deal compared to a 45 minute one?
Also, you're clearly not a Parks and Rec fan.
I don't even let people borrow my cameras, lights etc. because I see how poorly people treat their own stuff. Car sharing is out for me. I'd never allow my car to be driven by strangers.
People treat your property like crap, which means they'll abuse your car in ways I don't want to think about and perhaps park in the wrong areas. Even worse, this being Europe, where literally 99.9% of people commit slow suicide (smoking), a potential car sharer might smoke in my car (they think by opening the windows and spraying Febreeze that I won't notice...). No thanks.
My stuff lasts long because I treat it right. I'm not part of this consumer society that disposes of brand new products after a few months/years because they want the successor model...
It's pretty easy to make an economic case for using Uber over owning your car. Then again, basically no one here views owning a car from a purely economic perspective.
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 05:21:36 AM
A 15 minute commute doesn't seem like a big deal compared to a 45 minute one?
Also, you're clearly not a Parks and Rec fan.
An autonomous ride would have an optimized route that would be a lot shorter than whatever they do on the bus.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on April 13, 2017, 06:56:03 AM
It's pretty easy to make an economic case for using Uber over owning your car. Then again, basically no one here views owning a car from a purely economic perspective.
I don't agree. In my area, Uber would surpass a car payment, gas, insurance in about a week.
If that many people are "ride sharing," then who's ride are they actually sharing.
The whole thing mostly works now because there are enough drivers and car owners to support the riders. That could easily change as the economics of owning and driving a car change.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 13, 2017, 07:21:18 AM
I don't agree. In my area, Uber would surpass a car payment, gas, insurance in about a week.
Depends on a specific person's driving habits, what I mean is that it's pretty easy in a lot of cases, not all.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on April 13, 2017, 10:00:41 AM
Depends on a specific person's driving habits, what I mean is that it's pretty easy in a lot of cases, not all.
So, the answer is "it depends". :lol:
The carfree people I know are spending like $200-$250 a month for transportation. Buses do the majority of the work, and Car2Go/Uber fill in the gaps. $250 is the price of having a parking spot at home and at work. O_o
In 206's case, parking is a lot less of a cost. And the buses generally suck everywhere between New York and California
I'm not sure what it would take to give up car ownership entirely, but mostly it would come down to cost. I'm already using "carsharing" (Car2Go) quite a bit to get to and from work. Last year I only put about 7,500 km (less than 5,000 miles) on my own car. I use Car2Go because I don't have to pay for parking. A parking spot near my office is prohibitively expensive; the lot across the street costs $399/mo. Parking on street would cost >$35/day, and I'd have to move my car every two hours. When I'm not using Car2Go I take public transit instead. I haven't touched my car since Sunday.
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
Yeah, real estate prices be fuckin' crazy up in heah.
Quote from: 93JC on April 13, 2017, 11:48:01 AM
I'm not sure what it would take to give up car ownership entirely, but mostly it would come down to cost. I'm already using "carsharing" (Car2Go) quite a bit to get to and from work. Last year I only put about 7,500 km (less than 5,000 miles) on my own car. I use Car2Go because I don't have to pay for parking. A parking spot near my office is prohibitively expensive; the lot across the street costs $399/mo. Parking on street would cost >$35/day, and I'd have to move my car every two hours. When I'm not using Car2Go I take public transit instead. I haven't touched my car since Sunday.
Calgary is undergoing a population explosion as well?
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
I used to have a spot, but my office moved downtown a couple years ago. There are approximately 1200 people working in this building and only ~75 parking spots on site so no, they don't give us parking. Of the business unit I work in there are only three guys with parking stalls, and we have a couple passes that we sign out when we absolutely need them (i.e. can bill the cost to a job). My boss, three steps' seniority removed from the CEO, doesn't have a parking space.
Quote from: FoMoJo on April 13, 2017, 12:28:49 PM
Calgary is undergoing a population explosion as well?
Population has doubled in about 30 years, and from 2011 to 2016 it was easily the fastest-growing Census Metropolitan Area. More than twice as much growth as Vancouver and Toronto.
Quote from: 93JC on April 13, 2017, 12:46:10 PM
I used to have a spot, but my office moved downtown a couple years ago. There are approximately 1200 people working in this building and only ~75 parking spots on site so no, they don't give us parking. Of the business unit I work in there are only three guys with parking stalls, and we have a couple passes that we sign out when we absolutely need them (i.e. can bill the cost to a job). My boss, three steps' seniority removed from the CEO, doesn't have a parking space.
I gotta ask, why did they move downtown? Situations like that is exactly why companies move to all the suburbs around here.
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
They did not give me one in NYC either.
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
In city centers, it's not uncommon.
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 01:09:47 PM
I gotta ask, why did they move downtown? Situations like that is exactly why companies move to all the suburbs around here.
Other divisions were already leasing the space downtown, and the lease for our old space was up. Better to fill the space you've already leased for X years than sign another one at the old location (which was also about 35% unused).
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
+1
And they think we're the crazy ones
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 02:30:37 PM
+1
And they think we're the crazy ones
A lot of city folks live and work within a few miles of each other. That seems pretty sane to me.
Quote from: Laconian on April 13, 2017, 02:54:00 PM
A lot of city folks live and work within a few miles of each other. That seems pretty sane to me.
You can do that in Ohio too, with free parking. :huh:
Houses in suburbs are generally surrounded by miles of other houses?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 12, 2017, 02:32:21 PM
Is there anything? I still think fully autonomous vehicles fit for public use and purchase are decades away, but as someone already used to public transportation I think if there were some kind of autonomous "Uber" that compared in cost to ownership I'd be down. Especially if there were cost savings and available track days. What would it take for you? Or is it completely non-negotiable?
On a side note, Uber's self-driving car program is about to get royally fucked by Google because some of Google's ex-employees stole a bunch of stuff and took it to Uber.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/16/googles-fight-with-uber-over-self-driving-cars-is-heating-up/
Quote from: Laconian on April 13, 2017, 02:54:00 PM
A lot of city folks live and work within a few miles of each other. That seems pretty sane to me.
And many of the ones that don't are using busses or trains to get to work anyways.
I wish we had trains here. :P
We have light rail which shares its surface streets with cars. Worst of all worlds. Ughhh.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 13, 2017, 03:39:14 PM
On a side note, Uber's self-driving car program is about to get royally fucked by Google because some of Google's ex-employees stole a bunch of stuff and took it to Uber.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/16/googles-fight-with-uber-over-self-driving-cars-is-heating-up/
QuoteThe company has also accused two other engineers, Radu Raduta and Sameer Kshirsagar...
Wasn't that the name of the Indian guy in Office Space?
"It's not that hard: Na-ghee-nana-jar. Nagheenanajar."
Quote from: Laconian on April 13, 2017, 04:15:30 PM
I wish we had trains here. :P
We have light rail which shares its surface streets with cars. Worst of all worlds. Ughhh.
Chicago largely gets trains right. Err, rightish
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 02:58:41 PM
You can do that in Ohio too, with free parking. :huh:
But then you have to live in Ohio :zzz:
:hesaid:
Kind of a dickish thing to say at first blush, but that's ultimately what it comes down to. Parking is expensive here because demand outstrips supply by a great margin, or in other words it's a place where people want to be. Parking is cheap or "free" (it's never really free) in places where supply is far greater than demand, or in other words where people don't want to be.
Columbus is ok.
But Columbus is also starting to have big city woes, and with basically no good public transit it's gonna be bad in about five years.
