Slashdot Mirror


How Many Days Americans Waste Commuting In The Course Of A Lifetime, Mapped By City (digg.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Have you ever stopped to think that over the course of your lifetime, you will likely spend hundreds of days commuting back and forth from home and work? If not, we've got a great map that's sure to make you question what you're doing with your life. The good folks over at Educated Driver used Census Bureau data on average daily roundtrip commute times in hundreds of cities nationwide to calculate how much time Americans spend traveling to and from work over the course of their lives. (They assumed a 45-year career working 250 days a year.) The results, mapped by city, are pretty horrifying.

165 comments

  1. I'll just remodel your home from my living room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of us do work at locations that's not pushing buttons and shuffling papers

    1. Re:I'll just remodel your home from my living room by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

      Well, if THAT'S how you're going to be. We'll just have to outsource that work to SE Asia. So there. Woo-Hoo! Great idea! Bonuses for all VPs!

      --
      The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  2. Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But the price you pay to live or work in one is not.

    1. Re:Cities sure are great! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 0

      Commutes in cities themselves are often short. The problem is commuting in from the sub-BURPS, if you want a 4 bedroom McHouse on a quarter-acre lot like all the people you hated from high school now have.

    2. Re:Cities sure are great! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Many cities restrict downtown development, so you end up living in the endless suburban sprawl even if you would prefer a downtown condo.

    3. Re:Cities sure are great! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Those aren't cities -- those are sprawled suburbs of themselves that think they can call themselves "cities."

    4. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should see the price you pay for not living in one!

    5. Re:Cities sure are great! by XXongo · · Score: 1
      I'm somewhat surprised-- I would have thought that the people who actually live IN the cities would have short commute times, and the people who live in the 'burbs long commutes, but the map doesn't show that (I assume that the commute time listed is for where people live, not where they work, since it's based on census data.)

      Most of the data is simply red for big city, brown for medium city, yellow through blue for smaller towns, but there are a few puzzling exceptions. 61 minute commute for Winnemucca, NV, population 7,000? 64 minute commute if you live in DeRidder, Louisiana?

    6. Re:Cities sure are great! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Commutes in cities themselves are often short. The problem is commuting in from the sub-BURPS, if you want a 4 bedroom McHouse on a quarter-acre lot like all the people you hated from high school now have.

      Homes within most cities usually fall under one of two realms:
      1) Ridiculously Expensive
      2) Not Ridiculously Expensive but high crime.

      If you're happy living in a city, you're either in an unusual city, or you're wealthy and can afford to live in a good spot. Not everyone is wealthy or live in such a city.

      Sure, I'd love to be able to live close to where I work- but are there any affordable places within 20 mins of work. Absolutely not. The only areas that might work are the type of areas you lock your door and hope you don't get stopped at a traffic light passing through.

      Not all cities are "livable"- some cities you have to live in the suburbs.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. U.S. cities by order of size:

      1) New York is a city. Has a high-density downtown core which most people live in.
      2) LA is not a city. Urban sprawl.
      3) Chicago is a city. Has a high-density downtown core which most people live in.
      4) Houston is not a city. Urban sprawl.
      5) Phoenix is not a city. Urban sprawl.

    8. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that they don't have very many of the cities in say the SF Bay Area of California. Hayward is there. Pittsburg (larger than Hayward and a bedroom community hence a longer commute) is not. But that's OK. I can tell you my drive in is 30 minutes and my drive home is an hour.

    9. Re:Cities sure are great! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Homes within most cities usually fall under one of two realms:
      1) Ridiculously Expensive
      2) Not Ridiculously Expensive but high crime.

      You've lived in the wrong cities. I don't know what you'd call "expensive", but I lived for many years near the downtown of one of America's most beautiful and vibrant cities and I could walk to my office. There were huge parks all around me and it was completely quiet and peaceful at night when I'd walk my dog. I could see the iconic skyline from my back porch amid the well-kept Victorian town houses and 1890s-vintage three-flats.

      There was a police academy near by, but there wasn't really much presence at night, except for some older cops coming to the range or to work out at the facilities.

      You just have to pick your places carefully. Sometimes, you have to choose your job based on where you want to live instead of the other way around.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    10. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you're happy living in a city, you're either in an unusual city, or you're wealthy and can afford to live in a good spot. Not everyone is wealthy or live in such a city.

      Not true. Downtown Chicago is not ridiculously expensive nor high crime (the high crime parts are the south and west sides)

      Outside of outliers like San Francisco and New York, most cities are actually pretty affordable to most professionals who live in them.

      If you're talking affordable like you can buy a house with a big backyard, then no, but that is a suburban notion of affordability that pervades much of American thinking. But urban people don't think like that.

    11. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Downtown Chicago is not ridiculously expensive nor high crime

      Perhaps our definitions of high crime differ.

      #25. Chicago, Illinois
      Murder rate per 100k people: 17.52
      Number of reported murders (2015): 478

      https://rapidcityjournal.com/news/national/the-cities-with-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/collection_0e7dd367-2f62-5822-b849-97f4e9a43e3d.html#1

    12. Re:Cities sure are great! by edi_guy · · Score: 1

      That's another reason that decent houses, in decent locations within cities, are so expensive. People are willing to trade $$$ for all that accumulated commute time. Your SOMA condo is pricey, but you get to/from work in downtown SF in 10 mins.

    13. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      High crime is usually caused by gangs and limited among gang members. I lived in the most infamous neighborhood of NYC - South Bronx for 10 years in a "project" building, and nothing happened to me, not even a property theft. My neighbor had a break in but only after he forgot to lock the door. A lot of street racism though (I am white male). It's hard to either date in the neighborhood or convince a her to come spend the night from other parts of city. The crime problem is rather in mind than real for average people who don't deal drugs or shoot each other!

    14. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's taking a deeper dive into areas of the city itself, he did say that basically all the crime is in the south and west side, if you stay out of there you are fine.

    15. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Chicago. The murder rate of Chicago localized in the south and west sides. People don't realize how big the Chicago area truly is (10 million people spread over a large area). Downtown Chicago is almost another world.

      Chicago is also middle of the pack when it comes to murder rates. Number 1 is St Louis. Even Newark has a higher murder rate than Chicago.

      https://www.thetrace.org/2018/04/highest-murder-rates-us-cities-list/

      People's perceptions of Chicago are usually not based on lived experience or critical analysis of data.

