Traffic Congestion

The Number of 'Super Commuters' Explodes in America's Housing-Starved Metros

The number of people spending more than 90 minutes getting to work has grown 45 percent over the past decade, according to a new study.


A housing shortage in cities across the country is costing people more than just money. Unable to find affordable housing closer to the office, an increasing share of Americans are spending extraordinary amounts of time getting to and from work.

The number of "super commuters"—people who spend more than 90 minutes commuting one way—has grown by 45 percent, or three times the rate of the overall workforce, according to a new report from rental website Apartment List.

Pulling from data from the 2019 American Community Survey published by the U.S. Census Bureau, Apartment List found that 4.6 million people (or 3.1 percent of the workforce) qualify as super commuters.

"I think of this as primarily a symptom of excessive housing costs and lack of supply close to the urban core in the nation's most expensive markets," says Chris Salviati, an economist with Apartment List and co-author of the study. "These are places that have been rapidly adding jobs, but not adding new housing to meet that demand."

That's true of the ultra-expensive New York City region, which tops the nation both in the number of super commuters and in the percentage of the workforce that super commutes. Some 762,000 people there spend over 90 minutes getting to work, or about 7.2 percent of all workers.

Not far behind is the San Francisco Bay–San Jose region, where 269,000 people (6 percent of the workforce) super commute. That represents a staggering 255 percent increase in the number of super commuters from 2010.

Both have added a lot more jobs and workers than housing over the past decade.

In the San Francisco metro area, 3.46 jobs were added for every new unit of housing from 2008–2019, according to another recent report from the Manhattan Institute. The New York metro area similarly added 2.31 jobs for every unit of housing.

One reason for that is both regions contain municipalities, including New York City and San Francisco themselves, where zoning is quite restrictive compared to demand and the permitting process gives a lot of discretion to bureaucrats to shoot down new housing projects.

The Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., regions also top the list of areas with the most super commuters.

A decent jobs-housing balance isn't a silver bullet for preventing increasing commute times. Houston, Texas, managed to add one home for every new job over the past decade, but still saw super commuters grow as a share of its workforce. Nevertheless, only about 2.6 percent of the region's workforce has a commute of over 90 minutes, which is below the national average.

These high-cost metros have also spawned satellite communities like Stockton, California, and Poughkeepsie, New York—both about 90 miles from San Francisco and New York City, respectively—where super-commuting levels are hovering around 10 percent of the workforce.

Not all super commuters are traveling long distances. The Apartment List report says that about half of them are living within 30 miles of downtown.

Those people's primary problem isn't so much unaffordable housing but rather "poor transportation services," says Baruch Feigenbaum, a transportation policy researcher at Reason Foundation (the nonprofit that publishes this website). "[These are the] folks who experience ridiculous traffic congestion or folks who are taking awful transit so it takes them a ridiculous amount of time to go one mile."

Transit riders are particularly prone to being super commuters, with 13 percent of them taking more than 90 minutes to get to work, compared to 3 percent of workers overall.

The Apartment List study suggests more transit spending and expanding transit service as a means of improving commute times for riders. Constructing new highway capacity in growing areas with lots of motorists would be another way to speed up travel times, says Feigenbaum.

Congestion pricing, whereby motorists are charged a variable fee to use highway lanes or enter a city's downtown, could also help reduce travel times for both drivers and bus transit riders.

Super commuters, while growing in number, remain a pretty small portion of the workforce. That's to be expected. Urban policy research has consistently shown that people, whether they are modern Manhattanites or medieval Parisians, don't typically like to spend more than 30 minutes traveling one way to work.

For every super commuter, there are likely many more people who are either choosing to spend more on housing to be closer to a particular job or who are forgoing better employment opportunities altogether because of the excessive travel times involved.

Both outcomes make people poorer, even if they aren't spending three hours in traffic.

NEXT: Supreme Court Says Private Property Rights and Separation of Powers Do Still Exist in U.S.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Reads like a problem in democrat ruled areas.
    I would love to see the numbers broken down by which party rules in each city.

