Extreme Commuters Spend Their Lives on the Road

I can't say I sympathize for these people, sorry.

They made their beds, they have to lie in them.

I'm sure his kid will thank him when he ends up spending 50x the price today for a head of lettuce when he lives in the real world and could have driven his entire life on the gas this guy used up in three years.

Yeah, I feel real bad...

I don't think we should "spread jobs around" I think people should forget their suburban/exurban lifestyles and work on improving cities. This would leave more land to who it really belongs to- Nature.

I don't think we should "spread jobs around" I think people should forget their suburban/exurban lifestyles and work on improving cities. This would leave more land to who it really belongs to- Nature.

"living closer to where you work ". Thats not as easy as you make it out to be. take myself for example, I would have to sell my 60k house and buy a 180k house to move closer to where I work. Its just not that easy to triple your house payment.

Zack's a freakn' idiot.

Three reasons:

1: He didn't buy a diesel VW.

2: He chose this job and way of life.

3: It a job selling performance tuning Fast & Furious crap. (at least it seems so based on what's painted on his car)

The major problem with the individual choice argument is that it can be quite difficult for couples. To add to that, many of the places that have the most jobs are really expensive to live. In many cases, it is hard for both people to find jobs that are near where they live and have that place be affordable to live. For example, my husband only works about a 10 minute drive from where we live, while I work about a 45 minute drive away (which turns into about a 75 minute commute since I take the bus). Even if we both lived very near where I work, it would be hard for us to pay for the apartment because neither of us make very much money at all (and we're both well-educated!).

This blows my mind.

His gas costs him $7200 a year

If he loses 100 hours a month in commuting and lets say he is just an average US citzen and earns 38000 a year and you could value his driving hours at this rate as well (opportunity cost) then he blows another $22,800 in his time every year because of this commute.

A total of about $30,000 which does not include the impact to the enviornment.

What a horrible life.

Shannon hit it correctly. Sure I could move closer to work, then i triple my mortgage and my taxes as well. So my wife would have to go back to work but then we would have to pay for day care for our two year old and 7 month old so that would take all her income, then i could work a second job since the increased housing would take all of mine so I would take a second job to pay for food.

I work in the road construction industry and I work where the construction is. I frequently have to commute for 2 hours or more. In my line of work I have to go where the construction is. I recently changed companies to be 20 min from work, but my old company treated me much better. I do what I can to take care of my family!

Two percent is insignificant, so it's really not an issue to address immediate change within. There are probably that many people commuting in personal jets too.

It's the car that makes this lifestyle possible. There are plenty of people that would drive very far to support their family, (you do what you have to) but don't have a car or the finances to make this lifestyle work. So, they find other ways that do not include a car. No one is trapped by their choices forever (except those involving death or incarceration), and hopefully these extreme commuters will find a local means of support. I'm sure they would love to.

having such an extreme commute should be a short lived, temporary thing. . . the only reason i can think for such a foolish waste of time is if one gets a job in a new town and has to commute for a short time until the family can move to the new town. . . and even then it would be more effective and effecient for the adult with the new job to find a temporary housing solution in the new location - rent a tiny apartment or a room in someone else's place and only commute on the weekends.
my dad did this when he got his job with the state and the office was in Houston, 9 hours across the state of Texas from where my mom was a teacher. she needed to finish out the school year before she and my sisters could move closer to dad's office.

"Two percent is insignificant, so it's really not an issue to address immediate change within"

Well, it probably helps to work on the worse of the worse..

2 percent might burn 5-10% of the gas used by commuters.. and there's probably a few more percent that are just under 90 minutes and don't qualify as "exteme" commuters.

This is a very important issue. Our personal transportation devices.... (sorry about the silly euphemism) has since before WWII directed how our cities have been designed. It also had major impacts to where we work.

New York, for example, is greener then most of the large cities in the US because of the mass transit network. Los Angeles is the least. At one time Los Angeles did have a fine network of trains and light rail and electric cars but were convinced through the ad agencies of GM and AAA to tear them out to "See the sky!" (I remember those ads). However, Los Angeles was already preparing for this disaster.... suburbia in the San Fernando Valley. (see Chinatown for the fiction and Water Wars for the facts)

A number of studies show that the distance of your home to work is determined (on average across the nation and LA numbers weight this heavily) by the amount of money you make. the more you make the less time you spend on the road.

