You can’t convince me otherwise. The headline on this Associated Press story was filled with a backhanded slap at people who live in the suburbs, probably from a city slicker editor. I know who you are.
Now that we’ve settled the health care issue, we can turn to the war between people who live in the ‘burbs vs. those who live in the city. Both, we presume, have their advantages and in the end, people are free to live where they want to live. So why is there always the subtext that people in the ‘burbs should move to the city, or that some people in the city would find a better life in the ‘burbs?
The Associated Press story isn’t a lifestyle story that says young people have chosen a life because of its quality, per se; they’ve chosen it based on economic realities, which has often been the most influential factor in deciding where to live.
College debt, lousy jobs prospects, and available housing has forced many people to choose the city over the suburbs. Their generation is known as Generation Rent.
“I will never live in the suburbs,” said Jaclyn King, 28, of Denver told the Associated Press.
“I much prefer living in the city,” Symm Vafeades said. “There’s just a lot more you can do without having to drive everywhere.”
The good news, Symm and Jaclyn, is you don’t have to. Nobody’s making you move to the suburbs if you don’t want to.
But, the story points out, the economics that has made cities attractive again, can just as easily push people back out….
They point to practical considerations such as better schools in the suburbs, continued government tax breaks for home ownership and subsidies for travel in rural areas, as well as rapidly rising downtown rents, that are likely to push young adults to the suburbs once they sort out decisions about jobs, kids and finances.
Some things never change.