should I buy in temecula

[ocrenter]

[quote=paramount]

Commuting for most is the fly in the ointment when it comes to Temecula. For me it’s 45 miles down and 45 miles back…day in, day out, day in, day out, n!

Believe me, it gets old.[/quote]

it doesn’t just get old, it becomes extremely unhealthy.

just look at it this way, you are looking at essentially 2 hours everyday gone. And that’s on top of 8 hours at work.

One way to look at it is you have devoted 10 hours for your work but only got paid for 8 hours.

But another way to look at it is that was 2 hours you could have spend exercising and staying fit.

Not to revive the obesity topic or to make any assumptions, but long commutes tend to be associated with poor health and increased girth.

[smshorttimer]

While I have softened my anti-T-town stance as I have aged and had kids, I still ruled it out while we searched and searched for a place in North County. I once drove from Fallbrook to Vista, and sometimes the afternoon surface-street congestion could make my drive home take 30-35 minutes. Even at that relatively paltry sum, I tired of it fast, even if I could listen to music or KFI longer.

My 13-minute San Marcos-to-Dido drive just allows me to crank up the home hifi that much quicker.

Even mellowed, I still find T-town too new and suburban. Yeah, I live in SM, but at least it’s a lot closer to the city when that desire beckons.

Most of the people who move to TV have zero problem having “only” 90s-on, predominantly two-story tracts to choose from. Most of those same era homes exist around my place and I find them terminally duh.

[smshorttimer]

While I have softened my anti-T-town stance as I have aged and had kids, I still ruled it out while we searched and searched for a place in North County. I once drove from Fallbrook to Vista, and sometimes the afternoon surface-street congestion could make my drive home take 30-35 minutes. Even at that relatively paltry sum, I tired of it fast, even if I could listen to music or KFI longer.

My 13-minute San Marcos-to-Dido drive just allows me to crank up the home hifi that much quicker.

Even mellowed, I still find T-town too new and suburban. Yeah, I live in SM, but at least it’s a lot closer to the city when that desire beckons.

Most of the people who move to TV have zero problem having “only” 90s-on, predominantly two-story tracts to choose from. Most of those same era homes exist around my place and I find them terminally duh.

[smshorttimer]

While I have softened my anti-T-town stance as I have aged and had kids, I still ruled it out while we searched and searched for a place in North County. I once drove from Fallbrook to Vista, and sometimes the afternoon surface-street congestion could make my drive home take 30-35 minutes. Even at that relatively paltry sum, I tired of it fast, even if I could listen to music or KFI longer.

My 13-minute San Marcos-to-Dido drive just allows me to crank up the home hifi that much quicker.

Even mellowed, I still find T-town too new and suburban. Yeah, I live in SM, but at least it’s a lot closer to the city when that desire beckons.

Most of the people who move to TV have zero problem having “only” 90s-on, predominantly two-story tracts to choose from. Most of those same era homes exist around my place and I find them terminally duh.

[smshorttimer]

While I have softened my anti-T-town stance as I have aged and had kids, I still ruled it out while we searched and searched for a place in North County. I once drove from Fallbrook to Vista, and sometimes the afternoon surface-street congestion could make my drive home take 30-35 minutes. Even at that relatively paltry sum, I tired of it fast, even if I could listen to music or KFI longer.

My 13-minute San Marcos-to-Dido drive just allows me to crank up the home hifi that much quicker.

Even mellowed, I still find T-town too new and suburban. Yeah, I live in SM, but at least it’s a lot closer to the city when that desire beckons.

Most of the people who move to TV have zero problem having “only” 90s-on, predominantly two-story tracts to choose from. Most of those same era homes exist around my place and I find them terminally duh.

[smshorttimer]

While I have softened my anti-T-town stance as I have aged and had kids, I still ruled it out while we searched and searched for a place in North County. I once drove from Fallbrook to Vista, and sometimes the afternoon surface-street congestion could make my drive home take 30-35 minutes. Even at that relatively paltry sum, I tired of it fast, even if I could listen to music or KFI longer.

My 13-minute San Marcos-to-Dido drive just allows me to crank up the home hifi that much quicker.

Even mellowed, I still find T-town too new and suburban. Yeah, I live in SM, but at least it’s a lot closer to the city when that desire beckons.

Most of the people who move to TV have zero problem having “only” 90s-on, predominantly two-story tracts to choose from. Most of those same era homes exist around my place and I find them terminally duh.

[Ren]

[quote=pedrocon]Dont buy in Temecula. Long term the land there has no value. Imagine living in Temecula when gas is $5. Unless you are buying orange groves (or something like that).[/quote]

The first comment isn’t even worth a reply. As for the second, a couple, driving separately, getting 30mpg:

$3/gallon:
10 miles each/day $40 total
90 miles each/day $360 total

$5/gallon:
10 miles each/day $65 total
90 miles each/day $600 total

At $5/gallon, that’s $500+ more than the SD commuter, plus the car depreciation which is negligible. Meanwhile we’re saving $1,500+/month over renting an equivalent place in SD, plus $200 in child care. We just couldn’t get past that math – the gas expense isn’t even an issue. It’s the time away from family that’s the hard choice.

If your income is substantial enough that $1,000-1,500 in savings every month isn’t a big deal, or the drive is unacceptable, then SD is a better choice for you.

