For commuters, economic woes pile up
07-22-08, 09:48 AM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
For commuters, economic woes pile up
High gas prices, housing market downturn leave some workers stuck
For Dollie Kinkead, the economic turmoil gripping the country translates into an 80-mile drive each work day from a house she can't sell to a job she thinks she's lucky to have.
For Danny Jesse, it means living with his parents and enduring a commute that is at times so costly and brutal that he would rather spend the night in his car.
For Brian and Ronda Mitchell, the combination of high gas prices and a housing market downturn has forced them to make the difficult choice to allow the home they have owned for seven years to go into foreclosure.
“Gas was, for us, the straw that broke the camel’s back,” Brian Mitchell said.
The weak housing market, high gas prices and iffy job market are proving a nasty mix, leaving many Americans stuck with long commutes, unwanted homes and few options.
“Right now, we’re in the middle of this unpleasant confluence of a number of things,” said Patricia Mokhtarian, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California at Davis who studies commuting.
Mokhtarian said her research has long shown that Americans don’t just endure but actually enjoy having some distance between work and home. Commuting experts also have long argued that the cost and hassle of commuting was offset for many by perks such as better schools, bigger yards and cheaper housing.
In the era of cheap gas, the data seemed to corroborate that notion. As the suburbs and exurbs extended farther and farther from urban cores, Americans spent more and more time in their cars.
In 2000, the most recent Census data available, the average travel time to work was 25.5 minutes, up from 21.7 minutes in 1980 and 22.4 minutes in 1990. Most workers — three out of four — were spending that time alone in their own car.
The number of people who spend more than 90 minutes traveling to work nearly doubled between 1990 and 2000, from 1.76 million to 3.44 million, according to the Census data.
But the rising cost of gas has some experts wondering whether the cost of transportation is finally high enough to make far-flung suburbs far less attractive.
“Now all bets are off,” Mokhtarian said.
Still, some are skeptical that ingrained American habits will change dramatically, despite the current woes.
Alan Pisarski, author of a series of books called “Commuting in America,” believes high energy prices will prompt even more people to turn to carpooling, public transportation, telecommuting and fuel-efficient vehicles. Still, he disputes the more radical notion that a wide swath of Americans will suddenly flock back to in-city living. One big reason is that, in recent years, more jobs have moved to where those outlying houses have sprung up.
Nevertheless, he notes that the current spate of woes stand to hurt many Americans, especially those with the least financial wiggle room.
Even cutting trips to church
When the Mitchells bought their modular home in rural Platteville, Colo., north of Denver, they were among the many Americans trading a long commute for an affordable house.
Seven years later, the Mitchells are making another, more painful trade. Their housing woes compounded by the growing cost of Brian’s 50-mile roundtrip commute, the couple recently decided to let their home to fall into foreclosure. Instead, they are renting a house that is biking distance from Brian’s job.
The Mitchells had bought the house in 2001, for $129,900, with the intention of fixing it up and selling it for a profit. But in 2005, when they put the house on the market, interest was tepid at best.
The couple decided to put more money into improving the house, in the hopes that it would stand out among comparable homes in the area. In the end, they plowed some $15,000 and countless hours of sweat equity into the improvements, using credit cards and a loan against a 401(k) account to fund some upgrades.
Still, the house didn’t sell, even when they dropped the price from $126,000 to $122,000. In the meantime, gas prices skyrocketed, which added to their own expenses and made their rural home even less attractive.
The couple, who have two kids, found themselves using credit cards for everyday expenses, like groceries and bills. Even trips to church were curtailed to save on gas. Finally, they decided that their only option was to let the bank take the house.
“Sometimes, in surgery, amputation is the best solution,” Brian Mitchell said.
As the foreclosure proceeds, the Mitchells have rented a house in Longmont, west of Platteville toward Boulder, Colo., that is nicer than the one they had owned. It's also less than five miles from Brian’s job as a project manager. Although the rent is more than their former mortgage payment, Brian, 43, said that, with gas savings, they are still coming out ahead. The move into town is allowing the couple to downsize to just one car.
“It was a tough decision for us to decide to let the house go into foreclosure, but I’ll tell you what, once we made it … it was very liberating, actually,” he said.