    16. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well thats is something you would have to show evidence for. So far all of the evidence shows that you certainly deserve it though.

    17. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should come visit downtown Chicago and see for yourself. People who do find it mostly very nice and far from the crime-infested place that media sometimes make it out to be. Chicago has 77 neighborhoods and it is not homogeneous. It has great restaurants (Alinea), great universities (Northwestern, UChicago), great cultural attractions (Lyric Opera, Chicago Symphony Orchestra), etc. It's the second largest city with a downtown core in the United States (LA doesn't count).

      The crime is concentrated on the south and west sides, and as a Chicagoan, I feel for those parts of the city. But for perspective, those are two areas in a gigantic area that forms Chicago. Chicago is immense.

    18. Re:Cities sure are great! by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, the number of people who can live in such an arrangement is small relative to the overall population. You would likely think a person sounded utterly ridiculous if they used your line of reasoning to pretend that poverty didn't exist because it didn't affect them personally and that anyone could escape it simply by making more careful decisions.

      I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that you lived in a rent controlled property, which tends to be pretty common in a lot of cities. It's a great deal for whoever gets to live there because their rates are artificially low, but it also keeps people from developing new properties which contributes to the problem of a lack of housing in the places that people want to live. I also suspect that no one would be able to tear down that town house or those three-flats in order to build an apartment complex that would let more people live closer to their work.

      You can't have both historical districts (or rent controls) and short commutes. Cities often seem to push for the former, even though it makes the latter worse and everyone complains about long commutes quite a bit. Maybe it won't be so bad when we get self-driving cars, but looking at it from a value proposition, people spend a lot of their lives stuck in traffic. You're lucky to have escaped that fate, but you should realize that you're the exception to the rule and that it is not possible for most people to have that experience. When the number of jobs in an area greatly outstrips that number of places to live, it's impossible to avoid commutes.

    19. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Unfortunately, the number of people who can live in such an arrangement is small relative to the overall population.

      True in a sense. Not everyone who wants to live in a city can. Due to desirability, cities are typically only affordable to higher income earners or people who are ok with living in scaled down situations because they have a purpose for being there (trying to make it). You could not make a cost of living argument for living in a city -- you definitely pay more and get less.

      That said, great cities are desirable not because they are affordable or easy to live in, but exactly the opposite. They attract the ambitious, who want to live there in spite of the difficulties. See http://www.paulgraham.com/cities.html

      The ambitions of most people in America just want a comfortable house with a backyard in a good school district, and that's ok. We need that. Cities may not be the best bang for buck there.

      But the rest of us want other things, like access to culture, having a better peer group, having opportunities to do interesting things, work at our best, etc. To us affordability means living on a smaller scale.

    20. Re:Cities sure are great! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1) New York is a city. Has a high-density downtown core which most people live in.

      Nope. NYC metro area has a population of over 20M. Only 8.6M live in the city itself, and only 1.6M of those are in Manhattan.

      NYC has a strong NIMBY movement, and it is very difficult to get building permits for new downtown housing.

      Chicago is a city. Has a high-density downtown core which most people live in.

      Nope. Chicago is even more skewed than NYC toward suburban sprawl into "Chicagoland", extending into Indiana and Wisconsin.

    21. Re: Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that where all the blacks live ?

      That would explain the crime.

    22. Re: Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens when the blacks and latinos start shooting each other in the street because of their shoes, or what colour rag they have perched on their heads ? Didn't that make you feel unsafe ?

      One hears such beastly stories about such places.

    23. Re:Cities sure are great! by hey! · · Score: 1

      It's people who live outside the city who work in the city who make the average commuting time so long. If you work in the city and live in the city, getting around can be easy.

      Supposed you lived in The Dakota, a toney apartment building overlooking Central Park, and worked at Chase Bank in the financial district seven miles away. Your commute, including walking to and from the subway, would be half an hour on the dot *at the height of rush hour*.

      But the thing is, people who can afford to live a quick subway ride away from a major employment center aren't poor, or even working class these days. The janitor who empties our lucky banker's wastebasket probably lives someplace like the Bronx, and even though he also has a single subway ride to get to work, the train has to cover sixteen miles and it takes him at least an hour.

      So the source of the long average commute problem isn't just *transportation*. Affordable housing is also an issue. Also housing preferences. Wanting that house in the suburbs drives up commute times even in places with reasonable real estate prices.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    24. Re:Cities sure are great! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      61 minute commute for Winnemucca, NV, population 7,000? 64 minute commute if you live in DeRidder, Louisiana?

      These exceptions probably have to do with no jobs anywhere nearby for most of the people living there and commuting a long distance rather than in heavy traffic. DeRidder appears to be surrounded on 3 sides by nature preserves / parks. Nearest major employers are probably about an hour's drive straight south.

    25. Re:Cities sure are great! by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Supposed you lived in The Dakota, a toney apartment building overlooking Central Park, and worked at Chase Bank in the financial district seven miles away. Your commute, including walking to and from the subway, would be half an hour on the dot *at the height of rush hour*.

      Except for all the days where it takes 90 minutes because of signal problems, a sick passenger, someone pulling the brake, a train overrunning the platform, police activity, broken rail... and of course the major delays where you just have to walk to another line or take an Uber because it will be hours after someone was hit by a train, or there was a track fire. Then there's all the less common things we all nonetheless run into... stuck between stations for hours for various reasons.

    26. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      61 minute commute for Winnemucca, NV, population 7,000? 64 minute commute if you live in DeRidder, Louisiana?

      These exceptions probably have to do with no jobs anywhere nearby for most of the people living there and commuting a long distance rather than in heavy traffic. DeRidder appears to be surrounded on 3 sides by nature preserves / parks. Nearest major employers are probably about an hour's drive straight south.

      It's similar to where I live in that it shows a 56 minute commute time, which I assume is to one of nearby bigger cities (just like I have to do).

      But it's ok. I'd much rather live here than in the city, and my time spent in the car listening to audio books in anything but "wasted".

      I rather enjoy it.

      I'm not driving through any sort of traffic, other than a couple of street lights in the city within 5 minutes of work.

    27. Re:Cities sure are great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Downtown Chicago is not ridiculously expensive nor high crime

      Perhaps our definitions of high crime differ.