    1. The political split is between urban and rural. And it has been since the days of the Roman emperors. The particulars of the politics has changed but the split remains. The more urban a city the more likely it is be be one color rather than the other. There are a few exceptions, but even then they tend to be lagging indicators. San Diego used to be Team Red, but now it’s Deep Blue. Fresno is a solid purple, not because it’s moderate, but because it’s in the middle of Deep Red country

      Look at county political map of the nation. You can pick out the cities by the colors.

      1. Start making money this time… Spend more time with your family & relatives by doing jobs that only require you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home.XSa Start bringing up to $65,000 to $70,000 a month. I’ve started this job and earn a handsome income and now I am exchanging it with you, so you can do it too.

        You can check it out here…………………VISIT HERE

        1. Fantastic work-from-home opportunity for everyone… Work for three to eight a day and start getting paid in WSd the range of 17,000-19,000 dollars a month… Weekly payments Learn More details Good luck…

          See……………VISIT HERE

      2. You mean it’s a LOCAL (not national) problem? Go figure.

      3. I am making a good salary online from home.I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student.HJk I’m using an online business opportunity I’m just so happy that I found out about it.
        I highly recommend to everyone to apply…

        Join this right now………………… VISIT HERE

      4. I wonder what it is about people that when you get enough of them together, they become more liberal.

      5. Postulating that more urban jobs require an advanced degree of some level. The more schooling one has the more indoctrinated to a leftist ideology. The more urban the lifestyle the more dependency on services that rural folks do even consider. The more dependent one becomes the more demanding of “free” stuff. Not a unique observation, but likely true.

    2. Even if this data is true, we are fretting about sub double digit populations here.

      Is it really a national emergency that less than 10% of the country travels more than 90 minutes each way? And nation wide it is sub 5%?

      Those numbers tell me that these are largely preference choices. My dad spent 2.5 hours on the road each day for his entire life traveling to Rocky Flats. He would hop in a van pool at 6:30 every morning to get in by 8 and get home at 6:30 every day because he wanted to live in Littleton, rather than Golden. He didn’t have to do that. He just did.

      I live in Orange County, and when I traveled into the office, I would drive over an hour each way. I did it because I fucking hate Los Angeles county and its schools. Indeed, now that remote working is taking off post pandemic, I expect this trend to continue. I know many of my colleagues in Silicon Valley have moved 1 – 2 hours away because they know they will only “super commute” into the office a couple times per month.

      This isn’t to say that we shouldn’t be allowing people to build higher and more dense if they want. I am just saying that 3.1% super commuters doesn’t prove that housing shortages are a massive crisis driving people en masse out to the sticks.

      1. Also during the height of the pandemic shutdown, those of us still driving into work noticed a sharp decrease in our commute times, so if work from home continues this really becomes less of an issue. Still see less traffic on the road now, though it no longer has that post apocalypse feel of just me and 1 other guy on the road.

      2. More importantly, didn’t the person commuting 90 minutes make the decision to do so on their own and not through government power.

        I dont understand why this is an issue.

        Of they want to focus on building restrictions they should stick to that instead of complaining about people voluntarily making their own commute decisions based on current rules.

    3. Probably because democrat areas are more highly populated?

      I would guess that long commutes aren’t a huge issue in one stoplight towns, no.

    4. Start making money this time… Spend more time with your family & relatives by doing jobs that only require you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home.rgf Start bringing up to $65,000 to $70,000 a month. I’ve started this job and earn a handsome income and now I am exchanging it with you, so you can do it too.

      You can check it out here………………Visit Here

  2. This is why Work From Home is so popular.

    1. I had to do super-commuting for about a year several years ago. It’s an absolutely soul-crushing experience and not one I’d recommend for anybody.

      You basically get up, go to work, work you shift, go home, eat a quick dinner and then go straight to bed because you have to get up so early in the morning just to make it to work on time. I suspect that telecommuting is going to go up even more to accomodate these workers, or they’ll sell off their house after about a year or two and move back closer to the city.