While Mitchell can now bike to work, for other Americans the weak economy means adding hours on the road.
When Dollie Kinkead found out that her job was slated to be eliminated, she saw a silver lining — another job, at a place she’d always wanted to work, had just opened up. Although the new opportunity, as a training specialist for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was 80 miles from her home in the eastern Virginia town of Front Royal, Kinkead jumped at the opportunity. “I took the job thinking I could just sell the house and move,” she said.
Instead, she found that she was entering a real estate market already swamped with for-sale signs, many of them tagged “price reduced.” Kinkead and her husband, who paid $306,000 for their home about three years ago, now have it on the market for $276,000, and nobody has come to look at it in weeks.
That means that each work day, Kinkead, 53, leaves the house at 5:50 a.m. and doesn’t return until 7 p.m. Luckily, she drives a diesel-powered Volkswagen Beetle that gets 48 miles per gallon, meaning her gas bill is about $100 per week. She also works nine-hour shifts, giving her one day off every two weeks.
When she gets home, Kinkead says there’s usually time to eat dinner with her husband and little else. But she doesn’t see any other option.
“It’s either that or be unemployed,” she said.
The couple is looking at renting out their house, even though they likely won’t get enough to cover their monthly payments. Still, Kinkead said she doesn’t regret taking the job.
“I’m over 50, and sometimes, you know, it’s hard to find a job,” she said.
Sleeping in the car
Even though Danny Jesse is only 24, he understands the feeling. After Jesse lost his engineering job right before Christmas, he figured his job search would take several months, so he moved back in with his parents.
Jesse landed a new job six months later — but it was near San Diego in Escondido, Calif., about 110 miles from his parents’ house in the Los Angeles suburb of Norwalk. With apartment rentals at a premium near his office, he hasn’t been able to find a place he can afford. So instead, he’s spending hours on the road each day, and occasionally even sleeps in his car instead of making the long trek.
Jesse estimates he pays $215 a week for gas, and he also pitches in some rent to help his parents with the rising cost of their adjustable-rate mortgage. But so far he hasn’t found a housing solution that would make better financial sense.
“I’m stuck in a Catch-22,” he said.
He rarely sees his friends, and when he does they tend to hang out at someone’s house to save money. He’s also cut back on how much he eats to save cash, which means he’s lost a few pounds. He says it’s something he gets lots of compliments on, “but it’s not for the right reasons.”
Some stay put
While anecdotal evidence shows that some Americans are seeking to trade suburban or rural living for in-city housing, others say that even with high gas prices, they aren’t willing to give up their communities.
When David Speer took a job in San Rafael, Calif., three years ago, he didn’t consider moving from his home in Menlo Park, nearly 50 miles away, although he did invest in a Toyota Prius. Even though gas prices have risen substantially since then, Speer has no plans to give up his commute, which takes 75 and 90 minutes each way.
“I love Menlo Park,” he said. “I really feel like I’ve created a home, and to me life is more than just a job. You need to feel like you’re part of a community.”
It also would take a lot for Jack Sparks and his family to give up their home in Conifer, Colo., in the foothills outside Denver. Still, Sparks did recently stop driving the 38 miles each way to work and instead is taking the bus. He’s been surprised to find that there are more perks than just the hundreds of dollars he’s saving.
“Sitting on the bus is a lot easier than driving,” Sparks said. “I wish I had made this jump earlier.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25722409/page/2
For Dollie Kinkead, the economic turmoil gripping the country translates into an 80-mile drive each work day from a house she can't sell to a job she thinks she's lucky to have.
For Danny Jesse, it means living with his parents and enduring a commute that is at times so costly and brutal that he would rather spend the night in his car.
For Brian and Ronda Mitchell, the combination of high gas prices and a housing market downturn has forced them to make the difficult choice to allow the home they have owned for seven years to go into foreclosure.
“Gas was, for us, the straw that broke the camel’s back,” Brian Mitchell said.
The weak housing market, high gas prices and iffy job market are proving a nasty mix, leaving many Americans stuck with long commutes, unwanted homes and few options.
“Right now, we’re in the middle of this unpleasant confluence of a number of things,” said Patricia Mokhtarian, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California at Davis who studies commuting.