      #25. Chicago, Illinois
      Murder rate per 100k people: 17.52
      Number of reported murders (2015): 478

      https://rapidcityjournal.com/news/national/the-cities-with-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/collection_0e7dd367-2f62-5822-b849-97f4e9a43e3d.html#1

      I was actually thinking of the "not ridiculously expensive" angle.

      I suppose if you're rich, then it isn't ridiculously expensive. My rich friend used to live there, and I remember thinking it was insane to spend that kind of money to live in a such a place.

      He agreed and transferred somewhere nicer.

    28. Re:Cities sure are great! by hey! · · Score: 1

      And of course people driving over the GWB from Jersey never have *any* events to mess up their commute. Anyhow our banker living in The Dakota is just another example of trading commute time for housing preferences. For the same price he could live next door to work.

      There's really no way to beat density when it comes to travel efficiency. If people don't have to move far, then you don't have travel problems. And by in large traffic in Manhattan is surprisingly light most of the time. It's the arteries that move people on and off the island that are nightmares -- FDR Drive and the Henry Hudson.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    29. Re:Cities sure are great! by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Surprisingly light? You're either joking or have never driven or been in a taxi/rideshare below 59th during daylight hours.

    30. Re:Cities sure are great! by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      I live in the northern VA suburbs, and in '96 bought a $185k townhouse about 15 miles from my office because that's what I could afford. Several years and a promotion later, I had a real-estate agent look for something closer to work. I gave them the parameters of within 5 miles of the office, and up to $250k, and similar size to my existing place. Couldn't do it....looked for a couple months and gave up, because the homes close to work were just that much more expensive.

      I don't know why people continue to hate on those of us stuck in the burbs. I tried.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    31. Re:Cities sure are great! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Yeah, same here in mid-sized Southern city. A house in the city costs about 40-50% more than one in the suburbs. I think this is the case in most places, because most people would probably rather be where all the facilities are, where work is, where the shops are, where the better schools are.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    32. Re:Cities sure are great! by hey! · · Score: 1

      I've driven quite a bit around Manhattan. Sure things are a mess down in the financial district, with its tangles of old Dutch cowpaths, but north of Houston the grid keeps everything moving very well. Is rush hour north of Houston like driving around Omaha Nebraska at 6am on a Sunday morning? Obviously not. But having learned to drive in Boston, traffic on Manhattan city streets always strikes me as surprisingly orderly and manageable.

      Now throw a bridge, tunnel or expressway into the mix, and the picture changes dramatically. New York City as a region has horrible traffic. But if driving around within the borough of Manhattan isn't manageable for you, then you probably shouldn't drive around *any* city.

      Chicago follows this pattern as well. It's got terrible regional traffic, but as long as you stay away from expressways driving around *within* a neighborhood is surprisingly easy.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  3. Method also matters. by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Method of travel also matters -- you can read a book on a train or bus. You can't in a (not self-driving) car stuck in traffic.

    1. Re:Method also matters. by XXongo · · Score: 2

      Method of travel also matters -- you can read a book on a train or bus. You can't in a (not self-driving) car stuck in traffic.

      yeah, before they invented audiobooks, commuting was a drag.

    2. Re:Method also matters. by hawguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Method of travel also matters -- you can read a book on a train or bus. You can't in a (not self-driving) car stuck in traffic.

      I bike to work most days and don't consider any of that time "wasted" -- I spend less time in the gym and more time on my bike, and I look forward to the bike ride home, sitting in traffic in my car is no fun.

    3. Re:Method also matters. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Method of travel also matters -- you can read a book on a train or bus.

      A lot of folks I see commuting are not wasting time commuting . . . they appear to be commuting wasted, instead.

      Of course, some folks might consider time spent being wasted, wasted time . . . but I guess that's a personal lifestyle choice.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't follow audiobooks while I'm driving, no idea why.

    5. Re:Method also matters. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I lack public transit along my route, so (aside from podcasts or audiobooks, which will never have my full attention while I drive) my commute is nothing but unproductive, wasted time that I will never get back. As a result, I specifically chose to purchase a home that's an 8-minute drive from where I work, that way I could minimize that lost time.

      In a few years, if self-driving cars are a thing we can reasonably afford, I wouldn't mind moving out into the country and commuting to work, since our dollar would get us more land and more home without the loss of productive time we'd suffer now. I'd simply rearrange my morning and evening routines so that the things I do by myself (e.g. checking news feeds, catching up on reading/TV/film/games, etc.) happen during my drive, thus allowing me to spend even more time with my family.

      But until self-driving cars are here, there's no getting around the fact that those hours really add up, so I haven't regretted having a shorter commute in order to have those extra minutes each day to spend on things that matter.

    6. Re:Method also matters. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      yeah, before they invented audiobooks, commuting was a drag.

      That's why god invented beer in cans. You can pop a top with one hand and still keep one on the wheel. Keep a stack of good 8-tracks and your commute passes in a flash.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Method also matters. by edi_guy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Ditto this. Started riding my bike to work many years ago, after frustration with public transit and cost of driving/parking. Bike commuting is fantastic, and the random times I am forced to take the bus/train or drive it's so depressing. My $600 bike from 2006-ish requires occasional maintenance I do myself, but works great. I'm in decent shape in large part due to biking, but it's . As you do it more, things you were concerned about go away. "What about the rain" it's totally fine to ride in the rain with the right gear. Too hot, too cold. Rarely an issue.

      Keys to biking in my mind is

      1.) it's not a race, there's no reason run red lights & stop signs, get sweaty, etc. going at a normal pace is perfectly quick
      2.) don't ride like you are entitled. Whether legally you can or not, don't hog the lanes, give buses and cars the right of way, pedestrians obviously. Be chill.

      Unfortunately a lot of my cycling cohorts on the road are indeed jerks. I keep promising to strap a GoPro on the handlebars to create a clip of bad bicyclists..but all in all I recommend giving it a try. First 2 weeks might be an adjustment, but I promise that week 3 things will click and you might never go back.

    8. Re:Method also matters. by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      True, but even with that, I'd rather drive for 30 minutes each way than take the bus for a minimum of 90 minutes each way.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    9. Re: Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long is your kids' commute to school?

    10. Re:Method also matters. by ranton · · Score: 2

      I bike to work most days and don't consider any of that time "wasted" -- I spend less time in the gym and more time on my bike, and I look forward to the bike ride home, sitting in traffic in my car is no fun.