To put things into perspective, downtown Columbus (metro pop ~2.0 million):
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ff/75/b0/ff75b0f3fb8cc95f059ebc427a7c86df.jpg)
Downtown Calgary (metro pop ~1.4 million):
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/medias.photodeck.com/bde90aa3-c26f-4f58-80c7-45987b2e1b88/15-06-23-0732_xgaplus.jpg)
There's a fuck-ton more people in the city centre here. (And that photo is obviously a couple years old, as it doesn't have Brookfield Place—the new tallest building in town—in it.) I'm not saying I particularly like working at the location I work at, just trying to illustrate that when you get a big enough agglomeration of people space runs out and parking gets expensive.
To what benefit? I get no joy from being in a city constantly. It's much nicer to live in a suburbs, work in the suburbs, and only go to the city for fun stuff. All the benefits without the drawbacks (parking, crime, COL, etc)
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
To what benefit?
Employment
I think the big issue with cities is working in them. That's the grind. Right now though retiring in a city center seems like the jam. All the convenience and energy of a city center without the grind, exercise, and no dependence on diminishing driving ability to get around. Right now though, while I work, suburbs are definitely the jam.
There are plenty of jobs outside of major cities. And even a smaller city like Charlotte, Nashville, Cincinnati, etc. Are much less of a hassle to get around while providing a healthy job market.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
To what benefit? I get no joy from being in a city constantly. It's much nicer to live in a suburbs, work in the suburbs, and only go to the city for fun stuff. All the benefits without the drawbacks (parking, crime, COL, etc)
Commuting sucks in a lot of cities, and it's easy to say "work in the suburbs" but the reality is that most jobs (and often the best jobs) in many industries are in the city.
Crime often isn't as bad as it's made out to be (though obviously city and neighborhood dependent).
I quite enjoyed being able to walk to a lot of places, and Atlanta's not even a particularly pedestrian friendly city. I went to a music festival a few years back that was literally 1/4 mile from my apartment.
Even if I couldn't walk, taking an Uber a few miles across a city is WAY cheaper than one twenty miles from the suburbs, which lowers the cost of parking and helps to negate the COL advantage if you go into the city a lot.
There's more culture - better restaurants, more unique stores, better/easier access to quality music venues, theaters, museums, sporting arenas, and parks.
At least in my experience in the Atlanta area (super anecdotal, I know), the younger people who live in the city were generally more interesting people. Most of the young people that I've met in the Atlanta 'burbs work dead-end jobs, half of them never moved out of their parent's places, and they spend their free time hanging out at the same bar every night of the week. In the city, people generally had a purpose - even if they weren't career oriented, they were artists or musicians or something.
Don't get me wrong, it's not for everyone and I'm not necessarily suggesting that
you should move to a city, but like most things in life, there are pros and cons, and different people have different opinions on how to weigh them against each other. And of course the individual cities themselves vary dramatically - I know people who hated living in NYC but love Atlanta, and vice versa.
Likewise not all suburbs are the same. One of the reasons I love Boulder is that it's kind of the best of both worlds. It's small enough that it's easy to walk or ride a bike if you want, but also doesn't have much traffic so driving isn't a chore. There are good job opportunities, motivated people with interesting hobbies, and a thriving art and music scene, so it's developed it's own unique culture and doesn't
feel like a suburb.
The one thing about cities is, yeah, there's so much available within walking distance or a quick Uber/public transport ride's distance. But living in a city...I couldn't do. I need a house/yard/garage/etc. I'd feel too cooped up otherwise. But I see why people like it. I love visiting cities, especially with friends that live there.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 13, 2017, 07:15:44 AM
An autonomous ride would have an optimized route that would be a lot shorter than whatever they do on the bus.
Yeah, but I was talking about buses and their cost compared to UberPool.
Quote from: MrH on April 13, 2017, 11:50:01 AM
:wtf:
Work doesn't give you a parking space? That whole idea seems crazy to us in the midwest.
Oh yeah, parking at my internship would have been $32 a day. That ruled out driving pretty quickly.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
To what benefit? I get no joy from being in a city constantly. It's much nicer to live in a suburbs, work in the suburbs, and only go to the city for fun stuff. All the benefits without the drawbacks (parking, crime, COL, etc)
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
Hey now, it's a rental. :rage:
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
I've always lived <30 min outside of a medium sized city. Plenty of access to that when I want it.
Fact is that some of you think that there's living in the center of NYC and living in the middle of nowhere, with nothing in between. It's ridiculous.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 10:23:07 PM
I've always lived <30 min outside of a medium sized city. Plenty of access to that when I want it.
Fact is that some of you think that there's living in the center of NYC and living in the middle of nowhere, with nothing in between. It's ridiculous.
I grew up 35 minutes from Philadelphia.
It basically is city or the middle of nowhere. Every time I visit the suburbs, even a close one, I can't wait to get back to the city. The second you want to do something as basic as eat a meal, you're relegated to choices that usually include something as horrible as an Olive Garden.
Furthermore, I hate people who come into the city. They always come on big drinking days, like NYE, want to make the most of it, get sloppy drunk, rowdy as fuck, and then drive home. It's a goddamn mess.
I drive too much for work for it to ever make sense for me.
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
What, you think the UP lacks for bars?
As for the arts? Well OK, you've got em, but you don't go to see them any more than your average suburbanite. In fact, usually you have to go because the suburbanite friends and relatives are visiting...
Quote from: Raza on April 14, 2017, 04:34:34 AM
I grew up 35 minutes from Philadelphia.
It basically is city or the middle of nowhere. Every time I visit the suburbs, even a close one, I can't wait to get back to the city. The second you want to do something as basic as eat a meal, you're relegated to choices that usually include something as horrible as an Olive Garden.
Furthermore, I hate people who come into the city. They always come on big drinking days, like NYE, want to make the most of it, get sloppy drunk, rowdy as fuck, and then drive home. It's a goddamn mess.
Maybe the specific suburbs you are in suck for food. I'm well outside the city core of Charlotte and am still pretty spoiled for choice. Still though, there's nothing like having Thai/French/sushi/"new American" all within ~300 feet of each other. But the suburbs aren't always terrible
Quote from: Soup DeVille on April 14, 2017, 06:00:38 AM
What, you think the UP lacks for bars?
As for the arts? Well OK, you've got em, but you don't go to see them any more than your average suburbanite. In fact, usually you have to go because the suburbanite friends and relatives are visiting...
It's true that I wish I took greater advantage of the culture, but if I lived in the suburbs, I never would.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 14, 2017, 06:45:12 AM
Maybe the specific suburbs you are in suck for food. I'm well outside the city core of Charlotte and am still pretty spoiled for choice. Still though, there's nothing like having Thai/French/sushi/"new American" all within ~300 feet of each other. But the suburbs aren't always terrible
There are a few good places, but once you run the rotation of the 5 good restaurants, you grow tired of them rather quickly.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 10:23:07 PM
I've always lived <30 min outside of a medium sized city. Plenty of access to that when I want it.
Fact is that some of you think that there's living in the center of NYC and living in the middle of nowhere, with nothing in between. It's ridiculous.
It's only a little more ridiculous than saying that there are no benefits to living in the city. :huh:
People like different stuff, have different lifestyles, make different amounts of money, and have different priorities.
Even on the other end of the spectrum, I used to think that I'd HATE living in a small town. Turns out that I just don't like Southern, redneck small towns. Little mountain towns can be cool as fuck. I could absolutely see myself moving to somewhere like Salida a few years down the road.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 14, 2017, 06:45:12 AM
Maybe the specific suburbs you are in suck for food. I'm well outside the city core of Charlotte and am still pretty spoiled for choice. Still though, there's nothing like having Thai/French/sushi/"new American" all within ~300 feet of each other. But the suburbs aren't always terrible
I find it's a matter of finding what you look for. My in-laws live in basically the same area as me. I doubt they are aware of the existence of non-chain restaurants in the area, despite the fact that there are some really good little Mexican joints right around the corner, and that there's a Korean barbecue place about half a mile away. They wouldn't care if it did either anyways, but my point is the things they see are the obvious ones, and if you look just a little closer, you can often find something worthwhile.
