this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
63 points (89.9% liked)

No Stupid Questions

39675 readers
1369 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just the title

Seen lots of people moving to big places , but im from a small town and id go back there in a heartbeat if i had WFH option (not possible with current job)

To clarify, im a European and its a question for everyone , not just americans!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Australian here; I much prefer living away from cities. I like having a big house on a big block with lots of nature and as few other people around me as possible.

The catch is while the housing and land is wayyyy cheaper, other stuff is more expensive and inconvenient. The biggest thing people don’t consider is trades people; you’ll have plumbers, sparkies etc just refuse to even come out when they find out you’re more than half an hour away from civilisation, and if they do come out they charge for the travel.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

My mom came from a small town and said she'd never raise a kid in a small town - her cousins, all save one, were in jail or pregnant before they graduated high school. Because there was literally nothing to do.

I like having restaurants, a good library system, concerts, bars, not needing to drive to get anything. I like living in a mid-sized city, but if I couldn't, would go bigger not smaller.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

There is not enough stimulation in a small community. In the US, they are also usually full of hateful/ignorant people.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago

I don't like conservative communities, i get threatened for not being a white man

All small communities left in the US are just the angry conservatives who were too stubborn to leave.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 hours ago

As someone who has lived in a couple of small places before, for me it's accessibility. The first place I lived at for the longest since birth pretty much, there were so few places to go to. You had to kill 45 miles back and to, to get anywhere and that ate a lot of gas to do so. My place of origin, didn't really put anything interesting down that would attract more people to want to go to, converse in or conduct commerce in. Yeah the small community may have bonded people together, but it was all still relatively small.

Where I am at now, it feels bigger, there's more opportunity around and everything. I'm having a bit of a difficult time imagining where I could go if I decide to move that equals where I'm living now.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I've personally been thriving since moving to a big city. I never want to go back to the middle of nowhere. I enjoy urban exploration, I love the diversity of business and people, and I love the sheer amount of community that exists. I love that there's always new things to find. That just doesn't exist outside of cities.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I don't drive. Where I live, you can really only "not drive" in cities. And even then, it can be hard at times.

At the same time, I live within reasonable commuting distance of multiple friends and family members. I can walk to a few of them. I don't need to be closer to my community.

I might want to retire someplace quieter, but I like being able to hop on a train or a bus to get to somewhere fun, or to be able to walk across the street to a store if I need something. Heck, I can even easily get takeout if I don't feel like cooking -- I don't even need delivery.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

I can even easily get takeout if I don’t feel like

And I’ll take that up a notch. I currently live in a small city outside a large one, and I can walk to get takeout, from

  • American diner
  • Greek kebabs
  • Pakistani kebabs
  • several Indian restaurants
  • several Chinese restaurants
  • several Mexican restaurants
  • at least one Salvadoran
  • at least one Chilean
  • some sort of African thing I haven’t yet tried
  • ….. and so many more

Our new family activity for pandemic was to walk for takeout from the new Punjabi restaurant, and eat dinner on a bench in the town common….. try that in your small town

[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

The more wealth inequality grows the less important 99% of the population is as consumers and the more important the 1% becomes. As our governments go increasingly into debt to the benefit of only the rich, infrastructure will continue to suffer. As wealth inequality grows the standard of living for the 99% will continue to decline, making the ability to own assets like housing an impossibility.

Add these factors together and you can see why people are forced to move to where the rich are, because that's where the business is, because they're the only people with enough money to constitute a customer, and because everyone else doesn't have the money or infrastructure to go where they'd like to regardless of business smaller communities get choked out.

The only way to get the life you deserve, a better life for everyone in your country regardless of where you are in the world, is to tax the rich out of existence. Remove the possibility of becoming a threat to organized society, to democracy. Remove the threat of amassing wealth beyond reason and watch as your country becomes profitable, your job pays you more, the price of goods and services go down, and the quality of life for everyone begins to rise instead of plateau or decline.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

The more wealth inequality grows the less important 99% of the population is as consumers and the more important the 1% becomes.

Not as consumers, no. The 1% doesn't consume more than the 90th percentile. They just park a higher percentage of their wealth in wealth-generating financial assets, which leech wealth from the rest of society.

We need a tax on all registered securities, (with exemption for the first $10 million owned by a natural person.) That tax should be paid not in cash, but in shares of the security: the IRS should slowly liquidate those shares over time, such that IRS sales never constitute more than 1% of total traded volume.

