Herb: I think "ego trip" is a really inaccurate term.

Sure, the quality of food is important, but it's not the only factor.

"Good restaurants" (i.e., trendy, unique atmosphere, new ways of doing old stuff) have an appeal that goes beyond personal esthetics. As places where business is done--again, directly or indirectly--they have intrinsic value to those who can profit by being in them.

Your complaint might apply better to night clubs (which I don't habituate), but even there it's not always a safe assumption. In some places--Japan, China, Taiwan leap instantly to mind--business is done in the "right" nightclubs, not any old nightclub.

Unless you're in a one stoplight town, I can't imagine that there's not a stratification of places to be seen in, as well as places never to be seen in. So maybe you get to drop a zero at the end of the prices... the principle is the same.

http://www.opm.gov/feddata/html/paystructure/2004/table6.asp

This is 2004 data. I misspoke about "average" grade, when I meant "median" grade. You can see GS-13s are by far the larges group in the DC area. I'll admit I'm off on the average or mean salary, but it's still up there. Don't forget many of these people are in dual income households, so many of them are already above $100k in combined income.

Am I to understand that the "fine restaurants" in NYC, DC and Chicago are an ego trip and the quality of the food doesn't count for much.

If that's the case, then an ego trip is not an acceptable excuse for complaining about high prices.

As PT Barnum once said: "There is one born every minute"

When I left the Foreign Service, I also left DC to move to FL (no earned income tax is nice). But to do the work I do now--mostly my blog about Saudi Arabia and Islam--I still need to travel to DC every month or so. Embassies aren't located in minor cities. Think tanks aren't located there, either.

I do think a lot of the federal government could be "decentralized", with the bulk of the employees of most executive agencies relocated around the country. But some might just as well stay, like the Pentagon, CIA, and State.

And there's no reason for the Supreme Court or Congress to try and move. A huge portion of Washington's population and jobs are tied, directly or indirectly, to Congress.

I differ with Herb about restaurants, though. They aren't only about food. Were that the case, I'd never have to dine out because I can cook a good dozen cuisines perfectly well, including French haute cuisine. Restaurants are also about atmosphere, trends, and being seen. Who--useful to me--is going to see me in your town or most other towns?

I love my local restaurants and do use them. But they're not to be confused with a really top restaurant in NYC, DC, London, Rome, Vienna, or Paris. The food in the locals may be perfectly good in terms of freshness, art, presentation, quality. But let's not pretend they're the same. Hell, if I lived in Chicago, I couldn't even get fois gras!

As for "most" government employees (I'm not one) making over $100K, out of 15 GS grades (which doesn't include supervisors, political appointees, and part-time assassins), you don't crack $100K in the D.C. area until the very last of ten steps of Grade 13. Sure that doesn't include fringes but "most"? Really.

I understand some of what you say, but, I really dis-agree with you about the "Great Restaurants". I live very near a small town that has one of the finest restaurants that one would want. They serve a steak that better that "Ruth Chris and many other "famous steak houses". I have traveled many places during my working career and have had dinner at some of finest restaurants in Europe, England and South America and I would compare our little "home town" restaurant with any of them. We have a "fried Chicken" restaurant nearby where the tables are very plain, the silverware is stainless and the table cloths are gingham, but the fried chicken is without doubt the finest in the country. Along with the great chicken, there is a piano player there that plays music (Not the crap of today) and she never takes a break.
It makes no difference what kind of food one wants, we have it right here and it's great.

PS: If you are evre near Batesville Indiana, Drop in to the "Sherman House" and enjoy a great steak. It will be the beat you ever ate.

For the most part, these things are self-dictating. Washington attracts journalists and public policy types because that's where the nation's capital is.

I suppose the financial center could be somewhere other than Manhattan but it kind of makes sense for it to be aggregated somewhere. Anywhere that happened would wind up being a big city.

Some jobs also naturally gravitate around big cities. You can't support great restaurants or the arts without a large population center.

Now, I could probably do the kind of work I want to do anywhere given the Internet. But there are certainly more opportunities near DC, with its concentration of government, national security apparatus, think tanks, and the like. It's also much easier to network here for that reason.

It seems to me that those employers who are in the National Public Policy,Architecture, Journalism, entertainment, and Financial Trade arenas, are calling the shots for their employees. Is it worth working for anyone who "Tells" or "Dictates" where you will live and the Crime rate that is present in those areas because they have made the corporate decision for their location.

If those who qualify for those "High Paying" jobs are not located or will not relocate to the location of these corporations, the employer would have to relocate to a place where the prices are more reasonable, crime is lower and life in general is better. On top of that, Corporations that are located in these high price areas would find that they to would have "Less Operating Costs" if they were located in more suitable areas.

What it boils down to is, People choose where they want to work and live and must suffer the effects of those areas that are less suitable for living and put up with the consequences of that choice and therefore the government has no business or right to subsidize their choice. The people themselves, who live in those less desirable areas are to blame for the high prices they pay for housing, food, taxis,
etc.

The solution for the problem is so easy: Move away from those companies who dictate where they are located and they to will move to more desirable locations due to a severe lack of a skilled workforce.

If no is willing to make the "First Move" then everything will remain "Status Quo"

The solution is: seek employment elsewhere. The charms of metro DC, such as they are, just ain't all that charming to induce me to move from Hampton Roads.

When the only people who can afford to live in a city are doctors, lawyers and homeless people, sooner or later the business will move to other, more reasonable locations.

The decline has been less steep closer in. I'm out in Alexandria-Fairfax and a nice colonial is still going in the $900k-$1.2 mil range, down maybe 10% from last year. In McLean, a fixer-upper starts at $1 mil.

I am with Herb, I am much more of a country girl than a City girl.

I think the hearts are in the right place on this, but I am no too sure the government needs to subsidize housing for people making that much money. Maybe a nice local charity, like Habitat for Humanity or something can help get them in something affordable, I just don't think the government should be doing it.

As to the question why anyone would want to live and work in a high cost area such as DC - I would agree with James that the city draws a certain crowd that likes to do "government" work. Such work is not without rewards. Most government employees and contractors make close to or over $100,000. Lawyers and some technology people make much more. I certainly can't make what I make living in Akron.