Mokhtarian said her research has long shown that Americans don’t just endure but actually enjoy having some distance between work and home. Commuting experts also have long argued that the cost and hassle of commuting was offset for many by perks such as better schools, bigger yards and cheaper housing.
In the era of cheap gas, the data seemed to corroborate that notion. As the suburbs and exurbs extended farther and farther from urban cores, Americans spent more and more time in their cars.
In 2000, the most recent Census data available, the average travel time to work was 25.5 minutes, up from 21.7 minutes in 1980 and 22.4 minutes in 1990. Most workers — three out of four — were spending that time alone in their own car.
The number of people who spend more than 90 minutes traveling to work nearly doubled between 1990 and 2000, from 1.76 million to 3.44 million, according to the Census data.
But the rising cost of gas has some experts wondering whether the cost of transportation is finally high enough to make far-flung suburbs far less attractive.
“Now all bets are off,” Mokhtarian said.
Still, some are skeptical that ingrained American habits will change dramatically, despite the current woes.
Alan Pisarski, author of a series of books called “Commuting in America,” believes high energy prices will prompt even more people to turn to carpooling, public transportation, telecommuting and fuel-efficient vehicles. Still, he disputes the more radical notion that a wide swath of Americans will suddenly flock back to in-city living. One big reason is that, in recent years, more jobs have moved to where those outlying houses have sprung up.
Nevertheless, he notes that the current spate of woes stand to hurt many Americans, especially those with the least financial wiggle room.
Even cutting trips to church
When the Mitchells bought their modular home in rural Platteville, Colo., north of Denver, they were among the many Americans trading a long commute for an affordable house.
Seven years later, the Mitchells are making another, more painful trade. Their housing woes compounded by the growing cost of Brian’s 50-mile roundtrip commute, the couple recently decided to let their home to fall into foreclosure. Instead, they are renting a house that is biking distance from Brian’s job.
The Mitchells had bought the house in 2001, for $129,900, with the intention of fixing it up and selling it for a profit. But in 2005, when they put the house on the market, interest was tepid at best.
The couple decided to put more money into improving the house, in the hopes that it would stand out among comparable homes in the area. In the end, they plowed some $15,000 and countless hours of sweat equity into the improvements, using credit cards and a loan against a 401(k) account to fund some upgrades.
Still, the house didn’t sell, even when they dropped the price from $126,000 to $122,000. In the meantime, gas prices skyrocketed, which added to their own expenses and made their rural home even less attractive.
The couple, who have two kids, found themselves using credit cards for everyday expenses, like groceries and bills. Even trips to church were curtailed to save on gas. Finally, they decided that their only option was to let the bank take the house.
“Sometimes, in surgery, amputation is the best solution,” Brian Mitchell said.
As the foreclosure proceeds, the Mitchells have rented a house in Longmont, west of Platteville toward Boulder, Colo., that is nicer than the one they had owned. It's also less than five miles from Brian’s job as a project manager. Although the rent is more than their former mortgage payment, Brian, 43, said that, with gas savings, they are still coming out ahead. The move into town is allowing the couple to downsize to just one car.
“It was a tough decision for us to decide to let the house go into foreclosure, but I’ll tell you what, once we made it … it was very liberating, actually,” he said.
While Mitchell can now bike to work, for other Americans the weak economy means adding hours on the road.
When Dollie Kinkead found out that her job was slated to be eliminated, she saw a silver lining — another job, at a place she’d always wanted to work, had just opened up. Although the new opportunity, as a training specialist for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, was 80 miles from her home in the eastern Virginia town of Front Royal, Kinkead jumped at the opportunity. “I took the job thinking I could just sell the house and move,” she said.
Instead, she found that she was entering a real estate market already swamped with for-sale signs, many of them tagged “price reduced.” Kinkead and her husband, who paid $306,000 for their home about three years ago, now have it on the market for $276,000, and nobody has come to look at it in weeks.
That means that each work day, Kinkead, 53, leaves the house at 5:50 a.m. and doesn’t return until 7 p.m. Luckily, she drives a diesel-powered Volkswagen Beetle that gets 48 miles per gallon, meaning her gas bill is about $100 per week. She also works nine-hour shifts, giving her one day off every two weeks.