I am about do have a huge lifestyle change. Today we live literally in the heart of the City. I shit you not, we have maybe 500 restaurants or choose from in a 2 mile radius.
We'll be moving to the suburbs of a much smaller city in a couple of months. I am keeping the apartment here for a year at least. We'll see how it goes but I am excited for the change along with my wife.
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
Pretty elitist pov. Art exists outside of big cities believe it or not, plus people who don't live in cities can travel to them to take those things in, by your own admission living there you don't take advantage often and I'd bet that's pretty typical (seems most of the people I know who live in NYC are such slaves to their jobs they don't get much time, plus take it for granted).
The restaurants/bars thing has narrowed considerably in the last 10 years or so. Most areas with any population to speak of have good non-chain restaurants nowadays imo. We have way more than 5 good restaurants near me.
People who love big cities say there's more to do there, I feel like it's the opposite there is less to do. There's more only if you define "things to do" as nightlife/bars etc, I always find after 2-3 days in a place like NYC I'm bored and ready to get out.
The antisocial thing, eh surrounding yourself with people doesn't automatically make you social (and aren't you by your own admission pretty antisocial). Witness the NYC subway stare where people pretty much are intentionally oblivious to everyone around them. If anything I think you could argue there is more sense of community in small-medium towns than big cities.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 14, 2017, 08:28:44 AM
(seems most of the people I know who live in NYC are such slaves to their jobs they don't get much time, plus take it for granted).
On the flip side, if you're that busy with your career, having quick and easy access to those things becomes more important so that you don't have to waste your valuable free time driving in and out of the city to take advantage of them when possible.
Quote from: Laconian on April 13, 2017, 03:31:03 PM
Houses in suburbs are generally surrounded by miles of other houses?
Lots of businesses move to the suburbs here. Why pay more to be in a city, when all your employees live out in the suburbs anyways?
Within 2 miles of my house, there are 2 national HQs, and multiple other big company locations.
I work in downtown San Jose, which is essentially a big business park. There is no activity and not many restaurants here. I still pay $90/mo for parking. Granted, it's a nice parking garage, and I could pay as little as $10/mo for a parking spot farther away, but even here work doesn't pay for parking.
My work is old fashioned though. The big tech companies here have free parking garages for the most part.
Unfortunately for my line of work, I have to be in the city centers. Even the smaller cities don't have much to offer for what I do. Most job offers/listings I see are for SF, Chicago or NYC. Honestly though, I'd rather live in the suburbs because I need my garage and backyard to do shit in. I also need access to mountains and backroads without having to drive hours to get there, so I'm very picky when it comes to where I live, but what kind of work I do as well.
Back to the topic on hand, though, I think the cheapest Uber for my commute is around $12 each way. $25 a day. That more than covers gas + parking + insurance on my car, while not giving me any of the flexibility or convenience.
Quote from: MrH on April 14, 2017, 08:46:47 AM
Lots of businesses move to the suburbs here. Why pay more to be in a city, when all your employees live out in the suburbs anyways?
Within 2 miles of my house, there are 2 national HQs, and multiple other big company locations.
Yeah, but compared to just about any city center, that's nothing. You'll find more than that in single buildings in a lot of places.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 14, 2017, 08:28:44 AM
Pretty elitist pov. Art exists outside of big cities believe it or not, plus people who don't live in cities can travel to them to take those things in, by your own admission living there you don't take advantage often and I'd bet that's pretty typical (seems most of the people I know who live in NYC are such slaves to their jobs they don't get much time, plus take it for granted).
Nature is art for us boonies dwellers. I'd rather go on a hike or check out a nice view and see stuff than go to an "exhibit" of art.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 14, 2017, 04:18:43 PM
Nature is art for us boonies dwellers. I'd rather go on a hike or check out a nice view and see stuff than go to an "exhibit" of art.
Not much nature to be found in suburban sprawl, except in the fanciful names of developments...
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
Aren't you in Japan right now? From what you've said, it's pretty fuckin' anti-social there, despite being surrounded by thousands and thousands of people constantly. Come to a small town where basically everybody kinda knows who everybody is, and if you don't know who somebody is, you probably know somebody who does...it's difficult to be truly anti-social.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 14, 2017, 04:19:55 PM
Aren't you in Japan right now? From what you've said, it's pretty fuckin' anti-social there, despite being surrounded by thousands and thousands of people constantly. Come to a small town where basically everybody kinda knows who everybody is, and if you don't know who somebody is, you probably know somebody who does...it's difficult to be truly anti-social.
Yes, constantly being surrounded by strangers in a "big pond" is sometimes much more lonely than being in a smaller pond where you can actually get to know your fellow pondmates.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 14, 2017, 08:28:44 AM
Pretty elitist pov. Art exists outside of big cities believe it or not, plus people who don't live in cities can travel to them to take those things in, by your own admission living there you don't take advantage often and I'd bet that's pretty typical (seems most of the people I know who live in NYC are such slaves to their jobs they don't get much time, plus take it for granted).
The restaurants/bars thing has narrowed considerably in the last 10 years or so. Most areas with any population to speak of have good non-chain restaurants nowadays imo. We have way more than 5 good restaurants near me.
People who love big cities say there's more to do there, I feel like it's the opposite there is less to do. There's more only if you define "things to do" as nightlife/bars etc, I always find after 2-3 days in a place like NYC I'm bored and ready to get out.
The antisocial thing, eh surrounding yourself with people doesn't automatically make you social (and aren't you by your own admission pretty antisocial). Witness the NYC subway stare where people pretty much are intentionally oblivious to everyone around them. If anything I think you could argue there is more sense of community in small-medium towns than big cities.
An apt synopsis. I'm living proof. We do way more down here. More food, more art, more live music, more socializing. The whole "theres so much to do here" is a lie people in cities tell themselves. Its BS. I mean FWIW it's no problem for us to go up to NYC for a long weekend and take in more food and "culture" than we would have in a month living there. And with people being so much more relaxed and free with time and money it's much easier to socialize. We have more friends down here than we did in NYC.
Plus aside from having access to all the same cultural stuff (albeit obviously not as world class) I have a garage, a yard, access to lakes and pools and trails and shit as well within minutes rather than hours. It's absolutely no contest
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 14, 2017, 05:50:15 PM
The whole "theres so much to do here" is a lie people in cities tell themselves. Its BS.
Speak for yourself. I definitely did more of that stuff living in midtown Atlanta than I do living in Boulder.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 14, 2017, 08:28:44 AM
Pretty elitist pov.
I know.
Quote
Art exists outside of big cities believe it or not, plus people who don't live in cities can travel to them to take those things in, by your own admission living there you don't take advantage often and I'd bet that's pretty typical (seems most of the people I know who live in NYC are such slaves to their jobs they don't get much time, plus take it for granted).
The restaurants/bars thing has narrowed considerably in the last 10 years or so. Most areas with any population to speak of have good non-chain restaurants nowadays imo. We have way more than 5 good restaurants near me.
People who love big cities say there's more to do there, I feel like it's the opposite there is less to do. There's more only if you define "things to do" as nightlife/bars etc, I always find after 2-3 days in a place like NYC I'm bored and ready to get out.
The antisocial thing, eh surrounding yourself with people doesn't automatically make you social (and aren't you by your own admission pretty antisocial). Witness the NYC subway stare where people pretty much are intentionally oblivious to everyone around them. If anything I think you could argue there is more sense of community in small-medium towns than big cities.