[Ren]

[quote=pedrocon]Dont buy in Temecula. Long term the land there has no value. Imagine living in Temecula when gas is $5. Unless you are buying orange groves (or something like that).[/quote]

The first comment isn’t even worth a reply. As for the second, a couple, driving separately, getting 30mpg:

$3/gallon:
10 miles each/day $40 total
90 miles each/day $360 total

$5/gallon:
10 miles each/day $65 total
90 miles each/day $600 total

At $5/gallon, that’s $500+ more than the SD commuter, plus the car depreciation which is negligible. Meanwhile we’re saving $1,500+/month over renting an equivalent place in SD, plus $200 in child care. We just couldn’t get past that math – the gas expense isn’t even an issue. It’s the time away from family that’s the hard choice.

If your income is substantial enough that $1,000-1,500 in savings every month isn’t a big deal, or the drive is unacceptable, then SD is a better choice for you.

[Ren]

[quote=pedrocon]Dont buy in Temecula. Long term the land there has no value. Imagine living in Temecula when gas is $5. Unless you are buying orange groves (or something like that).[/quote]

The first comment isn’t even worth a reply. As for the second, a couple, driving separately, getting 30mpg:

$3/gallon:
10 miles each/day $40 total
90 miles each/day $360 total

$5/gallon:
10 miles each/day $65 total
90 miles each/day $600 total

At $5/gallon, that’s $500+ more than the SD commuter, plus the car depreciation which is negligible. Meanwhile we’re saving $1,500+/month over renting an equivalent place in SD, plus $200 in child care. We just couldn’t get past that math – the gas expense isn’t even an issue. It’s the time away from family that’s the hard choice.

If your income is substantial enough that $1,000-1,500 in savings every month isn’t a big deal, or the drive is unacceptable, then SD is a better choice for you.

[Ren]

[quote=pedrocon]Dont buy in Temecula. Long term the land there has no value. Imagine living in Temecula when gas is $5. Unless you are buying orange groves (or something like that).[/quote]

The first comment isn’t even worth a reply. As for the second, a couple, driving separately, getting 30mpg:

$3/gallon:
10 miles each/day $40 total
90 miles each/day $360 total

$5/gallon:
10 miles each/day $65 total
90 miles each/day $600 total

At $5/gallon, that’s $500+ more than the SD commuter, plus the car depreciation which is negligible. Meanwhile we’re saving $1,500+/month over renting an equivalent place in SD, plus $200 in child care. We just couldn’t get past that math – the gas expense isn’t even an issue. It’s the time away from family that’s the hard choice.

If your income is substantial enough that $1,000-1,500 in savings every month isn’t a big deal, or the drive is unacceptable, then SD is a better choice for you.

[Ren]

[quote=pedrocon]Dont buy in Temecula. Long term the land there has no value. Imagine living in Temecula when gas is $5. Unless you are buying orange groves (or something like that).[/quote]

The first comment isn’t even worth a reply. As for the second, a couple, driving separately, getting 30mpg:

$3/gallon:
10 miles each/day $40 total
90 miles each/day $360 total

$5/gallon:
10 miles each/day $65 total
90 miles each/day $600 total

At $5/gallon, that’s $500+ more than the SD commuter, plus the car depreciation which is negligible. Meanwhile we’re saving $1,500+/month over renting an equivalent place in SD, plus $200 in child care. We just couldn’t get past that math – the gas expense isn’t even an issue. It’s the time away from family that’s the hard choice.

If your income is substantial enough that $1,000-1,500 in savings every month isn’t a big deal, or the drive is unacceptable, then SD is a better choice for you.

[Ren]

[quote=Bob Lobbla]I have been commuting to Encinitas from South Temecula during rush hour for a few years. It takes any where from 45 minutes to 1 hour depending on seasonal traffic patterns. It takes about 25 minutes to get to the 78 from my driveway…[/quote]

Ditto.

I don’t mind the drive itself at all. KFI helps. It’s actually much better than when I lived in San Marcos and commuted to RB, before the 15 improvements. That 40 minutes of stop and go traffic was awful. At least with the Temecula to Carlsbad commute I’m moving most of the time.

[Ren]

[quote=Bob Lobbla]I have been commuting to Encinitas from South Temecula during rush hour for a few years. It takes any where from 45 minutes to 1 hour depending on seasonal traffic patterns. It takes about 25 minutes to get to the 78 from my driveway…[/quote]

Ditto.

I don’t mind the drive itself at all. KFI helps. It’s actually much better than when I lived in San Marcos and commuted to RB, before the 15 improvements. That 40 minutes of stop and go traffic was awful. At least with the Temecula to Carlsbad commute I’m moving most of the time.

[Ren]

[quote=Bob Lobbla]I have been commuting to Encinitas from South Temecula during rush hour for a few years. It takes any where from 45 minutes to 1 hour depending on seasonal traffic patterns. It takes about 25 minutes to get to the 78 from my driveway…[/quote]

Ditto.

I don’t mind the drive itself at all. KFI helps. It’s actually much better than when I lived in San Marcos and commuted to RB, before the 15 improvements. That 40 minutes of stop and go traffic was awful. At least with the Temecula to Carlsbad commute I’m moving most of the time.

[Ren]

[quote=Bob Lobbla]I have been commuting to Encinitas from South Temecula during rush hour for a few years. It takes any where from 45 minutes to 1 hour depending on seasonal traffic patterns. It takes about 25 minutes to get to the 78 from my driveway…[/quote]

Ditto.

I don’t mind the drive itself at all. KFI helps. It’s actually much better than when I lived in San Marcos and commuted to RB, before the 15 improvements. That 40 minutes of stop and go traffic was awful. At least with the Temecula to Carlsbad commute I’m moving most of the time.

[Author]

Posts