Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
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.
You have a vested interest in talking your book which is real-estate in inland CA where you live. If you were making actual points or backed comments, i'd hear you out but you are doing nothing but talking your book. So yes, you are 'talking' your 'walk' via talking up your book... It's called a conflicting bias.
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.
That's a pretty lame statement. Indeed Miami's job market sucks no arguing that, but saying there is nothing to do unless your retired is a joke. Don't move to FL for the warm weather, that's like saying I just want to move to the Bay Area for 24/7 Sweater Weather lol
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..
Actually they don't.... The unemployment rate does not tell you about the availability of jobs and needless to say its an aggregate number so it doesn't tell you about particular industries as well.
And before you go on another rant, I'm not suggesting that California is doing well right now...just that the unemployment rate can't be used to determine the availability of jobs.
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...
Bad sounding things... aka financial statistics that show the avg. high salary figure used to represent California is skewed by a very small %'age of people who are very wealthy.. Indicating income inequality is quite high.. The state is in the top 3 for unemployment and the gap between the wealthy and the middle class is the 3rd highest. Home-ownership rates are 2nd/3rd lowest by states in the country... top 10 in Highest taxes/COL ....Yes, of course against this 'publicly' accessible information, one can infer that your 'avg' Californian is doing great vs. the avg. American...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
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.
Florida is mainly 'urbanized' per your definition as are many of the major cities in the U.S ... and has way higher home ownership rates. Sorry, your comment means nothing. Here are the urban clusters across America :
California is in now way like New york. NY has population densities as high as 27,000 people per square mile, the closest California gets to that is 7,000 people per square mile in L.A.. Hardly a comparison .. SF forget about it.. is an even bigger joke in comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
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.
Ever hear of a cost of living index, try adjusting for cost of living and see what turns up ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
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....
You and myself who can easily afford a home but rent are anecdotes and are not Representative of the general population.. How do you arrive at who can afford a home? Easy, take income information and compare it to the cost of a home in various areas.. Factor in how much time it takes to save 'x' dollars given the high rent they are paying (data is also available).. The vast majority can't afford a home and you are being facetious as always pretending to the contrary ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
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...
I've never suggested such a thing....
There you go again w/ your false dilemma .. Yes, a family of 4 (2 kids/wife/husband) are most surely going to get by w/ a 1 bedroom in San Francisco. a 3/2.5 in the area you describe is going to run you about double what it would in other states if not triple. Given income data, you are hard pressed to explain how you are going to be financially better off (comparing apples to apples). I can't find anything avging less than 400/500k in SanFran that is a 3/1.5 .. That's $80/$100k downpayment for a traditional mortgage... and upon quick inspection this is in low-end areas of SF w/ bad schools...
Actually they don't.... The unemployment rate does not tell you about the availability of jobs and needless to say its an aggregate number so it doesn't tell you about particular industries as well.
And before you go on another rant, I'm not suggesting that California is doing well right now...just that the unemployment rate can't be used to determine the availability of jobs.
There you go again w/ no data to back anything you are saying accusing others who provide it as ranting.....
How about you post the job availability data by industry? California is doing horrible right now for a lot industries. As you like to note most often, the world doesn't revolve around tech. Further, a great deal of it is being prop'd up by money from uncle Sam that it has to pay back soon :
Just wait until people roll off the dole and its time to pay.... I wonder how many people are just barely hanging on and trying to remain in this state that they can no longer afford... Given the high COL here, if you are jobless, this state burns through a considerable amount of savings (if you have any) when you no longer have that 'month-to-month' check to keep you afloat.
Last edited by yeahthatguy; 12-06-2011 at 03:30 PM..
Bad sounding things... aka financial statistics that show the avg. high salary figure used to represent California is skewed by a very small %'age of people who are very wealthy..
So....as I said....California is home to many wealthy individuals. When you're worth millions you tend not to live in the dirty South...ya know?
Would California be a better place if wealthy folks all moved? No....so why is this an important statistic? Its not...
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
Florida is mainly 'urbanized' per your definition as are many of the major cities in the U.S ... and has way higher home ownership rates.
Umm.....except of course that I didn't give a definition. And no Florida hasn't urbanized to the degree California has....though there are certainly urbanized areas and those most costly. I know in your fancy California is universally expensive, but its not, if you look at the areas that aren't as urbanized (i.e., inland) the costs are much less.
Also, Florida? Florida is gross....its always going to be cheaper...
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
You and myself who can easily afford a home but rent are anecdotes and are not Representative of the general population.. How do you arrive at who can afford a home?
To say it again, there many lifestyles where owning a home doesn't make much sense. California, especially on the coast, has many "professionals" and these people often rent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeahthatguy
There you go again w/ your false dilemma .. Yes, a family of 4 (2 kids/wife/husband) are most surely going to get by w/ a 1 bedroom in San Francisco.
Umm...did you miss the part where I was talking about myself? I don't have 2 kids.
