This post missed one of the biggest reasons to not relocate for a startup:
A lot of smaller startups lack long-term capital. You could be relocating for a job that isn't there in seven months. Relocating to join an established company that will honor your multi-year contract? That's one thing. But relocating for a company that may not be in great financial shape (and may have never even made profit) is another thing entirely. Uprooting your entire family for what could be a massive risk is a lot to ask, especially when employees can remote work to see if the job is a good fit for a year or two. Startups really should be offering more remote employment if they want to be able to attract more established talent.
I would also quibble with his cost of living calculations. He doesn't say whether or not these short trips involve walking or driving a car. Based on my knowledge of Louisville and the tenor of his post, many of them may in fact be car trips, which are much more expensive than walking or public transportation trips -- both financially and physically. If you live in a truly walkable area, you don't need a gym membership. Exercise is called living your daily life.
Old cost of living indexes just factored in housing and some other data, leaving out transportation. When you factor in transportation, often a households second highest cost (and highest in rural areas), many of these areas become much cheaper. We live in the DC area right on the Red Line and only need one car because of it. All of our trips this past weekend -- going to parties, to the movies, to stores, to get pizza -- either involved walking or public transportation. While my housing is assuredly more expensive than someone living in Louisville, my families transportation costs are incredibly low.
So when we talk about cost of living, we have to factor in everything. I'd still bet that Louisville is cheaper than NYC, but it's a lot closer when you apply an apples-to-apples comparison. This is particularly true when you compare housing in the same metro. Much of that exurban housing is suddenly a lot more expensive when you factor in transportation.
Were we ever talking about living longer? Exercise is important because improves blood flow to the brain, and therefore brain function. It can make you happier and better rested.
Longevity is impacted by a lot of other lifestyle factors, many of which have nothing to do with exercise.
So basically you're conflating those other cultures' incidental lack of cardiovascular exercise with the fact that they live longer (which is due to completely unrelated factors), and then making the specious claim that exercising leads to shorter life spans.
> Going to the gym is largely an Americanism. Not exactly a culture I'd want to emulate for healthiness.
Going to the gym isn't an "Americanism", it's something done by a certain percentage of Americans who are significantly healthier than the American population at large.
The fact that you're even suggesting that intense exercise at the gym is bad for your health is just appalling.
> Consistent movement is much more healthy than sporadic bouts of high intensity. Walking everywhere is just about the healthiest thing you can do.
I never said that you shouldn't walk around, it has its benefits too. My point is that "walking around" is not "exercise".
> I would also quibble with his cost of living calculations. He doesn't say whether or not these short trips involve walking or driving a car.
Sure he does, e.g.: "I bought a house near my stepdaughter’s school, so she can walk to and from school, and transportation for extracurriculars is less of a problem." When he says he's two minutes from his gym, I assume he means two walking minutes; even if he doesn't, two driving minutes is not a significant transportation cost
Plus no matter how much you might have to drive to go to a party or a movie, none of that is going to compare to cutting out a commute by working from home.
That depends on if you need multiple cars to get other tasks done in your life. In some areas, you can get by with zero cars. Others with one for multiple people. Louisville is not a place easy to get by with no car.
That's a good point, although if you are willing to relocate to a hot spot, you won't have too much trouble picking up a next job when the first fails. I get asked multiple times per week if I know any developers looking for work here in San Francisco.
It's also much easier to get into a company if you can talk to the people working there in person regularly rather than doing remote interviews and phone conferences. A couple pair programming sessions, hackathons, or fun projects together and you might be in the door without any of the usual suffering. Although lack of process like that is part of smaller startups as well.
having lived in louisville, i can say it's extremely difficult to do things without a car. i lived there without a car for several years. it was do-able, but i was dependent on friends to drive me places every once in a while. also, it's the mid-west so when people find out you don't have a car, they treat you like a space-alien.
A lot of smaller startups lack long-term capital. You could be relocating for a job that isn't there in seven months. Relocating to join an established company that will honor your multi-year contract? That's one thing. But relocating for a company that may not be in great financial shape (and may have never even made profit) is another thing entirely. Uprooting your entire family for what could be a massive risk is a lot to ask, especially when employees can remote work to see if the job is a good fit for a year or two. Startups really should be offering more remote employment if they want to be able to attract more established talent.
I would also quibble with his cost of living calculations. He doesn't say whether or not these short trips involve walking or driving a car. Based on my knowledge of Louisville and the tenor of his post, many of them may in fact be car trips, which are much more expensive than walking or public transportation trips -- both financially and physically. If you live in a truly walkable area, you don't need a gym membership. Exercise is called living your daily life.
Old cost of living indexes just factored in housing and some other data, leaving out transportation. When you factor in transportation, often a households second highest cost (and highest in rural areas), many of these areas become much cheaper. We live in the DC area right on the Red Line and only need one car because of it. All of our trips this past weekend -- going to parties, to the movies, to stores, to get pizza -- either involved walking or public transportation. While my housing is assuredly more expensive than someone living in Louisville, my families transportation costs are incredibly low.
So when we talk about cost of living, we have to factor in everything. I'd still bet that Louisville is cheaper than NYC, but it's a lot closer when you apply an apples-to-apples comparison. This is particularly true when you compare housing in the same metro. Much of that exurban housing is suddenly a lot more expensive when you factor in transportation.