      Then again if you bike to work, you are among the few who have very short commutes. I have a 40 minute commute, but it would be an 175 minute commute by bike.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    11. Re:Method also matters. by hawguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I bike to work most days and don't consider any of that time "wasted" -- I spend less time in the gym and more time on my bike, and I look forward to the bike ride home, sitting in traffic in my car is no fun.

      Then again if you bike to work, you are among the few who have very short commutes. I have a 40 minute commute, but it would be an 175 minute commute by bike.

      In this country, a bike friendly commute doesn't usually happen by accident. My wife and I chose where to live based on our commutes -- we live a 10 minute walk from a train station for her, and a 10 mile ride to work for me. Hopefully to become a 5 mile ride early next year when my employer moves to a new office.

      My bike commute is a consistent 45 minutes (mostly on little used neighborhood streets and dedicated trails), my car commute is 30 - 60 minutes.

    12. Re: Method also matters. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      About a minute by car or five on foot. The school is on the edge of our neighborhood, so it's easy to access, and because our neighborhood has no cut-throughs the traffic just hits the school and turns around without ever entering the neighborhood itself. We get all the benefits of close proximity (i.e. fast commute, letting the kids walk themselves, etc.) without all of the drawbacks that close proximity typically entails (e.g. lots of traffic in the neighborhood).

    13. Re:Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't follow audiobooks while I'm driving, no idea why.

      I listen to audiobooks all the time while driving to and from work, but I drive through the country, so maybe that makes some sort of difference.

      The thought of commuting through downtown or taking public transportation is simply appalling to me.

      I'd rather make a lot less money than have to suffer like that.

    14. Re:Method also matters. by westlake · · Score: 1

      I bike to work most days and don't consider any of that time "wasted" -- I spend less time in the gym and more time on my bike, and I look forward to the bike ride home.

      The bike commute here is seasonal at best. With extreme conditions taking even the most youthful and vigorous cyclists off the road in both summer and winter. There are some fine trails available for recreational cyclists, for the daily commute, not so much.

    15. Re: Method also matters. by khb · · Score: 1

      About 4 years ago I started biking to work on an ebike. My commute was a hilly 7miles (1 way). What had been a 15 to 30 minute commute became a 20 minute workout). Now my commute is closer to 13, and I do it in under an hour. My schedule can accommodate an hour long commute...especially since it doubles as a workout.

      Electricity used averages .0271 kWh/mi

    16. Re:Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto. 40 minutes there, 40 minutes back, year round thanks to waterproof panniers and showers at work*. I certainly don't consider it wasted time - I enjoy it and it keeps me fit both physically and mentally.

      *admittedly it doesn't snow here. I would probably wimp out and drive if it did (and possibly have to buy a gym membership, which would suck)!

    17. Re:Method also matters. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      2.) don't ride like you are entitled. Whether legally you can or not, don't hog the lanes,

      Blocks to that. I feel entirely entitled to not get run over.

      If you use the middle of the lane you sometimes get to exchange pleasantries with the angry driver behind, but it's vanishingly rare that they'll actually try to murder you. But hogging the edge makes it much more likely you'll get knocked over by some entitled asshat of a driver trying to get past when there's insufficient room. If seen that happen far too many times.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    18. Re:Method also matters. by sad_ · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately a lot of my cycling cohorts on the road are indeed jerks. I keep promising to strap a GoPro on the handlebars to create a clip of bad bicyclists.

      please don't do this, yes there are bad apples, but us cyclists already get looked at in a bad way enough as it is, we don't need video's showing them few bad actors.

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    19. Re:Method also matters. by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Seriously? You think the proportion of bad apples is different between the two? I'd defy you to show any statistical evidence.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    20. Re:Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but I like driving my vehicle.

      I wouldn't say it's time lost. It is the best part of my day.

          It's time not stuck work and not stuck at home with the family.

      It's really my only free time to do whatever I want.

    21. Re: Method also matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I listen to educational audio books and podcasts and have no other time to do that. my commute is not wasted time.

  4. Multiplaction makes numbers big. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I actually rather like my commute. I only have a few spots of traffic, but for the most part it is nice time for me to drive down with only myself and my thoughts.
    Being scared that I may have wasted 2 years of my life driving to work, isn't that big of a deal. What is more scary is the 10 years of my life actually working.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Multiplaction makes numbers big. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The results also need to be normalized by how much time the averages person spends taking shits over their lives.

    2. Re:Multiplaction makes numbers big. by jezwel · · Score: 1

      Paid to poo at work. Commuting time and pooing time are probably about equal TBH (not that much either way though).

  5. It's worth it by rsilvergun · · Score: 2, Funny

    to most Americans. They couldn't afford nice houses in nice neighborhoods with nice schools and clean air if they didn't spend 2 hours a day commuting to work. Public transit isn't an option because nobody wants to pay for it, because people love cars (you get a lot of happy memories associated with them from when you were a teenager and your parents paid for it) and because you feel like a poor person riding the bus.

    This might change, but only because wages are plummeting and pretty soon most Americans won't be able to afford their own cars.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's worth it by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      I have happier memories from trains than on cars. I remember that having a car in high school still didn't get me many girls :D And my definition of "nice" is "walkable area with trains", not "huge house and not walkable."

    2. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as people age, families grow, lifestyles change, etc, the ideal place to live also tends to morph. Different things are important to different people. Different people have different needs. Trying to shove the needs based on one person's perspective on other people is disingenuous. Viewing the world through only your experiences and needs is very self centered.

    3. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What fleet of dipshits flagged this troll?

    4. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a used Geo Metro in high school that I bought myself. I can't really say I have any happy memories associated with it, but it has been the second best car I've ever owned (the best being a Pontiac Sunfire). Wish I could have either of them back, I have a Hyundai Veloster right now and its just terrible. All the performance drawbacks of the Metro with none of the robust engineering or quality.

    5. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did because this dipshit makes asinine troll statements about his perfect utopia would be a world of poor people riding substandard buses with no jobs and no potential future but having some magical self-fulfillment.

      And I'll do it again.

    6. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the AC..... You're flagging nothing. And you'll do nothing again.

    7. Re:It's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know your current car is bad when your Geo metro is known for "robust engineering ...quality"

  6. Re:Suckers by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

    Try setting up a basic sciences lab with multi-million dollar equipment in your home. Try doing other people's plumbing or electrical work from home.

