I'm from Europe and I also live apart from my long term SO.
The reason being our job commutes.
We work in completely opposite parts of town and due to the city lacking fast public transport and her job lacking flextime she has to wake up way earlier than I'm use to if I want to be productive at work and so far we haven't found a middle ground where one doesn't have to compromise too much.
Honestly, remote work would ease a lot of modern urban problems like traffic, rents, relationships, childcare, etc. If only our corporate masters would allow it.
World governments need to start incentivizing employers to offer remote ASAP as infrastructure in the cities is not keeping up with population growth.
I'm from Hong Kong, funnily enough, and what we do with mine is that we switch every 2 years. Renting here is easy (albeit expensive), so we just move to a flat near her work, spend 2 years of me having 3 hours of bus, and then we move near mine, when I am 10 minutes away by foot and she has the 3 hours of commute per day.
What's nice is we can pay the 4000 euros per month of rent. If not we'd find a 2000 euros flat mid-way. The main issue is that hker are either too stingy to rent, or really don't earn enough to spend that much on it. Don't underestimate the number of people here who can't pay rent by sheer ideology, and live at their parents while extremely overpaid compared to Europe.
Also, as a side note, city incentives to companies come either from your salary (via taxes on companies) or your taxes, not the sky, so it's not a solution. Real solutions are sacrifice, like changing job, changing girlfriend or changing flat. Would you ask for the country to give incentive to companies to help you work 300 km apart your gf ? Sometimes life's unfair and the government isn't your mom, you'll have to solve the problem yourself.
Would love to better understand the ideology. Could you elaborate? Is it the "you will build equity through real estate" argument? Are the people living at their parents saving up for a down payment on real estate so they can get in on that game?
"Saving to buy later" is not really a good strategy in Hong Kong, as the increase in market price is faster than what can save. The only option is to get a sharp increase in one's income. This is very disheartening, as the goal post keeps moving.
Just a clarification, 2000 euros is not anywhere close to normal rent in Hong Kong, I pay 900 euro for a place in Sai Ying pun. Also, buses don't take 1.5 hours unless you live in like Tai Mei Tuk.
But the problem the article tries to explain is that they live apart because they cannot afford a house at all (both live at their respective parents' and their child spends time with either alternatively).
I feel like housing policy is on the verge of becoming a major public issue, the same way that Healthcare has in the US in the last couple years. It seems to me that it's just gotten too difficult in too many places to find an affordable place to live, and it just doesn't seem sustainable for only high-wage earners to have stable housing.
it's just gotten too difficult in too many places to find an affordable place to live
Problem is that none of those places are swing states and voting demographics aren't exactly the ones moving to new cities and getting hit by awful rent.
There is a solution - start FINDING remote jobs. These companies will have to bend over backwards (I hate that term) to start offering high paying remote positions as their talent pool leaves looking for better options.
Chicken & egg problem: It's hard to find remote jobs if they're not being offered. We need to incentivize working from home (non-commuting) via tax governmental policy (local, state, federal level in the US). This is critical in order to cut greenhouse gasses and prevent traffic congestion without needing to build expensive new roads.
Do you live in Europe, or in the US? ("I'm from Europe" doesn't specify this.) If you're in the US, this is perfectly understandable: commutes here are hellish because of the gridlock on roads and the lack of decent public transit. But European cities, from what I've seen, are much better because they generally do have good public transit.
World governments need to start incentivizing employers to offer remote ASAP as infrastructure in the cities is not keeping up with population growth.
A lot of work can't be done remotely. Not everyone works in software. No, what governments need to do is build good infrastructure. Population growth in cities means more tax revenue, so there really isn't a problem here, except with some governments being too wasteful and inefficient and unable to build infrastructure on a budget. This isn't the case everywhere. China sure has no problems building clean and effective subway systems. The ones in Germany and Japan are pretty great too.
>But European cities, from what I've seen, are much better because they generally do have good public transit.
Yes, I live in Europe but not every city here has the public transport infrastructure of London/Berlin or the cycling infrastructure of Amsterdam/Copenhagen so this meme of "everything in Europe is so good" needs to stop. How you perceive the transport system as a tourist is different than when you actually have to live and work somewhere long term.
Sure, the public transport system in my city is probably better than the one in the US but because the city is so widespread and low density(think L.A.), pretty much everyone who doesn't live and work in the city center is commuting by car because otherwise you're looking at hours hopping through slow buses/trams to get somewhere.
>A lot of work can't be done remotely. Not everyone works in software.
