those who wanted to move to CA (San Diego, Newport Beach: renter, new home)

[TristramShandy]

Originally Posted by krock1dk

I'm from Indiana like you, and will say that you are WRONG! The Midwest is not that bad at all. True, there are no mountains. But the people are 'real' and have very good values. Housing is very affordable. The economy, though struggling, is diverse. Although I dont like the Midwest's snow. You will find problems no matter where you live. And I'm sure you will find California's problems to be much more profound than any Midwest state, including MI, i.e. earthquakes that will eventually make CA at the bottom of the ocean, illegal immigrants everywhere, beurocracy run ammock, huge crime crime, massive taxes, and enormous regulations. Why do U think CA has gotten where it is? CA is not what it used to be. Your ignorance is why so many people leave the Midwest and then wish to return. You'll be back.

There's a lot that I could rip into here - - I'll go with two:

Since 1970, there has been 205 Californians killed by earthquakes, 188 of them in three quakes: San Fernando 1971, Santa Cruz 1989, Northridge 1994. In 1974 alone, 366 people were killed in the United States by tornadoes. In 2007 and 2008 combined, 206 people died in the US from tornadoes. Certainly these tornadoes hit in the Southeast as well, but you are much, much more likely to die in the United States from a tornado (which happen in the midwest) than an earthquake.

Second, California's crime rate is miniscule in comparison to the Midwest - - it's a joke that you would even compare the two. Of the major cities you have:

3. Detroit
4. St Louis
6. Flint, MI
7. Gary, IN
11. Cleveland
15. Youngstown, OH
20. Minneapolis
25. Milwaukee

And this doesn't count Murder Capital USA 2008, Chicago, which must just kill people and not have other crimes.

The only cities in California in the top 25 are Oakland (5th) and Compton (17th). And the biggest California cities clobber the Midwest in safety - - San Francisco is the 102nd most dangerous city, Los Angeles is 158, and San Diego 184.

On the other hand, with the top 25 safest cities in the US, California once again buries the midwest:

2. Mission Viejo
11. Irvine
12. Lake Forest
13. Chino Hills
18. Thousand Oaks

The midwest has O'Fallon, MO (3rd), Troy, MI (21st), and Canton Township, MI (24th).

But you can continue to make claims without doing research - - you know what they say about people who assume.

[jc76]

Originally Posted by TristramShandy

There's a lot that I could rip into here - - I'll go with two:

Since 1970, there has been 205 Californians killed by earthquakes, 188 of them in three quakes: San Fernando 1971, Santa Cruz 1989, Northridge 1994. In 1974 alone, 366 people were killed in the United States by tornadoes. In 2007 and 2008 combined, 206 people died in the US from tornadoes. Certainly these tornadoes hit in the Southeast as well, but you are much, much more likely to die in the United States from a tornado (which happen in the midwest) than an earthquake.

Second, California's crime rate is miniscule in comparison to the Midwest - - it's a joke that you would even compare the two. Of the major cities you have:

3. Detroit
4. St Louis
6. Flint, MI
7. Gary, IN
11. Cleveland
15. Youngstown, OH
20. Minneapolis
25. Milwaukee

And this doesn't count Murder Capital USA 2008, Chicago, which must just kill people and not have other crimes.

The only cities in California in the top 25 are Oakland (5th) and Compton (17th). And the biggest California cities clobber the Midwest in safety - - San Francisco is the 102nd most dangerous city, Los Angeles is 158, and San Diego 184.

On the other hand, with the top 25 safest cities in the US, California once again buries the midwest:

2. Mission Viejo
11. Irvine
12. Lake Forest
13. Chino Hills
18. Thousand Oaks

The midwest has O'Fallon, MO (3rd), Troy, MI (21st), and Canton Township, MI (24th).

But you can continue to make claims without doing research - - you know what they say about people who assume.