But heck, if I did have two kids I'd rather live in the bay area in a 2-bedroom apartment than live in a large home in the South.
But naturally you are missing the point, people make trade offs....a middle-class family can live in the bay area and do well financially if they forgo a big house. Same goes for Boston, NYC, etc. If having a large home is your raison d'etre.....then obviously the bay area isn't going to work unless you have a decent amount of money.
Its fine, some folks as yourself are materialistic....there are plenty of areas of the country for you guys. Why all the complaining though? Plan your move and get on with things....
Some people need to just unplug the info-vac and listen to their hearts... Highnlite is right - go where you want to be and if you're smart and resourceful, opportunities will open up for you.
I have to laugh at the SV bias on this and pretty much every other thread on city data. The super-educated should have the world by the balls and be able to live anywhere they please, but apparently that's not part of the deal for them
I also lived in Florida.. Sure, "nice" weather, but it's the most boring, redneck place I've ever been in. Since I hope to never, ever retire, I guess FLA's just not for me..
So....as I said....California is home to many wealthy individuals. When you're worth millions you tend not to live in the dirty South...ya know?
According to a 2009 UBS study of 73 world cities, Miami was ranked as the richest city in the United States, and the world's fifth-richest city in terms of purchasing power.[17]
You obviously don't get out much beyond California...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Would California be a better place if wealthy folks all moved? No....so why is this an important statistic? Its not...
It's important when you consider that California has the 3rd highest gap between the wealthy in its middle class and the avg. income statistic of California doesn't mean sh*t when you consider the avg. is skewed by heavy hands .. and that there is a small middle class (given its COL) and a big impoverished class...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Umm.....except of course that I didn't give a definition. And no Florida hasn't urbanized to the degree California has....though there are certainly urbanized areas and those most costly. I know in your fancy California is universally expensive, but its not, if you look at the areas that aren't as urbanized (i.e., inland) the costs are much less.
You're brainwashed and it shows. The major cities in Florida are urbanized - where the majority stay (go pull up the stats for yourself) and people own homes in those areas far above California's urban areas. The keyword is 'inland'.... don't fluff it w/ anything more than that ... Inland California is not desirable, the jobs aren't there and many people don't live there ... and thus the costs are much less.. You can't compare this to an urbanized city in another state that offers affordability to your avg. middle class person. One is urban and the other is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Also, Florida? Florida is gross....its always going to be cheaper...
LOL, that's all you had to say .. Your ignorant opinion overshadows most of your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
To say it again, there many lifestyles where owning a home doesn't make much sense. California, especially on the coast, has many "professionals" and these people often rent.
There's a difference between having the income/option to buy a home and choosing to rent and not having the income/option to buy a home and being forced to rent. As for how many people are forced/option, income stats/home cost speak for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Umm...did you miss the part where I was talking about myself? I don't have 2 kids.
Your commentary shows... Now compare a 1 bedroom in SF to one elsehwere ... 3x-4x the cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
But heck, if I did have two kids I'd rather live in the bay area in a 2-bedroom apartment than live in a large home in the South.
Try comparing apples to apples.. a 2 bedroom to a 2 bedroom ..as for the last part, you have already indicated that you think FL is disgusting .. So, you need say no more. Probably have never left the state of CA w/ the way you talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
But naturally you are missing the point, people make trade offs....a middle-class family can live in the bay area and do well financially if they forgo a big house. Same goes for Boston, NYC, etc. If having a large home is your raison d'etre.....then obviously the bay area isn't going to work unless you have a decent amount of money.
There are no big houses in the bay area typically... Compare apples to apples and stop being sneaky... I don't think you can because you think everyone who lives in CA is somehow more enlightened and wants to live in a shoebox whereas everyone outside of it wants to live in a McMansion.. Your ignorance shows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Its fine, some folks as yourself are materialistic....there are plenty of areas of the country for you guys. Why all the complaining though? Plan your move and get on with things....
Yes, everyone but Californians are materialistic. There's a big difference between having the option to afford something and choosing not to and not having the luxury of having anything and settling for whatever you can scrap up. No one is complaining.. I only seem to be disproving an ignorant close minded fool.. and i am enjoying every bit of it.
Some people need to just unplug the info-vac and listen to their hearts... Highnlite is right - go where you want to be and if you're smart and resourceful, opportunities will open up for you.
I have to laugh at the SV bias on this and pretty much every other thread on city data. The super-educated should have the world by the balls and be able to live anywhere they please, but apparently that's not part of the deal for them
I also lived in Florida.. Sure, "nice" weather, but it's the most boring, redneck place I've ever been in. Since I hope to never, ever retire, I guess FLA's just not for me..
It's funny how you contradict yourself in your own post same post.
Happiness is where you you want it to be.. Affordability is a matter of dollars and cents. I am sure you didn't live in a nice part of FL if that is your assessment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