We can argue back and forth about specific pockets where there are up to 8 good restaurants, but the fact of the matter is that, on average, there is much, much, much more to do in a city than in a suburb. As for there being fewer things to do that aren't the nightlife, you let me know when Hamilton comes to some random Floridian suburb. ;)
And I'm an ambivert, not antisocial. And while I don't get to enjoy the arts as much as I would like, there's even less of a chance I'd be able to enjoy them at all if I lived another 30 minutes from the city and had a longer commute to contend with.
Look, if you like the suburban life that's cool. If city life isn't for you, that's cool too. The suburbs have their advantages, sure. But there's no need to take it so personally, especially when half of my post was a clear tongue-in-cheek dig at giant_mtb, who actually does live across the street from a house that has no windows on the second floor.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 14, 2017, 04:19:55 PM
Aren't you in Japan right now? From what you've said, it's pretty fuckin' anti-social there, despite being surrounded by thousands and thousands of people constantly. Come to a small town where basically everybody kinda knows who everybody is, and if you don't know who somebody is, you probably know somebody who does...it's difficult to be truly anti-social.
1. You responded to that post twice. :lol:
2. Yeah, Tokyo is super anti-social, at first. Culturally, the Japanese tend not to talk to people they don't already know; you need to know someone to get to know someone. It's a bit weird and it makes it almost impossible for gaijin to assimilate quickly. But the bars are packed most every night with people out with their friends and coworkers, the malls are massive, gorgeous, multi-use vertical buildings that offer much more than just shopping, and have people in them all the time. In one of the Hills buildings here (such as Roppongi Hills or Toranomon Hills), there's probably more to do than in the average suburb. Roppongi Hills has shopping, several fine dining establishments, a multi-screen movie theater, and a modern art museum (that's really cool; 52 floors above the city, with one of the best views in Tokyo).
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
But there's no need to take it so personally, especially when half of my post was a clear tongue-in-cheek dig at giant_mtb, who actually does live across the street from a house that has no windows on the second floor.
Comedic genius that you brought that into it.
But also, fuck you!
Also, that house is for sale right meow. :lol:
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 15, 2017, 02:10:49 AM
Comedic genius that you brought that into it.
But also, fuck you!
Also, that house is for sale right meow.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
What it really all comes down to is that different people value different things. I'd go nuts trying to live in a suburb again, but one of my best friends from high school would probably blow his brains out living in the city. He loves space to work on his cars, he's a home body, et al. Everyone's different, it's not a big deal.
I hear ya. We all like different things.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
But there's no need to take it so personally, especially when half of my post was a clear tongue-in-cheek dig at giant_mtb, who actually does live across the street from a house that has no windows on the second floor.
How is this not personal :confused:
Quote from: Raza on April 13, 2017, 09:39:30 PM
Yeah, I forgot. Most people on this forum are antisocial and view being around people and having easy access to art, culture, bars, and other amenities as a bad thing. "I want my space and quiet and I want to live across the street from a house with a second floor that has no windows!"
I still think the talk of "all the things to do" in cities is overblown. Most people in those cities don't have the time or money to do them.
Plus I think Hamilton is coming here... and tickets will be a lot cheaper here than they would up there. City living is only as good as people make it out to be when you're really rich.... and even them there's shit you just can't buy
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
I know.
We can argue back and forth about specific pockets where there are up to 8 good restaurants, but the fact of the matter is that, on average, there is much, much, much more to do in a city than in a suburb.
That you define "things to do" as number of restaurants and bars is to automatically lose the argument. There's a hell of a lot more to life than restaurants and bars, and I'm saying that as someone who loves to eat and drink. Something as simple as finding a swimming pool in a place like NYC is a giant pain in the ass. There are reasons that nearly everyone in NYC who can afford to gets out of the city on the weekends.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
As for there being fewer things to do that aren't the nightlife, you let me know when Hamilton comes to some random Floridian suburb. ;)
http://www.clickorlando.com/entertainment/hamilton-coming-to-dr-phillips-center
Plus, a show is still sorta nightlife isn't it? When I say not nightlife, I'm thinking more along the lines of swimming, paddleboarding, surfing, hiking, or whatever it is outside/active you like to do. Even just walking out the back door to throw the football or kick around the soccer ball, something we do probably 5 times a week, unless you live right next to a park is a pita in the city.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 02:03:22 AM
Look, if you like the suburban life that's cool. If city life isn't for you, that's cool too. The suburbs have their advantages, sure. But there's no need to take it so personally, especially when half of my post was a clear tongue-in-cheek dig at giant_mtb, who actually does live across the street from a house that has no windows on the second floor.
Oh, no offense taken, I'm just pointing out this "there's more to do living in a city" line is mostly fantasy to justify a living arrangement that 90%+ of the time is ultimately career driven. And fwiw not everything that's not a city is a suburb.
Thing is, not living in a city does not mean you lose access to what cities offer even ignoring this snobbish assumption that art only exists in cities. How many times a year do you partake in these "cultural" type activities? I'd wager I travel to cities at least as often, and thus effectively have the same access. If I really want to see Hamilton sooner, I can be in NY in time for dinner on any given Friday and be home sun night - 2-3 days is about as much as I can stand of the place in any given stretch.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 15, 2017, 08:11:14 AM
City living is only as good as people make it out to be when you're really rich.... and even them there's shit you just can't buy
And the really rich all have weekend homes outside the city.
I'm gonna have to decide a similar situation. Live in Sumter with an 18 minute drive to work or 42 minute drive to work from Columbia. And do I rent an apartment or buy a house at either location. Columbia has more to do and see but am I really going to do any of it during the week. But if I'm dating I could see the girl during the week and not have to go as far to do things on the weekend. Sumter doesn't have much besides some diners, chain restaurants and a few dealers
Quote from: Lebowski on April 15, 2017, 08:27:37 AM
Oh, no offense taken, I'm just pointing out this "there's more to do living in a city line" is fantasy to justify a living arrangement that 95% of the time is career driven. And fwiw I don't define everything that's not a city as a suburb.
Thing is, not living in a city does not mean you lose access to what cities offer - again, how many times a year do you partake in these "cultural" type activities? I'd wager I travel to cities at least as often, and thus effectively have the same access. If I really want to see Hamilton sooner, I can get to NY in time for dinner on any given Friday and be home sun night - 2-3 days is about as much as I can stand of the place in any given stretch.
One thing to keep in mind is that each of us is basing our perspective of "cities" off of different cities. NYC is different than SF is different than Chicago is different than Minneapolis is different than Atlanta is different than Philadelphia is different from Denver is different than Dallas is different than Seattle...
That said, I know a lot of people in Atlanta and Denver who live in the city and commute to the suburbs, including myself when I lived in Atlanta. It's obviously not a career-oriented decision. But those are cities with significantly lower COLs than some of the other major cities, though both are currently growing a lot and they're getting the COL spikes that comes with growth, so it'll be interesting to see how they evolve over time.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 15, 2017, 09:00:09 AM
One thing to keep in mind is that each of us is basing our perspective of "cities" off of different cities. NYC is different than SF is different than Chicago is different than Minneapolis is different than Atlanta is different than Philadelphia is different from Denver is different than Dallas is different than Seattle...
That said, I know a lot of people in Atlanta and Denver who live in the city and commute to the suburbs, including myself when I lived in Atlanta. It's obviously not a career-oriented decision. But those are cities with significantly lower COLs than some of the other major cities, though both are currently growing a lot and they're getting the COL spikes that comes with growth, so it'll be interesting to see how they evolve over time.
