“There’s this wild disconnect between what people are experiencing and what economists are experiencing,” says Nikki Cimino, a recruiter in Denver.

  • @aidan
    link
    1
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Cheaper places are cheaper for a reason.

    Yes, and I agree I prefer higher density, but ultimately some people living in less desirable areas is more reasonable than trying to build ever taller skyscrapers in city centers- in a country with massive amounts of empty land.

    Worse health care.

    It depends, there are plenty of cheaper cities with very good healthcare, I grew up in Louisville, KY, spent a lot of time in LA, CA, and now live in Prague, CZ. Louisville has had the cheapest rent/purchase price and had by far the best quality healthcare(at least that I and my family received) out of anywhere I’ve lived.

    Worse education for your kids.

    This is valid in some cases, and there are plenty of valid reasons to desire living somewhere else more, that doesn’t mean there aren’t costs to that. Furthermore, there are plenty of expensive places with terrible school systems, plenty of cheap places with passable school systems, but more importantly traditional schools systems in general suck. Kids now days have access to the internet, that combined with parents who encourage curiosity and creativity will be much more important to them learning than the school system they go to.

    For instance St Louis has a median home price of 207k but they also have 10x the murder rate of Seattle a worse jobs outlook.

    That is cherrypicking, compare Chicago to Fargo, ND. Or a less distant example, Seattle to Spokane.

    You’ll make less money etc.

    Assuming you don’t work remotely, but you’ll also spend less.

    Who in their right mind would want to live in a red state?

    Not about being red or blue, its about not being a HCOL megalopolis. You can also move to Maine.

    • @michaelmrose
      link
      English
      19 months ago

      Manhattan doesn’t have much room to expand up or out but but Seattle still has 70% single family homes it and surrounding cities have plenty of room to build up.

      Spokane is largely populated by bigots and Trumpers. In particular the state congressman they elected wrote a paper the “biblical basis for war” wherein he advocated that after the fall of the united states they would make war on the rest of us nonbelievers taking the women prisoners and killing men who wouldn’t submit in his new Christofascist white ISIS like kingdom. He was then caught trying to “rescue” a bunch of Ukrainian kids on behalf of an organization that existed on paper only without doing boring stuff like making sure they didn’t have parents fighting in the war or other relations who wanted to take them.

      On an economic front the Seattle Metro area has substantial commerce, an international airport, a port and 4M people. Spokane has about 230k. Adding another 230k would be a 5% increase in population for the Seattle Metro it would double spokane. The resources for expanding housing and resources in the Seattle metro actually exist. If it ever makes it there that is about half a century of growth for Spokane.