Driving Down Real Estate

There is another option besides moving back to the city to fight the high cost of gas. Rather than move your home, you can move your office. The office does not have to move for everyone ??? just you.

Rather than work in a centralized office, ask your boss if you can work in a remote office. Remote Office Centers provides office facilities, internet and phone systems to workers from different companies in shared centers located in the suburbs. There is a free web site for people who want to find a remote office near where they live.
http://www.remoteofficecenters.com

With the price of fuel as high as it is, people are going to have to move closer to work or move the office closer to home. Sometimes, moving is not an option or it is too expensive an option. The technology is already available. There are office buildings and under utilized commercial real estate facilities all over suburban America. Why drive to work through crowed roadways, when there are plenty of offices located within a mile of where you live?

For more from Chris Leinberger about the move from suburbs to cities:

http://blog.islandpress.org/author/christopher (his contributions to Island Press' Eco-Compass Blog),

http://islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261364 (his book, The Option of Urbanism)

For those interested in more from Chris Leinberger about the migration from suburbs to cities:

http://blog.islandpress.org/author/christopher (his contributions to Island Press' Eco-Compass Blog)

Or read his book, "The Option of Urbanism" (http://islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261364)

The problem is that teh commute is just one small part of teh urban/suburban equation. Most major urban centers have third world level school systms and a complete dirth of amenities for anybody except young urban childless singles. A great example of this woul dbe Chicago, where there is no longer a single toy store in the city, and all toy stores have been repelaced with H&M and Urban Outfitter stores.

The "millenials" make teh baby boomers look altruistic...and they're equally blinkered. A mass shift back to urban centers would first require a massive upgrade and investment in infrasturcture and schools. For example, in Chicago, Gas can hit $40 per gallon and teh commute would still be cheaper than paying for a private school in the city if you wanted to live in teh city but still keep your kids out of the war zone.

Having "driven down real estate for many years," I was motivated to find a way to preserve suburban life styles. My solution along with a variety of others are contenders for the Progressive Automotive X Prize competition. The goal of 100 mpg is within reach of many of these contenders. Nearly all, especially mine which is the Miastrada, will require motorists to rethink their concept of the automobile. See www.miastrada.com for an early view of an interesting solution.

"Grow small" is what I've been telling people for years. I live in a small house and drive a small car and even make a small income, but I'd doing fine and expect to continue to do so.

You is screwed dude. Exercise your second Amendment Rights. Live off the land--squirrel with fresh sage is delicious. Shoot a Republican. Tough, but good if smoked for 12 hours, thinly sliced and accompanied by lentils.

Automobiles and highways allowed people to leave the cities, but 1960s social changes forced people to take that opportunity. Cities have yet to become friendly to middle-class families with children.

For example, middle-class families moving back to the city must be able to afford private school tuition in addition to the extra cost of a housing in a safe urban neighborhood -- thanks to the sharp reduction in academic and behavioral standards in urban public schools during the 1960s, That is a _huge_ expense. If private school vouchers were available, then maybe we'd see a more massive gentrification movement pushing the poor out into the suburbs, but I don't think that will happen.

Instead, I think we'll see people buying little tiny gas-efficient or electric cars for each wage-earner solely for use in commuting or shopping, in addition to the family car used on weekends. The collision risk of driving a tiny car is small compared with the risk of muggings and burglary in an affordable urban neighborhood.

If the suburbs are to be saved, mass transit must be brought to them. Myself, I really don't want to give up my suburban (actually almost country) living, and all the peace and quiet that comes with it, and go to the city. The development of a transit system in the long run would be a lot less expensive than "suburban blight".

Buggie, your synosis of the suburbs are wrong and your post reeks of class envy. You hate the suburbs for reasons other than what you are saying. There is no proof that suburbian life leads to anything you are talking about. Now, if you want to have a sensible discussion as to how low gas prices this country enjoyed for many years lead to the creation of suburbia then by all means we can have that discussion. Suburbia was created due to the outrageously high costs of living in the city and the low costs of commuting. Why would a person rent a 700sq. ft. one bedroom apartment in a major metropolis for $1600 a month when they could own a home for hundreds less a month and reap a return on investment?

As a city planner I think the high gas prices may be one of the best things for revitalizing our downtowns and curbing the incessant sprawl and poorly built housing associated with the suburbs. But, while I hope this pattern of thoughtless inefficient development slows, I also hope the answer to this article is a resounding NO. We can not let the suburbs die. We need to learn from the mistake we made when we abandoned our downtowns in the decades after WWII. Suburban growth resulted in urban blight. We face a new suburban blight if we kill the suburbs. Sprawling mile after mile of crumbling housing, poverty, and crime. No. Instead we need to learn from the past, make use of ALL that we have built, reinvigorate downtown and retrofit our suburbs so they are more liveable.

There is no way we can accomodate the masses of people in most cities in their downtowns alone, unless they suddenly come to resemble Manhattan, which I find highly unlikely. We need to push for higher density development downtown, add a mix of uses in close walking, biking, or car ride distance to our suburbs. Add greenspaces, recreation, true small town centers so they don't have to commute downtown for everything. Mass transit and other alternatives must be brought to these once auto only neighborhoods so they actually become a closely connected part of the larger city and true neighborhoods. Lastly we need to push for infill development both in our downtowns and in our suburbs. We need to stop the leap frogging development pattern that has strained our infrastructure and put us in the situation we are in. I think the high gas prices could ultimately be the one of the best opportunities for us to invest in and improve both our cities and suburbs, but we have to do it right and we have to start now.

