I keep reading things online about how people in general talk badly about the inland areas away from the city.

What is everyone's opinion based on their preference of living near the cities vs living 1 hour+ away from the city.

According to people online, the city has more to do (if you are willing to spend valuable money that has to go to rent), but no one can really specify other than indoor activities (e.g. indoor rock climbing) and eating out at restaurants.

Personally, I don't like inner city of San Diego. There is so much traffic especially during the day, and it's too loud, no room to safely drive anywhere, can't park anywhere since it's usually packed and parking lots are super thin to accommodate the exact size of your car, and it's difficult to merge at some points in the day. I remember getting off work at 5, and I was stuck in my lane since everything was gridlocked, and people aren't generally the nicest of drivers, so I was forced to take the wrong exit into further gridlocked traffic just increasing my commute like 20+ minutes. It generally feels pretty unsafe walking around at night unless you are in the areas that have night life.

Inland however, I like how there is barely any traffic, so your speed isn't impeded. The environment is really kept up and green, so a nice walk through the neighborhood is pleasant. I remember I used to jog at midnight and I felt 100% safe inland. My biggest issue with living inland is that there are barely any jobs, so you are forced to commute to work. Everything feels more outdoorsy, so I don't necessarily have to go to a park (like I would in the city) just to enjoy the environment. A lot of parts aren't blockaded as they are in the city which have many signs preventing people from walking around. I don't really care for eating out $25 meals for fun. That doesn't sound interesting to me. I'm happy cooking my basic meals.

These reasons might be superficial, but I love calling inland home vs the city.

The country is better suited to a man. The city seems better suited to women. Just my opinion, but I have lived most of my life in cities and now I live in the country and am MUCH happier. Way better life. Not even close.

Lol imagine someone cooking that chile in their suburban home just to drive to the city for 2 hours then dropping it in the office.

If you live within the city perimeter, you're in for a bad time.

I prefer to be around normal people with space.

Exurbs or Suburbia.

I agree man I used to live 2 hours away from SD, and life was so awesome back then. So much happier, no stress driving my car, and I could feel like I was going on adventure just going outside. Now not so much, the concrete jungle is filled with illegals, heavy traffic, and each house has like 6 cars In their driveway

After having lived in a chithole city center, and now having lived in the outskirts of our city, I look forward to our next move being even further away from people. The further the better. Housing is cheaper, but you have a longer commute to work and other things. But like my husband says, at the end of the day the 1+ hour drive is worth it to be away from it all.

I mean like I was going to put something close to the city, but from my experience there is little difference to someone who grew up in the suburbs when comparing the city vs in the "suburbs near the city". They both feel like the same place. Someone from the exurbs would probably think they were in the city since it feels just like the city just less high rise buildings with just the same traffic depending on the time of day.

depends imo

if you're young it should be inner city

but once you get older gradually move towards suburbs and country side

I can't imagine living in the city, I hated it just going to work, and when I had to drive around for work, i was always afraid I was going to get in an accident.

Damn you used to live in SD? How was it, I can't even imagine that. How far are you thinking about moving like 2 hours away? And like where further north or east?

Even if you are young, you might not want to live inside the city just because the cost is huge unless you don't mind living in a box 900sq ft or less if you are going out all the time. I guess living with roommates would make it easier, but I wouldn't consider that for myself.

Depending on costs 1 hour away is like $140-$160 in gas a month. If you could save more than that away from the city, that would probably be a better choice depending on priorities.

Das it mane.

Humans packed in large groups are acinine.

My ideal spot is outside the city, but I want an secluded backyard in an old fashion historic neighborhood.

Something like this outside the city. Best of both worlds

I actually lived in Anaheim, city center near Disneyland, for many years. We don’t call it “AnaCrime” for nuthin. Traffic is ridiculous! Currently live on the outskirts of Temecula. We still plan to stay in this house for another 7-8 years. Then eventually get something bigger further out, more inland from the area. Unfortunately we can’t move too far because we have little kids. But once they’re out of school, we’ll move further out. I used to think my dad was crazy for living in butt-fuuk-nowhere South Dakota in a tiny town. But man, now that just seems like the life.

What's an excluded backyard?

I'm looking to buy land where my nearest neighbor is at least 5 minutes away. By car. So far there are plenty of possibilities in my area within a 2 hour drive from a metropolis. I'd be moving around for work anyway or can do it from home so I don't need to commute in the city. I don't just like privacy, I need it. Not possible in the city or with neighbors 20 meters away.

Duuuuude, I love Temecula. Lived there most of my life. It's way different than it used to be in some parts like the mall. Lots of memories going to Hollywood Video and the park, which sucks because they changed it into a special needs park, so it's locked away from the general public now. A lot of places used to be dirt and "swamp", but now a lot of it is sand and so many businesses are closed.

I would say Temecula is more of an Exurb type feel to it (relatively speaking) but it has bigger activity and it's like 1 hour from SD, it's not a typical suburban town like Poway or Escondido is. I can't stand either of those places.

That's awesome, I've seen places like that that are realistically affordable on the east coast that would be good if retiring. I would need to work though I'm still young lol unless I could find extremely stable remote work.

I meant secluded. I hate suburbs with a passion but if I can find something that has space gives actual privacy I'd be happy. And I wouldn't have to live in the country 1 hour away

In CA, that would be like a $5milion home. That would be nice to live in

Cities are sht holes
If that wasn’t clear before, this year should have made it quite clear by now

Don't have to convince me man. There was a riot going on in San Diego recently, If I would have lived there, I would be dead, since the state has effectively banned firearms. And there are schools on every other street.

C'mon fat misc, I guess they all live in an igloo.

Bump bump bumpity bump bump

This, the ideal for me would be somewhere inbetween not living directly in the city, but not in nowhere bumfukville either.

It'll not matter where you live due to more remote working these days. I think people will be able to live whereever they want and not have to make their decision on commuting distance etc

Why is that though? I want your opinion.

Why would you want to live near the city but not in the city?

I would like that in theory, but then it makes jobs super competitive.

The problem in San Diego is that there are significantly less jobs than other cities, but the pay is also a lot lower while the cost of living is close to the cost of other cities.

I think making everything remote could possibly make it worse if every employer adopts it.

I guess a way to get around it would be companies for whatever reason only want to hire within like SD county or something and wouldn't consider people from outside.