  7. Looks like a population map. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other words, where a lot of people live, they have long commute times. Where nobody lives, they have short times.

    Not very useful. Plus, the range is suspect. I've heard of many people that have daily 1 hour commutes, each way.

    1. Re: Looks like a population map. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. London, my wife has 50-70 minutes each way. That is double the top end of the legend.
      Meanwhile I work from home, 0 minutes' commute but I do the school run (15-30 min each way)

  8. I'll tell you what is NOT the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The solution is not to make it easier/more efficient for millions of people to shuttle back and forth every day. If you're solution starts with this premise, you will always fail.

    No, the solution is to stop forcing people to shuttle back and forth every day. It's stupid, wasteful, and was only ever made into a thing so that car makers can sell millions of cars you fools,

    1. Re:I'll tell you what is NOT the solution by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Many jobs still involve working with physical objects on site, or meeting with actual people, not just pushing bits or shuffling papers around.

  9. Re:Suckers by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    However for a lot of companies that have Work from home, the employee is often not seen, and will not be considered for promotion.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  10. No time off? by Albanach · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They assumed a 45-year career working 250 days a year

    So, 365 days in a year, less 104 weekend days leaves just 261 days.

    We then have holidays - most folk get off (either on the day or in lieu) New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas.

    That puts as to 255 days available to work. In other words, the analysis reckons the average person will take five workdays total for vacation and sick time in an entire year.

    And they think it's the commute time to be concerned about!

    1. Re:No time off? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep, America sucks in this respect. Keep pointing it out -- US workers need it drummed into their heads that they're being exploited.

    2. Re:No time off? by will_die · · Score: 1

      No they are taking high pay for the extra work. I am at a US job and get around 50 days off a year however I am taking lower pay compared to if I was at a job where I only got 15 days off a year.

    3. Re:No time off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get 50 days off a year because regurgitating rote book material isn't a real job.

    4. Re:No time off? by sdinfoserv · · Score: 2

      and be sure to keep telling them "unions are evil"....

    5. Re:No time off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That puts as to 255 days available to work. In other words, the analysis reckons the average person will take five workdays total for vacation and sick time in an entire year.

      And they think it's the commute time to be concerned about!

      Americans are sick to be expected to work 250+ days a year. That would put them as the least productive workforce among civilised countries.

      When I do project estimation, I always used 1 year = 200 working days for estimates.

      Saner countries usually have 10-15 days of national holidays, and 15-25 days of normal leave days, plus a number of sick leave days if given by doctor. 200 working days is what you usually get a year.

  11. Oh Common by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about mapping the time we spend sleeping instead (already done before)? Much more horrifying.
    Or what about mapping the amount of energy we waste while taking a dump?

  12. Assumptions... by gosand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The assumptions are that you have the same commute during your entire career.
    I have had anywhere from zero (worked from home for 8 years) to 1.5 hours. For that 1.5 hour commute, I drove or walked to a train station, rode the train into the city (Chicago) and then had a 20 minute *brisk* walk to the office. During that commute I was able to relax, and I read lots of books that year. I also got 40 minutes of exercise every day walking to/from the office. My schedule was also very predictable. So there are trade-offs. I wouldn't want to do it today, but it wasn't bad at all at the time.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:Assumptions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The assumptions are that you have the same commute during your entire career.

      No. The assumption is that your average commute throughout your career is comparable to the average commute in your city.

  13. How much of your life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and how much of your paycheck?

    include car payments, interest, insurance, fuel, maintenance (both mechanical and hygenic)

    now subtract that from your salary...

    are you making enough? Does that giant black hole of time and money seem in any way worth it?

  14. Re:Suckers by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    Nobody who has reached this point in their career is still naive enough to believe they'd be considered for promotion in the first place.

  15. Shocking! by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Digg still exists?

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:Shocking! by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's actually good now. Social media and social networks that grow too large seem to end up attracting too many idiots and the signal-to-noise ratio suffers horribly. Eventually you just get a lowest common denominator deluge of cat memes and moronic whinging. Maybe September finally ended for them.

      Nope, I checked and it's still mostly crap. Wonderful articles such as "Jaden Smith Wants You To Dress Like A Superhero", "Holy Crap, Here's Why You Always Lock Your Car Door When Lions Are Around", "This Is, Hands Down, The Worst Pool Delivery In History", and "Neopets Let Me Be A Gay Kid Online" make up the bulk of the front page. Stories like this one we're discussing here seem to be more of an accident.

      Most stories only have single or low double digit diggs though, so I'm guessing that the user base is incredibly small, or that it's mainly lurkers that don't participate.

  16. Commuting drains the soul by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

    At my last job, I used to have an hour commute each way. There were two ways I could get there. One was mostly divided highway @ 70 MPH, but was several miles longer than the back road way, which was mostly 55 MPH, but also cut through several towns with 45 & 35 MPH zones, along with stop signs and traffic lights. I usually took the back road way because I got better gas mileage. Besides, I'd rather worry about hitting a deer than getting crushed by a semi.

    When I took my new job, it cut my commute by about 25 miles & 35 minutes each way. I figured it saved me about 280 hours a year and nearly 12,500 miles of driving, and over $1500 in gas. Given all that, I figured I could probably take a $1500 cut and still be even with my old job. Thankfully, I got a 20% increase over my old salary. The pay increase was a nice benefit, but the shorter commute has been a life-changing experience!

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  17. I live in Seattle by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Minutes.

    It's even faster if you bike or skateboard, by the way.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:I live in Seattle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because in Seattle traffic laws don't apply to bikes.

    2. Re:I live in Seattle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are being transferred to the Tacoma Campus. Deal with it.

    3. Re:I live in Seattle by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Because in Seattle traffic laws don't apply to bikes.

      Sure they do. I think you meant cars, which blow thru stop signs and red lights here.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  18. I was so much time commuting by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    And by waste I mean I'm getting paid to show up, as in I have a fucking job and being here is part of it.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  19. Ya Ever Notice How Things Are NEVER Slash dotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    any more?

  20. Re:Suckers by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Where I work, at home employees are just as entitled to apply for new positions as in office employees are.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  21. Re: Suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sad but true.

    If you haven't been getting promoted quickly while young, when you are older, odds are against it happening then.

    Career tracks (the type of job you start out with) have a much larger effect on promotion than your ability does.