Thank you TS! Being stuck in the Hoosier state I have to deal with the kinds of comments this poster made on a daily basis. I am constantly called a *insert bad word for a homosexual* for wanting to move to California and I can't even count how many times a Hoosier told that lame old "California's gonna fall off into the ocean from a erthkwayke, hyu hyu hyu". So once again, people are still moving to California from the midwest and vice versa...but usually the CA natives I meet here end up getting a taste of all the, what I call "Midwest Inconveniences" and head back west. California is not an escape route, it's got it's problems but to think that the midwest is full of people with "good values" is a cliche as well.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by krock1dk

True, there are no mountains. But the people are 'real' and have very good values.

I'll have to call up all my friends and tell them they are not "real" people and have no values. Even the ones who have been married 20+ years.
Contrary to popular myth, the vast majority of people in California ARE real (middle-class, working type). Plus the mountains. So, that's two pluses right there.

i.e. earthquakes that will eventually make CA at the bottom of the ocean

Those who are familiar with Seismology (the study of earthquakes) know that California will not be at the "bottom of the ocean." I have NO idea where you got that from, certainly not from a book on Seismology.
86% of coastal California is rising, not sinking. The major fault, the San Andreas, is a lateral, strike-slip fault, not a thrust fault. Geologically, California will look very much the same hundreds of thousands of years from now.

In a few million years, the land west of the San Andreas fault is expected to break off from the mainland (similar to Baja California breaking away from mainland Mexico millions of years ago). The land west of the fault will be a long, narrow island and will be approximately to the west of San Francisco in about 10 million years. I don't think any of us will be around to be worried about it!

[Puddy4LyF]

Originally Posted by TristramShandy

There's a lot that I could rip into here - - I'll go with two:

Since 1970, there has been 205 Californians killed by earthquakes, 188 of them in three quakes: San Fernando 1971, Santa Cruz 1989, Northridge 1994. In 1974 alone, 366 people were killed in the United States by tornadoes. In 2007 and 2008 combined, 206 people died in the US from tornadoes. Certainly these tornadoes hit in the Southeast as well, but you are much, much more likely to die in the United States from a tornado (which happen in the midwest) than an earthquake.

Second, California's crime rate is miniscule in comparison to the Midwest - - it's a joke that you would even compare the two. Of the major cities you have:

3. Detroit
4. St Louis
6. Flint, MI
7. Gary, IN
11. Cleveland
15. Youngstown, OH
20. Minneapolis
25. Milwaukee

And this doesn't count Murder Capital USA 2008, Chicago, which must just kill people and not have other crimes.

The only cities in California in the top 25 are Oakland (5th) and Compton (17th). And the biggest California cities clobber the Midwest in safety - - San Francisco is the 102nd most dangerous city, Los Angeles is 158, and San Diego 184.

On the other hand, with the top 25 safest cities in the US, California once again buries the midwest:

2. Mission Viejo
11. Irvine
12. Lake Forest
13. Chino Hills
18. Thousand Oaks

The midwest has O'Fallon, MO (3rd), Troy, MI (21st), and Canton Township, MI (24th).

But you can continue to make claims without doing research - - you know what they say about people who assume.

I agree with you completely. However, I would like to concede and say there are a FEW more California cities that go up there. Using CQ Press, Richmond, CA also comes up as #9 on the list of most dangerous cities, while Oakland drops to #5 and Compton remains #17. (This is 2008 -- the latest we have these rankings.) http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/City...8_Rank_Rev.pdf

You won't find Chicago on it because the rankings revolve around its per-capita statistics, and while there are an ungodly amount of murders in Chicago, there are also an un-godly amount of people, and nice ones at that. If we're to diss Chicago, you also have to diss Los Angeles proper, because it's that same reason that you won't see L.A. on that list either..

Anyway, I am no apologist of the poster from Indiana, however, because he just has flat-out no idea what he's talking about and probably hasn't visited California. He likely has no idea has cities like San Jose, even with 1 million residents, has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the entire country. Oh yeah, and California isn't filled with all cities and all illegals. In fact, there are so many wonderful little cities and towns and homesteads and farms and you get the picture -- rent a car and visit California and you'll be quite surprised as to what you see.