When she gets home, Kinkead says there’s usually time to eat dinner with her husband and little else. But she doesn’t see any other option.
“It’s either that or be unemployed,” she said.
The couple is looking at renting out their house, even though they likely won’t get enough to cover their monthly payments. Still, Kinkead said she doesn’t regret taking the job.
“I’m over 50, and sometimes, you know, it’s hard to find a job,” she said.
Sleeping in the car
Even though Danny Jesse is only 24, he understands the feeling. After Jesse lost his engineering job right before Christmas, he figured his job search would take several months, so he moved back in with his parents.
Jesse landed a new job six months later — but it was near San Diego in Escondido, Calif., about 110 miles from his parents’ house in the Los Angeles suburb of Norwalk. With apartment rentals at a premium near his office, he hasn’t been able to find a place he can afford. So instead, he’s spending hours on the road each day, and occasionally even sleeps in his car instead of making the long trek.
Jesse estimates he pays $215 a week for gas, and he also pitches in some rent to help his parents with the rising cost of their adjustable-rate mortgage. But so far he hasn’t found a housing solution that would make better financial sense.
“I’m stuck in a Catch-22,” he said.
He rarely sees his friends, and when he does they tend to hang out at someone’s house to save money. He’s also cut back on how much he eats to save cash, which means he’s lost a few pounds. He says it’s something he gets lots of compliments on, “but it’s not for the right reasons.”
Some stay put
While anecdotal evidence shows that some Americans are seeking to trade suburban or rural living for in-city housing, others say that even with high gas prices, they aren’t willing to give up their communities.
When David Speer took a job in San Rafael, Calif., three years ago, he didn’t consider moving from his home in Menlo Park, nearly 50 miles away, although he did invest in a Toyota Prius. Even though gas prices have risen substantially since then, Speer has no plans to give up his commute, which takes 75 and 90 minutes each way.
“I love Menlo Park,” he said. “I really feel like I’ve created a home, and to me life is more than just a job. You need to feel like you’re part of a community.”
It also would take a lot for Jack Sparks and his family to give up their home in Conifer, Colo., in the foothills outside Denver. Still, Sparks did recently stop driving the 38 miles each way to work and instead is taking the bus. He’s been surprised to find that there are more perks than just the hundreds of dollars he’s saving.
“Sitting on the bus is a lot easier than driving,” Sparks said. “I wish I had made this jump earlier.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25722409/page/2
07-22-08, 10:01 AM
#2
Lexus Champion
I saw this article, and what I take from it, other than that they found a few people with a real bad occurrence of bad luck, and really like the shock value of hte headline, is that some people who stretched their dollar to buy their homes have ended up on the losing side.
If you drive 15,000 miles per year, and your car gets 20mpg, you are using 750 gallons of gas a year. Given that gas has gone from about $2/gal a couple of years ago to about $4/gal now, that amounts to an annual difference of $1500. While maybe that's chump change to a bunch of Lexus owners, to most other people that is real money. But I just can't believe that people can't make cuts elsewhere in their budgets to recoup some of this money, and that an additional $2000 over a whole year forces people into foreclosure--unless they were spending every last dollar they own on housing costs before the price of gas increased.
The other point, of course, is lots of other costs have been increasing, so it's not just gas alone that's putting the squeeze on people.
If you drive 15,000 miles per year, and your car gets 20mpg, you are using 750 gallons of gas a year. Given that gas has gone from about $2/gal a couple of years ago to about $4/gal now, that amounts to an annual difference of $1500. While maybe that's chump change to a bunch of Lexus owners, to most other people that is real money. But I just can't believe that people can't make cuts elsewhere in their budgets to recoup some of this money, and that an additional $2000 over a whole year forces people into foreclosure--unless they were spending every last dollar they own on housing costs before the price of gas increased.
The other point, of course, is lots of other costs have been increasing, so it's not just gas alone that's putting the squeeze on people.