    Just try to secure a high salary and aim for decent working conditions. The "promise" of promotion is usually an illusory carrot dangled in front of you.

  22. Re:Suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many jobs do not accommodate working remotely. Many people that have jobs that could support remote work are not responsible enough to work unsupervised or get too easily distracted. There's also a lot of benefit to the social contact at an actual office. Not to mention the ability to collaborate face to face. It can also be healthy to have a distinct separation between work space and leisure space. Unless you have a home that has a dedicated office space that you only use for work, lines blur too much.

  23. Zoom out to see Hawaii and Alaska by Aristos+Mazer · · Score: 1

    The article starts out zoomed in on the connected 48 states. Zoom out to see Hawaii and Alaska. Hawaii has a giant red dot -- you may not be going far on a small island, but getting there is apparently slow.

    1. Re:Zoom out to see Hawaii and Alaska by laie_techie · · Score: 1

      The article starts out zoomed in on the connected 48 states. Zoom out to see Hawaii and Alaska. Hawaii has a giant red dot -- you may not be going far on a small island, but getting there is apparently slow.

      I grew up on Oahu. Oahu has the Koolau Mountains in the middle of the island and Kamehameha Highway slows to 25 mph in most villages. It can take an hour driving from Laie to Honolulu; The Bus (the actual name of the bus company!) takes longer. Thankfully, my job was a 10 minute WALK from my home those days.

  24. Do they actually get those holidays by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    anymore? My bro doesn't, and he's in a fairly well paid job (just shy of $50k/yr, good money where he is). When I was a dumb kid working fast food nobody got those holidays except the other dumb kids (are parents wouldn't let us work). I'd be willing to bet less than half the population gets holiday time/pay anymore. I know retail employees don't.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Do they actually get those holidays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you know wrong and I don't believe you looked very hard. Target give vaca and paid time off.

  25. Re:Suckers by hawguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Try setting up a basic sciences lab with multi-million dollar equipment in your home. Try doing other people's plumbing or electrical work from home.

    Meth-heads seem to be able to set up home labs, why can't you?

  26. We get the exact opposite by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    I have it drummed into my head that this is the greatest country on earth. It was big news when a dumb show about corrupt politicians had a phony TV politician asked about American Exceptionalism and go on a rant about how we're not in the top 5 for anything except prisons. And I've never heard a real politician make that point. Even Bernie has to shy away from it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:We get the exact opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't about politicians, it was about the news media. Since your talking about it you should probably get at least the basic facts correct, but you didn't.

      The show was Newsroom.

    2. Re: We get the exact opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      USA is number 1 for software, television and film. And 50/50 on aerospace. Thatâ(TM)s pretty good.

  27. Commute vs remote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Average commute time for last 10+ years: 34min x 2 = 78 minutes five days a week
    Average cost per year of commute with a small Honda: $12,000

    After working remotely for the last six years, it's hard to justify both the financial and mental costs of commuting.

  28. Yep, Land of the Free by idji · · Score: 1

    You 're free to drive in any lane you like until the next traffic light in 300 yards.

  29. Thanks for reminding me, Slashdot by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    While you're at it, why don't you give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  30. Numbers seem odd... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    For average daily commute (round trip), the daily time seems off. Some areas of LA or SF for example should be well over 77 average-- minimum of 100, but I could see 120. A few other cities raise flags as well. Only explanation I can see is they are counting unemployed people.

    Not complaining about my daily 35-minute round trip commute on the bike though.

    1. Re:Numbers seem odd... by Nkwe · · Score: 1

      For average daily commute (round trip), the daily time seems off.

      Agreed. The numbers indicate that the average commute time in Longview, WA is 48 minutes. You can drive from one side of Longview to the other in 10-15 mins. If you are commuting to Vancouver, WA (Northern edge of the Portland, OR metro area), it would be around 45 mins. So the numbers may be for commutes to the nearest large metropolitan area? They certainly are not for local commutes.

    2. Re:Numbers seem odd... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Presumably they are from census data, but... I think the census breaks it out per worker. Looking at a number of extra-urban communities, either my perception of how many people commute to work is way off, or the numbers are. There is something providing a favorable bias in rural areas in general.

      For Longview, WA, the metro area population is 3x the city population, and it looks like there is major employment in Kalma which is about in-line with the average commute time, so I might be able to see it.

  31. Re:Suckers by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    You can Apply for the Position, however being considered against others who are in office, may be taken into consideration.
    There is you who is faceless email, vs bill who the boss talks to every day.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  32. Wasted? by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 1

    Is the time we spend travelling always to be classed as "wasted"? If I'm going to an event and it takes me two hours to get their are those two hours wasted?

    1. Re:Wasted? by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Even if the time can certifiably be classified as "wasted" just think how much time our ancestors "wasted" traveling.....

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  33. My commute hours by Jeremi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My commute to my job is about 30 minutes each way, and I've been doing it 5 days a week, for almost 20 years now, so that's ~250 hours of commuting time a year, or ~5000 hours of commuting time total.

    So that's ~208 24-hour days of my life wasted, right?

    Well, the kicker (and I know this is going to sound obnoxious/pretentious, but it's true so I'll post it anyway) is that I've been commuting by bike, and enjoying all of that commuting time as exercise and a recreational activity. I wouldn't count it as wasted at all.

    If your situation allows you to commute by bike, I highly recommend it -- it transforms a tedious daily chore into something you can look forward to both before and after work. It also cuts down on the time you need to spend at the gym, since part of your exercise quota you now get "for free" as part of your commute.

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    1. Re:My commute hours by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      I take the train part way and walk part way. I get 12,000+ steps every day. It takes me about between 30 and 60 minutes depending on where I decide to get off the train.

      Living close to work is the way to go for sure.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:My commute hours by krray · · Score: 1

      LOL -- my commute is double yours (60 minutes). Each way. And there is NO WAY I could bike it -- I'm usually doing ~80mph for the most part... Bike. I wish!

    3. Re:My commute hours by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      It's doable, you just have to be insane like this guy:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnYp4srEooI

      So time to step up your game!

    4. Re:My commute hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my commute is about 10 seconds.

    5. Re:My commute hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't agree more, except a few years ago I swapped a bike for a skateboard, and I love it. With a smartphone, google maps, and a skateboard I'm in bliss; and I'm 55. Note google maps is swell for public transportation, and the skateboard serves 'the last mile'.