We further need the punitively-high top-tier tax rate we had for most of the 20th century. That tax rate pushed businesses to spend their excess income, turning it into other people's paychecks. It discouraged the kind of wealth-hoarding investment that is stunting consumer spending.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

You're being incredibly over dramatic. Plenty of businesses thrive off of mostly middle or lower income customers.

Cities are just better. Rich or no rich, larger amounts of people means more restaurants and things to do.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think I am being over dramatic, I'd love to know what specifically you think isn't grounded or reasonable.

Plenty of businesses do thrive off of the lower 90% of wage earners but those businesses are increasingly owned by the 0.1% and I'm talking about a slope here - a velocity. "Increasingly..." means there is a trend. When all wealth is increasingly owned by the wealthy 1% then we'll see all possible wealth be within their immediate vicinity, within serving their needs. When there's 50 businesses offering a service or product you can expect to see the wealth of those 50 companies spread out over many locations, but when all products and services are produced by 1 company you can expect most of their wealth to be situated in fewer places. Less competition means lower wages which means everywhere those workers are there is less wealth circulating. More wealth in fewer hands means less money flowing around to enliven cities, towns, villages.

More restaurants in cities because there's more money in cities because there's more people - but small towns used to have good restaurants too, with variety. But as wealth drains from the hands of the many into the hands of the few more corners have to be cut. More quality goes away. Another restaurant closes because people have to eat out less. It's all a matter of how much wealth is in your community and owned by your community.

Things to do is facilitated by that same factor, but additionally by infrastructure. If the US had high speed rail connecting every major city and town, everyone would have a lot harder time justifying being within 30 minutes of city center by car when a train could take them into city center for cheaper, less hassle, and quicker from a much farther distance. We can't build that infrastructure because... of a lot of reasons, but I'd argue most of them come back to too much money in the hands of too few people and that it's only getting worse.

It's why populism is so popular right now. It's why the US is sliding rapidly into fascism. It's why most European countries score as better places to live in nearly every metric, and it's why if they're not careful they'll be in exactly the same situation in a few years time.

Wealth inequality is everything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

Add these factors together and you can see why people are forced to move to where the rich are, because that's where the business is, because they're the only people with enough money to constitute a customer,

This part specifically is the what I was referring to. Basically, I feel as though you're overemphasizing the "rich" aspect of why people live in cities. Tons of people just like being around other people.

The faster money flows, the more expensive jobs can be provided, and in the country side money moves slower. Wages being higher in cities isn't because that's where the rich are; it's because there's more places to spend money, so everything changes hands quicker and "creates" more money.(While I do think that plenty of modern econ is bunk bullshit, that's one concept that rings true).

While I do agree that the rich kills small towns, I think it's primarily a different reason---big box stores like walmart and medium boxes like dollar general using abusive price practices like undercutting using their wealth to push out the smaller competition, and make it nigh impossible for new places to get going.

Wealth inequality is quite meaningful, but I think it's far from everything. There's a lot of smaller reasons why cities tend to be better places to live, that don't have to do with the rich.

One good example is that higher density means more gov $ per sqrmile, even if the people are poorer, and more infrastructure can be shared, making it cheaper to build. That results in cities inevitably having better infrastructure than the countryside

[–] [email protected] -3 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

Because they don't know how to do a spreadsheet for household budget.

Once you see the numbers all laid out, living in a small town is usually better in NA.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

If you measure your life only in dollars, maybe. Maybe.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Only certain things cost more in cities like housing. Other things are basically the same price, especially with online options. You get paid more, which means your 401k match is more money. There's more opportunities in cities and services like schools are generally much better because of better funding.

Yeah, if you're childfree and wfh, it's probably worth it to move to a lcol area. But there are a lot of things to consider.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Average income is about 60k, I can't see a way past the triple cost for housing to make up for the comparatively tiny hit you'll take in income.

To live in a city, you're looking at 4k a month for a 3bdrm. Small town you're looking at 1.5k. The 2.5k difference is 30k more per year for housing.

I just don't see a 60k person making 90k just to live in a city.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

A $30k person in a town could be making $60k in a city. With two incomes, that's an extra $30k/yr.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Bullshit. McDonald's workers don't make 60k in a city bro.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

It's even cheaper to live in the woods!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago

I remember some guy, anthropologist or something like that, was trying to figure out why it was that people in cities made on average more money than people in small towns or rural areas, until it hit him: That's why cities exist in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

TL;DR: capitalism.

