![]() |
Quote:
|
Missoula, Montana
It's a college town far from the bright lights. The cost-of-living is lower than on the coast, of course. The weather is harsher. Scenery is purtier. You've got your micro-brews, your cowboys, and your trout streams in abundance.
|
Oh hey, Anchorage is actually on your list.
I don't know if I could live there for an extended period of time, but if you really are looking at this as just a short term thing, and springboard elsewhere, you might want to jump on the opportunity to live in Anchorage. Food and other goods can be pricey, but land is cheap, there's no state tax, and you get a couple thousand dollars of oil revenue sharing money every year. Of course, I haven't experienced winter there, there's no denying that it's harsh. But if you even glanced at our absurdly large photo album from our trip last May you know just how astoundingly beautiful it is there. It's a whole other world, a life experience you can't possibly get anywhere else on that list. Except maybe Fairbanks...but it doesn't have the ocean to keep things at least partially moderate, weather-wise. As I understand it, that 300 mile difference is a big one. |
I'm a little torn about the temporary/permanent thing. I'd really like to do a federal appellate clerkship at some point, which will likely mean at least one year at the district court level first - or two years at state court. So, that's up to three years clerking. Assuming any federal appellate judge would have me, considering the lack of prestige associated with my institution of higher learning.
I'm also torn on the term/career clerk decision. I'm not sure I would be happy in a conventional firm. I might be happy, however, clerking for a number of years and moving into government or policy work. Which means I might end up staying put for awhile. Plus, I hate moving, so I'd like to do it as little as possible. So, I guess I'd rank places that are nice to live long-term over places that would be tolerable for a year. Alaska does rate somewhat high on my list for its potential to involve not having neighbors so close I could lean out my kitchen and smack them. But it's pretty far away from anyone I know, any family, and anything we like to do. Conversely, California is closer to people I know and the weather wouldn't prohibit family visiting for Christmas, but damn there are a lot of people. (That's why Sacramento was on the list, actually - in California, close enough for driving vacations to places we like to go, but housing seemed relatively affordable - which makes me wonder what's wrong with Sacramento.) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Hahaha. |
Quote:
Plus, it's effin' hot in the summer. |
Quote:
|
Oh, and it's effin' hot almost year round anyplace you could afford to buy a house in Southern California ... plus those locations do not have what we like to call "air," but rather a compustible mixure of pollutants that the body's lungs will grudgingly accept .... until they prematurely don't.
|
Every area has it's drawbacks. You just have to figure out which ones you can live with. Sacramento is hot in the summer, but maybe heat doesn't bother you. LA area has traffic but maybe a few hours alone in your car every day is ok with you.
I have a former co-worker who moved to Chicago from San Diego, huge change there. They love it. They love having so much to do nearby, easy public transportation and as long as you don't stand around outside in the winter it's not so bad. One of my best friends lives in Portland because she can't stand heat. Another lives in Phoenix cause she can't take the cold. Personally I'd rather move somewhere smaller. But unfortunatley I'm stuck here for another 7 years so just have to make the best of it. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.