This is the best possible result of high gas prices. Suburbs are inefficient, horrible for the environment, lead to obesity, and degrade the sense of community. Hooray for high gas prices!

Did you know that if McCain is elected you will have to pay income tax on the value of the medical insurance that your employer gives you? Worse still, he is offering a tax break for people who pay their own insurance, BUT only $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families.

Let's say you have a family of four. Your insurance policy costs would be at least $1,500-2,500 per month under a self-pay plan, which cost more than employer group plans. So, you pay $18,000 -$30,000 per year for insurance, and you get to deduct only $5,000 of that. If you paid $25,000 for you insurance, you would be out of pocket $20,000 per year. This is FAR WORSE than the current system, where if you are self employed you can deduct 100% of you medical insurance costs.

So, if you're not self employed, you would stick with your Employer's plan. Employer plans for a family of four have a value of $900-$1,500 per month totaling 10,800-$18,000 per year. Surprise! On April 15th, you owe tax on all of that as INCOME to you. Say your bracket is 25%, and the value of your Employer medical plan is $14,000. You will OWE THE IRS an additional $3,500, and that's ON TOP of whatever monthly premium you already pay to your employer for your insurance.

Many analysts say that McCain's new rules would encourage employers to stop offering health benefits. If that happened, then far fewer Americans would be insured than are insured today, because what family of four can afford $18,000-$30,000 out of pocket per year for self-pay health insurance?

Furthermore, McCain's plan does not require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions of people who self-pay their insurance. People under employer group plans have all of their pre-existing conditions covered. This is a hugely unfair aspect of the current system. Insurance companies can afford to cover the pre-existing conditions of the much larger pool of people with group insurance, but they refuse to pay the pre-existing conditions on the smaller pool of self-pay customers. They have been allowed to price gouge the self-pay customers, which is a form of market manipulation that should be illegal.

So let's say one of your kids had diabetes and you have high blood pressure, then your employer stops offering insurance. You now have to buy your own, but you and your child are INELIGIBLE due to pre-existing conditions. Oh, yeah, they will let you buy the insurance, but you can't use it for any pre-existing condition until you have paid on time every month for two years. And you know what happens at one year and 11 months? You get a letter saying your policy has been cancelled. I have many patients this has happened to.

McCain's plan SUCKS.

It does nothing to help middle class working Americans afford or obtain medical insurance. In fact, it makes the current system WORSE.

trams subways and intracity rail and s-trains check out munich germanys suburban connections they didnt have anything until 1972 when the subway and tram system was built for the olympics.
now any city within an hour by train is an easy commute its like a giant spider web that works well and is very efficent.
fares are cheap and cars are only for weekend trips to france italy or the alps ...in boston it would be the your locaL ESCAPE spots.
all across america there are ten of thousands of jobs just waiting to be created by state and local gov floating bond issues supported by federal backing IF of course SOMEONE in the upper reaches of the federal government ever GETS A CLUE about what it takes to move people and goods efficently.
dont take my word for it just look at germany it is an example of a country that has completly modernized its transportation system.
its safe as well.

It would be fanciful to believe that moving near your job would be effective. Given the propensity of companies to 'trade' out employee every time the market farts, you would be forced to move every couple of years. Now just being closer could definitely be a plus. I know that here in Colorado, there are three or four areas of employment, all at opposite ends of the city. Our public transportation is very poor. My wife would use it if it didn't extend her comute over an hour each way. Luckily, I'm only 10 minutes away from work. With kids, I just cannot justify having them in daycare another two hours a day, just to save a few bucks on gas, so we drive. My time has more value than that. My car is paid off; the cost of an extra $100+ in gas per month is nothing compared to a $600 car payment for a hunk of metal that costs over half as much as my first house did in '82 and will depreciate to nothing in a few years. If Tata can make a $2500 car, why can't we? Because 'we' don't want to. We are overly paranoid about safety. OMG.. What would happen if I rolled my car at 80 mph? Ooo! Better have 8 airbags! Hey! Don't hose cost $800 a pop? And the list goes on. Maybe. Just Maybe, we should drive better, maybe, a little slower. Why in the wolrd does your average passenger car need to get to 60 in 7 seconds and have a top end of 150mph? You can't go that fast! As if getting to that speed in 12 seconds instead of 6 is criminal. There just isn't any real reason to need that. And you don't need a pickup truck, if all you ever put in it is groceries. Most of the things we think we need, are just proof of how well advertising works. The rest is just a sickness, thinking we can buy happiness, or need to keep up with our neighbors. Why not just let them go into dept yo their ears, and smile as you watch them place that for sale sign up. Afterall, by living wisely, you would never be in the situation of HAVING to sell your house because you would have a savings account and not be leveraged to the hilt!!

gas $1.17 when bush took office...gas $4.00+ today...good thing we elected a oil man for president and vice president or it might be more....