Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
However, I just wanted to point out, for that hour, you are not driving. So no road rage. A nice relaxing ride. People who insist on driving everywhere forget this very important point. You're in stop and go traffic for who knows how long, commuting to work, getting quite frustrated. Whereas I just kick back on public transit, and laugh at people who feel they must drive even though they could do what I'm doing, lol. It's also "green" and cheaper than driving a car everywhere. I pay $70 a month for public transit. How much do you pay to drive to work each month?
I did the same commute in reverse for years and it took less than 15 minutes one way. And I had a rail stop RIGHT BY MY HOUSE and another one right by work, so that was best case scenario. That's AT LEAST 90 minutes a day I saved compared to the train … enough for a grueling workout or perhaps a nice long hike to work out whatever stress I may have incurred on the road (which was minor, since the reverse commute was short and fast) Or, I could ride my bike in 45, still less that train…
I don't remember how much it cost me per month but it was 9 miles one way, so: 9 x 2 x 5 x ~4 = 360 miles. Conservatively, my car mileage was 20 mpg, and gas is how, much there now… $4? So that's $72 a month (did I get the math right?), but I also carpooled with my wife back then daily so divide that by 2 for me. But few people have a very convenient car-pooling option like that so I'll give you a tie there. But of course I really needed a car for other non-work things each day anyways, and I could often multi task and come out ahead that way. If you could get by on only a VTA pass, then you could maybe beat a car and a short commute in terms of $$, but that would be pretty tough in SV. So, when I think of some dude in a train lol'ing at me for getting home in 1/4 the time and 1/2 the cost I can't think of much to do but LOL back.
Obviously, the key is living as close as you can to work. Right next door if possible, and if you HAVE TO commute, try to set that up in some sort of reverse direction or at off peak hours if possible.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,085,543 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by otterprods
I did the same commute in reverse for years and it took less than 15 minutes one way. And I had a rail stop RIGHT BY MY HOUSE and another one right by work, so that was best case scenario. That's AT LEAST 90 minutes a day I saved compared to the train
Yeah but did light rail have wifi at the time? It does now, so you can do work on the train.
And Google transit directions says light rail from Pita Pit to Lockheed takes 68 minutes (walk to train, ride train, walk to lockheed campus), not 90. So you saved like an hour. It could be 90 minutes if you walk a mile or so to the light rail as I had to do when I lived downtown.
Quote:
… enough for a grueling workout or perhaps a nice long hike to work out whatever stress I may have incurred on the road (which was minor, since the reverse commute was short and fast)
But in a lot of cases people will face stop and go traffic because they aren't going on a reverse commute. The majority of cases, actually, hence the name "reverse" commute. That's why they want a short commute, because they don't want to deal with traffic.
I'll take one hour on light rail all day, if the alternative is driving bumper to bumper and taking one hour for something that should take ten minutes.
I see 87 and 85 in bumper to bumper traffic all the time, as I go by at 55 mph. So you better believe I laugh at that, very gratifying. lol
Quote:
I don't remember how much it cost me per month but it was 9 miles one way, so: 9 x 2 x 5 x ~4 = 360 miles. Conservatively, my car mileage was 20 mpg, and gas is how, much there now… $4? So that's $72 a month (did I get the math right?) So, when I think of some dude in a train lol'ing at me for getting home in 1/4 the time and 1/2 the cost I can't think of much to do but LOL back. Obviously, the key is living as close as you can to work.
Yes, living close to work is good for many reasons, but you don't have to live as close if you use transit. I still wouldn't drive a car all the way to work.
You forget, I could commute from Morgan Hill to Palo Alto every day on transit and it would cost me the same $70 a month. Whereas you have to live next to where you work to achieve that. Everywhere I go within Santa Clara County is the same flat rate, $70 a month. And I'm kicking back on transit, not having to do the driving.
Sure it takes longer and I have to plan things out, but if you're making minimum wage, as I do right now, it's the only way to fly.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,085,543 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeya
Absolutely not! Just a bit cheaper. I don't know why you're under the impression that private sector employees get free health care. Maybe in Canada...
I think IBM offers it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBM
The IBM PPO is available to all regular full-time employees at no cost for 2009 (there is a monthly contribution for spouse/domestic partner and child coverage).
But yeah, like you said, even if they charge $100 for every dependent, you'd have to have a lot of kids before you couldn't afford that on $85,000 a year.
People are whining...I make minimum wage, I have maybe $100 left over after I pay all my expenses when I'm paying rent....at 85k you should have at least 500 left over, more like 2000 if you're not wasting your money trying to buy a single family home or living in an apartment in an expensive area.