Anyone who thinks the Midwest doesn't have issues needs to visit E. and NW St. Louis; Gary Indiana; Cleveland, Ohio, etc, etc, etc. You don't know poverty, destitution, and utter hopelessness until you've been to some of those areas.

[FresnoFacts]

Originally Posted by Puddy4LyF

You won't find Chicago on it because the rankings revolve around its per-capita statistics, and while there are an ungodly amount of murders in Chicago, there are also an un-godly amount of people, and nice ones at that. If we're to diss Chicago, you also have to diss Los Angeles proper, because it's that same reason that you won't see L.A. on that list either..

LA is at #158 on your CQ link.

Chicago is left off the CQ list because they classify some crime data differently than most cities.

Illinois and Minnesota use a data collection method for forcible rape that is different than the FBI standard used in the rest of the country.

CQ Press leaves out 14 cities for that reason since they cannot compare them directly to other US cities. The 14 cities not listed are:
Aurora, IL; Chicago, IL; Joliet, IL; Naperville, IL; Peoria, IL; Springfield, IL; Bloomington, MN; Duluth, MN; Minneapolis, MN; Rochester, MN; and St Paul, MN.

[Puddy4LyF]

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

LA is at #158 on your CQ link.

I think we understand my point though. LA being #158, even still, understates completely that in certain areas, it's absolutely dangerous. You'll never see it, or NYC, or Houston, anywhere near the Top 10. You wouldn't see Chicago either whether it was counted or not. Per capita, places with as much population as these cities have (especially these 4) just can't murder fast enough for it's population to be counted so high, haha.

But really, all of that is just a side note. The real point of the rankings is that there are areas of the midwest which aren't just on par with California, but absolutely exceed it.

[speedingwolf]

We came here from Seattle, WA in 2005. Never look back. Then moved my folks here. Infact, I just got a job for my brother-in-law and he's moving here in 2 weeks. Love it here. Traffic is bad but have you tried driving through downtown Seattle on I-5 during rush hours? Or 405 South through Renton in the cold rain? Here at least i could see the blue skies. Yeah it gets hot once awhile but that's what AC is for.

[BlueSkyGal]

Originally Posted by speedingwolf

We came here from Seattle, WA in 2005. Never look back. Then moved my folks here. Infact, I just got a job for my brother-in-law and he's moving here in 2 weeks. Love it here. Traffic is bad but have you tried driving through downtown Seattle on I-5 during rush hours? Or 405 South through Renton in the cold rain? Here at least i could see the blue skies. Yeah it gets hot once awhile but that's what AC is for.

I have to agree w/this person ! I'm still in the Portland area, and the traffic can be grueling for sure (I found SD area traffic 'easier!' -- and, sorry to say, 'friendlier!'). No earthquakes, that's true -- but we did have that one 'small event' in '81 -- you know, when about 40% of Mt. St. Helen's blew off !! Every place has it's 'trade-offs' -- I LOVE this area, but trying like heck to move to SD !

[amirelez]

Originally Posted by Soul Survivor83

i still plan to move back to california. You gotta take the good with the bad. It's not for everyone, but I love the west coast movement and be glad when I can leave Houston in the near future. Just deciding on whether to go to So Cal or if I should look into NorCal. All in all i like Cali..

Why did you move in the first place? Did you not like Houston? I am planning to move there soon. Could you give me some opinions of what you like and dislike about Houston? Anything is appreciated.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Puddy4LyF

That's more of a commentary on the United States as a whole, and not just California. What this thread shows is that some people, like Nita, has found a better quality of life elsewhere and others, like myself, Grapico, and others, have found a better quality of life in California. Earth-shattering news? I don't think so.

It's true that this is a trend seen thoughout the US. But I think it's also fair to say the trend is more advanced in California because the cost of living is so much higher.