Why California's High Cost of Living Might Be a Good Thing ... (Bakersfield: real estate market, condos)

[RangerDuke08]

You pay for what you get ... People that can afford it still live there, more and more of the middle class are the ones moving out to NV, AZ, NM, UT, CO, ID, OR over the past 20 years. Eventually the disparity will rise along with that to accomodate the poor (illegals consisting of 25% of the population) and the rich maintaining the affluence in lifestyle of hollywood, politics and big businesses.

I lived in Santa Barbara, CA for a few years, one of the most expensive places in the nation and what I found out there wasn't exactly that individuals were rich through ingenuity or hard work either. Most of them came through either communal or inheritance, in fact a lot of them millionaires were just getting by. Mind you the housing was $1,000,000 on average with places like Hope Ranch at $5,000,000 on average. How did these illegals manage? Well they lived 10 person in 1 house. I mean if the mortgage was $5000/month they managed $500/each. While as those in the rich usually had extended families, for example when grandpa dies, he leaves you with $1,000,000. Unfortunately those that had $1,000,000 spent it on a $1,000,000 house instead of spending it on a $500,000 house and putting the rest in the bank.

People just don't go to Lalaland and strike it rich, neither does one go to lalaland and become a movie star overnight (met quite a few daddy's girls turned starving models/dancers with those aspirations). People may dream it but it's not that simple, there is a system in place and if one does not understand the system they will be at a significant disadvantage.

[sheri257]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

The high cost of living is going to hit the middle class the hardest. The poor / illegals will just go on welfare. The rich can take the hit. That leaves the middle class to leave the state. And I've known some middle income, decent, tax paying families that recently had to leave because of the economic climate around Ventura county.

Again, you're not reading what you're posting ... Sure, welfare rolls are up with the recent economic downturn as I'm sure they are everywhere. But, overall, welfare rolls are dramatically down from 13 years ago. From the same Sacramento Bee article ...

Demand for social services rises as funding falls - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee

In California, welfare caseloads plummeted 45 percent ...

In July 1995, two years before the Legislature enacted reforms, Sacramento County's welfare rolls peaked at 46,362 cases. This past July, that number had shrunk to 30,749, a drop of about 34 percent.

If the state is too expensive for the middle class ... what makes you think poor people can afford it either? It doesn't make any sense.

From the article I originally posted on this thread:

Lopez says an increasing number of farmworkers are skipping the season in Salinas and just going to Yuma or traveling to cheaper states. “I know so many farmworkers who used to migrate,” Lopez says, “and they don’t come back to Salinas anymore. They can live in another place that’s not expensive.”

[sheri257]

double post.

[sheri257]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

God, what a "let them eat cake attitude"!

No, that's not the point. The point is that the places people are moving to are going to get more crowded and expensive also. Cheap inevitably brings the same problems: more crowds, more demand for housing and services and, ultimately, a higher cost of living.

What, exactly, would you have the state of California do?

Regulate housing? Lift all building restrictions so we could bring in more housing tracts so housing would be cheaper? That would be pretty weird with the current housing crash but maybe it's worth a shot.

Do you want the state to start regulating wages and force employers to pay people more? Or maybe the state could cut taxes all together giving people an instant pay raise.

Even if the state could do all of these things, what would happen? Even more people would move here and probably drive up the cost of living all over again. And we'd pretty much be back to where we started.

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by sheri257

Again, you're not reading what you're posting ... Sure, welfare rolls are up with the recent economic downturn as I'm sure they are everywhere. But, overall, welfare rolls are dramatically down from 13 years ago. From the same Sacramento Bee article ...

Demand for social services rises as funding falls - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee

In California, welfare caseloads plummeted 45 percent ...

In July 1995, two years before the Legislature enacted reforms, Sacramento County's welfare rolls peaked at 46,362 cases. This past July, that number had shrunk to 30,749, a drop of about 34 percent.

If the state is too expensive for the middle class ... what makes you think poor people can afford it either? It doesn't make any sense.