      1. I was super commuting 3 days a week. I actually liked the chance to listen to some amazing podcasts. Up at 5am, home by 5pm meant that I generally spent no time in traffic, and it worked since most of my staff was on the east coast.

        But it did wear on me after awhile. I was glad when I started staying home, though I do regret not having time to keep up with Critical Role any more.

        1. I had to do that shit five days a week and it sucked. You’re absolutely right about the lack of traffic, which was the one saving grace of the experience. But after about a month of doing that, I told my wife (who was supercommuting herself, we got a place to rent that was halfway between our jobs after we got married) “We’re moving closer to the city when our lease is up.”

    2. About what I was thinking, “I’ve got a better idea: I’ll stay home….”

  3. And of course the Progressive solution is to build more choo-choo trains.

    1. 1) Pass restrictive development and environmental regulations that lead to a dearth of housing construction
      2) Encourage tens of millions of immigrants to migrate here
      3) Venture capital orgs like Blackrock and oligarchs like Bill Gates buy up vast swathes of homes and land that further decrease the housing supply and developable areas.
      4) Cities become deep blue, crime-ridden shitholes that compels residents to flee to the exurbs and rural areas in order to escape the behavioral sink.
      5) Lefties–“Hey, how come there’s no affordable housing?”

      The lack of future-time orientation is one of the hallmarks of leftist ideology.

      1. I am not a conspiracy minded person, but if I were a socialist utopist who felt that the majority of the population should be living in dense, planned cities, this would be my action plan:

        1) Ruin the cities so that the people with power leave
        2) Buy up the land, and change the laws now that the middle class is gone
        3) Build my utopia
        4) Make living rural nearly impossible by making gas illegal.

        6) Profit!

    2. Back when I was working in the city my commute was 1 hour by car or 2 hours by train

    3. ….And make even the sheep-herders pay for it.
      Infrastructure is not a *national* matter.

  4. I worked thirty years at an oil refinery. Can’t do that from home.

    1. That is tough work. Did it leave you gassed?

      1. He worked the oily shift.

    2. Like we care about what working class yabbos need or want. If you’re not living in an urban center and don’t have a creative job, the world just won’t be designed for you. Like we need oil refineries anyway. I use public transportation or ride my e-bike to work.

      1. Some are gonna miss the sarc…

  5. I’m in the SF Bay Area. I’ve had more than one coworker commute in from the Sierra foothills on the east side of the state. It’s nuts. Meanwhile I live literally one mile from work. (I drive two to hit the donut shop on the way).

    The problem is that people want houses with front and back yards. You can’t get that in the bay area for less than a couple million. But get out east of I-5 and you can get a larger house with larger yards in a decent neighborhood for $300k. (Price as been going up as they turn into SF/SJ bedroom communities). For a further commute not so close to major arteries Fresno, Madera, etc., one can get the same for $200k. Or less if they don’t insist on an all-white gentrified neighborhood of the kind progressives prefer. But that’s a six hour commute each day.

    One reason I am very suspicious of the bullet train construction STARTING in Fresno. It reveals the intention all along was for LA and SF corporates to commute in from outside the metroplexes.

    Meanwhile I live in a modest condo and have a five minute commute.

    1. One reason I am very suspicious of the bullet train construction STARTING in Fresno. It reveals the intention all along was for LA and SF corporates to commute in from outside the metroplexes.

      That honestly wouldn’t surprise me. I think these people, for all their big talk about their love of density, understand on an instinctive level that cramming increasing numbers of people into ever-declining spaces is just not good for civic health or social pathologies.

      The problem is that people want houses with front and back yards.

      It’s a very American thing to want to live in a quiet place with separation from the masses, and you’ll notice that the people who LOVE living in places like New York City tend to highly neurotic control freaks. Also, we’re seeing the echo baby boom of the Millennials aging out of their “ooh, let’s live in DA BIG CITY so we can go to the bars and these amazing boutique restaurants!” phase, starting families, and wanting more room and a safe community in which to raise children. It’s not a big deal to risk being a victim of the Knockout Game when you’re the only one you have to worry about. No one wants to take their kids downtown to watch the hobos shoot up.