My wife and I just finished the hell known as the Extreme Commute. She took a prommotion and moved from her regional office to the main corporate office and that meant a 90 minute drive each way.

But here's the difference then with this guy: It was a short term fix for the long term plan! It was always conceived as a temporary thing.

Step 1 was her job transition (luckily my company moved and I was able to commute by bus and take one car off the road).

Step 2 I go a job in the new area and we car pooled while selling our old house.

Step 3 New house and 5 minute commute (and I get my bike back from the shop this afternoon so that will mean biking to work)

The whole process took about 8 months. It was a long grueling experience. It was expensive and generally speaking it made us unhappy. The only reason we were able to do it was because we knew it was temporary.

I pity anybody who is stuck doing this on a permanent basis. They must be miserable.

My wife and I just finished the hell known as the Extreme Commute. She took a prommotion and moved from her regional office to the main corporate office and that meant a 90 minute drive each way.

But here's the difference then with this guy: It was a short term fix for the long term plan! It was always conceived as a temporary thing.

Step 1 was her job transition (luckily my company moved and I was able to commute by bus and take one car off the road).

Step 2 I go a job in the new area and we car pooled while selling our old house.

Step 3 New house and 5 minute commute (and I get my bike back from the shop this afternoon so that will mean biking to work)

The whole process took about 8 months. It was a long grueling experience. It was expensive and generally speaking it made us unhappy. The only reason we were able to do it was because we knew it was temporary.

I pity anybody who is stuck doing this on a permanent basis. They must be miserable.

To Zack, Eugene, Shannon and anyone else who thinks they "have no choice but to continue doing what they are doing":
Welcome to the club. Noone is trying to chastise you. We just want you to SHUT UP and stop complaining, because the general consensus is that you DO have a choice. Don't you think that all of us had to make those difficult decisions too? Noone is saying that it is easy; in fact it really sucks. I have turned down some damn sweet job opportunities just because it didn't fit into my life...sometimes it opens up opportunities you weren't aware of. There ARE alternatives, even if it means you or your spouse quitting your job to take a lesser position, or to start your own business. Life goes on, your kids will not starve.

When discussing the 'live close to work' or 'spread the jobs around' issue, it must be understood in the context of urban design.

While it is true that the cost of housing for most people is too expensive to live close to their work (of course, people have excessive expectations/demands with respect to house size, etc.) ... what must be understood is that is we were to have well design cities, urban/suburban areas, then the cost of housing could very well be reduced from what it is now.

If the 'urban form' were to be designed around/for pedestrians (with automobiles as secondary), then, less land area would be devoted to automobiles in terms of paving (roads, parking, etc.) which would 'free up' land for better uses ... like, 'living'! House prices would be lower, with an increased quality of life, more green space, more child/teen/youth amenities, etc.

We need to think beyond what we 'see'.

There are other possibilities and options.

We must make better choices.

***

As for those who've chosen their excessive commute. Too bad.

You may choose your actions, but you cannot choose the consequences of those actions.

"Homes are cheaper in the suburbs" is quite a frivolous argument.

What about the expenses in gas, car maintenance, commute time... (look at Shannon entry in the comments). And what about the lifestyle - having to drive to buy some milk? Car culture, car addiction...

And in the end, what's the point of paying less for a bigger and cheaper house that you are never in?

Sorry, but I don't have any pity for the "extreme commuters".

Moving closer to work may take sacrifice- such as a smaller living space instead of buying something with the same square footage as your current house/apt. Obviously a 2000 s/f place in the city will be more expensive than a 2000 s/f place in the suburbs (depending on circumstances) So if you are willing to downsize, living closer to work can be possible. I guess one has to decide what is more important. Personally I would rather live within walking, biking or bus distance to work than have to endure the stress, cost and time it takes to drive sometimes hours to work.