I’ve put some thought into this and I don’t have a good answer other than because of how society is designed to keep us from doing it now.

Evolutionarily speaking, we are designed to thrive in smaller communities. It’s only in the more recent part of humanity that we seem to have moved away from that. I mean, there were still cities a long time ago, but within them were what could be thought of as smaller communities.

I myself am of European descent, but currently live in a place where there is a thriving native community and realizing that I sometimes have envy of some of their ways of life is what got me thinking.

For instance, in western society becoming elderly is almost seen as a problem, like a burden that needs to be “dealt” with. For them it is a station of respect and reverence. If an Elder walks down the street, they are taught to show respect and pay heed to their wisdom and guidance. If the rest of us are lucky, we can get a seniors discount at select stores by declaring they we are among the needy.

I’ve even went as far as researching communal living, intentional communities and cooperative housing, but I keep chickening out when it comes time to pull anything into action.

The idea of finding 4-6 like-minded families to share resources with and use our individual talents and skills to help each other really appeals to me. It makes sense to build resilience against harder times.

But to answer your question, smaller communities helping each other is against the capitalist ideal and is/will be thwarted at any scale by corporations and corporate influenced governments alike at every turn. So I guess that’s the most likely reason.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Be careful. Having ownership of your resources allows you to take your stuff, or sell it, and try something else somwhere else. If all the resources are communal, it is harder to escape if the things go south. One of the reasons why is it difficult to leave certain kind of cults.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

Absolutely, which is why cooperative corporate structure appealed to me. Everyone has there same stake in it and still maintains their own separate lives. Only things that are agreed upon as shareable would be shared.

Like bulk food, equipment, etc.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Seniors who show they deserve respect should be given it. But plenty do not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

I hear you and agree, but part of me wonders if that is solely because they were always nasty people, or they are actually reacting to the awful way they get treated.

They are already probably dealing with failing health, burying most of their friends, not understanding most of what is going on in the world, feeling left behind, etc.

In their shoes I’m not sure if I could be very cheerful myself. Maybe I’ll get the opportunity to find out and hopefully I’ll not be one of the ones you mention, but who knows.

Most of us are tired from all the crap of the world already, imagine 30-40 more years of that on top of the things I just mentioned.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Remember when American tax payers gave billions to telecoms to install fiber in rural America?

Don't worry they conveniently forgot too.

That plus other services like rural hospitals and education are huge drawbacks to living in most of rural America.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Also a bunch of other issues with small town living like lack of privacy/anonymity, entertainment, restaurants, government services, etc... And these problems get more severe the smaller the community.

But people really did spread out to smaller towns during COVID. Property values went crazy in a lot of small towns around me.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I live in a small mountain town, and property values went apeshit. Like a house/cabin that was $150-250k is now $4-500k. It's insane.

Privacy and anonymity is definitely still a thing as long as you keep you business to yourself, because as I'm guessing you're alluding to, people are pretty chatty as it is and a smaller population makes it more difficult. It also helps to not be an asshole and give people even more to talk about, especially when most everyone knows each other.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even without direct interaction, it's easier to know someone as "the guy in the cabin on hillside road with the blue Honda CRV and the beard". I assume that's what the comment meant since they tied privacy to anonymity

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Remember when American tax payers gave billions to telecoms to install fiber in rural America?

It's actually happened multiple times...

I remember two off the top of my head, but it's possible there was a couple more

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 day ago (1 children)

European

As an American, it's because there's nothing out there. We have SO much land. A small town means you have to drive everywhere. It means the local grocery is 30 min away. It also means 300 people in the town, one library (maybe), but at least three churches. Very much not my vibe :-)

Not everywhere, obviously, but it's a thing.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I live in a city of over 100,000 people and my grocery store is 25 minutes away. About an hour if I walk.

I grew up in a small town and had two grocery stores within 8 minutes. Everything was a lot more expensive and there was less selection.

Moved because of the lack of services (no hospital, volunteer FD and ambulance, no high school, no college nearby, no taxi service, no bus service, everything shut down at 6 PM).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago

I feel you on that.

I live in a town of about 71,000 The nearest grocery store which is a little bit more expensive is seven minutes by car. The other one that’s a little bit less expensive is about 15 to 20 minutes by car.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Out of curiosity, what region are you in? I live in a city of ~80,000 in the northeastish US and I'm not even sure it's possible to be more than 5 or 10 minutes from a grocery store here.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago

West… there’s a lot more sprawl here AND rush hour traffic that lasts half the day, even on weekends.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm weird as fuck. Other people who are as weird as fuck as me are possible to be found, but a small community makes it unlikely if not impossible. People as weird as me can only really be found in a big enough place with enough people.