Yes, not everyone is a programmer but they aren't the only ones who can work remotely, lots of office jobs can be remote as well if the companies would adjust for that.
>No, what governments need to do is build good infrastructure.
Yes, governments need to build infrastructure, but that stuff is highly costly, funds are limited and it takes a lot of time to build due to politics and NIMBYism whereas switching to remote would be a much faster way to relieve slack on existing infrastructure until more gets build.
Let's assume that 20% of jobs can be done remote, that would free up a lot of traffic, living and office space for the people who have to commute.
>China sure has no problems building clean and effective subway systems. The ones in Germany and Japan are pretty great too.
As opposed to democratic countries, China is an outlier, the party has funds and can build infrastructure wherever it wants without public opposition.
Japan and Germany have build their subways decades ago when the economy was good and infrastructure was cheaper. Lots of cities in Europe, and I assume in the US as well, have grown so much that they are in desperate need of a subway system, but now is a bad time, the economy is crap and infrastructure is expensive.
EU GDP may be high, but gov costs like healthcare for example are now even higher than ever due to an aging population.
Take a look at where your taxes are going where you live.
You'll see it's mostly social services like pensions, umeployment and different kinds of welfare programs so the gov has less money to spend on infrastructure as it has to spend most of it on the aging and often sick and unemployed population with voting rights.
Commutes are generally longer in Europe than the US, in part because people take public transit over driving. (I like mass transit, and commute with it every day. It'd be shorter for me to drive though, sometimes by half).
That really depends on where you live; public transit is better in some places than others.
Also, you're forgetting the stress factor. It doesn't take much mental energy to sit on a train for 30-60 minutes; you just need to make sure you don't miss your stop. Dealing with high-speed traffic for that long takes a mental toll. And on a train, you can read a book, look at your phone, etc.
This won't work, as remote work only affects a tiny percent of all jobs. Most people don't have the option due to the structure of the work; those that do are a tiny percentage of the whole.
Comments
I'm from Europe and I also live apart from my long term SO. The reason being our job commutes.
We work in completely opposite parts of town and due to the city lacking fast public transport and her job lacking flextime she has to wake up way earlier than I'm use to if I want to be productive at work and so far we haven't found a middle ground where one doesn't have to compromise too much.
Honestly, remote work would ease a lot of modern urban problems like traffic, rents, relationships, childcare, etc. If only our corporate masters would allow it.
World governments need to start incentivizing employers to offer remote ASAP as infrastructure in the cities is not keeping up with population growth.
I'm from Hong Kong, funnily enough, and what we do with mine is that we switch every 2 years. Renting here is easy (albeit expensive), so we just move to a flat near her work, spend 2 years of me having 3 hours of bus, and then we move near mine, when I am 10 minutes away by foot and she has the 3 hours of commute per day.
What's nice is we can pay the 4000 euros per month of rent. If not we'd find a 2000 euros flat mid-way. The main issue is that hker are either too stingy to rent, or really don't earn enough to spend that much on it. Don't underestimate the number of people here who can't pay rent by sheer ideology, and live at their parents while extremely overpaid compared to Europe.
Also, as a side note, city incentives to companies come either from your salary (via taxes on companies) or your taxes, not the sky, so it's not a solution. Real solutions are sacrifice, like changing job, changing girlfriend or changing flat. Would you ask for the country to give incentive to companies to help you work 300 km apart your gf ? Sometimes life's unfair and the government isn't your mom, you'll have to solve the problem yourself.
Would love to better understand the ideology. Could you elaborate? Is it the "you will build equity through real estate" argument? Are the people living at their parents saving up for a down payment on real estate so they can get in on that game?
"Saving to buy later" is not really a good strategy in Hong Kong, as the increase in market price is faster than what can save. The only option is to get a sharp increase in one's income. This is very disheartening, as the goal post keeps moving.
Just a clarification, 2000 euros is not anywhere close to normal rent in Hong Kong, I pay 900 euro for a place in Sai Ying pun. Also, buses don't take 1.5 hours unless you live in like Tai Mei Tuk.
Where do you live in Sai Ying Pun for 900 eur.
The cheapest place I'm finding is 1500 eur for a really bad studio.
https://www.squarefoot.com.hk/en/rent/sai-ying-pun/?sortBy=p...
But the problem the article tries to explain is that they live apart because they cannot afford a house at all (both live at their respective parents' and their child spends time with either alternatively).
Sounds like high school.
I feel like housing policy is on the verge of becoming a major public issue, the same way that Healthcare has in the US in the last couple years. It seems to me that it's just gotten too difficult in too many places to find an affordable place to live, and it just doesn't seem sustainable for only high-wage earners to have stable housing.
