Urban vs Rural low cost living | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Marganne (margannemacnexus.org) | |
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 11:04:50 -0700 (PDT) |
At 7:44 AM -0400 5/19/08, Sharon Villines wrote:
So cities can be better areas for low cost housing than out in the country or the suburbs. Because people can walk to work, it also makesthem very convenient.
I was raised as a city girl in L.A. I've lived all but 7 years of my life in big cities (not by choice). I would give almost anything to return to semi-rural living. I'm very drawn to large, open vistas without the low roar of traffic, the whine of sirens, and watching helicopters every other night flying overhead with search lights.
There are many services and other stimulating things offered in larger cities. I found smaller towns provide more sense of community which was very attractive to me. As I read somewhere, it doesn't bother me that I have to drive more than 2 miles to find a Starbucks! (LOL)
In this world of people finding many ways to work via telecommuting, it removes some of the need to be near a hub of employment.
Cheers! Marganne
- Re: How much living space to you need?, (continued)
- Re: How much living space to you need? melanie griffin, May 20 2008
- Re: How much living space to you need? Matthew Whiting, May 20 2008
- Re: Pattern Language Ed and/or Kathryn Belzer, May 20 2008
- Re: Pattern Language James Kacki, May 20 2008
- Urban vs Rural low cost living Marganne, May 19 2008
- Message not available
- Re: Urban vs Rural low cost living Matthew Whiting, May 19 2008
- Re: Urban vs Rural low cost living Marganne, May 19 2008
- Message not available
- Re: Urban vs Rural low cost living Matthew Whiting, May 19 2008
- Re: Low cost housing Marganne, May 18 2008
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.