      1. “It’s a very American thing to want to live in a quiet place with separation from the masses”

        That’s one of the things Reason always seems to fail to understand when they talk about housing policy. Some people- MANY people- value other things more than they value money when it comes to choosing housing.

        The article doesn’t mention if the super commuters would move closer to work if more housing was available. It seems like a no-brainer, but it’s really not. The kind of housing matters too. If the choice was, live in a reasonably priced 2 br condo closer to the urban center with a 20 min commute, or live in a 3 br, 2 bath colonial with a fenced yard and garage on a cul de sac, but it costs an extra 60 minutes a day, many people would still choose the ranch because they want the lifestyle.

        1. “Some people- MANY people- value other things more than they value money when it comes to choosing housing.”

          Again, I think this is a great time to embrace the power of Both. The problem that Christian (rightly) points out is that when people get their house, they then really resist anything that will make housing cheaper- as that impacts them as well.

          Here in Orange County, the people constantly complain whenever there is discussion of putting up an apartment complex. They WANT a giant city of single family dwellings, because that jacks up the price of housing overall. I paid to get my back yard and nice sized house, but I have no problem if they want to increase the density of housing around here (as long as they leave my property alone). Personally, I think my kids grow up a lot more healthy when friends at their school are a mix of socio-economic backgrounds rather than being in a class of rich kids living in mcmansions.

          1. And that’s fine if that’s your preference. I don’t want apartment complexes, because not only do they impact property values, they also bring with them all of the things I moved away from: traffic congestion, noise, crime…

            1. I think it just depends on your personal mileage in this regard. I’ve lived in white-bread suburban communities that made accomodations for apartment complexes in certain areas of the city, and it didn’t hurt property values any. You could definitely tell who the poor kids and the middle/upper class kids were by how they dressed and the shoes they wore, though. I’ve also lived in barrio/ghetto neighborhoods, and the presence of apartments didn’t really hurt the property values so much as the general low class of the people who lived there. I suspect its the same thing when you get out in to Hillbillyland in certain parts of the country.

              Generally, it’s not so much the presence of apartments as it is the class of people who live in a place.

              1. I greatly prefer living in outer-ring middle class suburbs because I think I get a happy medium of rural and urban accommodations there. I do realize that’s not everyone’s cup of tea, though.

                1. That’s another good point. Apartments in my area wouldn’t likely appeal to low-income people because there’s no additional infrastructure for them. You need a car to live here. This is one of my major gripes with the Biden housing policies. Some towns- like mine- don’t have infrastructure to support high density, low income housing, and in order to improve the infrastructure to make room for public transit and increased traffic, that’ll be a lot of front lawns eminent domained to put in sidewalks and bus stops and widen roads.

                  People make choices based on what they value, and some people place a higher value on the type and quality of housing situation than they do on other considerations, like proximity to work.

                  I also prefer to live in the outer ring. My town is where the people who live in the boondocks come to grocery shop, so it’s got enoung amenities to suit my needs.

                  This is why zoning policies belong at the local level. Sure, local politics can be contentious, but it’s easier to hold your local elected officials accountable when it’s a guy you actually see around town every week.

    2. yeah, but a modest condo 1 mile from Google or Apple will cost you 1.2 million.

      1. Step over the city line into Sunnyvale, and out of site of the new mothership, and the price is only 350k.

    3. Meanwhile I live in a modest condo and have a five minute commute.

      Without revealing your address, what does a “modest condo, five minutes from work” cost in the bay area these days? I assume by “bay area” you’re not IN San Francisco?

      Because I can tell you that a “modest condo” IN Seattle that’s five minutes from your typical downtown tech job is probably going to cost you a few hundred thou.

      I sold my 600 sq ft loft condo in Capitol Hill, which was situated in one of the more modest, side streets, not quite in the middle of super-hipster Capitol Hill for $160,000. In 1999. 600 sq ft.

