←back to thread

526 points cactusplant7374 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.347s | source
Show context
xp84 ◴[] No.44077508[source]
I've commented (probably too much) to argue with the harshest critics of this piece, but I am surprised to not have seen much this criticism which is my main one:

Supposing I've made peace with the main gist of this: Cut living expenses to a point where you can work ¼ or so of the time most of us spend working by living somewhere cheap and not being so materialistic.

The missing piece here is social connections. Family and friends. If I could take my in-laws and my 2 best friends and their families with me, I'd sign up to move to a rural place like this tomorrow. But it's impractical for nearly everyone in the whole country to make such a thing happen. This limits its appeal. This place is 90 minutes or so from the Montreal airport, which is actually not bad for rural places, but flights are not cheap, certainly not accessible on the budget described here, so for you to have contact with anyone outside this town, they're likely going to have to drop about $500 per person, per visit, and will be staying at the Super 8 since you probably don't have a guest room). So, implied but not acknowledged in this piece is the assumption that you are almost definitely going to only see your family and friends a few more times (maybe once a year each, if you're super lucky) for the rest of your life.

And unlike questions of money; food, entertainment, family and friends aren't fungible. You can start over and hope to make new friends out there, but you can't replace people. This is what would make this life untenable to me, and I'm not even all that extraverted.

replies(18): >>44077661 #>>44077836 #>>44077861 #>>44077989 #>>44078076 #>>44078326 #>>44078481 #>>44078497 #>>44078865 #>>44079089 #>>44079776 #>>44081693 #>>44081796 #>>44082021 #>>44082114 #>>44086836 #>>44093839 #>>44110159 #
jvanderbot ◴[] No.44077661[source]
Any discussion of staying near family and friends on a forum predominated by startups out of the bay area is completely disingenuous.

But that aside, I suggest this is front page and meaningful not because it brings up a third option (to stay home, move to a city, or move to rural NY), but instead because it advocates accidentally for just staying home. Your family probably already lives in an area that is more affordable than SF/NYC/Paris, and they are there waiting. It's entertaining as an extreme data point but motivating for other reasons

This article is most interesting to me because I tried moving to the big city to be a big shot techie, and have been substantially happier living outside a major city in Minnesota.

Absolutely nobody that I knew in those cities lived near their family, absolutely all of them moved away to chase fortune and fame.

replies(6): >>44077721 #>>44077723 #>>44078469 #>>44078507 #>>44078784 #>>44079352 #
npodbielski ◴[] No.44079352[source]
Yes, if you plan to have kids having parents or other family near is a big help. Big cities are fine when you are 18-25 and want to have fun. Near 30 and older you are just tired by the noise and other people being around ;)
replies(1): >>44085106 #
1. throw383624 ◴[] No.44085106[source]
Disagree. The older I get, the more I love living in the city.

I dislike having to drive long distances to do anything. In a city, my block alone has tons of stores I can go to.

Anywhere else I want to visit is just a subway ride away.

I do agree it's good to have parents and family around to help take care of your kids. That's even better in the city since the kids can just walk to there themselves once they're old enough.

I know some older seniors who can't drive anymore and it doesn't affect them at all because they can either take the bus or subway.