Yeah, I generally use NYC as the model "city" in my head.
Some of those cities you listed are places I could see myself living, esp Denver or Atlanta. But those also have access to lots of non-city outdoors type activities, and in the context of this thread, are places where IMO you need a car (I really can't see not owning a car in say Atlanta, in pretty sharp contrast to NY). I don't really consider Orlando much of a city in this context, either.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 15, 2017, 09:09:48 AM
Yeah, I generally use NYC as the model "city" in my head.
Some of those cities you listed are places I could see myself living, esp Denver or Atlanta. But those also have access to lots of non-city outdoors type activities, and in the context of this thread, are places where IMO you need a car (I really can't see not owning a car in say Atlanta, in pretty sharp contrast to NY).
True - I only know a couple of people in Atlanta who don't own a car. Public transit is pretty crap, but it is becoming more and more bike friendly. Atlanta gets some pretty heavy rain storms though (more annual rainfall than Seattle), so cyclists need to turn to Uber/Lyft a lot depending on the time of year.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 15, 2017, 08:11:14 AM
How is this not personal :confused:
I still think the talk of "all the things to do" in cities is overblown. Most people in those cities don't have the time or money to do them.
Plus I think Hamilton is coming here... and tickets will be a lot cheaper here than they would up there. City living is only as good as people make it out to be when you're really rich.... and even them there's shit you just can't buy
That was personal, sure. If you're giant_mtb, who that was aimed at.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 15, 2017, 08:27:37 AM
That you define "things to do" as number of restaurants and bars is to automatically lose the argument. There's a hell of a lot more to life than restaurants and bars, and I'm saying that as someone who loves to eat and drink. Something as simple as finding a swimming pool in a place like NYC is a giant pain in the ass. There are reasons that nearly everyone in NYC who can afford to gets out of the city on the weekends.
http://www.clickorlando.com/entertainment/hamilton-coming-to-dr-phillips-center
Plus, a show is still sorta nightlife isn't it? When I say not nightlife, I'm thinking more along the lines of swimming, paddleboarding, surfing, hiking, or whatever it is outside/active you like to do. Even just walking out the back door to throw the football or kick around the soccer ball, something we do probably 5 times a week, unless you live right next to a park is a pita in the city.
Oh, no offense taken, I'm just pointing out this "there's more to do living in a city" line is mostly fantasy to justify a living arrangement that 90%+ of the time is ultimately career driven. And fwiw not everything that's not a city is a suburb.
Thing is, not living in a city does not mean you lose access to what cities offer even ignoring this snobbish assumption that art only exists in cities. How many times a year do you partake in these "cultural" type activities? I'd wager I travel to cities at least as often, and thus effectively have the same access. If I really want to see Hamilton sooner, I can be in NY in time for dinner on any given Friday and be home sun night - 2-3 days is about as much as I can stand of the place in any given stretch.
It's not fantasy, it's fact. And despite the fact that you can go to a city and do the things that are already there, if you spend the time to do so doesn't give you equal access. Or the average person equal access. I grew up in the suburbs. I know what it's like to go to the city. Getting the kids ready, packing up the car, driving to the city, finding parking, then the exhausted drive home when it's all done. It's not at all the same thing as being able to order an Uber on your phone and go wherever you want in under 10 minutes. You can prefer the suburbs and that's fine, but it's dishonest to say that the suburbs are the same as the city when it comes to things to do because you can go to a city. I can just as easily take the 30 minute drive out to the suburbs and do all the suburban stuff you're talking about. I can go Paris any time I want, but that doesn't mean I have equal access to the best French food in the world as Parisians. You value what you value, and that's fine, but don't pretend that fact is fantasy because you don't value the facts.
You can do most of those activities in a city. There's a pool near me. There's a park near me. There's even a baseball diamond. There's a river near me. I can take a 5-10 minute drive and go canoeing if I wanted to. And unless you live on a beach, shit like surfing isn't really a thing that's convenient for the average suburb. And I can't say that I have the same access to the beach as people who live there do because I can just drive there. Depending on what you consider hiking, that's probably not right there either. There certainly wasn't an ocean and a mountain within 30 minutes of the suburb where I grew up. Most of the outdoor activities you're talking about are still travel activities for most people.
This is a little further from me than it used to be before I moved, but it's still quite convenient:
(http://i466.photobucket.com/albums/rr27/SpinRaza/New%20car/9DB2A2C3-8135-4C65-A89B-29CBD4F32402_zps2rci2rfn.jpg)
I've seen swimmers, paddleboarders, canoes, kayaks, and all sorts of people doing stuff right there. No surfing, sure, because it's not an ocean. There's a nice trail for biking and walking, too, grassy areas to throw a ball around, and it's adjacent to a pretty nice driving road, one that claims a few lives every year (cars tend to go over and the water takes them). It's not the Dragon, sure, but it'll do in a pinch. I've had many a spirited drive up and down that road. Actually, that picture was taken after one of them.
It is cool that Hamilton is coming to Orlando. You should go see it. I mean, it's not the same as seeing it with the original cast, but it is an awesome show.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 15, 2017, 09:09:48 AM
Yeah, I generally use NYC as the model "city" in my head.
Some of those cities you listed are places I could see myself living, esp Denver or Atlanta. But those also have access to lots of non-city outdoors type activities, and in the context of this thread, are places where IMO you need a car (I really can't see not owning a car in say Atlanta, in pretty sharp contrast to NY). I don't really consider Orlando much of a city in this context, either.
I think we can all agree that NYC kind of sucks for anything more than a couple of days. :huh:
Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO
And I still don't buy the whole "city cultural access" argument, unless you are really going to Broadway shoes and museums and fine dining all the time. Most people in a city can't afford to go to something like a Broadway play or a "band that matters" concert regularly, so the idea that them living closer to shit they can't afford makes it more accessible is BS. Then on top of that when they come home they have very little space/privacy. I'd argue access to the outdoors is more legit.... my yard is right outside, I'm 5 minutes from a pool, 10 minutes from a park, and I don't have to pay for any of it :huh: Plus a case could be made for the health and psychological benefits of being outdoors, not so much for indulgent foods, alcohol and indoor events :huh:
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
It's not fantasy, it's fact.
This entire discussion is a matter of opinion. I acknowledge for some people living in a big city makes sense but I think for most it's career driven and I think the "there's more to do in a city" line is generally not very well thought out.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
And despite the fact that you can go to a city and do the things that are already there, if you spend the time to do so doesn't give you equal access. Or the average person equal access. And again, this ignores the absurdity of your premise that art and culture only exist in big cities.
In practice, access beyond what you actually utilize has no value.
If you have access 365 days a year, but only go to a broadway show or an art museum 3-4 times a year, how does that have more value than having access a half dozen or a dozen times a year? That's still more than you're using it.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
I grew up in the suburbs. I know what it's like to go to the city. Getting the kids ready, packing up the car, driving to the city, finding parking, then the exhausted drive home when it's all done. It's not at all the same thing as being able to order an Uber on your phone and go wherever you want in under 10 minutes.
Eh, it's really not all that difficult. And if things like parking are such a hassle, you can uber into a city too you know.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
You can prefer the suburbs and that's fine, but it's dishonest to say that the suburbs are the same as the city when it comes to things to do because you can go to a city.
I'm actually saying living outside the city is BETTER as far as things to do than living in it. Again, I don't define "things to do" purely as the number of restaurants and bars around me (which BTW is not an issue of the difference between 5 and 8 ... there are dozens of good restaurants and bars near me and probably over a hundred if you expand the radius to say within a 30-45 minute uber ride from my house).
