California vs. Texas provides very stark job comparison (Bakersfield, Modesto: living, moving to)

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by user_id

I don't think this was a clerical mistake, it was central to what you were saying. You just keep moving the goal post. Regardless, Texas is an ugly state and that is why wealthy folks aren't flocking to it to buy homes.

In terms of the other tread, no evolution frame war at all, the point of my comments was that its silly to be hostile against people because they doubt evolution.

No matter how you want to slice and dice it I know what I think and it was a mistake. You tried saying that most Texans live in the rural areas...and that is total BS...that was my point.

Regarding the other thread...it was your flame war since evolution goes right over your head!

You show so much unfriendly words and insulting arrogance whenever anyone thinks differently then you...even when they can point out the truth and facts right in front of your face...you think you know it all and that is why you can't learn anything new outside of your belief system. Big chip on your shoulder for sure!

[TVC15]

Hey lets get back to the real topic of this tread and not the bickering between me and user_id!

Dan Walters: California vs. Texas provides very stark job comparison - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee (http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/26/3727778/dan-walters-california-vs-texas.html - broken link)



http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/laus.pdf

[ahzzie]

Originally Posted by winkosmosis

It sounds like you're remembering what you want to remember. Late fall and winter in Houston/East Texas is dreary, wet, and cold. It might as well be Seattle or Portland.

No...it's not. Weather during that time of year in Houston is more similar to the weather in L.A., not Seattle. Of course with what we've been through with the extreme heat and drought this summer we WISH we could have that rainy Seattle weather for a while.

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by user_id

That is a "very nice neighborhood" if your standards are very low, "very nice" isn't consistent with homes that are going for below construction costs.

Regardless, you can find similarly priced homes in:

Clovis Real Estate & Clovis Homes For Sale — Trulia.com

How did I know you would attack the quality of the neighborhood? I almost predicted it, but thought I'd let you do that yourself. Of course you would find fault. Like all good liberals, you never let the facts get in the way of a good rant. And you always make exceptions to an argument that doesn't go your way. Whatever.

You really are ignorant about this whole subject. And in true lib fashion, take the rude route. Showing trailers in Clovis in no way furthers your argument. The home I shared with you is in a nice neighborhood, in a good school district, near a major metro area, with good construction. To ignore these facts just proves you have no desire to have a civil conversation.

[roadwarrior101]

Well, the unemployment rate in the Silicon Valley for those with a college degree is something like 5% (or less). Cities in CA with the highest unemployment rate are primarily agricultural-based or on the outskirts of the major metropolitan areas (foreclosure crisis). Texas largely escaped this crisis as they had much more stringent lending laws prior to the crisis.

For me, as a high-tech professional in the silicon valley, with a graduate degree, the case for Texas is not so compelling. The main draw for me moving somewhere like Austin would be due to the cost of living, not due to a superior job market.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by TVC15

You tried saying that most Texans live in the rural areas...and that is total BS...that was my point.

Nope, I said that most Texans live in rural and suburban communities.

Originally Posted by TVC15

Regarding the other thread...it was your flame war since evolution goes right over your head!

Its a flame war because you think I said something wrong? Hardly....

[user_id]

Originally Posted by ringwise

How did I know you would attack the quality of the neighborhood? I almost predicted it, but thought I'd let you do that yourself.

Probably because its obvious? If homes are selling for below construction costs, then the neighborhood isn't desirable. How could it be otherwise? The costs represents low demand, not what you'd expect in a "nice neighborhood" in a growing city.

The link I gave you was for SFR in Clovis, apparently you didn't get past the first page to see that non-manufactured homes start in the $50k~$60k range.

Also, the home you picked is a lot cheaper than the average homes in the area, in fact you seemed to just list the cheapest listing you could find. Now are we to assume that this single house is just some excellent deal or that there is something about the home that justifies its low cost?

I must say though, Texas is awesome in the sense that its attracting all the people that speak in terms of "you liberals", etc. Awesome! Move'em all out.

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by user_id

Probably because its obvious? If homes are selling for below construction costs, then the neighborhood isn't desirable. How could it be otherwise? The costs represents low demand, not what you'd expect in a "nice neighborhood" in a growing city.

The link I gave you was for SFR in Clovis, apparently you didn't get past the first page to see that non-manufactured homes start in the $50k~$60k range.

Also, the home you picked is a lot cheaper than the average homes in the area, in fact you seemed to just list the cheapest listing you could find. Now are we to assume that this single house is just some excellent deal or that there is something about the home that justifies its low cost?

I must say though, Texas is awesome in the sense that its attracting all the people that speak in terms of "you liberals", etc. Awesome! Move'em all out.

Again "you liberals" fall into the same tactics over and over. Your original argument was that homes in CA were the same as in TX. NOW, it's that homes in TX are below construction costs. What are you talking about now?

And, I'll say it again - you're showing your complete ignorance of reality. The costs represents housing costs in this area. Just because you've decided that, because it doesn't further your argument, it isn't in a nice area, you're going to ignore that fact proves that you are "one of those liberals".

Done with arguing with you about this. You'll always find a reason why someone else's argument is not valid, and that you have the only truth.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by ringwise

Your original argument was that homes in CA were the same as in TX. NOW, it's that homes in TX are below construction costs. What are you talking about now?

You may want to reread what I stated. My argument was not that homes in California are the same as Texas, instead, that when you compare apples-to-apples the costs in California are not dramatically higher than in Texas.

People in this thread are trying to compare bay area real estate to some drab suburbs of Dallas, etc. That isn't a serious comparison.

As far the second issue, apparently you didn't get the point. When homes start selling for below the costs of construction that means that the homes aren't attractive, that is there is low demand for the homes. This is not want you see in "nice neighborhoods". This is just as true in California as it is in Texas. The desirable areas of Texas don't have homes for below construction costs. But since Texas has an almost endless supply of ugly flat land to build houses on there isn't much of a land premium in Texas real estate, you only see significant land premiums in Texas in the areas that are naturally desirable. For example, homes built around Travis Lake in Austin.

[pawnforward]

California vs. Texas hahahaha:

Official California vs. Texas Rap Battle - YouTube