I think there needs to be a nationwide agreement to trade employees. I remember reading about a program where a large city -- I believe New York -- did what they could to switch firefighters around so that they worked at the station nearest their home (as long as they wanted to switch, anyway).

I don't see why the same thing couldn't happen within every corporation with more than one location in the same area -- retail, banks, etc. -- and potentially between companies if the people are up for it.

It might be a big waste of time, but I know a lot of people who drive 10, 20, 30 miles to work jobs at places that have alternate locations closer to their homes, so I assume it at least partially works both ways, with people commuting the other direction.

Any takers?

Housing prices are no excuse to commute 200 miles. If you can't find an affordable house within 50 miles of your job, it's because you're not looking hard enough. The only equivalant commutes I've heard of are a person who commutes from Montak (end of long island) to Manhatten, which is ~100 miles each way, and a person who commutes from Albany to Manhatten, ~130 miles. At least they took a train, when you can do something productive for a few hours (like sleep). This guy probably spends as much time commuting as he does working.;

It's routine for Angelenos to drive two hours or more to the job.
I couldn't stand the thought of it, so I lived close to work. It's not difficult to find a place if you (a) look; and (b) are willing to compromise on things like size, design, etc.
I couldn't stand Los Angeles so I moved away. You DO have a choice, and don't have to live like that if you dont' want to. A friend who had the two hour commute quit her job and moved to another state. "I no longer commute two hours a day to work, and my hair has stopped falling out."
This man has a stupid car and probably a stupid job. What kind of quality of life can he have with his family if he spends all his time on the road? Maybe spending time on the road and avoiding the family is the whole idea.

I think people who think you can simply move closer to work haven't looked around lately. You don't just find affordable housing. The affordable houses are bought up and torn down to make way for housing developments which are all the same and meet a minimum square foot requirement for that area. Near my work I can't buy a house less than 2000 sqft because there are none that exist. Even if I could get a developer to sell a section of land the land vaule is greater than the value of my house and land currently. The choice it either buy a house that is three times the cost of mine or take a job making 1/3 the salary. I'm not complaining ,yoshhash, simply presenting the facts that make the "move closer" arguement invalid. Go ahead find a house in the 43240 zip code thats not too big. Then the hard part is selling my curent house in order to move closer to work, we just re-listed it for the second year after puttin in all new carpet and central air (we never needed it but 9 out of 10 people who looked at it last year said that was a major reason they didn't buy it).

What ever happened to renting? Who says you have to own a home? The government's just going to invoke imminent domain on six feet of your front yard to widen the road, pollard all your trees to protect the power lines, then your neighbors will sue you for putting in trees that block their solar panels, and ultimately the freeway extension will devour your entire neighborhood. I exaggerate for effect, but the U.S. government doesn't respect private property, so why put such a premium on it? I've been a happy renter for years, and I feel like I monopolize less space and have fewer obligations to the consumer culture. And if I need to move closer to where I work, the lease is always up within a year (and you can usually arrange something sooner than that).

I believe that the home-ownership consensus will fade with the boomer generation, and a lot of the 20 and 30-somethings now will rely more and more on renting (especially now that those "easy borrowing" mortgage scams are under intense scrutiny, and everyone is saddled with the equivalent of a small mortgage in student loan debt fresh out of college). Perhaps I over-generalize, but a trend away from home-ownership may be good for the environment--or possibly a return to landless serfdom. Leastways, there are some big changes ahead.

I only commute 10-12 miles, but that can take me 90 mins in a car! For any sane person the train (an 11 minute trip) or cycling (40-50 mins) makes a lot more sense. People won't do it though. Once people are signed up to buying an expensive car they feel compelled to sit in it as much as possible regardless of the alternatives.

This person is harming his health, the environment and his bank balance. He really needs to re-evaluate his home or his job. One of them must go. This can't go on.

Call him an idiot, tell him he must be blind and throw an egg. Then turn and wash your hands. Thank god I'm not that guy.