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
I can just as easily take the 30 minute drive out to the suburbs and do all the suburban stuff you're talking about. I can go Paris any time I want, but that doesn't mean I have equal access to the best French food in the world as Parisians. You value what you value, and that's fine, but don't pretend that fact is fantasy because you don't value the facts.
Again, you are the one confusing fact and opinion here. And fwiw, it's my opinion the food in Paris isn't all that great.
Thing is if, as you say, we take the assumption that the only thing separating a suburb and a city is a 30 minute drive/uber, that to me supports living not in the city. The things I want to do in a city - a show, a nice dinner etc. - are things I need only occasionally. The things I want that I can't get in a city - a garage, more than 800 sq ft of living space, separation from neighbors, and some personal outdoor space, are things I want and utilize just about every day. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to uber 30 minutes for a nice dinner and a show than it does every time I want to throw the ball for my dogs, having a garage 30 minutes away is useless etc.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:38:39 AM
You can do most of those activities in a city. There's a pool near me. There's a park near me. There's even a baseball diamond. There's a river near me. I can take a 5-10 minute drive and go canoeing if I wanted to. And unless you live on a beach, shit like surfing isn't really a thing that's convenient for the average suburb. And I can't say that I have the same access to the beach as people who live there do because I can just drive there. Depending on what you consider hiking, that's probably not right there either. There certainly wasn't an ocean and a mountain within 30 minutes of the suburb where I grew up. Most of the outdoor activities you're talking about are still travel activities for most people.
Well sure, if someone who lives near a beach only uses it once a year then yeah you can get the same value by driving there. If they use it every day, you can't. My guess is the vast majority of city dwellers don't go to broadway shows and art museums on a daily basis, for those that do sure they should live near them.
Quote from: Raza on April 15, 2017, 11:40:13 AM
I think we can all agree that NYC kind of sucks for anything more than a couple of days. :huh:
Wait, what?
Dude, New York is THE quintessential American city. I don't think you can credibly argue for 2 pages that cities are the cat's meow and then say yeah we can all agree NYC sucks for more than a couple of days. Take away NYC and most of the 'pros' of your argument like art and culture and fine dining get seriously watered down, as does access to jobs etc. It sounds like what you've described is much smaller city or almost suburban-ish (and fwiw as I said, I don't really consider Orlando to be much of a city either). Again to me the context of the thread and what brought up cities was having a car vs. not having a car, so in that context I think of cities as in it's impractical to own a car such as NY. A smaller city that can offer a reasonable cost of living, some personal space, and access to outdoors stuff like you describe I could survive. At the same time I don't really consider the town I live in to be a "suburb", I guess it technically is one but has a lot more character than the stereotypical suburb consisting of subdivisions and chain restaurants and I don't think I could stand that, either.
After reading this thread, it's apparent that if Hamilton comes to your location, you're a privileged mofo? Hmmm. Guess I'm shit out a luck. Oh well.
:muffin: :lol:
Lebowski, I'm a Philadelphian. I've got to bag New York whenever I get a chance. Of course, it's an amazing city, but it's the New Yorkers that are the problem.
NYers and NYC is the best, period.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 15, 2017, 12:20:07 PM
Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO
The car-friendliness, or unfriendliness, of a city has more to do with the city's age, geographical location, and origins than whether or not it's a "real city". Major cities (million+ people in the urban center) that aren't car friendly typically fall into at least one, usually 2, of the following buckets:
-Older cities that were already large/populous before the proliferation of the automobile (well over 100K people by the start of WWI), or even railroads.
-Built around industries like trade/commerce, and therefore often dependent upon a geographical feature like a natural bay or harbor, rather than agriculture/manufacturing
-Are situated where geography drives/limits the size or shape of the city and available buildable land
The more car-friendly jumbo cities all saw their populations boom after the automobile and so the designs of the cities accounted for the fact that the average person could afford a motor vehicle.
Examples of car unfriendly cities:
NYC
-Settled in the 17th century. Population in 1910: 4.7 million
-Historical main industry: Port/harbor city. Shipping, fishing, trade
-Geography: Restricted by ocean and rivers. And, being a port city built around trade and shipping, businesses and homes of people who worked those businesses needed to be close to the harbor, preventing the city proper from sprawling too far inland.
Boston
-Settled in the 17th century. Population in 1910: 670K
-Historical main industry: Port/harbor city. Shipping, fishing, and trade
-Geography: No geological restrictions preventing inland growth, but being a harbor town, the water-related industries force the population to live near the water.
San Francisco:
-Settled in the 18th century. Population in 1910: 417K
-Historical main industry: Port/harbor city. Shipping and trade
-Geography: Situated on a hilly peninsula, buildable land is at a premium. No easy way to grow inland and being a harbor/port city, people supporting the main city industry were forced to live near the water anyway.
Seattle
-Settled in the mid-19th century. Population in 1910: 237K
-Historical main industries: Initially, lumber as well as trade via the port/harbor
-Geography: The city-proper is a relatively thin strip of land sandwiched between the bay and Lake Washington.
Then the more car-friendly cities.
Phoenix
-Settled in the mid 19th century. Population in 1910: 11K
-Historical main industry: Agriculture
-Geography: No major geographical limitations on buildable land.
Atlanta
-Settled in the early-mid 19th century, destroyed in the Civil War and rebuilt in the late 19th century. Population in 1910: 150K
-Historical industry: Railroad hub and manufacturing
-Geography: No major limitations on buildable land
Dallas
-Settled in the mid 19th century. Population in 1910: 92K
-Historical industry: Agriculture and Railroad
-Geography: A few small lakes at the outskirts of the current city, but no major limitations on buildable land.
And so on, and so forth...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 15, 2017, 12:20:07 PM
Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO
lol that's completely asinine. You don't get to just arbitrarily redefine words so that your argument makes sense.
Just my opinion man. CLT is not a real city to me either. That's a good thing
LOL, I guess the millions of people who commute NJ-NY-NJ every day do it because Manhatten isn't exclusive enough for them.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 16, 2017, 08:46:01 AM
lol that's completely asinine. You don't get to just arbitrarily redefine words so that your argument makes sense.
Indeed, by that asinine definition perhaps the only "city" in North America is New York. Knowing who this hypothesis is coming from it's not surprising...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2017, 02:35:08 AM
NYers and NYC is the best, period.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2017, 08:54:03 AM
Just my opinion man. CLT is not a real city to me either. That's a good thing
CLT is another city that didn't grow into a large city until after WWI and the automobile. It also doesn't really have any geographical limitations.
What is CLT, Chicken, Lettuce and Tomato? :confused:
Quote from: FoMoJo on April 16, 2017, 12:11:38 PM
What is CLT, Chicken, Lettuce and Tomato? :confused:
It's the airport code for Charlotte.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 13, 2017, 06:44:53 PM
To what benefit? I get no joy from being in a city constantly. It's much nicer to live in a suburbs, work in the suburbs, and only go to the city for fun stuff. All the benefits without the drawbacks (parking, crime, COL, etc)
The benefits of having a dense central business district are principally logistical, from both the businesses' point of view and the municipality's.
If a business builds an office park in the 'burbs they risk alienating themselves from potential employees who live on the opposite side of the metropolitan area, and they risk isolating themselves from the rest of their industry. Isolating your operations in its own little area far away from everyone else can irreparably harm your business.
The municipality has a huge incentive to have a densely occupied central business district. Property values skyrocket, thus so too do property tax revenues.
My city's CBD has preposterously expensive parking for a city of its size because it's densely populated and has a comparatively limited supply of parking. Limiting parking was a deliberate choice on the municipal government's part in order to prevent having to spend a hell of a lot of money on building freeways and other roads into the CBD. In the 1950s, '60s and '70s many other North American cities built freeways into their central business districts and spent a lot of money doing it, and ultimately a lot of them ended up creating traffic hell. Calgary considered building a downtown freeway in the late 1960s, but decided to scrap it and built an LRT line instead. Now about half of all the people who work downtown take public transit, about 40% still drive or carpool, and the rest walk or bike.
