Here's an interesting post I found this morning. It compares the pros and cons of retiring in a big city versus a small town.
Which would you prefer?
For me, I like a middle to small sized-city where you can live far enough out to be "in the country" but close enough to take advantage of what a good-sized city has to offer.
I can lump this post in with those “How to move to a rural area and become a millionaire!” posts. In my mind either your money is working for you, or you're working for your money. The primary issue for me is not how to best stretch my retirement dollar, but how to accumulate enough so that I can live where my family lives (or in reasonable proximity), and then work to stretch my retirement dollar. Money is tool to achieve your goals - I can't/won’t structure my goals simply for the sake of making money. I want to retire in an area where I can see as many of my children and grandchildren as often as possible. (Granted, I'm 31 right now and currently have neither). One of my goals in creating/growing wealth is to have enough at retirement to allow me to live in the geographic area where I will see my family. To decide to live somewhere, either now or at retirement, simply for the sake of spending less/saving more, I feel like, what's the point? I'd rather have higher expenses, save less, and be near my family than have super low expenses and be isolated from everyone I know and love. For me, personally, these theories are a bit backwards. Just my $.02.
Posted by: Amy | February 18, 2008 at 12:49 PM
This is interesting.
We are living in a small town about 70 kms from the Federal Capital. This small town is also a State Capital, so it has all the Government departments that we have to deal with.
We are enjoying the small town life and yet have the full life of the biggest city in the country about 45 minutes away.
No regrets so far.
Posted by: fathersez | February 18, 2008 at 10:47 PM
I think it depends on personal preferences as well as financial situation. If you like theaters you are better off in or near big cities, preferably NYC; if you like hiking you probably want to live in a small town with lots of hiking. If you like both, you my want to live close to a big city but in a wooded area. If you don't care about theaters, there is no point to pay the premium for living close to a big city. Obviously, you have to be able to afford the place.
Personally, I like to live where I am - in a small town but within commuting distance to NYC.
Posted by: kitty | February 18, 2008 at 10:49 PM
I'm like you I like the best of both worlds. The city has a lot to offer in the way of entertainment and services but there is also a lot to be said for having a nice quiet place to relax. The ideal option might be to have a cottage in the country not too far from the city and a small house or condo in the city for when you want to or need to be there. Though this does require a bit more in the way of retirement planning.
Posted by: Matt | February 19, 2008 at 08:10 AM
I live in a small city; New Haven, CT to be exact. Much has been written about stretching the retirement $ by moving to a less expensive area. The fact still remains that the best medical, educational, and cultural activities and most services are located in the city. I live in a suburban-like neighborhood where I can walk to restaurants, the cleaners, and use public transportation. What planners don't tell you that the further from the city that you live, the more you need to depend upon your automobile. And we all know what that cost these days. For those who want to ski or hike or go to the beach, the truth is that most people don't do that everyday, and at some point in life you're going to need the services that are offered in cities. I can always visit more rural areas, but for my retirement buck, and even today, give me where I live. Having a second home is prohibitive unless you're very weathy. p.s. Don't think that because you live in a suburban or rural area that you're safe from crime. About 9 nine months ago, Connecticut-ites witnessed one of the most horrific crimes in a tony part of a suburb: almost an entire family was murdered in their home. No one is far from crime.
Posted by: carol | February 19, 2008 at 09:28 AM
My wife and I have been married for 11 years. At 33 years old, we have yet to start having kids. If we have 2 in the next 4 years or so, we'll be 55 when they both turn 18. Perfect time to retire (if we can swing it... and if we want to).
Right now we live in a small town of about 40,000 people that's about an hour outside Chicago. It has small-town charm with big-city proximity. Where will we retire? Well, if we don't just stay here, I think it would be fun to retire to a big city. Public transportation, more activity than we could ever want, and none of the usual home-owning hassles (shoveling snow, mowing grass, etc) if we live in a condo (with a view), and an airport nearby.
Of course, we enjoy our lives right now, so maybe we'll just stay put. :)
Posted by: Rich Schmidt | February 21, 2008 at 01:04 PM