My commute isn't THAT extreme, but the 'you have a choice' contingent are welcome to come squat in the abandoned house across the street from me and dance at the strip club two blocks away. Oops, 'women only' for that job. The strip club, chop shops, and scrap metal dumps are the only neighborhood jobs, and they are not eager to hire college-educated women. Yeah, I bought my tiny house, in an inner-city former SUBURB because it was the best I could afford. Since it had been abandoned for 3 years and was not up to code for a rental, I was able to buy it for less than half of what I would have paid to rent an equivalent hole. Then, I got a permanent job with affordable health insurance diagonally across the city from my house. It pays more than twice what I would get paid without benefits in my own blighted neighborhood. I would LIKE to use the lightrail and busline that can ALMOST get me to work, but there are two reasons I never will: The roundtrip lightrail fee alone costs more than what my hatchback burns in gas for the whole trip and the equally expensive bus is never, never, NEVER on time. I need 'reliable transportation' for my job, and mass transit is anything but reliable. Because I was unemployed/underemployed with temporary jobs (that had much worse commutes) for a YEAR AND A HALF before I lucked into this job, I can conclusively declare that jobs are not out there to be had for the asking. Maybe choices are vast and easy for the rest of the commenters, but they are limited for some of us.

I think Garrett mad a very good suggestion earlier:

"I think there needs to be a nationwide agreement to trade employees.....
I don't see why the same thing couldn't happen within every corporation with more than one location in the same area -- retail, banks, etc. -- and potentially between companies if the people are up for it.

...so I assume it at least partially works both ways, with people commuting the other direction."

There is a website using the principle of multiple-user swap agreements called swaptree.com. It is only for books and dvds, games, but I think there is a huge potential for the same idea applied to real estate swaps. Employers don't have enough incentive to organize such a trade, but all it would take is a programmer that knows how to write code to do this and start a whole grass roots level trend. Someone should really get on this.....

I just discovered an amazing website that is trying to alleviate the commute dilemma, along the lines of what Garrett suggested:
http://www.proximatecommute.com/

Unfortunately, this is wholly dependant on large scale employers doing the legwork.

Well, my family is working hard to be greener... but it isn't always easy.

My husband drives almost every day from his home office into one of two major metro areas - one is 40 miles, one is 80 miles. Once there, he drives from customer to customer.

He has been in the same industry, same job type for 15 years. He's had positions where he sticks to a small square-mile radius and for others, like now, he covers half of the state of Arizona. He drives roughly 30k miles per year. And then there are the airplane trips to CA (or Canada, or Massachusetts....)

We will be purchasing a hybrid this summer - a Camry or Altima. His employer prohibits compacts or 2 doors.

There is no "close to work" for some people. His territory can (and has) changed overnight. From one employer to the next - and the office location is no indicator of the territory location.

Now, before you start blasting him about choosing the wrong profession - keep this in mind. There are simply jobs that do, and must, exist out there that will always leave a large carbon footprint. Don't we (and his employer) get points for not occupying a building space and consuming raw materials to build, furnish, heat and cool that space?

Should shipping companies be put out of business because they leave a large carbon footprint? Should every corporation give up outside sales people? I don't think so, but they should find ways to reduce that footprint. In time, with proper incentives, r&d it will happen. I just hope it's sooner than later...

Our solution is to be green every way we can... and reduce our carbon footprint where we can. For now, the best solution is a hybrid. Hopefully, in two years, the next car will get at least 60 mpg (if it uses gallons of anything...). Maybe we'll get lucky and his employer will ok one of those Apteras (when it seats 4 and is sold in AZ).

Another 'in your face' opinion from Treehugger.

The solution for this is simple... MOVE YOUR FAMILY.

Lots of dissention on this subject. For many people there is little choice, as long as you want to maintain you standard of living. For my wife and I we had a choice. We could live 60 miles from my job in wine country next to a nature preserve in a nice new house and survive on my salary alone so my wife could homeschool my stepson, OR we could live in San Diego in a very small condo or rental and either put my stepson in the crappy SD schools, or put in him a private school. Either way in SD my wife would have had to work and hopefully make enough to pay for the private school or a nicer place to live.