07-22-08, 11:50 AM
#4
Lexus Champion
07-22-08, 11:52 AM
#5
Super Moderator
I saw this article, and what I take from it, other than that they found a few people with a real bad occurrence of bad luck, and really like the shock value of hte headline, is that some people who stretched their dollar to buy their homes have ended up on the losing side.
If you drive 15,000 miles per year, and your car gets 20mpg, you are using 750 gallons of gas a year. Given that gas has gone from about $2/gal a couple of years ago to about $4/gal now, that amounts to an annual difference of $1500. While maybe that's chump change to a bunch of Lexus owners, to most other people that is real money. But I just can't believe that people can't make cuts elsewhere in their budgets to recoup some of this money, and that an additional $2000 over a whole year forces people into foreclosure--unless they were spending every last dollar they own on housing costs before the price of gas increased.
The other point, of course, is lots of other costs have been increasing, so it's not just gas alone that's putting the squeeze on people.
If you drive 15,000 miles per year, and your car gets 20mpg, you are using 750 gallons of gas a year. Given that gas has gone from about $2/gal a couple of years ago to about $4/gal now, that amounts to an annual difference of $1500. While maybe that's chump change to a bunch of Lexus owners, to most other people that is real money. But I just can't believe that people can't make cuts elsewhere in their budgets to recoup some of this money, and that an additional $2000 over a whole year forces people into foreclosure--unless they were spending every last dollar they own on housing costs before the price of gas increased.
The other point, of course, is lots of other costs have been increasing, so it's not just gas alone that's putting the squeeze on people.
I have met people here since I got back from Mexico and they literally are blaming everyone but themselves for not seeing the that housing prices can decline very much in times of economic uncertainty. They never planned ahead and continued to try to live their same lifestyle.
07-22-08, 11:52 AM
#6
The one silver lining for most areas across the nation is at least those residence still have cheap housing options. Sure, they may have to trade longer commutes for cheap housing, but at least they have that option. It would suck even more for them if housing prices near urban and city areas were near Million Dollars and suburban houses were still 2-3X the national average. I personally don't see it as that bad of a thing for the economy to tank and then eventually self correct to achieve a more realistic equilibrium.
Personally, I find it hard to feel too much sympathy for people complaining of a 40-50 mile round trip commute, sitting in traffic for only an hour each way, and going back to their $150-$300K house. I think my wife and I would jump on that deal if given to us today.
Personally, I find it hard to feel too much sympathy for people complaining of a 40-50 mile round trip commute, sitting in traffic for only an hour each way, and going back to their $150-$300K house. I think my wife and I would jump on that deal if given to us today.
07-22-08, 09:56 PM
#7
There are just too many people living far outside their means and it finally caught up with them. So many people bought houses that shouldn't have been able to over the last 4 years. I saw several people who only clear 45k a year getting a loan for $250,000. That is nuts! Then people would blame the bank for giving them the loan when in reality these guys need to read up on buying a house before just jumping into it. 50% of people today don't even know what type of loan they have on their house and when it adjusts. It is pretty sad but the majority of people just follow the trends.
Trending Topics
07-23-08, 01:25 AM
#8
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: California
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are just too many people living far outside their means and it finally caught up with them. So many people bought houses that shouldn't have been able to over the last 4 years. I saw several people who only clear 45k a year getting a loan for $250,000. That is nuts! Then people would blame the bank for giving them the loan when in reality these guys need to read up on buying a house before just jumping into it. 50% of people today don't even know what type of loan they have on their house and when it adjusts. It is pretty sad but the majority of people just follow the trends.
we're all ****ed
07-23-08, 05:43 AM
#9
Lead Lap
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Likely they cound never truly afford the house they were living in.
Lets say they have to drive combined 24K miles (married two drivers) and say they have normal cars that get ~24 MPG. That's 1000 gallons of gas a year and if gas goes up $1.50 a gallon (big f-en deal) that's a grand total of $30 a week ($125 a month). I mean that's a cell phone bill (for some).
If you are selling a house or going into forclosure because you can not afford a higher $30 a week in gas how the heck could you afford to buy the house in the first place?
Let me point out that people don't save enough money in this country. Everyone should be comfortably saving 10% of what they make. I mean if you spend your pay by the 20th and you don't get paid til the 25th don't you think that means you are living beyond your means?
