Thinking of exiting the rat race - anyone else have similar experiences? (San Francisco: middle-class, apartment)

[user_id]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

Having to rent your whole life, having no assets, or money in the bank is a 'good life' for many until they loose their jobs.. Many of which can be found on TV crying to all high hell about how the 'conditions they created for themselves' that made them happy (up until reality struck) wasn't in fact conditions made by them but by others ....

I am less concerned with the fool living month-to-month in rental bliss and more concerned with what percentage of people living comfortably and are actually able to build a financial nest egg for their future.

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here.... A home is just one type of asset....and on many levels its not a particularly desirable one.

Californians aren't living "month-to-month" in greater numbers than people in other states.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Cyberfire

You're right, it's not apples to apples - that's kind of the point. "the city" in Idaho is actually quite nice - it's just on a much smaller scale, which is a nice change.

But that isn't really the point... The fact that there are areas cheaper than the bay area isn't interesting at all, what would be interesting is if there were areas that were similar in key ways yet cheaper.

If you like Boise great, but its nothing...and I mean...nothing...like the bay area. Someone making $100k+ in the bay area is unlikely to find a similar job in Boise....

Originally Posted by Cyberfire

I think some people are missing the point - it's not about rural living. If I wanted to do that, I could find some cheap farm property out in the middle of nowhere, or some mountain home. The point is finding decent COL near a business hub, or smaller city - things which other states offer more of.

Who said anything about rural living? You have some sort of odd double standard. You are speaking of Boise as if its a serious city, but its population is only 200,000...you can find many cities that large or larger inland.

There are many decent sized cities throughout inland California. The inland empire is larger, population wise, that many states.....

Originally Posted by Cyberfire

Unfortunately, for my generation (I'm in my late 20's), we're kind of left holding the bag, being Bay Area natives. Our parents bought homes here when the prices were sane, and have since built up massively in price, and job opportunities were more stable. That isn't the same bay area I live in today.

Right, in reality this is all about buying a house. Remove that requirement and most of the issues vanish....

The bay area has transformed over the last 2-3 decades, if you look at older cities on the east you'll find that people don't have the same issues with renting....its not viewed as some sort of inferior lowly option. What you're seeing in the bay area is just the nature progression of an urban area....

If someone is going to consider home ownership to be a defining aspect of their life than....sure...perhaps the bay area isn't the best option for them unless they are in the top income percentile.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by user_id

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here.... A home is just one type of asset....and on many levels its not a particularly desirable one.

Californians aren't living "month-to-month" in greater numbers than people in other states.

http://www.cbpp.org/files/4-9-08sfp-fact-ca.pdf.
-> The gap between California’s richest and poorest families is 8th largest in the nation.

-> The gap between California’s richest families and families in the middle is 3rd largest in the nation.

-> California has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country.

-> The state with the lowest home ownership rate in 2009 was the District of Columbia (45.6%), followed by New York (54.5%) and Hawaii/California (both at 56.1% http://www.danter.com/statistics/ho2010.pdf)

A home is just one type of asset ..
Home ownership is one of the first assets most people accumulate.. get out of here w/ that foolishness..
> top 3 in highest unemployment rate...
> Higher poverty rate that the u.S average (god help the poverty rate if you adjust for cost of living)
> One of the lowest home ownership rates in the u.s
> High inequality rate compared to the u.s (Say goodbye to that lofty avg. income value of Californian's when you realize a small minority are the ones skewing it..)

No money.. No homes.. If you think the financial makeup of Californians isn't by and large different than the u.s, you most be on some of that good California green. People don't rent because they can afford homes.. They generally rent because they can't afford... Data speaks for itself. A big bump has come along in California's history and a lot of people are a$$ out because they have no savings and have no form of assets/equity to draw on. But hey, to you, making $65k and only socking away $300 a month is living the 'high' life. After 12 years, you have enough to cover your living expenses for a year.. Dem thar' are great finances bro !

[blauskies]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Perhaps a somewhat less specialized area would be a good career move.

For example, I know of several engineers & scientists who, at mid-career, went to law school & became patent attorneys. Mostly they do patent prosecution (writing patents & filing them with the USPTO). Several of them have chosen to live in less densely populated areas (Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, etc) because all they really need is broadband, a good computer, FedEx & telephones. They have a great quality of life. And patent law is booming.

Not my cup of tea, I would rather sit and do differential equations then be a patent attorney. Just something I do not picture myself ever enjoying.

