PODS survey - Where Are People Moving to in 2024? Hint: There’s Been a Shift!

[BnaBreaker]

Why are they combining Myrtle Beach and Wilmington? They're like seventy miles apart. I mean no wonder it has been number one for two years in a row. Let other cities randomly tack on a few thousand square miles and I'm sure these rankings would look a bit different.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

"permanent vacation" is probably sexier in theory than in the reality of living it daily.

And I say that as an extremely ardent beach lover.

But there's more to life than the beach.

Lots of people that move to FL find that out too! That's why so many leave even as huge numbers come in....

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

"permanent vacation" is probably sexier in theory than in the reality of living it daily.

And I say that as an extremely ardent beach lover.

But there's more to life than the beach.

I'm not really a beach guy - but I do like mountains and need to exercise my leg muscles or I start getting twitchy. We don't have beaches and nice cool great lake vistas in St. Louis but thank god we have tons of nice rocky Ozark trails in St. Louis County that go 400+ft straight up to treat my restless leg syndrome, lol. It's one of the midwest's best kept secrets that we have appalachian-style trails in St. Louis county, hope it stays secret, lol.

[AviationGuy]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

It's funny where people in the US are moving to...

As an aside, I recently read an article about the cost of healthcare in the US, and the supposedly cheap states of Texas and Florida actually are among the most expensive states for healthcare in the US. I guess that wouldn't matter to a retiree with Medicare, but for younger people who think they're escaping high costs of living, well, wait until you have to go to urgent care or need surgery, or need to see a specialist.

Here's a Forbes article about it, with rankings and methodology: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/healt...h-care-ranked/

But to cut to the chase, here are the 10 most expensive states for healthcare:

1. North Carolina
2. South Dakota
3. Nebraska
4. Florida
5. Texas
6. South Carolina
7. Arizona
8. Georgia
9. New Hampshire
10. Louisiana

Here are the 5 most affordable states for healthcare:

1. Hawaii
2. Michigan
3. Washington
4. California
5. Massachusetts

I went to an urgent care here in Cypress, TX about a month ago, and the staff mistakenly thought it was in-network for my Medicare Advantage Plan PPO. But it wasn't. A five minute consultation cost $130. I don't know if that's normal or not. But it seems like a lot.

[llamaorama]

I like the beach but I could see how it would get old fast if that was the only thing going on in a location. Also in many places I feel like the beach is actually hard to access, there's never enough parking or entrance points. I guess lakes in places that have them can have the same problem as beaches - they are all surrounded by private cottage developments and its hard for us peons to get on the water. At some point if it's a hassle you'd never go even if you lived close by.

Same with mountains, though I have less interest in activities you'd do in the mountains beyond maybe finding them interesting to look at.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by edale

I've driven from Knoxville to Greenville and it was pretty easy. I'm not sure the exact route we took, but I think we went through Ashville, and it didn't take very long. I also don't know why a lack of a direct connection to Knoxville would be a critical flaw. Knoxville isn't even a big or important city,

Because I-75 travels through Knoxville, which is the second or third-most important interstate highway.

Per google, Knoxville and Greenville are 117 miles apart but the drive time under ideal circumstances (middle of the night) is 3 hours. That means 4 hours during daylight and possibly 6 when you get caught in an I-40 wreck in the mountains.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

I-75..... which is the second or third-most important interstate highway.

By what measure?

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

Hilton Head fucking sucks - the water is turbid, fucking hot as hell, spread way the hell out in a bad way, the houses are nice, but at least the redneck riviera in Florida has nice clear water. I don't get the appeal of HH. Its a fucking sham for upper middle class dumbasses.

There is far too much development along the eastern coastlines - all of it vulnerable to hurricanes. South Carolina built the first bridge out to Hilton Head in the 1950s, but big-time development didn't happen until the 1970s and 80s when the families who still owned the big farms all sold at the same time and the place turned into what it is now. With some foresight the state could have petitioned the federal government to buy out the entire sparsely populated island for preservation as a national park ala Isle Royale in Lake Superior.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

By what measure?

It's maybe the second or third most important North South interstate? (i-95 clearly more important and perhaps I-5 as well). But certainly a couple esst-west interstates would come before (80,90,10).

[edale]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Because I-75 travels through Knoxville, which is the second or third-most important interstate highway.

Per google, Knoxville and Greenville are 117 miles apart but the drive time under ideal circumstances (middle of the night) is 3 hours. That means 4 hours during daylight and possibly 6 when you get caught in an I-40 wreck in the mountains.

75 also goes through Atlanta. Yes, Greenville is a couple hours further away from Knoxville, Cincinnati and Detroit than it would be with a northwest connection to 75, but is that really a big deal?

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

It's maybe the second or third most important North South interstate? (i-95 clearly more important and perhaps I-5 as well). But certainly a couple esst-west interstates would come before (80,90,10).

No. A sharp majority of the US population lives east of the Mississippi River, meaning the east/west interstates have vast, vast stretches through the western wastelands. I-95, I-75, and I-65 never travel through...rock/dirt/scrubgrass. I doubt that any of them have a stretch between exits exceeding 10 miles, except maybe Alligator Alley.

northwest connection to 75, but is that really a big deal?

The northwest territory states have a combined population that is almost identical to California's, and comprise a similar land area. Interstate highway access from all directions is a big reason why well-connected cities are better places to do business than isolated ones - more competition from more vendors plus larger regional markets.