      It was brilliantly designed, even had a vertical stack washer dryer sneakily tucked inside a little cubby in the bathroom. But $160,000… in 1999. I shudder to think what that would go for now.

      1. Oh, and I should add I didn’t repurchase in the same neighborhood, because I couldn’t afford a single family home (which is what we needed with the new baby coming) in that same neighborhood. I had to move to a way less hip neighborhood that was much more out of the way.

        Also, I said 1999. I realized that year is wrong, I sold it in 2002. I purchased the condo in 1998.

      2. It’s in Sunnyvale, and is in the neighborhood of three hundred. I bought it about ten years ago, and I saw similar prices all over Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Milpitas, and San Jose. Mountain View was a big step up due to the Google Effect, and ditto for Cupertino with Apple. And by modest I mean it’s not fancy, but it’s two bedroom and more than spacious for a single person like me. The townhomes across the street go for around a million, but they are townhomes and not multi-unit buildings.

        The general rule is that the further south from SF the cheaper stuff becomes, with expensive bubbles int he vicinity of Google and Apple (nouveue riche tech kids with no concept of what stuff should be worth). Which suck for Redwood City, as it’s a lower class area with upper class prices because of it’s closer proximity to SF.

        1. The general rule is that the further south from SF the cheaper stuff becomes, with expensive bubbles int he vicinity of Google and Apple (nouveue riche tech kids with no concept of what stuff should be worth).

          I hate to be that guy… I really hate to be that guy, but it just bugs the shit out of me when young people who come up very fast in the income game crank the prices up because they have zero concept of ‘value’. It’s their right, I don’t think government should “intervene”, but markets being markets doesn’t always mean it has a ‘good’ outcome. Sometimes the outcome sucks and we have to accept the wisdom of the Lone Biker of the Apocalypse.

        2. To be fair, ten years ago was a great time to buy.

        3. I’m in Sunnyvale too—Lakewood Village. Not sure how close of neighbors that makes us (getting from the northern most part of Sunnyvale to the southern most part isn’t my idea of fun.) If you live in either 94086 or 94087 zip codes beware—they caught mosquitoes carrying West Nile Virus in both! (They were briefly detained, fined and released)

    4. “One reason I am very suspicious of the bullet train construction STARTING in Fresno. It reveals the intention all along was for LA and SF corporates to commute in from outside the metroplexes.”

      Definitely this. One of the VPs I used to work for commuted from Santa Barbara every day. He was basically the reason our office stayed in Burbank for so long- because he could easily get to the office on Amtrack and metrorail. He was also the reason we almost moved to downtown LA- so that he could cut off the extra leg from Central Station.

      1. I should note that the “bullet” train has half a dozen stops or more before along it’s route from LA to SF. Those aren’t there for the potty breaks, they’re there for the commuters.

  6. Public transportation riders declined by half since (and largely due to) covid lockdowns. So that is not a pragmatic alternative, nor are HOV lanes that are rarely used (except by people who have a maniquan.

    So while urban left wing Democrats have been claiming climate change will destroy the planet, are banning oil and natural gas fracking, mandating expensive electric cars and falsely condemning anyone who opposes their disastrous policies as “climate change deniers”, it appears that transportation attributable carbon emissions in/near large Democrat controlled cities have declined little (or may be increasing) due to longer commutes.

    1. If I had filed to run for governor in the recall, that would have been one of my major platform planks: open up the HOV lanes to everyone to reduce traffic congestion. No more HOV free passes for electric cars, which don’t pollute anyway when they’re stuck in traffic.

      1. It’s federal law. All federal money for highways has to go to HOV lanes, or something like that.

    2. And now they’re trying to patch the easily foreseen problems of replacing a proven and reliable (but polluting) power grid with wind and solar power, at the same time encouraging and subsidizing people to buy electric cars and to work from home to drive up electric power consumption, by having kids nag us on TV to not use electricity at peak hours.

    3. “except by people who have a maniquan.”

      A Mr. Roboto would really come in handy for that….