And yeah, there's also just much more to do than in a smaller town. Taking 30-45 minutes to arrive at something you wanna do is a significant hurdle compared to 5-10 minutes.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)
  • Poor infrastructure in many of these communities, and no way to get to larger towns and cities without a car. So you're stuck with crappy chain stores and terrible quality food, harming your health. And it's boring, because it can't support many kinds of entertainment.

  • Smaller communities tend to skew towards conservatives, and there's little way to escape from it (due to the distances and the lack of high speed rail). So expect more religiosity, more discrimination, and politicians that are even shittier than the average.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Huh , i forgor about americans and their shit-frastracture ... im from europe and our villages/small towns are dying even tho most of what you said isnt true for us.

Idk whats it about , as most people my age (late 20s early 30s) want to live in a smaller town nearby but noone is moving there just staying in the big cities.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

I think you need to specify your European country, because small French villages have awful infrastructure while their cities have amazing infrastructure.

But even here in the Netherlands, if I'd live in a village and I wanted to go to another village further away I'd need to take the train to the nearest city and then take another train to said village. This often takes much longer than by car. Also, while basic shopping needs like a supermarket, greengrocer and some basic repair shops might be there (maybe just the supermarket) you don't have access to... Anything else really, and need to take the car there, too. Sadly, necessary non-commercial facilities like hospitals and higher education are also missing from most villages here.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 21 hours ago

Yeah, even in the Randstad, for distances up to like 15 km it's often faster to cycle somewhere than take public transport.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My neighborhood is my "small community". I don't need to leave the city for that.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

Interesting .. usually where i live, neighbourhoods in big cities arent well connected so i never saw it that way i guess ?

More power to people who can organise like that !

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

Infintevalence pretty much nailed it

We're country as fuck up here. Not a small town any more, but still more rural than suburban.

While we're in driving distance of a good hospital, it's a drive, not something in town. There's just not enough people to keep a hospital in use often enough to make it reasonable in a capitalist system at all, but even in an ideal, post scarcity system, the resources to build and run hospitals are going to be best located where the most people can benefit from it.

And pretty much everything scales the same. Why locate a big university in a town with maybe 10k people if you include outlying areas? To support that kind of endeavor, you'd need more people to do the work, so the town would get bigger because of the large undertaking.

It's a balance. If you want to have bigger centralized services, you need more people to make it work. And, if you don't already have the population, attracting bigger things is harder, so the chances of things like public transit, resource intensive facilities, exotic supplies/foods coming there are lower.

It results in people that value the benefits of a smaller population center over the usual benefits of a bigger center being the only ones that'll move out

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

The career opportunities for my partner's career are basically only available in this region of our country.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

If I could get a fully remote job and move to the middle of BFE... Well, I'm considering doing that without a remote job, and just accepting that any job I can get will take a longer commute and probably earn pay less. I lived in Chicago for more than a decade, lived in San Diego a few years. Currently I live in a rural part of my state, but the city keeps creeping nearer, and I'm seeing farms in my county get bulldozed to put in yet another housing development "..starting from the low, low $600s!" of identical, oversized, characterless houses with 1/4 acres plots of land and no trees.

I don't want neighbors. I want trees, deer eating my hostas, raccoons trying to tear open my garbage bins, and bears being oversized raccoons. I want candles and laterns in every room because the power goes out every time there's a thunderstorm, a woodburning stove that I can feed with trees that get blown down, and enough land that I can raise goats, chickens, and do a little dirt farming, in addition to my job. I want to opt out of this goddamn rat race, and just have a quiet place where I can offer people refuge from the bullshit that's happening around us.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

It would probably help to define the terms you're using, as there are many ways to interpret "big place", "small place", "many people", etc.

I don't even know if your starting point is accurate.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don't know, the whole being completely surrounded by backwards fucking hicks who hate my mere existence for living my life as who I actually am might have something to do with it.

Maybe, just maybe, I like living near people who accept me for who I am and most of those people are in cities while the rural areas are filled with hate filled fucking jackasses who couldn't manage to fucking read Green Eggs & Ham even if they had a gun pointed at their head with the threat of death if they failed.

load more comments
view more: next ›