In a recent article in the Washington Post, some folks that commute more than 50 miles a day outlined their experiences. They indicated that they moved so far away "for the children" or to find their dream house.
Is quality of life even a consideration? What good is a dream house if you are only there for 10 hours a day? How can someone be making a decision for their children knowing that the decision is going to take them away from their children for such a long time?
As if the quality of life issues weren't enough, the article outlines the additional ways that living a car-dependent lifestyle can actually make you sick. The health implications of planning, sprawling developments and suburban lifestyles have been well documented. This article explores the health implications specific to the commute itself, including the toll on one's body from sitting in place and the stress of dealing with the drive every day.
Shouldn't one's dream house be one that allows them to live the lifestyle that is healthiest and most enriched, not the one with the most bedrooms 60 miles from home? Shouldn't the best choice for the children be the one that allows their parents to spend the most time with them? When will quality of life be a consideration?
Are we going to destroy our communities, our environement, our bodies and our children before we figure this out?
Monday, April 09, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)