Try this get paid (say it's $4K a month) put $400 in savings straight off. If you can't than you are spending too much and need to work harder or spend less.
PS for savings, I mean actual savings, not counting what you pay for a house. Paying for a house is not saving. See all these forclosures? that piggy bank does not work. People tell me they don't save but they are paying $3K a month for the mortgage that's not saving that's paying for a place to live. If you can cash-out some day that's a bonus. But real savings (meaning cash/stock/bonds is something you can use for a rainy day and hopefully for retirement). Don't look under that rock (retirement savings) it's appaling how little money people are saving for retirement.
Last edited by rai; 07-23-08 at 07:28 AM.
07-23-08, 06:09 AM
#10
I agree with Rai pay yourself 1st put at least 10% of your money up. I used to drive a long commute to work I made good money and loved my job. The problem wasn't the commute it was not spending time with my son and wife. Found me a job paying a lot more working 4 days a week right above Charlotte. I jumped all over that.
I saved almost 20% down to put on my house. I had my house built almost 8 years If I want to I could sell it for almost 2.5x what I paid for it.
I saved almost 20% down to put on my house. I had my house built almost 8 years If I want to I could sell it for almost 2.5x what I paid for it.
07-23-08, 10:13 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
When the Mitchells bought their modular home in rural Platteville, Colo., north of Denver, they were among the many Americans trading a long commute for an affordable house.
Seven years later, the Mitchells are making another, more painful trade. Their housing woes compounded by the growing cost of Brian’s 50-mile roundtrip commute, the couple recently decided to let their home to fall into foreclosure. Instead, they are renting a house that is biking distance from Brian’s job.
Seven years later, the Mitchells are making another, more painful trade. Their housing woes compounded by the growing cost of Brian’s 50-mile roundtrip commute, the couple recently decided to let their home to fall into foreclosure. Instead, they are renting a house that is biking distance from Brian’s job.
This ridiculous article is like so many whining articles about couples with 9 children and menial jobs having a hard time making ends meet.
(Hey, if you'd kept it zippered more your bills wouldn't be so huge!)
The Mitchells had bought the house in 2001, for $129,900, with the intention of fixing it up and selling it for a profit. But in 2005, when they put the house on the market, interest was tepid at best.
The couple decided to put more money into improving the house, in the hopes that it would stand out among comparable homes in the area. In the end, they plowed some $15,000 and countless hours of sweat equity into the improvements, using credit cards and a loan against a 401(k) account to fund some upgrades.
The couple decided to put more money into improving the house, in the hopes that it would stand out among comparable homes in the area. In the end, they plowed some $15,000 and countless hours of sweat equity into the improvements, using credit cards and a loan against a 401(k) account to fund some upgrades.
Still, the house didn’t sell, even when they dropped the price from $126,000 to $122,000.
In the meantime, gas prices skyrocketed, which added to their own expenses and made their rural home even less attractive.
Finally, they decided that their only option was to let the bank take the house. ... Although the rent is more than their former mortgage payment, Brian, 43, said that, with gas savings, they are still coming out ahead.
Sleeping in the car
Even though Danny Jesse is only 24, he understands the feeling. After Jesse lost his engineering job right before Christmas, he figured his job search would take several months, so he moved back in with his parents.
Jesse landed a new job six months later — but it was near San Diego in Escondido, Calif., about 110 miles from his parents’ house in the Los Angeles suburb of Norwalk. With apartment rentals at a premium near his office, he hasn’t been able to find a place he can afford. So instead, he’s spending hours on the road each day, and occasionally even sleeps in his car instead of making the long trek.
Jesse estimates he pays $215 a week for gas, and he also pitches in some rent to help his parents with the rising cost of their adjustable-rate mortgage. But so far he hasn’t found a housing solution that would make better financial sense.
“I’m stuck in a Catch-22,” he said.
He rarely sees his friends, and when he does they tend to hang out at someone’s house to save money. He’s also cut back on how much he eats to save cash, which means he’s lost a few pounds. He says it’s something he gets lots of compliments on, “but it’s not for the right reasons.”
Even though Danny Jesse is only 24, he understands the feeling. After Jesse lost his engineering job right before Christmas, he figured his job search would take several months, so he moved back in with his parents.