Also, looking at Greenville on Google Earth, it appears to be an example of the handful of US cities with no downtown interstates but the place still looks as auto-centric as those where neighborhoods were torn down. It's almost like this whole narrative re: neighborhoods being demo'd doesn't really cause all of the ill-effects people blame the highways for.

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by edale

75 also goes through Atlanta. Yes, Greenville is a couple hours further away from Knoxville, Cincinnati and Detroit than it would be with a northwest connection to 75, but is that really a big deal?

It isn't. Greenville does just fine with I-85, I-185, and with I-385 to connect it with I-26, and with I-26 directly intersecting with I-85 over in Spartanburg.

I-85 connects Charlotte and Atlanta, and I-26 connects the region with the ports down in Charleston and Georgetown. That's been enough to push the economy here to dizzying heights -- the industrial output here is such that the state had to build an inland port facility to collect it all for shipping to the seaports via a direct rail line, or else trying to move it all by truck would have caused regional gridlock. And even with that, I-85 is still a moving wall of trucks for most of the day.

We do quite well for ourselves just with what we've got.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

No. A sharp majority of the US population lives east of the Mississippi River, meaning the east/west interstates have vast, vast stretches through the western wastelands. I-95, I-75, and I-65 never travel through...rock/dirt/scrubgrass. I doubt that any of them have a stretch between exits exceeding 10 miles, except maybe Alligator Alley.

"Never travel through.... rock/dirt/scrub grass" sounds like a pretty dubious way to measure the relative "importance" of US interstate routes.

Economic impact, traffic loads, total population connected, etc. would all be far more telling things to look at, IMO.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

It's maybe the second or third most important North South interstate? (i-95 clearly more important and perhaps I-5 as well). But certainly a couple esst-west interstates would come before (80,90,10).

We had a thread about commerce on interstates a while ago. I think I-75 was second to I-80 and ahead of I-95.

EDIT: Here it is - https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=251711

Ranked by value of trade I-75 was third behind I-80 and I-70. I-95 was sixth.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

"permanent vacation" is probably sexier in theory than in the reality of living it daily.

And I say that as an extremely ardent beach lover.

But there's more to life than the beach.

Yea, its kinda overrated. I work next to the beach in Santa Monica and lived next to Oak Street beach in Chicago.

Its nice to look at but it does get old and you dont think much of it anymore. The crowds/energy are fun bun you still take it for granted.

I like the bike/jogging paths next to the beach in Chicago and LA than the actual beach lol. I think hiking is far more interesting now, all kinds of different views, landscapes change, different trails,
nice crowds of people, great cardio etc.

It's not even good for you to be at the beach all the time, for skin reasons. Vacations are not the same thing. No doubt. If you get bored by the beach in Chicago or LA you can just walk in or hop over to another fun area. I have no idea what these people are doing who get bored by the beach (and they will) and live in these smaller towns.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by LA21st

I have no idea what these people are doing who get bored by the beach (and they will) and live in these smaller towns.

The problem with living near the coast is that you can't really travel in all directions. You're sort-of pinned up against a wall. If you're on a barrier island with just one bridge, you cross that bridge over and over again. If there is a recreational path, you either go one way or the other, meaning your exercise routine becomes very repetitive. This is probably not so much the case in LA or Chicago, where you can go inland (and LA of course has mountains where you can trail run or mountain bike), but it's definitely the case on barrier islands.

Boating often suffers from the same problem. If you are lucky to own a boat, there are usually just a few repetitive things you can do with it in your area. After you've explored everything within a 10-mile range of the dock, it's unlikely that you take the boat out other than when you have visitors.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Yea, its kinda overrated. I work next to the beach in Santa Monica and lived next to Oak Street beach in Chicago.

Its nice to look at but it does get old and you dont think much of it anymore. The crowds/energy are fun bun you still take it for granted.

Our family certainly doesn't take the beach for granted.

Other than my college years up in the twin cities, I've never lived more than a couple miles from a beach in Chicago, and have been a regular Lake Michigan beach-goer my entire life.

We average about 10 beach days every summer because it's our family's happiest place.

But if it was literally every single day 12 months/year? Yeah, it would lose some luster, I'm sure.

[LA21st]

Well sure, 10 beach days a summer is fine. Thats probably what I do in LA/So cal.

But every day, no. I dont believe people who say they do that either.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

The problem with living near the coast is that you can't really travel in all directions. You're sort-of pinned up against a wall. If you're on a barrier island with just one bridge, you cross that bridge over and over again. If there is a recreational path, you either go one way or the other, meaning your exercise routine becomes very repetitive. This is probably not so much the case in LA or Chicago, where you can go inland (and LA of course has mountains where you can trail run or mountain bike), but it's definitely the case on barrier islands.

Boating often suffers from the same problem. If you are lucky to own a boat, there are usually just a few repetitive things you can do with it in your area. After you've explored everything within a 10-mile range of the dock, it's unlikely that you take the boat out other than when you have visitors.

Yea, the repetitiveness has to get to people. I dont understand how it wouldnt. I knew people in Chicago who had boats and they didnt use them as much as I thought. They just liked having it or drinking on it when it was docked.

[SteveD]

My sister lives about a third of a mile from beaches on the Gulf side of Florida in Seminole FL (Madeira Beach) and the only time she goes is pretty much when friends or family visit.