Living in a rural area may have it's benefits but for me the negatives often outweigh the positives not just on the career opportunity aspect but other things outside of that. It works for some people but I have had mixed results from my past experience.

Serious lack of culture, quality ethnic food, dealing with people who live a sheltered life and so on.

[DMenscha]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

Says the real-estate broker who lives in BFE talking his book ! .
Leave California and find that you can live in a major city with affordable homes ... and not have to live in BFE to be able to buy one.. Sounds like a hellavuh lot better option to me.

Apparently, unlike you I walk my talk. As for the BFE comment, you obviously haven't been off the freeway very far. Out here in "BFE" we even manage to coexist with folks like you.

[.highnlite]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
Says the real-estate broker who lives in BFE talking his book ! .
Leave California and find that you can live in a major city with affordable homes ... and not have to live in BFE to be able to buy one.. Sounds like a hellavuh lot better option to me.

Based on my drive into San Jose last week, it is apparent that BFE is the large urban megaslobopolis.

One has to be an odd person indeed to enjoy stop and go on an 8 lane freeway, just to move from one patch of concrete to another.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

-> The gap between California’s richest and poorest families is 8th largest in the nation.
-> The gap between California’s richest families and families in the middle is 3rd largest in the nation.

Right....that is because California is home to many wealthy individuals. But what does this have to do with the number of people living month-to-month? Nothing..... But this is what you do huh? Just randomly list bad sounding things...

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

-> The state with the lowest home ownership rate in 2009 was the District of Columbia (45.6%), followed by New York (54.5%) and Hawaii/California

Yes...and? Urbanized areas have lower rates of home ownership...Most of California, population wise, is urbanized. Indeed, much of the complaining from people, such as yourself, is really just complaining about the fact that over the last 2-3 decades California has become largely an urbanized area.

4 decades ago California was like Texas, where as today its more like New York. J

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

> Higher poverty rate that the u.S average (god help the poverty rate if you adjust for cost of living)

The poverty rate in California is around the same as the nation as a whole....indeed most states are within 1% of the national average. The outliers are the poor conservative Southern states that have a lot of poverty and the wealthy liberal new England states that have little poverty. Anyhow...nothing to see here.

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

People don't rent because they can afford homes.. They generally rent because they can't afford... Data speaks for itself.

They don't? Interesting because I rent and can easily afford to buy a home... In fact...I know a number of people just like me.

People rent for all sorts of reasons and only the financially naive think home ownership is universally superior to renting. It all depends on your lifestyle....

I'd much rather rent a small 1-bedroom in San Fransisco than own a large home in the South.... Now if you prefer the large home in the South...go for it...just don't pretend as if you're going to be financially better off...

Originally Posted by yeahthatguy

But hey, to you, making $65k and only socking away $300 a month is living the 'high' life.

I've never suggested such a thing....

[mayorhaggar]

Originally Posted by blauskies

You won't be escaping "the rat race" moving to South Florida, would be like going from one frying pan to another albeit a smaller pan. You can toss Orlando in there as well. On average, the slow paced areas have less opportunity in the way of careers and are good for the retired and wealthy.

There's no rat race in Florida because there's no jobs. I'd almost consider moving there just for the warm weather but there's really nothing to do there for work or play if you aren't retired.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by mayorhaggar

There's no rat race in Florida because there's no jobs. I'd almost consider moving there just for the warm weather but there's really nothing to do there for work or play if you aren't retired.

The unemployment statistics show something much different. Again, California is in the top 3 states w/ highest unemployment. Seems like there are no jobs here, if you are able to do basic math..

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by .highnlite

You are whining, and again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Which figures, being a city boy and all.

Pick your landscape then pick your job. It works, I am retired now, and I have never had a year round job. I have worked for private and I have worked for government, despite your odd declaration, government jobs will be around.

Consider this, wildfires are getting bigger and more common, that means more Federal and State Firefighters, but, to do that work one must be strong, fit, capable of thinking under pressure.

Based on what you state is important to you, you would not survive a season. Spend fire season doing that, then move to a ski town and ski until the next fire season.

It works, and it works well, and you don't have to live in hell, which is any big city and Florida.

Living in Florida dear boy, is like being dead, people with no imagination may find it interesting, but no interesting people would.

Here, a little experiment for you. Fill you sink with water, stick your head in it. Pull your head out, notice the size of the hole you left.

That is the size of the impact you will have on this earth.