Jesse landed a new job six months later — but it was near San Diego in Escondido, Calif., about 110 miles from his parents’ house in the Los Angeles suburb of Norwalk. With apartment rentals at a premium near his office, he hasn’t been able to find a place he can afford. So instead, he’s spending hours on the road each day, and occasionally even sleeps in his car instead of making the long trek.
Jesse estimates he pays $215 a week for gas, and he also pitches in some rent to help his parents with the rising cost of their adjustable-rate mortgage. But so far he hasn’t found a housing solution that would make better financial sense.
“I’m stuck in a Catch-22,” he said.
He rarely sees his friends, and when he does they tend to hang out at someone’s house to save money. He’s also cut back on how much he eats to save cash, which means he’s lost a few pounds. He says it’s something he gets lots of compliments on, “but it’s not for the right reasons.”
07-24-08, 01:10 AM
#12
Out of Warranty
Telecommuting it the only appropriate answer for the majority of white-collar workers whose physical presence is not critical to the job. Most sales, office, clerical, and software jobs can be easily transferred to the home office. It's not just the workers who benefit from working from home.
Companies need to recognize the cost savings in providing working quarters, common areas, and services for dozens if not hundreds of workers are not just limited to rent, furnishings, and utilities, but the loss of efficiency caused by employees commuting to work. This adds an hour or more to the workday, creates lost working hours for off-site lunches and meetings. By telecommuting from a home office, most of these costs can be significantly reduced or eliminated. Teleconferencing, whether across town or around the world is fast, efficient and extremely inexpensive. Compare that to the cost of air travel to meetings at a central location and the time lost in transit.
The savings of having up to say 50% of a company's workers telecommute is simply staggering. It might not effect a medium-sized 40,000 sqft shop, but the office attached could shrink from 15,000 sqft to maybe 5,000 or less. Considering the cost of 10,000 sqft of built-out offices, furnishing, providing common areas, maintenance, and utilities for 60-70 workers, there is no lack of good business reasons to consider letting the growing number of people who work with computer screens and telephones all day do so from home.
Certainly ironworkers, machinists, process operators, and medical professionals cannot work from home - they must go where the capital equipment and "customers" are in order to do their job. But, for the rest of us, it only requires a change of mindset and a bit of self-discipline to carry on business as usual from a home office.
The cost of gasoline is only the latest of many reasons to make that culture-shift. Consider the cost of maintaining a home and a remote office. When the total costs for maintaining separate working and living environments is added to the costs in cash and time to travel between them becomes rather laughable. Why do we continue to insist on doing this to ourselves?
Companies need to recognize the cost savings in providing working quarters, common areas, and services for dozens if not hundreds of workers are not just limited to rent, furnishings, and utilities, but the loss of efficiency caused by employees commuting to work. This adds an hour or more to the workday, creates lost working hours for off-site lunches and meetings. By telecommuting from a home office, most of these costs can be significantly reduced or eliminated. Teleconferencing, whether across town or around the world is fast, efficient and extremely inexpensive. Compare that to the cost of air travel to meetings at a central location and the time lost in transit.
The savings of having up to say 50% of a company's workers telecommute is simply staggering. It might not effect a medium-sized 40,000 sqft shop, but the office attached could shrink from 15,000 sqft to maybe 5,000 or less. Considering the cost of 10,000 sqft of built-out offices, furnishing, providing common areas, maintenance, and utilities for 60-70 workers, there is no lack of good business reasons to consider letting the growing number of people who work with computer screens and telephones all day do so from home.
Certainly ironworkers, machinists, process operators, and medical professionals cannot work from home - they must go where the capital equipment and "customers" are in order to do their job. But, for the rest of us, it only requires a change of mindset and a bit of self-discipline to carry on business as usual from a home office.
The cost of gasoline is only the latest of many reasons to make that culture-shift. Consider the cost of maintaining a home and a remote office. When the total costs for maintaining separate working and living environments is added to the costs in cash and time to travel between them becomes rather laughable. Why do we continue to insist on doing this to ourselves?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Gojirra99
Car Chat
41
04-25-05 12:44 PM