From the article I originally posted on this thread:

Lopez says an increasing number of farmworkers are skipping the season in Salinas and just going to Yuma or traveling to cheaper states. “I know so many farmworkers who used to migrate,” Lopez says, “and they don’t come back to Salinas anymore. They can live in another place that’s not expensive.”

Just what is your point of looking at data from 1995? That's coming off of the last recession in the 1990's. Well, f'ing DUH cases went down...

I'm talking about FUTURE trends starting NOW. People who get welfare get subsidized for all essentials, so they can stay if they want to. The poor who leave do so because they want something better than welfare. People who are middle class do not get subsidized for their mortgage (well maybe under Obama). They HAVE to LEAVE. THAT's my point. THAT was the INTENT of the article.

Oh, by the way, more middle class CA people leaving soon...

[sheri257]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

Just what is your point of looking at data from 1995? That's coming off of the last recession in the 1990's. Well, f'ing DUH cases went down...

The cases have been going down for several years now ... not just when the economy gets better. Your own links that you posted prove that.

You make it sound like California is this great welfare state when, in fact, it's not.

[sheri257]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

I kid you not. I left a meeting today that went something like this. "Corporate headquarters is looking for ways to cut expenses. By the way, they find that California salaries are by average more than other states." Hey, guess where do you think this is heading? Connect the dots. Higher cost of living means more reasons for companies to pull OUT of CA.

Ok so, they'll move out of state so they can pay you less which, hopefully you'll be able to make up with a cheaper cost of living. Not sure if you come out ahead with this scenario but ... hopefully you will.

The problem, of course, is when other people move to the same cheap state and drive up the cost of living there. Meanwhile, with all of these people and businesses leaving, California's cost of living should be going down ... right?

And, actually, it already is with the housing crash. If the main problem is the cost of living then, maybe that's aleady being corrected as we speak.

[jkbatca]

Originally Posted by sheri257

The cases have been going down for several years now ... not just when the economy gets better. Your own links that you posted prove that.

Have a reading comprehension problem? Comparing welfare statistics from 1995 to now prove NOTHING. Welfare cases go down during a housing boom? Gee, I NEVER would have guessed it! I'm not going to repost what I've said earlier.

Originally Posted by sheri257

You make it sound like California is this great welfare state when, in fact, it's not.

Really? Apparently, you can believe whatever you want to believe as you dig for crumbs of unimportant facts to support whatever case your attempting to make. This is despite screaming headlines and paragraphs of text outlining how bad things are.

[sheri257]

Originally Posted by jkbatca

Have a reading comprehension problem? Comparing welfare statistics from 1995 to now prove NOTHING. Welfare cases go down during a housing boom? Gee, I NEVER would have guessed it! I'm not going to repost what I've said earlier.


Really? Apparently, you can believe whatever you want to believe as you dig for crumbs of unimportant facts to support whatever case your attempting to make. This is despite screaming headlines and paragraphs of text outlining how bad things are.

Ok ... if you don't like the '90s stats maybe you could actually read what you posted earlier regarding 2006. If it's so unimportant then, I'm not sure why you posted it in the first place. Just as an example:

Though the percentage of the population on welfare in the Golden State has fallen from an unfathomable 7.7% at the time Welfare Reform was passed to about 2.9% in at the end of 2006, that percentage is still more than double that of the rest of the US.

So he's still unhappy that 3 percent of the state's population is on welfare but ... he does acknowledge that the percentage of the population is way down.

Down 62 percent, in fact. Obviously there could be more room for improvement but ... the welfare rolls are down significantly.

[Humanoid]

Originally Posted by sheri257

No, that's not the point. The point is that the places people are moving to are going to get more crowded and expensive also. Cheap inevitably brings the same problems: more crowds, more demand for housing and services and, ultimately, a higher cost of living.

California is not so expensive because of "crowds", similarly populated areas of other states have much lower costs of living. The issue is government policy, not the size of the population. Policies in California drive up the costs of a variety of goods. This has been occurring since the 1970's. California is now one of the most taxed and expensive states to live and to do business.

But reality will be forced one way of another on California. Its not going to come from Sacramento.