Is commuting worth the financial burden and health risks?
The theory of property value asserts that land values increase with the volume of economic activities within a given area or community. This explains why high employment areas tend to have extremely high property and rental values. In New York City, the housing market is indicative of this trend. Various neighborhoods throughout the city are becoming major business destinations for tech firms and startups, and the construction of condos and luxury apartments have escalated rental prices in these areas. While the market itself has deterred workers and residents from settling down in these high cost neighborhoods, business districts are expected to gain more commuter traffic. The New York metro transportation hub is the largest interregional transit network in the United States, with more than 4.7 million commuters traveling to work in New York City every day. In fact, 80 percent of the 4.7 million live within the five boroughs; the other 20 percent live within the NYC metro region, which comprises of Long Island, Hudson Valley, southwest Connecticut and north New Jersey. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the benefits of working in high employment areas outweigh the financial and health costs of using regional public transportation.
According to Bram and McKay, most of America’s cities were planned with the view of creating suburban communities which would have its own economic structures and central business district (2). This was to lead to conurbation where many suburbs would be self-sufficient and people would abandon the inner cities in ways that would ease congestion. However, in the 21st Century, things have changed significantly. High-paying jobs, especially in the technology and banking sectors, have moved to the inner cities; thus, forcing people from all backgrounds to commute long distances in order to work in these high employment areas. The economic attraction creates a cost-benefit situation which is increasingly matching the cost of commuting in a very competitive manner.
In the case of New York, most people tend to live within the high employment area and also work there for various reasons. Over 55 percent of people in New York City tend to get jobs within their own borough (NYC Planning). This is complemented by a strong and efficient subway system that allows people to move from home to work with limited challenges. In spite of this, some 7 percent of New Yorkers out-commute to the suburbs to work, or 273,000 New Yorkers. This shows that living in a place with a lot of employment opportunities does not guarantee jobs that would prevent a person from considering commuting. Commuting has become a reality for our world because it is far superior to living in a place with high employment.
For many commuters, whether inbound or within the boroughs, they face several transit challenges throughout the city. Commuters from Long Island rely on mass transit to get to Queens at roughly the same commuter density as New Jersey residents arriving in Manhattan and approximately 3.8 million city residents (NYC Planning). In recent years, the reliability of transit networks has been suffering due to low maintenance and outdated infrastructure. Major track and service delays plagued the regional transit network during the summer of 2017, or the “Summer of Hell.” LIRR and NJT passengers were forced to look for alternate routes as Penn Station underwent necessary track renovations (Fitzsimmons and McGeehan) while the subway’s inefficiency — after a derailment, track fires and overcrowding — was reason enough to trigger a state of emergency (Fitzsimmons).
So why go through the hassle? Commuting allows people to fulfill their dream of owning a nice house in a peaceful suburb or the countryside while going to work in expensive city-centers where property rates are extremely high. As a matter of fact, the number of Americans willing to commute greater than 90 minutes a day doubled between 1990 and 2000 (Schaefer). A close analysis shows that property rates in inner cities are extremely high in contrast to the prices of homes in the country, which are extremely low in comparison. When considering this fact, it makes little sense to pay rent in a neighborhood that has rental rates that are five to ten times higher than the mortgage of a house in a suburb where property values are low. Therefore, to the average American, commuting for a few years and owning a property outside the high-employment area might be worthwhile. This because they get to own a property in their name after a few years, rather than merely live as tenants in a home that is extremely expensive; paying a lot of money for a house close to one’s workplace in order to enable a person to walk to work is not worth the comfort and luxury. Rather, staying far from work or waking up an hour or two earlier to get to work is part of the commuter’s daily sacrifice and could possibly boost a person’s stock of tangible assets.