      Speed? A car would burden me because I travel a lot on planes and trains, but the board *always* fits in the overhead bin, and I love it when the cheap airlines, like wowair drop me off at that farthest airport gate, because gliding soooo smooth through the airport, faster than anyone can bother to bust me absolutely rocks!

      FWIW, google is your friend:
      121c carbon fiber aileron
      Avenue suspension trucks
      75mm sharkwheels
      vans shoes, including waterproof MTEs for winter.
      Bones ceramic (not steel) bearings, for the rain.

      IMHO electrics aren't realistic due to price, weight, and often length (no knuckle dragging while grocery shopping please). Also they go so fast a helmet is req'd and that's 'another thing'. Electrics can be ticketed, and are not TSA/ overhead bin friendly.

      Like I read elsewhere in this thread, speed is no big deal, but efficiency is.

    6. Re:My commute hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL -- my commute is double yours (60 minutes). Each way. And there is NO WAY I could bike it -- I'm usually doing ~80mph for the most part... Bike. I wish!

      OK, hope you take that into account when you choose your job.
      From your point of view that is two work related hours every working day but from your employers point of view that is two hours of your own time.
      You have to consider those hours when you calculate how much money you make per hour since you can't use them for anything else.
      You can however not use them when negotiating your salary.

  34. What is the definition of "wasted time" here? by TomR+teh+Pirate · · Score: 1

    I have colleagues who sometimes work from home but also is a dependency for others in the office, and those non-commuters are less effective at their jobs when issues arise that require them to interact with somebody else. The office chat programs are often ignored, set to offline / do not disturb, etc. If that person with the issue had commuted in, the rest of us wouldn't be idled by their situation. The work-from-home employee didn't "waste" his time by staying home, but he is wasting other people's time by not being present.

    1. Re:What is the definition of "wasted time" here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your boss needs to tell that person they only have one more shot at staying contactable.

  35. This is why I bicycle to work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It takes me about 10 minutes (on average) to bike to work each day each direction (20 minutes total per day). Plus I get exercise, so I don't even count that as lost time. This just makes me feel even better about it. Unfortunately the winters are tough (I am located in Canada).

  36. Podcasts by jcdenhartog · · Score: 1

    Echoing what others have said about the questionable use of the word "wasted", I use my commute time to listen to podcasts. The content is educational (history, news, etc.), so it's hard to consider the time 'wasted'.

    --
    "The majority is always wrong; the minority is rarely right." - Henrik Ibsen
    1. Re:Podcasts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fake history and fake news. Yeah, your time is totally not wasted.

    2. Re:Podcasts by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've been making good use of podcasts and audio lectures for years, and it really make the commute time a lot more pleasant. Among other things I haven't been able to read as much since the kids were born, so it serves a double function as both reading time and making boring time not boring.

      I'd still prefer to have a shorter commute, but it's not nearly as much of a waste as when I was getting by on news and talk radio.

  37. 45 years??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who in this age keeps the same job for 45 years?

    1. Re:45 years??? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Anyone below 30, that's who.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  38. FollowTheMoney by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    If you superimpose that map over an income map, it would look the same. There's a reason no one want's to live in the Midwaste with 100 degree summers, 50 below winters, bottom of the barrel pay and virtually nothing to do. Sure, you can buy a McMansion for $300K, but then you have to live there.
    Or better yet. Make $50K in the Midwaste putting 10% away for retirement or live in a "red zone" making $120K and see who has the best choices after 45 years of working and saving. Chances are better of ending up a Walmart greater if you in the blue zone.

    1. Re:FollowTheMoney by kaatochacha · · Score: 2

      I used to think that, as a kid, in California- the midwest sucked and we were the chosen few. Then I grew up. I realized that the friends I knew who moved there were HAPPIER. Not from McMansions, or from the weather, but from the lack of traffic/annoyance/your attitude prevalent in California. They could afford trips, visiting nature, doing things that made them happy.
      In other words: Not having to deal with you.

  39. Commuting by plane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of us even fly regularly to the California bay-area for work, rather than live there. When I could limit my lobby wait-times, it was about an 80 minute commute to fly there and back from Oregon twice a week.

  40. First it's horrifying. by MJhasHIV · · Score: 0

    Then you go numb.

  41. Actually, it's a pretty small number by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

    I happen to be pretty close to the average that TFA (yes, I even skimmed it!) cites. And that adds up to just 408 days over the course of the average working lifetime.

    Now, it you want some REAL shocking numbers:

    Assuming their number of 45 years working, and 40 hours work a week (yes, coders and IT need to adjust...). And also assuming 50 working-weeks per year.

    That's an eye-popping 4.79 years spent working.

    And as far as SLEEP...

    Assuming the recommended 8 hours per day, and an average lifespan of 80 years, that's 26.6 (!!!) Years spent unconscious!!!!

    So, add those up, and you have an average of 1 + 4.79 + 26.6 = 32.46 YEARS of just... Nothing.

  42. Re:Suckers by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

    Depends on the boss. Maybe the boss can see that Bill is a time-wasting sycophant.

  43. Californians, ride! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many Californians could help reduce this across the state by riding motorcycles, but for one reason or another we don't. We have the weather for it. Filtering is legal. We get the commute lane. On top of all that, even if we're not using it, 4 motorcycles can take up the same space as 2 cars pretty easily, and we rarely find ourselves driving with a passenger. Motorcycles typically manage 40-70mpg without having to go to hybrid technologies, and you can find them for as little as $4500 brand new - $4100 if you don't need freeway capacity and don't mind looking a bit like you're riding on a micro machine. With significant numbers of motorcycles on the road, we could also feel more comfortable that we'd be seen, and keep an eye out for each other more easily.

    Get out and ride!

    1. Re:Californians, ride! by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      I would, except for this:
      https://www.psychologicalscien...

  44. My commute is ten minutes by bicycle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suck it, flyover deplorables!

  45. The commute times don't seem accurate by Kalendraf · · Score: 1

    They based this on the commute times from the census bureau, but I'm not sure how they arrived at the values. Two of the cities (pop 100K to 150K) where I've lived in are listed at 39+ minutes for commutes (roundtrip), but you'd have to take some really bad routes to need more than 15 minutes to go point-to-point in those cities. 8-12 minutes each way for a round trip of 16-24 (avg 20) minutes would be a more realistic average for most residents in those communities.