What benefit do
I get out of it? Eh, I suppose my dining options for lunch are much better, but generally I hate working downtown. I'd probably hate if I worked in the 'burbs even more.
Quote from: 93JC on April 16, 2017, 11:00:47 AM
Indeed, by that asinine definition perhaps the only "city" in North America is New York. Knowing who this hypothesis is coming from it's not surprising...
It's not the only city but again NY is THE American city. It's hard to argue city life is great while admitting living in NYC would suck. Many of the other cities discussed Atlanta etc are a lot more like living in a big sprawling suburb.
Again, many people who work in New York don't live there because they can't afford it, want to stretch their money further, want a quieter neighborhood, etc...
There's 12 million people in the metro area outside of the burroughs. It has suburbs.
Quote from: Tave on April 17, 2017, 01:27:31 AM
Again, many people who work in New York don't live there because they can't afford it, want to stretch their money further, want a quieter neighborhood, etc...
There's 12 million people in the metro area outside of the burroughs. It has suburbs.
My entire state is basically one giant suburb. South Jersey is a suburb for Philly, North Jersey is a suburb for NYC. There are no large cities in NJ, but its the most densely populated state in the country.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 16, 2017, 02:35:08 AM
NYers and NYC is the best, period.
Says the guy so desperate to leave it he went to the south. :hmm:
Quote from: Lebowski on April 16, 2017, 12:28:39 PM
It's not the only city but again NY is THE American city. It's hard to argue city life is great while admitting living in NYC would suck. Many of the other cities discussed Atlanta etc are a lot more like living in a big sprawling suburb.
Just for the record, I'm arguing that there are definite benefits to living in the city, not that all aspects of city living are totally awesome. IIRC, this whole conversation started because someone said that cities have "no benefit."
But it's also not fair to use the most extreme example as the defining case. It'd be like saying additional horsepower is pointless on all cars just because the Dodge Demon is pointlessly powerful.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 17, 2017, 08:45:32 AM
Just for the record, I'm arguing that there are definite benefits to living in the city, not that all aspects of city living are totally awesome. IIRC, this whole conversation started because someone said that cities have "no benefit."
But it's also not fair to use the most extreme example as the defining case. It'd be like saying additional horsepower is pointless on all cars just because the Dodge Demon is pointlessly powerful.
I think Lebowski is missing the point here.
Sporty said, "Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO."
Regardless of whether you like city living or not, that statement doesn't make sense for two reasons:
1) Sporty isn't Websters and doesn't get to single-handedly define the word "city" for the entire human race; and,
2) The criteria does not apply to any major US city, New York included. Even the oldest, most European, city-centric US cities have massive commuter populations.
Quote from: Tave on April 17, 2017, 12:27:28 PM
I think Lebowski is missing the point here.
Sporty said, "Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO."
Regardless of whether you like city living or not, that statement doesn't make sense for two reasons:
1) Sporty isn't Websters and doesn't get to single-handedly define the word "city" for the entire human race; and,
2) The criteria does not apply to any major US city, New York included. Even the oldest, most European, city-centric US cities have massive commuter populations.
Yeah I think the weird part of 12,000 RPM's post was the "or commute" part. As you say there is a ton of commuting in to NYC for work (and FWIW there are in fact people that live in NYC and commute to NJ for work).
Driving in on a daily basis would be a nightmare though (IMO) and would be relatively expensive. I tried to google to see what portions of people commute via mass transit versus driving themselves; this is popped up but I am not sure how accurate it is:
(https://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/files/filemanager/Blog/By_Type.png)
Keep in mind that include all commuters in NYC (so people that both live and work in NYC).
Wait, why am I missing the point if you disagree with something Sporty said? Sporty isn't my spokesman.
What I'm saying is I think its disingenuous to say city living is great but then admit yeah living in New York would suck. I also don't agree NY is an "extreme example", it's the quintessential American city, it's not some oddball example I pulled out of left field.
Quote from: Lebowski on April 17, 2017, 12:53:37 PM
Wait, why am I missing the point if you disagree with something Sporty said? Sporty isn't my spokesman.
What I'm saying is I think its disingenuous to say city living is great but then admit yeah living in New York would suck. I also don't agree NY is an "extreme example", it's the quintessential American city, it's not some oddball example I pulled out of left field.
I get that, and I realize the discussion was broader than Sporty's one statement, but here is how that specific portion of the conversation unfolded that you quoted:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 15, 2017, 12:20:07 PM
Any city where a normal person can afford a car or commute in from the suburbs into the city isn't a city IMO
Quote from: BimmerM3 on April 16, 2017, 08:46:01 AM
lol that's completely asinine. You don't get to just arbitrarily redefine words so that your argument makes sense.
Quote from: 93JC on April 16, 2017, 11:00:47 AM
Indeed, by that asinine definition perhaps the only "city" in North America is New York. Knowing who this hypothesis is coming from it's not surprising...
Quote from: Lebowski on April 16, 2017, 12:28:39 PM
It's not the only city but again NY is THE American city. It's hard to argue city life is great while admitting living in NYC would suck. Many of the other cities discussed Atlanta etc are a lot more like living in a big sprawling suburb.
No one in that exchange was saying anything about whether city life sucked or not, at least in those posts.
I wish I could move to a more rural/small town setting, but that ain't happenin' right now. The older I get, the less patience I have for other people's stupidity. More people=more stupidity.
Quote from: shp4man on April 17, 2017, 02:07:15 PM
I wish I could move to a more rural/small town setting, but that ain't happenin' right now. The older I get, the less patience I have for other people's stupidity. More people=more stupidity.
"If everyone around you seems like an asshole, you're probably the asshole."
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 17, 2017, 02:46:23 PM
"If everyone around you seems like an asshole, you're probably the asshole."
You'd have to live here for a while. Do people in your town race to steal parking spots? Throw trash in the street in front of your house? Take 15 minutes with a cashier when there's 15 other people in line? Do cars back up for a 1/4 mile at intersections?
lol I didn't tell you where to live, man.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 17, 2017, 03:21:32 PM
lol I didn't tell you where to live, man.
See what I mean?
Quote from: shp4man on April 17, 2017, 03:27:44 PM
See what I mean?
No, I don't. It sounds to me like you live in a city where city things happen and you're mad about it. You can't escape stupid people except in your own mind. ie, lighten up.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on April 17, 2017, 12:52:13 PM
Yeah I think the weird part of 12,000 RPM's post was the "or commute" part. As you say there is a ton of commuting in to NYC for work (and FWIW there are in fact people that live in NYC and commute to NJ for work).
Driving in on a daily basis would be a nightmare though (IMO) and would be relatively expensive. I tried to google to see what portions of people commute via mass transit versus driving themselves; this is popped up but I am not sure how accurate it is:
(https://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/files/filemanager/Blog/By_Type.png)
Keep in mind that include all commuters in NYC (so people that both live and work in NYC).
I knew that at least a Jersey guy would get it. :lol:
I figure there's probably more car commuting in the eastern borroughs from LI and New England, but who knows. For as daunting as Manhatten feels, I don't think the traffic itself is as big an issue as all the grid-ed stoplights and lack of limited access thoroughfares.
