News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by cynicalkane on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @07:11PM (#9141811)
NYC is needlessly expensive but not by as much as you think. Building very dense cities is a thing that costs money, and if you look at very dense well-developed cities with good economies, only Hong Kong and Singapore come in as slightly cheaper.

Most of the parts of NYC near the city center are so dense you need to build n-story mid-rise or high-rise condos if you want to add more people. That is expensive even if there were no political barriers.

Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by x0x0 on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @07:50PM (#9141996)
nyc is also helped once you realize you can get by with zero cars. Your transport cost is $112/mo for an unlimited metro card plus perhaps $100/mo for the odd cab. That replaces car payment, insurance, parking, gas, and repairs -- easily $400+/mo.

Edit: and, distinctly contrary to sf, you won't miss a car. There is a food delivery culture: you may assume the vast majority of restaurants deliver. Seamless web is amazing. Groceries, gyms, dry cleaners, wash-and-folds, restaurants, and delis are so close to the majority of places you can live that you have no need for a vehicle.

Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by xienze on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @08:04PM (#9142051)
> nyc is also helped once you realize you can get by with zero cars. Your transport cost is $112/mo for an unlimited metro card plus perhaps $100/mo for the odd cab. That replaces car payment, insurance, parking, gas, and repairs -- easily $400+/mo.

Now consider the rent differential between NYC and any other "cars required" city in the US. There goes your $400 and then some...

Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by x0x0 on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @08:28PM (#9142136)
Um, duh? parent of my comment's thesis:

   NYC is needlessly expensive but not by as much as you think.
me: mentions supporting fact

   nyc costs are comparatively helped by not needing a car!
No one claimed nyc is cheaper, merely that just looking at rent doesn't accurately account for the real price differences. Note also that is a $200-$300 cost savings per person, so double it for a couple. And there is a QOL improvement: taking the train and either reading a book or merely being half-zoned out and sipping coffee is much better than driving.
Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by ghaff on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @09:30PM (#9142333)
I do know people who by choice live in SF without a car and are mostly fine with it. They also use Zipcar and rentals as needed. That said, NYC (esp. Manhattan) is probably unique in the US in the degree to which not owning a car is just part of the culture. Some do own cars of course--not sure the %--but it's not the norm.
Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by saosebastiao on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @07:51PM (#9141999)
Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by elithrar on Tuesday March 03, 2015 @08:19PM (#9142108)
> You mean apart from Tokyo?

Average Monthly Disposable Salary (After Tax) Tokyo New York 312,241.52 ¥ 464,589.78 ¥

Everything appears "cheaper" up until that point, but that's never the whole picture. You could also assert that you're likely to be paid less living in Tokyo, and the costs of living reflect this. Property is the major difference there.

Re:$350M Might Not Be Enough to Save Las Vegas by cynicalkane on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @03:08PM (#9146965)
When I said "well-developed cities with good economies" the intent of the 'good economies' bit was specifically to exclude Tokyo. A bad economy will make anywhere cheap and Japan's had two decades of that.