    On the other hand, the commutes for some of the larger cities actually seem too low. Could the census bureau method be biased and incorrectly scaling up commute times in smaller cities for some reason?

  46. Re: Traitor Trump better watch his bootay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wouldn't Trump's ghost haunting the prison be considered "cruel and unusual punishment" to the other inmates??

    Imagine his bullshit echoing throughout the cell blocks forevermore....

  47. What about life spent working to buy cars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whilst in worst cases they are showing commuting time of almost 2 years over a life time, they haven't broken down working time spent on actually purchasing cars. I haven't done the calculations, but my guesstimate would be 1+ years spent working simply for purchase and running several cars over the life of the worker. Which is not insignificant compared to actual commute time.

  48. Re:Suckers by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Doesn't seem to matter where I work, since hardly anyone works in the office.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  49. Who says it is a waste? by mschuyler · · Score: 1

    Commuting can be the only quiet time you have in the entire day. I used to commute 25 miles each way (not outlandish compared to some) and enjoyed it. Maybe listen to the radio. Maye just enjoy the peace and quiet. Nobody around to bitch. I never considered it a waste.

    --
    How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
  50. ROI by BlazeMiskulin · · Score: 1

    The premise assumes that "travel time = waste". That's a false assumption. Let's assume a 2-hour commute (round-trip) for every work day. What is 2 hours worth to you?

    The nearest city to me is about a 45-minute commute one-way. Were I to live there, the difference in cost of living between "in the city" and where I live (1.5 hours/day) would double my mortgage payment and double my property taxes. That would be about $20k per year.

    It's not "wasted time". It's an investment with a higher ROI than living in the city. Add on quality of life and all those other things that can't be quantified in dollar amounts, and.... The author of the article has no clue.

  51. Re:Traitor Trump better watch his bootay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    shouldn't have voted for him then.

  52. Bogus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My city shows 52 minute commute time. In reality it takes me about 15 minutes in bad traffic (stopping at signals) and 12 or so otherwise (signals green). And since I drive a Porsche to work, it's more like play time than "commuting" in the traditional sense. Sometimes I drive the long way on purpose. /shrug

  53. Re: Traitor Trump better watch his bootay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dunno, removing all of the illegal alien criminals would greatly reduce overcrowding.

  54. LOL, suckers by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    I guess most of these so called "liberal paradise" spots, such as Seattle, San Fran, LA, NYC have the LONGEST commute times. What's wrong? Don't like living in your utopia? So you flee the high taxes, high housing costs, high crime to the suburbs, but then have to spend an HOUR or more to get to work? Out here in flyover country, we have peace and quiet IN the city, takes 10-20 minutes to get to work, low crime, low housing cost, and low crime. Oh, by the way, stop moving here! You are bringing your stupid ideas, that screwed up your own part of the country with you and we don't like it. Don't like God/Church, guns, country music, pickup trucks, etc? Stay out!

    1. Re:LOL, suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you hicks keep your country music and pickup trucks out of our cities/suburbs. It's bad enough I have to spend 60+ minutes one way commuting, it's worse when some 3-toothed hillbilly in his Silverado is blaring Florida-Georgia Line for the entire interstate to hear.

  55. Ooo, Ooo by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Ooo, Ooo, now do a map for how much time we lose to sleeping. Or how about one for time we lose to eating.
    Time not spent working or with friends and family is time wasted!

  56. To an Engineer There are No Promotions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've often wondered what I'd consider a promotion. Certainly not becoming a manager. Any "promotion" would involve more paperwork and less creation. What I am is senior, which means I usually win arguments, and can tell junior engineers and outsource coders what they should do.

  57. define "waste" by Tom · · Score: 1

    I used to do my commute by train, and it was not wasted time at all. I had a book with me and read it, and aside from the good of reading books, it was also a really good frame for the working day, helping me to change my mind into and out of private/work mode.

    Currently, I'm forced to commute by car (no acceptable public transport connection). I've switched to audio books and while not the same thing, it does help. However, I notice how much more exhausted I arrive home, because driving in traffic does take constant concentration.

    If you are only driving, it's a waste. Using the time reduces the waste, and that part is in your hands.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  58. Re:Suckers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try setting up a basic sciences lab with multi-million dollar equipment in your home. Try doing other people's plumbing or electrical work from home.

    Meth-heads seem to be able to set up home labs, why can't you?

    ---and they are probably hiring! No need to commute when you can make product in your very own home!

  59. Suck it, americans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank god for Europe, have taken my bike to work/school all my life and the commute has always been 15min max (one-way).
    Some free exercise isn't bad either.

  60. Not always a waste of time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its not a waste of time for me to commute, I take mass transit and either work on projects, or study the language Iâ(TM)m learning.

  61. I quickly noticed an incorrect assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somewhat flawed and narrative oriented... I hate commuting to work and I live in a yellow graded city and I take measures to reduce time wasted in commute.

    In reviewing the map against places known personally - it appears that the study was consider with only commute time and that commute distance was not taken into consideration. The edge case noticed : some of the smaller towns (some with populations less than 10k) with the red grading do not have the physical capacity (infrastructure) for employment hence traffic delays and commute is due to distance to an employer.

    The assumption of a full-time working career that begins at 18 is most likely flawed - naively or otherwise.

    The article presents a singular facet as the total picture.

    The methodology should be published with the actual formulas used.

  62. yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Live in Spring, TX (like 5 min south of Woodlands), study is accurate.

  63. It depends on HOW you commute by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

    What percentage of the time you spend commuting is wasted depends on what mode of travel you use. Commuting time driving a car is nearly a total waste for most people, though some mitigate that a bit by listening to audiobooks, and you can sometimes combine the trip to work with needed errands. (For example, if you stop to buy groceries on the way home from the office, you eliminate time that you otherwise might spend taking a trip from home to get them.) Commuting by public transit varies depending on how crowded the train or bus is; it may be possible to read, or even get work done on a laptop on a long trip. Walking or bicycling to work is time spent on exercise, and not wasted at all for most people with desk jobs.

  64. time spent communting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    my commute is 40 mins a day.
    That's a lot of time away from the wife and kids, and not actually working.... So I wouldn't call it wasted.
    I only wish I lived further away from work.....

  65. Re:Republicans are too fat and lazy to bicycle tho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, because everyone knows it's the middle of the country that is completely clogged with vehicles and there's never a traffic jam on the coasts.