And part of the explanation is that the NYC metro public transport system is so relatively extensive and such a value proposition, that why bother driving? Just because you're riding the rail doesn't mean you're too poor to afford a car. I mean, surely the gigantic parking lots at the line stops serve some purpose besides being a convenient space to practice donuts.... :thumbsup:
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 17, 2017, 03:33:49 PM
No, I don't. It sounds to me like you live in a city where city things happen and you're mad about it. You can't escape stupid people except in your own mind. ie, lighten up.
It sounds to me like you haven't spent a whole lot of time in a big city.
Quote from: shp4man on April 17, 2017, 04:13:24 PM
It sounds to me like you haven't spent a whole lot of time in a big city.
Absolutely correct. Because I don't want to live in one.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 17, 2017, 03:21:32 PM
lol I didn't tell you where to live, man.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 17, 2017, 02:46:23 PM
"If everyone around you seems like an asshole, you're probably the asshole."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laFGAp6Ip40
Quote from: shp4man on April 17, 2017, 04:13:24 PM
It sounds to me like you haven't spent a whole lot of time in a big city.
Where do you live? I got the impression you already lived in a smallish town.
Quote from: Raza on April 18, 2017, 03:55:46 AM
Where do you live? I got the impression you already lived in a smallish town.
I live in coastal southern California. I grew up in a small town, though.
Quote from: shp4man on April 18, 2017, 07:45:26 AM
I live in coastal southern California. I grew up in a small town, though.
So not a big city?
Quote from: Raza on April 18, 2017, 07:47:41 AM
So not a big city?
I live in a suburb of San Diego, the 2nd largest city in California.
Quote from: shp4man on April 18, 2017, 08:56:23 AM
I live in a suburb of San Diego, the 2nd largest city in California.
Ah.
Great baseball stadium there.
Quote from: shp4man on April 17, 2017, 03:01:23 PM
You'd have to live here for a while. Do people in your town race to steal parking spots? Throw trash in the street in front of your house? Take 15 minutes with a cashier when there's 15 other people in line? Do cars back up for a 1/4 mile at intersections?
There's two sides to every story, and I give anyone on the other side of yours the benefit of doubt by default.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 18, 2017, 04:56:49 PM
There's two sides to every story, and I give anyone on the other side of yours the benefit of doubt by default.
Damn, Sporty you're getting a little #triggered I see. Is it daddy Trump? Don't worry, everything will be OK. :violin:
Quote from: shp4man on April 18, 2017, 05:23:57 PM
Damn, Sporty you're getting a little #triggered I see. Is it daddy Trump? Don't worry, everything will be OK. :violin:
I'm great man, eating croissants in Barcelona at the moment. Trump can't stop me
Eating croissants in Barcelona. On his phone. Arguing with shppy about Trump :lol:
Sporty order some churros.
Livin the dream
Just tell the waitress "Uno mas cervesa, por favor!" :lol:
Quote from: shp4man on April 19, 2017, 11:02:04 AM
Just tell the waitress "Uno mas cervesa, por favor!" :lol:
That actually might not work in Barcelona.
Quote from: Raza on April 19, 2017, 11:03:54 AM
That actually might not work in Barcelona.
Por que?, they no speaky Spanish?
Quote from: shp4man on April 19, 2017, 11:04:38 AM
Por que?, they no speaky Spanish?
I'd say the vast majority do, but in Barcelona, I believe the preferred language among a slim majority is Catalan.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 19, 2017, 02:08:45 AM
I'm great man, eating croissants in Barcelona at the moment. Trump can't stop me
Oh man, I loved Barthelona!!
Quote from: Raza on April 19, 2017, 11:07:32 AM
I'd say the vast majority do, but in Barcelona, I believe the preferred language among a slim majority is Catalan.
Yeah, they're pretty prickly about Spanish cultural influence.
Quote from: shp4man on April 19, 2017, 11:02:04 AM
Just tell the waitress "Uno mas cervesa, por favor!" :lol:
I don't drink anymore, unless I have to, like the free glass of wine they gave us at the flamenco show last night.
Quote from: Raza on April 19, 2017, 11:07:32 AM
I'd say the vast majority do, but in Barcelona, I believe the preferred language among a slim majority is Catalan.
I think tonight was the first time I heard someone throw out some "ths". Everyone speaks Spanish and enough English to make money off us tourists.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on April 19, 2017, 01:35:06 PM
I don't drink anymore, unless I have to, like the free glass of wine they gave us at the flamenco show last night.
Well, that's what I would have told the waitress. Plus, would have added "Y un chupito de tequila, tambien!"
Quote from: shp4man on April 19, 2017, 11:02:04 AM
Just tell the waitress "Uno mas cervesa, por favor!" :lol:
Whenever somebody says that, I grab Bud Light from the cooler as a joke. Oh, you wanted Corona? Fucking say so.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 19, 2017, 04:45:09 PM
Whenever somebody says that, I grab Bud Light from the cooler as a joke. Oh, you wanted Corona? Fucking say so.
"Uno mas
cervesa Bohemia, por favor!"
Fixed it. ;)
You want one more western Czechoslovakia?
Quote from: shp4man on April 19, 2017, 05:26:45 PM
"Uno mas cervesa Bohemia, por favor!"
Fixed it. ;)
Uh, nope. Don't you live in SoCal? lol
Es la cervesa Mexicano mas bueno!
(http://nfgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/nueva-imagen-cerveza-bohema.jpg)
:lol:
Need Hector to back me up on this one. Sorry about Trump, Hector. ;)
I'm a Negra Modelo guy. Though I don't really drink much beer anymore.
Quote from: Raza on April 19, 2017, 10:32:08 PM
I'm a Negra Modelo guy. Though I don't really drink much beer anymore.
I'm starting to like beer less and less. It's a good social/party beverage when you're on a long haul, but it's starting to appeal to me less and less as a daily beverage, regardless of brand/kind. Probably a good thing, really, as long as I don't switch to liquor.
Quote from: giant_mtb on April 19, 2017, 11:29:22 PM
I'm starting to like beer less and less. It's a good social/party beverage when you're on a long haul, but it's starting to appeal to me less and less as a daily beverage, regardless of brand/kind. Probably a good thing, really, as long as I don't switch to liquor.
I only drink once or twice a week, if that, but I am definitely a hard liquor kind of guy. Summer is the time of gin cocktails!
Nothin' like a good Tom Collins on a summer afternoon.
Eh, I could see us going down to one car as long as I am in the job I am in now. But zero cars seems unlikely... not anywhere that I would want to live on a permanent basis.
Quote from: MrH on April 14, 2017, 08:46:47 AM
Lots of businesses move to the suburbs here. Why pay more to be in a city, when all your employees live out in the suburbs anyways?
Within 2 miles of my house, there are 2 national HQs, and multiple other big company locations.
Because the suburbs are not a singular place. Yes, 90% of your employees might live in the suburbs. But that doesn't mean they all live in the same suburb. For example, Irving to Rockwall is 37 miles. Those are both suburbs of Dallas. Wouldn't it be better to based in between those two rather than in one or the other? Being in the city center also makes public transportation more viable for more people.
Not to mention being outside of the city can be a serious mark against some companies when recruiting talent. One of our chief competitors was in the suburbs for a long time (convenient for the partners), and it was a definite edge when recruiting against them. If there is a robust urban / residential area, then generally younger, more educated people are going to want to live there. At least until they can settle down. But, even when the do settle down, they would probably stay "within the perimeter" if they can afford to.
In Dayton, all the nice suburbs are south of town. It's easier to drive between suburbs than through the city, so everyone just opens offices down here.
I imagine the dynamics in a midsize city like Dayton are quite different than those of somewhere like Atlanta or Dallas, where suburban sprawl is a real issue. It's too hard to untangle Dallas from Fort Worth, but the Atlanta metro area has 7x the people and 5x the area compared to the Dayton metro area.