  7. I know in Houston a lot of people time shift and some start their work day at 5 or 6 am. Not much traffic and you’re home by 3pm.

  8. Except in Cali. If they are used for gaming.

  9. Your not a true super commuter until it involves a plane.

  10. Transit riders are particularly prone to being super commuters

    That was my experience commuting into Washington D.C. Riding the gubmint choo-choo is a terrible experience.

  11. Are we sure “super” is the correct word here?

  12. And sometime last year, that average commute dropped from 90 minutes to 90 seconds.

    The urban housing crisis has been killed by work from home. People are now fleeing crime and virus infested cities like NY and SF.

  13. Congestion pricing, whereby motorists are charged a variable fee to use highway lanes or enter a city’s downtown, could also help reduce travel times for both drivers and bus transit riders.

    Reason-libertarian priority #1 is imposing tolls on existing public roads. KM-W may top the masthead but Bob Poole calls the shots.

    1. Congestion pricing in cities will encourage workers and visitors to work or visit elsewhere. Did they think of that?

      1. No, it will encourage them to use the new bullet train.

      2. It means people will stop insisting that everyone work exactly the same hours everyone else does. Here in Silicon Valley we got out of that mode, mostly, but places like LA are still fixated and strict schedules. Everyone MUST start work at 8:00 and MUST leave at 5:00. WTF?

        Heck, I remember stopping off in Bend, in the middle of nowhere Oregon, and seeing a bumper to bumper traffic jam precisely at 5:00pm and then magically clear at 5:15pm.

        1. I used to be in charge of western US sales for an east coast company at which I was based. My sales reps hated this because I was gone for the day at 2 or 3 pm their time. So I suggested to my sales manager that it would be better if I worked from 10 to 6. He agreed that it made more sense, but nonetheless declined my request because our hours were 8 to 5. That was his sole reason for denying an otherwise sensible request. Note that this was not some huge multinational corporation, but a mid-sized electrical manufacturer. Past of my reason was also to avoid rush hour traffic. Where I work now, we have several construction project managers who would rather work 7 to 3 because this is when the construction crews are working, but they cannot switch to those hours for the sole reason that our working hours are 8:30 to 4:30 (it’s a university). No other reason. The 9 to 5 mentality is a bane to efficiency.

    2. Bob Poole calls the shots.

      The same idiot that said that self-driving cars, the exact same number taking up the exact same footprint on the pavement, would need less parking and/or road space?

      1. “would need less parking and/or road space?”

        Isn’t that because you won’t own a self driving car, but share it among others? Cars which are owned by drivers spend some 90% of their time parked, taking up space. Self driving cars would spend more time driving and less time parked.

        1. This is true.

  14. And yet … people weigh the choices — expensive local shithole + easy commute until the next job change increases your commute from 5 minutes to an hour, vs nice house with a terrible but consistent commute — and make their choice.

    Someone told me these bargainings are called markets.

  15. Boy, ain’t this a complex subject. Yes, housing is affordable in the cities. And one of the things that the left has decided to do is take on “zoning” as an answer to affordable housing.

    Now, there is *some* merit to this. Easing the way for developers, in theory, should generally reduce the cost of housing as availability increases. But what kind of housing will that bring in? It’s going to bring in high-density, multi-family housing. So there are a lot of ‘super-commuters’ who want a front and back yard (let alone the super-commuter who– in some cases literally want a back-forty) who won’t be satisfied with this development.
    “Hey, it’s great you’ve increased the availability of “housing”, and yes, I can now better afford a 400 sq ft efficiency cube and ride my e-scooter to work, but I don’t WANT a 400 sq ft efficiency cube and ride and e-scooter to work. I want a front and back yard, and you’re tearing those down to make room for… the 400 sq ft efficiency cube and e-scooter station out on the sidewalk.”

