Reading your comment and others beneath you, I sense many of you have a weird idea of what a city is.

What you describe is true only for a minority of cities. I live in a city with above median housing prices. I live a 10 minute drive from my work. My house is not expensive - in fact, the expensive neighborhoods are farther away.

Initially you may not have much of a choice on where you work, but if you go through your whole career not having that choice, you probably need to work on your career a bit. For everyone I know, they decided to make that compromise (don't want to leave awesome city, etc). For them, not having enough time in the day definitely is a choice.

I agree with the rest of your accounting, but will note that there are weekends. As for gym, I just figured out exercises I can do at home with minimal equipment. It's a lot more flexible (and takes less time) than going to a gym.

And frankly, even looking at some of the top 20 areas, some of them have pretty decent traffic. I know people who live in Phoenix (ranked 10th) whose commute is definitely under half an hour one way. And they live in nice areas.

Houston: Some of the major employers are in a crappy part of town. Very easy to find houses nearby, but few do so because they don't like the neighborhood. Still, the long commute is an active choice and not about affordability.

Take Manhattan. I got a call from a well known company to work there. I said "No way. Expensive and long commutes." The recruiter explained: No - just live in New Jersey. If you get the right neighborhood, the commute to work by public transit will be 30-40 minutes. I checked - he was right. Those New Jersey neighborhoods were decent ones, and the houses were about the same price as mine.

I haven't checked Chicago recently, but 10-15 years ago, you could easily find houses near enough the L-train such that your commute to downtown would be about 30 minutes.

>If you get the right neighborhood, the commute to work by public transit will be 30-40 minutes.

Okay, so one of your idealized cases and it's still closer to the "1 hour by public transit" scenario than "10 minutes by driving" you originally chose. But you know people in Phoenix so case closed.

>The majority of people who live in cities in the US are not in the top 20 metropolitan areas

I'm curious where you get this, too. The top 5 MSAs already cover 25% of the population.

Your statement is true. And it's also true when we switch the pronouns. What's your point?

"Plenty" is not the same as "majority", which was your original claim.

> Okay, so one of your idealized cases and it's still closer

How is it one of my "idealized" cases? Putting words in my mouth isn't going to help this conversation.

> to the "1 hour by public transit" scenario than "10 minutes by driving" you originally chose.

1. I never claimed you will always find affordable houses within 10 minutes drive. I was countering the claim that it need be an hour or more. That it took 40 minutes is still in support of my claim. That it took more than 10 minutes doesn't refute my point.

2. It was fairly clear from my original comment that the point was one can move to a city where you can find sub-hour commutes. From that it's clear that I am not implying you'll find it with every employer or in every city. The whole comment was about choosing where you work.

> I'm curious where you get this, too. The top 5 MSAs already cover 25% of the population.

Simple: Look up a list of metro areas in the US. Add up the top 20. Then add up the rest.

Hint: A city of 100K is still a city. Trying to claim that this is a minority position will again get the same response: Given that most people who live in 100K (or even smaller) cities believe they live in a city, it would be incorrect to claim that the majority do not view such places as cities. There may far fewer employers for engineering in such cities, but I can assure you there are still plenty.

(And no, you don't need to go as low as 100K to get a cumulative greater than your top 20).

Your statement was:

> I'd wager most people think of something like the top 20 metropolitan statistical areas by population when they hear the term.

Baltimore is not in the top 20. Nor is San Antonio. Nor is Portland. Nor is Milwaukee. The list goes on and on. Do you think these people do not think of their own cities when using the word?

Here’s a suggestion: don’t live an hour away from work?

With more companies going permanent remote, I find the whole concept of commuting for 2 hours round trip a day unimaginable. Especially for those of us working in Tech that don’t need a physical presence to deliver results.

A friend used to say that majority of people who work from home fall into one of two types of people, the kind that never go to work or the kind that never come home.

So sorry, it's not that simple.

I thought the same thing, until I focused on tightening up my schedule and making active choices to minimize wasted time.

If you want to live somewhere that requires 2 hours (!!) of commuting each day, take long lunch breaks away from the office, have relaxed mornings with hours between alarm going off and leaving the house, that's fine.

However, you have to recognize where you're making personal choices. You don't have to choose a job and house combination that requires an hour long commute each way. You don't have to leave the office for lunch every day. You don't have to have leisurely mornings. It's perfectly fine if you choose to do those things, but you're not being completely honest with yourself if you start portraying those personal choices as completely out of your control.

> And do you really want to spend all those 4hrs being productive?

It's not about being productive all day every day. You can spend those 4 hours watching TV if you want, or you can spend those 4 hours going to dinner with friends, or going to the gym. It's your choice.

> If you follow the pomodoro technique and use 5min for leisure every 30 mins, you end up with only ~40mins of "leisure" in that type of day.

The Pomodoro technique is for work time. You shouldn't be Pomodoring you personal time after work.

> What if you want to do things like spend an hour working out at the gym / looking after physical health?

Make a priority and make it happen.

If you spend 1 hour at the gym 3 times per week, that's less than 3% of your waking hours. Surely you can find 3% slack in your schedule somewhere?

> It quickly drains away at any time you would have to spend on your own personal projects, interests, hobbies.

The idea of "side projects" has become a major problem for many new grads growing up the internet era. For some reason, many of them feel obligated to be working on side projects when they're not working. They basically end up with two jobs, a day job and tending to their side projects, and then they wonder where all of their time has gone.

The solution is simple: Don't do side projects if you would prefer to spend your time on something else.

It's all about making active choices in how you spend your time. Once you go down the spiral of assuming everything is an obligation in your life, your schedule starts to feel out of your control. Start being honest about the choices you're making and what you want to do with your time and it becomes much easier to take control again.

That’s true with all those things you wanted to do but didn’t realize that there is actually a hidden time sink that nearly doubles the duration.

This is actually a big reason why people don’t accomplish everything they set out to do because they didn’t budget for all the extra non value add things

It’s maybe not as effective as barbells, but I also hurt myself sometimes with those. My home routine hasn’t hurt me yet.

Basic equipment:

* Chinup bar above doorframe. I like the rogue jammer. You can still shut the door.

* Dip bar, for dips and rows

* Exercise bike, for sprints

Other exercises are pushups, planks, and bodyweight squats. I have a weight vest for when I need to add more to squats, but don’t need it yet. Am doing 50 squats, and they’re still hard just with bodyweight.

Also have a powerblock, but haven’t used it recently. However, it’s a great addition to a home gym, and would go well with a bench.

Cost of equipment I am using was $400 or less. Comparatively affordable, especially if it cuts a gym membership.

Time savings:

* No commute, changing

* No waiting for machines

* Can use rest breaks efficiently preparing food, a mindless task that doesn’t interfere

Will not go back to gym

What kind of connective tissues do they maintain?

Connective tissue = tendons, fascia, muscles themselves When working with machines like at many gyms, the movement is really isolated. Free weights are better since they kind of force your muscles into different directions. Kettlebells are a bit better in that regard and are more versatile and easier to use sporadically like in a home office environment.