[hugh4]

It's neither realistic nor desirable that maintenance workers in San Francisco should live in San Francisco. Any more than the cleaners at the Hilton should live in the Hilton.

San Francisco is a small expensive area within a large metropolis, it's not that tricky to commute from somewhere a lot cheaper.

[SamReidHughes]

Um, sorry, but it certainly is desirable that people be able to find an affordable short commute.

[hugh4]

Sure, it's desirable for them. In the same way that it's desirable to own a Ferrari.

However, more broadly speaking, it is neither necessary or desirable for everyone to own a Ferrari.

Given that a place in SF costs many times more than a Ferrari nowadays, I don't think it's an inapt analogy.

[SamReidHughes]

You don't think what's an inapt analogy? Wait, your Ferrari analogy that you made in the same post?

And it is indeed a great analogy because it shows how wrong you are -- having advanced cars that can rapidly accelerate to freeway speeds be affordable is a very desirable thing, and the fact that a Honda Civic of today is a vastly superior automobile to a Ferrari of the past (or better yet, a Volvo of the past) is a triumph of modernity. You think what, cars are too good?

Likewise, the fact that many people of today find that the best way to live involves throwing years of their lives away on a long commute is a human tragedy, and thinking that it's not desirable for this to be fixed is equally brain-damaged as thinking people shouldn't have good cars.

[MiddleEndian]

In what way is it not desirable for everyone to at least have the option of shorter commutes?