I like San Diego, but the choice was easy for us. I commute on a motorcycle, and my work schedule has every other friday off. My fuel bill every month is $160. I see more motorcycles on the road every week.

I rent. 540 sq ft, one bedroom, one bathroom, miniature kitchen. Gas, Sewer and Water are included on my bill for rent each month--which averages out to be close to $1,000 a month.

That may not seem so bad to some people, but really--that is one half of my earnings for the month. That doesn't include the cost of food, the ever-rising cost of fueling my vehicle (i fortunately have a short commute--15 to 30 minutes across town, 2 or 3 hours if i bike or hoof it), or other "luxury" expenses like being able to wash my clothes, since i don't have a washer or dryer.

I've checked--my rent is high for the area, but it is not the highest. People less than two miles away from me are paying around $1,200 for the same amount of space.

Moving to a lower-rent apartment would save me more money and actually get me more space for myself and the two other people i share my home with, but it would also mean moving into a high-crime area, and a longer commute.

Such is life in urbanized areas like the suburbs of Southern New Jersey.

It's always interesting to consider others "deal breakers". I don't approve of the "spread the jobs around" idea because then everyone is traveling different directions and the sprawl grows accordingly. I live in town but commute out 10 miles to suburbs for two jobs. It's expensive in town, but the commutes are fast and against the major commuter traffic. The jobs are only fair on pay, but they are low stress. I work a lot of hours, but am off duty at a specific time. It's just a matter of priorities and choices. I may have some regrets once in a while, but no one has held a gun to my head, or made me eat the exhaust pipe.

"It's always interesting to consider others "deal breakers". I don't approve of the "spread the jobs around" idea because then everyone is traveling different directions and the sprawl grows accordingly"

The idea is more that if they are spread around, you have more chance of finding a house/apt. close to the job.

If all jobs are clustered together, and all residential is together, very few people will live close to the jobs and the costs there will skyrocket.

With many modern jobs, you just need an office. Doesn't matter too much if that is downtown or somewhere else.

Even the best laid urban plans cannot overcome poor decision making by individuals.

As others have noted, there is a price difference between a 2000SF home in the burbs and a 2000SF home in the cities close to jobs. The obvious solution is to downsize the home and move back to the cities. Of course, that is the antithesis of what American's have come to believe as the "American Dream". We can thank our consumer culture for that one.

However, I always ask people who refuse that choice, "what is the marginal difference between the home in the suburbs and the home in the cities? --- an extra bedroom?, a larger living room?" The conclusion is that for the extra bedroom, you spend thousands of dollars on gas, you get a bad back from sitting in the car for hours, you never see your family, you can't get involved in your community, and you are polluting the planet.

Less is more!!! Simplicity, Simplicity, Simplicity!!! May it be shouted from the roof tops.

He could rent a studio near where he works, then come home on the week-end.

My dad does that, yet he works only 1h away.

I'm always surprised, sometimes, to see some people with really unkind comments here (i.e., "Zack's a freakn' idiot.")

Turning the gas-guzzling boat we created the last 100 years around is going to take time and evangelism. If you call someone an idiot, it's not exactly going to get him thinking about alternative plans of transportation.

We know we have suburban sprawl, but if we work together on this, we can get something solved.

Otherwise, we're all sunk.

For the $1K a month apartment renter: move away from Jersey. Even in here TN you can get a job like that and a nice house for the same as your rent.

For the AZ Aptera commenter: diesel Passat. Gets 40+ mpg and despite the high prices, it's still cheaper than a gas version per mile. Comes in wagon or 4 door sedan. Diesel Jetta = 55 mpg. Askf or the diesel VW Luppo = 70 mpg, not availiable in North America...

Moving back to the cities: dealbreaker = schools. We are lucky to be able to live in a town of 25K people in TN. The rest of our family lives in TN's big cities. In every case in order for us to move to the city I would have to take a pay cut (I make slightly above average pay), we'd have to take a lifestyle cut (our 1700 sqft house is considerably more expensive IF we want to be in a comparable neighborhood to our current one), and the schools are really rotten.

I blame that on disinterested parents and a school a