Secondly, commuting allows people to further their careers and gain better-paying positions. The best jobs are often opened in the city-center which is far from most suburbs in any state. These are jobs linked to multinational corporations that often require offices in prestige addresses rather than faraway suburbs and are increasingly demanding employees with higher skills (Bram & McKay). Therefore, a person who wants to get ahead in life will have to face the reality of traveling more than an hour to get to work that is faraway. This is because doing so would help a person to attain an upward economic mobility. Allowing geographical mobility to become an excuse would cause a limitation to a person’s professional progress. This leads to a trade-off where people have to decide between economic mobility and geographical mobility. In many cases, they choose economic mobility and commute in order to get to work, earn more money, and pursue their goals and aspirations in life.
The health and financial costs are often high. There is a cost-per-minute for every moment spent in transit to work (Schaefer). This involves a form of stress that people go through either by driving or simply sitting idly in a bus. In cases of major weather disasters, people who live far away cannot get to work and this might have a toll on their professional tasks. In spite of this, many people choose to overlook this and consider it as part of the broader sacrifice to rise in their careers or pay for an affordable property. Spending a few hours driving to work is time that would have been spent doing other things – sleeping or undertaking some social activity. However, sacrificing it for a greater goal might be justified. A person can spend the hour of commuting doing something productive, like listening to podcast or catching up on work. This is possible because of modern advancements in technology which optimizes time and place. A typical example is that of Mr. Ubert Scott who commutes over 180 kilometers to work each day, using his iPhone to answer messages in the bus while still managing to log a 10 to 12-hour workday (Miller).
Human beings have other considerations other than travel costs and health risks. America has moved towards a system of increasing specialization in residential amenities. Thus, a person might want to move to a given neighborhood for a specific reason – like a family seeking a top-rated school or a couple seeking a brisk night life (Bram & McKay). All of these reasons influence where we live and if that is the priority, a person might gain more satisfaction in a good residential neighborhood that might far outweigh the need to stay in a high employment area. This is testament to the fact that we live for more things other than merely getting a job. Thus, the financial costs and health risks of commuting might be little, compared with a person forcing themselves to live in a high employment neighborhood.
There is also a continuously reducing cost of transportation in our times which make the financial and health costs of commuting almost negligible – when compared to the demands of living in high employment areas. Car prices have fallen significantly in the United States and cars are also very comfortable today, thereby reducing the commuting health issues to a very high degree (Bram & McKay).
Finally, there is a rise in flexible work schedules which allows people to have greater luxury in getting to work at convenient times and working from home sometimes (Bram & McKay). A case in point is that of Ubert Scott who answers his emails during his 2-hour + commute and through this, he is able to optimize his time and gain significant work hours in the workday. This has erased the health and opportunity costs of commuting which translate to financial costs. With this, there is no pressure for people to move into high employment areas as though it is compulsory to do so.
In conclusion, the benefits of working in a high-employment area include the comfort of getting to work quickly with less stress. These gains are being erased significantly by changes in our society which make it easier and less costly to commute. Extreme rental values in high employment areas make it less competitive when taking commutes from a place where mortgages are cheap into consideration. The advancement of technology allows for the flexibility of work schedules, which reduces the stress in commuting. Some people have other residential needs that might bring benefits that outweigh living in a high employment area and allows them to access a wide array of jobs which might provide better paid positions than those in areas where there is high employment.
Works Cited
Bram, Jason and Alisdair McKay. “The Evolution of Commuting Patterns in the New York City Metro Area.” Federal Reserve Bank of New York 11 (10) (2005): 1-7. Web.
Fitzsimmons, Emma G. Cuomo Declares a State of Emergency for New York City Subways. 29 June 2017. Web. 12 May 2020.
Fitzsimmons, Emma G. and Patrick McGeehan. Penn Station Commuters Plot B for ‘Summer of Hell’. 19 June 2019. Web. 12 May 2020.
Miller, Bryan. Extreme Commuting. 21 July 2017. Web. 5 May 2020.
NYC Planning. The Ins and Outs of NYC Commuting. 2019. Web. 5 May 2020.
Schaefer, Annette. Commuting Takes Its Toll. 1 October 2005. Web. 5 May 2020.
