Hacker News Reader

Let's be real: you are not the poor person, you just want to ride your car for whatever reasons.

Poor people will chose a job that is nearer, rents and salaries adjust to job opportunities - it's a good thing to decentralize, we cannot keep concentrating more jobs and dwellers around already problematic zones.

View on HN

Let's be real: you've never been poor. I have. When you're poor you don't "choose a job that's nearer". You get whatever you can take. If that's 2 hours commute each way, so be it. You need to eat and pay rent (at least in the US where there's not much in the way of welfare). The rich and poor alike drive, but the rich can live close to work and the poor often can't. The very poor take the bus if it's available and just eat the extra time commuting, which in my city is usually 3x the time driving. The bus is also a safety issue, my friends have been robbed waiting for the bus and after getting off the bus, driving is safer in this regard.

Yes I have been poor, probably more than you, and I have chosen any job that's near to survive. Before starting my career in IT, I once had my car wrecked and consequently lost my job. I had to take another job nearby and commute by bicycle. If you talk about poor people benefiting from car centric cities, then you are delusional either about what "poor" really means, or about the reality of relying on a car when you're poor.

Don't be absurd. If the poor person somehow could find no jobs closer than a 2 hour commute away, they should buy a second home closer to the job. This isn't rocket science.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com