Hacker News Reader

Comment by grubbs | Hacker News Reader

I never totally understood the attraction to it.

Come live here in Baltimore. Plenty of tech jobs and a nice home in the city will cost 300k.

Baltimore? Tech jobs? Nice home?

Don’t get me wrong, Baltimore has fun bars and Orioles games are fun..but I’ve never once heard anyone try to sell Baltimore as a great place for tech workers to live and work from

Obligatory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1dUk8x2XkA /s

I've never heard Baltimore described as a place with a low crime rate! I guess it depends on what you're comparing it to.

Just one recommendation. Don't move to Charleston. It's awful here, you'll hate it. ^^;

> It's awful here, you'll hate it. ^^;

It's no surprise that SF, Portland, and Seattle are the worst of the worst. Tech workers exasperate inequality and vote in virtue signalers (to be clear, I agree with the goals, I don't agree with deciding to do nothing about these problems). If you have a good spot, seriously, keep it secret

He might be talking about Baltimore County. Though parts of Baltimore are fairly to pretty nice like Canton, Fells Point and Harbor East. These neighborhoods are mostly populated by professionals. These neighborhoods could see a murder cumulatively once every few months or less.

One annoying thing in Baltimore is the squeege kids. Umm I have no need for you to come up to my car and wash my windows..I have windshield wipers.

As for homeless, drug addicts, and the mentally ill ..they do not litter the streets along with their problems like they do in the wasteland that is San Francisco.

I'm sure it would be more expensive if they did.

For me there's no city in the US as walkable as NYC or SF. NYC is super busy, but I just like how I could bike / walk / transit virtually anywhere within the city.

Boston is also pretty walkable, but I agree that there aren't a lot of options in the US.

I dunno, I think Chicago is certainly more walkable and less car-dependent than SF. Then you have DC, which probably is (substantially more public transit at least) as well, and even cities like Minneapolis which are probably more amenable to walking over a larger area than the actual core, downtown SF area.

SF has ok public transit for the west coast I suppose. But overall it’s quite poor compared to the east coast from DC north, or a city like Chicago.

You can walk and bike in the winter in SF though, and that's a real plus.

Yeah but walking in Chicago in the winter weather?

Honestly, it's not that bad. I find that once I'm properly bundled up, outdoor temps between 20° and 30° are downright comfortable. It's not until about 15° that you get the cold that just seeps in everywhere, and it rarely gets that low in Chicago (at least at any time of day I'd be walking outside).

https://therealfitz.medium.com/how-i-learned-to-stop-worryin...

How did you bike to Staten Island?

High-density and car-hostile != walkable. If walking means that you have to always be watching your step to avoid feces and used hypodermic needles, and you're constantly getting accosted for money or worse, that's at least as unwalkable as the stroads of suburbia.

Philadelphia is surprisingly close to these two IMO.

No thanks, I've lived in the DMV and it's worse than SF.

A lot of us who were born and raised in Cali have roots too deep to abandon.

Baltimore isn't a place to move to if the motivation is to avoid crime.

Isn’t Baltimore one of the most violent cities in the United States?

Very high murder rate, though some parts are much safer than others.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com