Problem is that none of those places are swing states and voting demographics aren't exactly the ones moving to new cities and getting hit by awful rent.
Housing is a national issue, by some estimates we're losing double digit percentages off US GDP to appease NIMBYs https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/opinion/housing-regulatio...
There is a solution - start FINDING remote jobs. These companies will have to bend over backwards (I hate that term) to start offering high paying remote positions as their talent pool leaves looking for better options.
Chicken & egg problem: It's hard to find remote jobs if they're not being offered. We need to incentivize working from home (non-commuting) via tax governmental policy (local, state, federal level in the US). This is critical in order to cut greenhouse gasses and prevent traffic congestion without needing to build expensive new roads.
Thanks but your tip is invalid in most EU regions as the employers here like to "see workers on the plantation" as my ex boss put it.
It’s not invalid. Bosses here also like to see butts in seats.
No one said it was going to be easy. But if it really would make your life better, at least try.
I don't know much about this, but is it possible to get a remote job from a US company?
Do you live in Europe, or in the US? ("I'm from Europe" doesn't specify this.) If you're in the US, this is perfectly understandable: commutes here are hellish because of the gridlock on roads and the lack of decent public transit. But European cities, from what I've seen, are much better because they generally do have good public transit.
A lot of work can't be done remotely. Not everyone works in software. No, what governments need to do is build good infrastructure. Population growth in cities means more tax revenue, so there really isn't a problem here, except with some governments being too wasteful and inefficient and unable to build infrastructure on a budget. This isn't the case everywhere. China sure has no problems building clean and effective subway systems. The ones in Germany and Japan are pretty great too.
>But European cities, from what I've seen, are much better because they generally do have good public transit.
Yes, I live in Europe but not every city here has the public transport infrastructure of London/Berlin or the cycling infrastructure of Amsterdam/Copenhagen so this meme of "everything in Europe is so good" needs to stop. How you perceive the transport system as a tourist is different than when you actually have to live and work somewhere long term.
Sure, the public transport system in my city is probably better than the one in the US but because the city is so widespread and low density(think L.A.), pretty much everyone who doesn't live and work in the city center is commuting by car because otherwise you're looking at hours hopping through slow buses/trams to get somewhere.
>A lot of work can't be done remotely. Not everyone works in software.
Yes, not everyone is a programmer but they aren't the only ones who can work remotely, lots of office jobs can be remote as well if the companies would adjust for that.
>No, what governments need to do is build good infrastructure.
Yes, governments need to build infrastructure, but that stuff is highly costly, funds are limited and it takes a lot of time to build due to politics and NIMBYism whereas switching to remote would be a much faster way to relieve slack on existing infrastructure until more gets build.
Let's assume that 20% of jobs can be done remote, that would free up a lot of traffic, living and office space for the people who have to commute.
>China sure has no problems building clean and effective subway systems. The ones in Germany and Japan are pretty great too.
As opposed to democratic countries, China is an outlier, the party has funds and can build infrastructure wherever it wants without public opposition.
Japan and Germany have build their subways decades ago when the economy was good and infrastructure was cheaper. Lots of cities in Europe, and I assume in the US as well, have grown so much that they are in desperate need of a subway system, but now is a bad time, the economy is crap and infrastructure is expensive.
The GDP of any single European country has never been as high. The lack of government investment is not due to that.
EU GDP may be high, but gov costs like healthcare for example are now even higher than ever due to an aging population.
Take a look at where your taxes are going where you live.
You'll see it's mostly social services like pensions, umeployment and different kinds of welfare programs so the gov has less money to spend on infrastructure as it has to spend most of it on the aging and often sick and unemployed population with voting rights.
Commutes are generally longer in Europe than the US, in part because people take public transit over driving. (I like mass transit, and commute with it every day. It'd be shorter for me to drive though, sometimes by half).
https://www.oecd.org/els/family/LMF2_6_Time_spent_travelling...
That really depends on where you live; public transit is better in some places than others.
Also, you're forgetting the stress factor. It doesn't take much mental energy to sit on a train for 30-60 minutes; you just need to make sure you don't miss your stop. Dealing with high-speed traffic for that long takes a mental toll. And on a train, you can read a book, look at your phone, etc.
This won't work, as remote work only affects a tiny percent of all jobs. Most people don't have the option due to the structure of the work; those that do are a tiny percentage of the whole.
I’d think it would strain rather than ease a relationship to be home with your spouse all day every day.