    1. should read “housing is unaffordable in the cities”

      1. If housing is unaffordable, how come so many people are buying it?

    2. Here’s an example of what I’m talking about.

      The above is a picture of luxury, high density housing which has cropped up over the last 20 years on Alki Beach near where I live. When I moved here, all of that were quaint, charming little ramshackle single-family homes– many in need of repair. Then those properties started getting swept up by developers who turned them into luxury condos and apartments. If you squint at the far right, you see one of those single-family homes, literally dwarfed in the shadow of the condo complex next door. (I’ll try to find another picture with a more obvious example).

      Those single family homes didn’t get cheaper, they got MORE expensive. A small lot with a front and back yard is now worth multiples of millions because it’s presumed that the buyer isn’t going to move his family, two kids and a dog in, it’s going to be sold to Luxury Condo Inc, who’s going to build 22 Luxury Condo homes with Sweeping Views of Puget Sound, breathtaking sunsets, walking distance to shops and restaurants, beach access , public transportation and an address that says to the boys down at the office, “You’ve arrived…”

      1. The owners of said single family home better not sit on it too long, or the developers will bribe . . . err . . . lobby the city to change the zoning, condemn the house and declare eminent domain.

  16. I live in a very affordable midsize city and I’ve worked with tons of people that commute daily from the boonies. I always just assumed they either suck at making life choices or hate their families and want to escape them for as long as possible

    1. Or maybe they sacrifice their happiness for their families’. Better schools, less crime, less noise.

      People make decisions for themselves, not to make you feel smug about your superiority. Your not even an Ayn Rand libertarian.

    2. Perhaps they’re not as obnoxiously self-righteous as you?

  17. Um. This is not proof of a housing shortage. It is proof that while people may be okay working in a crime infested, crumbling liberal shithole, they do not want to live or raise their kids there.

  18. Drove over an hour each way to work, 100 miles total, for ten years. Working from home saved me over $200/month in gas alone.

  19. Here in the Portland/WA area all the Californians are USED to an hour commute, so they have no issues settling an hour outside the city and driving in. Even the ‘hick’ areas of Battle Ground and Kelso are turning into destinations.

  20. Any discussion of this topic that omits work-from-home from the conversation is ignoring the 10-ton elephant in the room. Yes, I know, not everybody can work from home. But, you don’t need everybody to work from home to relieve the problems of unaffordable urban housing and traffic congestion. Even a modest increase would probably take enough vehicles off the street to ease problems for those who still commute into an office and open up supply near urban cores to provide some price relief. The country just had a year-and-a-half long experiment with it. And, no, it didn’t hurt productivity. Only the egos of a few bosses who really think face time is particularly important.

    1. And, no, it didn’t hurt productivity.

      I think the jury’s still out on that.

      1. It certainly is.
        Yahoo hired a new CEO several years back and one of her first moves was to cut the WfH roster; productivity increased promptly.
        There are ‘self-starters’ among the working population, but quite a few others are willing to do enough to get a “B” on their evaluations.
        If you can somehow make it self-policing, the issue is solved, but it’s difficult to make every position sensitive to price signals.

    2. I have been doing that for years. Long before any of this Covid stuff. Works for me. Not for everyone or every job.

      So for what it is worth what I have learned.

      -This is not a vacation. It is work.

      -Create your office space. Invest in a good chair, workstation, internet access, whatever you need. It is not an extension of your home life. This is your workspace.

      – You have a team out there. Treat them with courtesy and respect and they will do the same.

      I am more productive. I find fewer distractions. Better time to focus on my task and have found a group with strong support system.

      But that is me.

  21. Of course, this problem will soon be solved by the policies of the democrats, as no one will have a job.

  22. There is no housing crisis or lack of housing. There are those who think if they desire to live someplace, they should be able to do so at a price they find acceptable.
    It’s called ‘the market’.

  23. Whether its a partisan problem or not one thing is certain; It’s a problem each and every city on the list NEEDS to deal with *entirely* themselves and be responsible for THEIR city.

    Instead of tasking the Na(National)zi-Regime to go out and *steal* more from their neighbors who haven’t created this problem.

    1. What problem? Long commutes and traffic congestion contribute to the GDP, making us all wealthier.

  24. Say “Thank you”

Please to post comments