Yeah but did light rail have wifi at the time? It does now, so you can do work on the train.
Ok, great, if I happen to be on the rail and need to do some work. But without that extra 45 minute commute time I don't need to work extra time like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
Google transit directions says light rail from Pita Pit to Lockheed takes 68 minutes (walk to train, ride train, walk to lockheed campus), not 90. So you saved like an hour. It could be 90 minutes if you walk a mile or so to the light rail as I had to do when I lived downtown.
No, my commute was < 15 minutes, compared to 60. I saved at least 45 minutes. EACH WAY. times TWO is 90 minutes. Per day, times 5… times 4… times 12… = a heck of a lot of wasted time on the train, wifi or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
I'll take one hour on light rail all day, if the alternative is driving bumper to bumper and taking one hour for something that should take ten minutes.
Come on, literally?… 10 minutes ---> 1 hour? I never had that experience. If I did I might the take the train but more likely I'd move or quit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
I see 87 and 85 in bumper to bumper traffic all the time, as I go by at 55 mph. So you better believe I laugh at that, very gratifying. lol
You're looking at a different part of 87 than I drove when I was there. I was coming from 101 to downtown SJ. You can't even see the freeway from the train at that point. People commuting with traffic from south of downtown are paying a price for choosing a house out there. Train or not, it would never be worth an hour + commute for me to live out in that mess, unless I had no choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
Yes, living close to work is good for many reasons.
On this we agree x 100!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
You forget, I could commute from Morgan Hill to Palo Alto every day on transit and it would cost me the same $70 a month. Whereas you have to live next to where you work to achieve that. Everywhere I go within Santa Clara County is the same flat rate, $70 a month. And I'm kicking back on transit, not having to do the driving.
No I didn't forget that. I was speaking from my own experience, and I never did a commute from Morgan Hill to Palo Alto or anything like that, nor would I. Since when does VTA rail go to Morgan Hill? That's Caltrain, right? Which costs more, right? And caltrain doesn't serve nearly as much of SC County. Of course if you compare best-case-rail scenario to worst-case-car scenario, rail is going to come out ahead. But I lived there for 12 years and never, not once, ever, found myself in any long term scenario where taking the rail daily made any practical sense over driving. But again I'm just speaking about my own experiences and circumstances. In any case, I don't laugh at other people just because their commute is worse than mine… unless of course I somehow knew they were crammed onto VTA, laughing at me for driving.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
Sure it takes longer and I have to plan things out, but if you're making minimum wage, as I do right now, it's the only way to fly.
If you're really making minimum wage and public transit is saving you money, then that's great. I think that's probably the best (if not the only) reason to keep public transit around even though it loses money.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,085,543 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by otterprods
No, my commute was < 15 minutes, compared to 60. I saved at least 45 minutes. EACH WAY. times TWO is 90 minutes. Per day, times 5… times 4… times 12… = a heck of a lot of wasted time on the train, wifi or not.
Yeah, I guess that's true. On transit you don't really think in those terms though, since you don't have to concentrate on driving while you're on there. You can be listening to music, reading a book, doing work or whatever.
Quote:
Since when does VTA rail go to Morgan Hill?
VTA Light Rail doesn't, but VTA Bus 68 goes down there. And express bus 168 to downtown. I think there's a Lockheed express from there too.
Quote:
That's Caltrain, right? Which costs more, right? And caltrain doesn't serve nearly as much of SC County.
Yeah CalTrain costs more, but it goes more places than you might think. It stops at Santa Clara, downtown, Tamien Light Rail, Lawrence Expressway, Sunnyvale, Stanford University, and I think a couple other places. Of course it doesn't branch out east and west like Light Rail. But a lot of people use it. CalTrain is actually one of the fastest public transit options in the Bay Area, it probably ties with BART. CalTrain goes 80+ MPH between Blossom Hill and Morgan Hill.
Quote:
If you're really making minimum wage and public transit is saving you money, then that's great. I think that's probably the best (if not the only) reason to keep public transit around even though it loses money.
Transit is needed to relieve traffic congestion, provide emergency transportation, and reduce the need for parking lots at industrial and retail sites, among other things. But there's lots of things that need to be done to improve it. That's a whole other thread...not sure if it would be welcome in the local forum?
