Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

cmajka8 t1_ithx2bh wrote

Rutland and Princeton are both pretty rural arent they? I dont think its a fair comparison to Worcester

20

NativeMasshole t1_iti7gc4 wrote

I'm honestly a bit confused here. Living in Holden or Sterling isn't really any cheaper than Worcester, while Paxton and Rutland are more rural so land is a bit cheaper. These towns aren't even really comparable to each other.

8

Emergency-War7360 t1_itiaofc wrote

I guess Holden is good if you work in worcester but it's a long way to anywhere East. Rutland and Princeton are rural though.

3

[deleted] OP t1_ithy3p3 wrote

[removed]

−7

cmajka8 t1_ithy9tw wrote

Yeah but what is there to do in Rutland? You cant compare a city to a suburb like Rutland

7

NovelNo87 t1_itibm05 wrote

I lived in Rutland for almost a year because I was having trouble finding an affordable apartment close to my job in the city. Not much to do and I spent most of my time out of town anyway, but I really liked the Rail trail and all other hiking trails that I could just walk to from my apartment. I found a lot of cool little known historic sites buried deep in the woods and learned a lot of local history. But long term it never would’ve worked out for me.

4

Radz12765 t1_itiq8ky wrote

Rutland is out there. Ashland is close to Framingham and closer to Rt9, 495, 90. So probably the longer commute from Rutland that makes is more affordable

4

Ok-Grand-1882 t1_iti2mp7 wrote

Middle of nowhere if you're a commuter.

18

ntcummings42 t1_ithx7tx wrote

Yes, but you're missing out on so much else. If you want to do literally anything else - grocery shopping, culture, nightlife, restaurants - have fun spending just as much time in the car as you do at the event. Add to that a regular commute for work, from an area that doesn't have sufficient highway access. And don't forget less reliable public services (including snowplows).

There are folks that hate "city life" and love being self-reliant and set apart from the rest of the world. I am not one of those people.

15

Notfromcorporate t1_ithzjb8 wrote

A bit dramatic..

It’s a 20ish minute drive to downtown worcester from Rutland and both those areas have fine plow service.

4

FirstOrderRouge t1_iti34vf wrote

Paxton is literally immediately outside Worcester, has excellent infrastructure and public services for its size, and access to a premium school district.

2

legalpretzel t1_itinigm wrote

Paxton has a fairly high residential property tax rate. They offer a discounted rate to anyone over 65 (and there’s a lot of elderly living in Paxton) and they don’t have much in the way of commercial property to help offset the towns budgetary needs, so buying there is more expensive than the other larger wachusett towns.

2

slum_life_frownface t1_itip2he wrote

if you're rich and willing to live in a town full of assholes, you'd be a lot better moving to a real town closer to Boston than wasting your money on a palace in the middle of the woods.

0

[deleted] OP t1_ithxu3s wrote

[removed]

−3

jp_jellyroll t1_itimo0t wrote

Auburn's schools are directly on par with Holden's. Wachusett Regional is hardly a farm school for the Ivys. There are nice houses & shitty houses in both towns.

You're cherry-picking for Holden because you have some weird boner for Holden despite it being a quiet, boring town. Lol, having a Big Y gets you excited to live in Holden..? Not that Auburn is a wonderland, I'm just saying you're making it sound like "Pawnee vs Eagleton" when really both towns are equally... meh.

10

This-Recording9461 t1_itiku24 wrote

What's going on with OP's post history? Is this a real account? Someone with too much free time?

7

legalpretzel t1_itinqua wrote

They post OFTEN about this subject, and always include listings. It makes you wonder if they work in the industry. Otherwise they should just pick a town and buy a place so they can stop asking these same questions every month or so.

11

swoldier_force t1_itip97g wrote

But his son will be very angry with him… /s

7

This-Recording9461 t1_itiptce wrote

I read the one from a few days ago about the gifted kid, and the Holden principal that uses an outdated iphone, and the only thing I could think was it had to be a troll post, like "shit Holden parents say."

8

jbezorg76 t1_itj0341 wrote

He deleted his account. Was it that bad?

2

swoldier_force t1_itj0x3x wrote

About two dozen posts over the past few days. All the same length. Reposted to various subreddits. All the same topic, ranting about buying a big house in Holden, and his 11-year old son demanding they buy in Boston instead.

3

albalfa t1_itj60ib wrote

Ahh so I'm not alone.

Just replied on their other post today that this whole spiel just reeks of something being off.

1

AWalker17 t1_iti41pj wrote

Because it’s boring af there and many people want to live where there is culture, diversity, and something to do besides hang at home.

6

BarreNice t1_itib7sa wrote

Used to live in Barre. These places have their charm and benefits- when my husband and I moved to MA in 2019 on two teacher salaries, and had to buy a home, Worcester was on the edge of affordable but too competitive still, so we looked at homes in many of the places you noted. They are all really fairly different, and generally the closer you are to freeway access, the more expensive. Princeton is not very affordable at this point, especially if you’re thinking in terms of housing. It’s a beautiful place to live, and my favorite of the places you mentioned, with fantastic schools- but still a drive to get anywhere. It gets increasingly rural, affordable, conservative, and in some places, impoverished and rough, the further in you go, in my experience.

5

jesseMc420 t1_ithyctd wrote

Taxes are pretty high there though

4

Feralhousewife930 t1_iti8w1d wrote

Not as bad as Worcester.

0

beaux-tie t1_itin65k wrote

Simply not true in terms of residential tax for the towns being discussed — just a quick glance, but Rutland (15.79/1000), Paxton (18.98/1000), Holden (16.56/1000), Princeton (15.68/1000), and even sterling (15.25/1000) have higher residential tax rates than Worcester (15.21/1000).

Commercial taxes are another matter entirely, and there Worcester definitely has these towns beat. If Worcester didn’t have a dual tax rate, I imagine the residential tax would be higher than this to make up the difference.

3

[deleted] OP t1_itioxl1 wrote

[deleted]

2

beaux-tie t1_itipbpl wrote

I don’t dispute this. I do dispute saying that taxes are higher in Worcester than the communities being discussed by OP, which they simply aren’t, at least in terms of residential properties

3

thisisntmynametoday t1_iti5dw9 wrote

Housing supply is the main factor. Holden and the surrounding towns have been steadily growing and adding new housing stock as people are priced out of the Boston area. These towns have plenty of undeveloped land to build single family houses compared to other towns to the east, or a city like Worcester.

New subdivisions are going up rapidly, and that’s keeping the price of previously built houses down. Once they stop building, prices will start to escalate.

4

Ju2blue t1_itiyvxb wrote

I just bought my house in Worcester in September, we spent the summer house hunting and found the opposite to be true. The houses we looked at in Holden were often much smaller and usually more outdated and were going for at least 30-50k more (and selling FAST) than a comparable sized house/land in Worcester..

4

Sweetbeansmcgee t1_itizuuq wrote

Maybe because I don’t wanna live around a bunch of people like OP who think they’re superior to people in Worcester…

3

Zaius1968 t1_itimu9x wrote

Maybe because it takes two days to reach the nearest highway. Hyperbole…but you get my point. They aren’t commuting towns.

2