How COVID is creating opportunities in the suburbs

[Buckeye Native 001]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

it’s a long-time class identifier in st. louis. the private schools are neatly stratified but so are the public school districts more generally. for instance jon hamm taught ellie kemper (who comes from missouri old money) at john burroughs and that is towards the top.

i guess more recently its become more of a running joke to ask it mocking the culture.

Ditto in Cincinnati. The Greater Catholic League schools (Moeller, Elder, McNicholas, St. Ursula, Purcell-Marian, La Salle, St. X) is serious business, especially in football. Hell, even on the other side of the river it's a class identifier (Highlands, Covington Catholic, Newport Catholic).

My dad and his two siblings, as well as most of their kids attended Highlands. It's mostly a rivalry among people who've never lived outside of 275 and can be off-putting to newcomers. Provincialism and whatnot. Even Marty Brennaman said in his retirement speech last year that he had to work to be established and accepted by Cincinnati sports fans because he wasn't a native Cincinnatian (came from North Carolina).

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Acajack

If true that doesn't speak much to the attractiveness of cities for attractiveness' sake.

It suggests that lots of people hold their noses and live in the city for practical or economic reasons. Not because they actually like it.

lol it's like you just discovered the reason cities exist at all. They're a necessity of our human reality.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by The North One

lol it's like you just discovered the reason cities exist at all. They're a necessity of our human reality.

So no one actually likes living in the city? I highly doubt that's true.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by Acajack

So no one actually likes living in the city? I highly doubt that's true.

Who is saying that?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Handro

Who is saying that?

Just following his post to its logical conclusion, which runs against the conventional wisdom on here that most everyone wants to live in the city, and would if they could.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Acajack

So no one actually likes living in the city?

I actually like living in the city.

But it's probably not for everyone.

Also, these discussions always neglect to account for the 50 million shades of gray in between. People want "city/burbs" to be this neatly cleaved, black and white dichotomy, but where does it ever actually play out like that in real life?

I mean, there is a whole continuum of options in between living in the heart of downtown or out in some far-flung, cul-de-sac'ed sprawlburb.

The nuance is real, but often ignored around here.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

There are definitely many, many, many, many, many, many, many. MANY. MANY!!, people who are only living in NYC for practical or economic reasons. NYC is not an easy, stress free city to live in, so that should not be a surprise to anybody. That's partly why these doom-and-gloom scenarios about post-pandemic NYC don't make sense. Many of those people who were here only for practical reasons will still be inclined to come back for practical reasons post-pandemic.

there is a saying for that in ny ---> after 7 years you leave in a box.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Handro

But I was referring specifically to middle/upper-middle class young people who are destined for a life in the suburbs once they get their fill of trendy nightlife and brunches and get established enough in careers and relationships that allow them to comfortably buy a house and a car in a bedroom community. Those are the people who may be compelled to move to the suburbs sooner now that COVID has made what might have been their last 2-5 years of city living less enjoyable.

I think yes, this is plausible, but in the long run it makes no difference. It means a cohort of households is making the same lifestyle decisions they would have made absent pandemic, just accelerated.

The same thing happened after 9-11. There was a discernible uptick in outmigration, at least in NYC, but outmigration in subsequent years was actually much lower than average. What happened is that some of the people ultimately destined for suburbia (or wherever) decided to speed up their timetables.

IMO a BIG reason that young, educated people flock to cities is because women like cosmopolitan life and guys like to chase those women. It isn't because they value urbanity, specifically. These factors will remain post-Covid.

[Acajack]

I think what happened in most U.S. big cities (including NYC) from the 60s to the 90s is that a series of factors had a depressor effect on that natural balance you guys are describing.

Making the outflow significantly disproportionate to the inflow.

The past couple of decades have seen a return to (the desirable balance) in many cities.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I think yes, this is plausible, but in the long run it makes no difference. It means a cohort of households is making the same lifestyle decisions they would have made absent pandemic, just accelerated.

The same thing happened after 9-11. There was a discernible uptick in outmigration, at least in NYC, but outmigration in subsequent years was actually much lower than average. What happened is that some of the people ultimately destined for suburbia (or wherever) decided to speed up their timetables.

IMO a BIG reason that young, educated people flock to cities is because women like cosmopolitan life and guys like to chase those women. It isn't because they value urbanity, specifically. These factors will remain post-Covid.

Agreed, my original post said it might create some short term opportunities but I don't think this will create any sort of tectonic shift in the general trend toward urban living of the past 25 years. A pretty specific subset of people (upwardly mobile late 20s/30s) will accelerate/make plans to decamp cities for the suburbs. But overall younger people don't seem overly concerned with the virus and are itching to get back to what they were enjoying 6 months ago.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think what happened in most U.S. big cities (including NYC) from the 60s to the 90s is that a series of factors had a depressor effect on that natural balance you guys are describing.

Making the outflow significantly disproportionate to the inflow.

The past couple of decades have seen a return to (the desirable balance) in many cities.