I have several ideas, myself. For one, we need "grade separation" badly, that's the technical term meaning that the train is not stopping for traffic or pedestrians because it has its own dedicated space. Light Rail needs elevated runs to more places, for example an elevated run west out to De Anza/Apple would be good, as well an elevated run replacing buses 22 and 522. I would also have turnstiles to prevent people from getting on transit without a ticket, unless we're going to just pay for that via general tax revenue, like they do in Hawaii (in HI the buses are free). Also ideally I would like to see an elevated train system that is modular and easily expanded. It should be designed in such a way that if a private business like Apple has a big campus not far away, they could add track modules to connect directly. When they built the elevated monorail train in Seattle (which only has a 2 mile run or something like that), they never had to close the street underneath.
This is one that's been talked about since the 90s, you have individual pods that run on an elevated track. The person gets in, tells the computer where to go, and the pod skips every stop except the destination. It was originally an American idea -- it was being developed at NASA at one point -- but now the Israelis are talking about it. It uses maglev instead of wheel on rail.
CalTrain costs more, but it goes more places than you might think. It stops at Santa Clara, downtown, Tamien Light Rail, Lawrence Expressway, Sunnyvale, Stanford University, and I think a couple other places. Of course it doesn't branch out east and west like Light Rail. But a lot of people use it. CalTrain is actually one of the fastest public transit options in the Bay Area, it probably ties with BART. CalTrain goes 80+ MPH between Blossom Hill and Morgan Hill.
Indeed. CalTrain is the only option I enjoyed back when I lived there and the only option I will take when I come out now, having to commute the whole peninsula these days. If I have to go somewhere within light rail's range I ride my bike or grab a ride with a co-worker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrino78x
This is one that's been talked about since the 90s, you have individual pods that run on an elevated track. The person gets in, tells the computer where to go, and the pod skips every stop except the destination. It was originally an American idea -- it was being developed at NASA at one point -- but now the Israelis are talking about it. It uses maglev instead of wheel on rail.
That's been talked about since the 60's as some sort of way of the future, and it still hasn't happened 50 years later, so I'm not holding my breath.
I agree that public transit should relieve traffic congestion, provide emergency transportation, and reduce the need for parking, but it doesn't. I don't see that changing anytime soon, so in the meantime I'm just glad people like you can save some money with it and that it works well for a few other people in some cases, because I would not want to have no transit options at all.
If the trains have outlets I can plug my laptop into, I wouldn't be so partial on the idea of taking the train. I do iOS development as a hobby and I'm always plunking away at my laptop/iMac whenever I can. I'll take that into consideration.
$3k for 700 sqft? That's outrageous. When I moved out of my Sunnyvale apartment in 2010, I was paying $1200 for 1000sqft. It was a single. When I moved into that apartment in 2006, the rent was $1000. My salary then was about 60k/yr.
Rents have gone up a LOT since 2010, so while $3K is a bit ridiculous for a 1br, you won't find anything near $1000/mo these days - yes, it has changed that much in 4 years! When I moved here in 2011 the averages (for a 1br between SJ & Sunnyvale) were closer to $1200-1300, now they are averaging $1500-1600 in most neighborhoods. My rent just went up to $1710, and was only $1380ish when I first moved in here... I'm sure they're signing new leases at the complex for even higher rents, but can't raise mine more than 10% (IIRC) when I sign a continuing lease.
Anyway, this is the harsh reality of living in Silicon Valley. That being said, I live on a lot less than $85K, so to the OP I would say yes. As long as you're not the type to spend lavishly, or have a ton of revolving debts, I think you will be just fine. I get by on around $60-65K, but keep my non-rent expenses as low as possible... well, except for my pet care which is excessive.
Oh, and while you may have already been told this, I think Sunnyvale would be rather boring for a young single guy. I'm a 37 year-old woman, and consider that town too "family friendly" for my taste. I'd recommend downtown San Jose, Willow Glen, Campbell, and if you can find anything "affordable-ish," Mountain View or Palo Alto. JMO.
Whereas I just kick back on public transit, and laugh at people who feel they must drive even though they could do what I'm doing, lol.
Totally getting off topic, but what makes you assume everyone who drives could be using public transit? I don't want to get specific on my locations, but trust me... there is literally NO way for me to commute from home to work without a car! I tried mapping it out on 511.org once, when my car needed some repairs, and it would take 2.5 hours with two transfers (both bus & train) to travel the 18 miles - and that's just one way. So yeah, I'm pretty much screwed if I lose my car.
(not to mention I work extremely odd/variable hours and days, thus eliminating the possibility of a ride share or carpool)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People who insist on driving everywhere forget this very important point. You're in stop and go traffic for who knows how long, commuting to work, getting quite frustrated. Whereas I just kick back on public transit, and laugh at people who feel they must drive even though they could do what I'm doing, lol. 