I think the biggest factors that undermined U.S. cities was government policy: freeway building, slum clearing, redlining, etc. We don't currently have that same situation. If anything, we still have a national mood that is very much in favor of reversing those policy decisions. As Baby Boomers come to represent a smaller share of voters, it will only speed up the reversal of those policies.

[llamaorama]

Regarding lifestyle versus practicality; it varies among cities.

Somewhere like Portland or Austin doesn’t really have a super dominant CBD and are mostly suburban metros. The city dwellers there chose that lifestyle and are likely to be reverse commuters anyways. I don’t see a big exodus from these places.

NYC is unusual among American cities because there are just so many jobs and institutions in Manhattan and the commute from outside the city is so extreme that it’s easy to imagine a huge number of residents who live in dense urban neighborhoods merely out of practicality and have no special loyalty to urbanism. And New York is so much more intense and expensive and idiosyncratic in many ways which is a strong push factor. So work from home could really hit it hard.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Just following his post to its logical conclusion, which runs against the conventional wisdom on here that most everyone wants to live in the city, and would if they could.

That's not the conclusion at all you're just making massive leaps and spewing obviously false absolute statements.

[the urban politician]

I know of people in the burbs who are very reluctant to get back on the train and start working in downtown Chicago again.

Ugh....I hate this pandemic. Watching all of these skyscrapers go up with so much confidence and...hell....hubris...was...RAD!!!!

[10023]

I’ve probably missed this earlier, but what do people make of Facebook’s plan to pay people less if they are working from home in less expensive locations? Slack has said the same. In other words, the savings that come from not needing expensive real estate in a major hub city accrue to the business, not the individual.

If you can’t move away from NYC or SF (or London or Paris or wherever) and make the same money with cheaper housing, then a lot fewer people will do it. And those high salaries have only really ever come to be because people needed them to cover high costs.

There is and will always be something lost when working remotely, and people are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.

[CaliNative]

The covid pandemic may be temporary, but it may change some people's behaviors for a longer period. It will take a while to get back to the old social habits until people feel safe. Perhaps a longer term concern is the perception (and in some cases the reality) that crime is increasing again in the cities. This may be the bigger problem long term for city living. When things fall apart and generally go to hell, most people think cities are NOT the place to be.

[Qubert]

Originally Posted by 10023

I’ve probably missed this earlier, but what do people make of Facebook’s plan to pay people less if they are working from home in less expensive locations? Slack has said the same. In other words, the savings that come from not needing expensive real estate in a major hub city accrue to the business, not the individual.

If you can’t move away from NYC or SF (or London or Paris or wherever) and make the same money with cheaper housing, then a lot fewer people will do it. And those high salaries have only really ever come to be because people needed them to cover high costs.

There is and will always be something lost when working remotely, and people are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.

I don't think it's dawned upon the workers of corporate America that if it can be done in Boise it can be done in Bangkok, which is obviously a very slippery slope to be on. At some point even the higher ups will realize that collaboration, business meetings and just the overall synergy of being amongst your peers and even your competitors matter.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by Qubert

I don't think it's dawned upon the workers of corporate America that if it can be done in Boise it can be done in Bangkok, which is obviously a very slippery slope to be on. At some point even the higher ups will realize that collaboration, business meetings and just the overall synergy of being amongst your peers and even your competitors matter.

A flight from Boise to San Francisco and back could be done in a day. Not to mention obvious limitations due to language barriers, time differences, professional cultures, etc. Most of the corporate jobs we're talking about here just won't be outsourced.

The synergy of being in cubicle cluster is vastly overstated by many business-types with sensibilities from another era. It's been proven in some studies that working from home actually boosts productivity: https://hbr.org/2014/01/to-raise-pro...work-from-home

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Handro

A flight from Boise to San Francisco and back could be done in a day. Not to mention obvious limitations due to language barriers, time differences, professional cultures, etc. Most of the corporate jobs we're talking about here just won't be outsourced.

English is now the universal global business language, so no language barriers. There are more English speakers in India than the U.S.

Time differences aren't a barrier. We have an employee who has been working from Shanghai this entire pandemic, on EST business hours. You just change your schedule. Many firms are 24/7 operations anyways.

Professional cultures require in-place social interaction, i.e. not WFH. Someone in Boise has no obvious social advantage over Bangalore.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by Crawford

English is now the universal global business language, so no language barriers. There are more English speakers in India than the U.S.

Time differences aren't a barrier. We have an employee who has been working from Shanghai this entire pandemic, on EST business hours. You just change your schedule. Many firms are 24/7 operations anyways.

Professional cultures require in-place social interaction, i.e. not WFH. Someone in Boise has no obvious social advantage over Bangalore.

I worked for a company based in Bangalore with offices in San Francisco and Chicago with extremely flexible work from home policies (we had an optional office space but could WFH whenever we liked.) I was speaking from experience. Good luck replacing your sales and marketing teams with less expensive overseas labor.

The proof is already out there--requiring employees across the board to fill a physical space in an office forty+ hours a week is foolishly outdated. Framing the alternative as a mass outsourcing of every corporate job in America is foolishly alarmist.