Really Quick Question.

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by stargazzer

If a service is needed in a location like mechanic or hairdresser and the "PAY' is not enough to ...."look after yourself".......then my friends
THe community, will have to ......"DO WITHOUT"
...................LOGICALLY>>>>>>>>>
Is that too much to GRASP..........DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

It just means that the people who do those jobs in a place like Laguna Beach have to drive in from where they can afford to life. I read in another post that the people in Santa Barbara don't have a problem with the people who clean their houses having to drive in from two hours away because they can't afford to live any closer. That's the reality of rich areas.

[stillkit]

The reality is that even those who live in the wealthier neighborhoods need the same basic services we all need. However, they typically do not want to live next door to "service people," so rents are high to keep them out.

Laguna Beach is a prime example. There are shop keepers, maids, mechanics, waiters etc there just like anyplace else, but they usually can't afford to live there. The last time I looked (which was admittedly a couple of years ago), 500 sf rentals started at $1000-1100 a month and went up from there. The same was true up the road at Newport Beach and south in Dana Point and San Clemente. Even with a combined gross income of $80,000, you'd have a hard time making such rent payments unless you just really, really wanted to live in Laguna.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by stillkit

The reality is that even those who live in the wealthier neighborhoods need the same basic services we all need. However, they typically do not want to live next door to "service people," so rents are high to keep them out.

Are the rents high because owners conspire to keep certain demographics out?

Or, does the demand for the existing supply drive rents higher?

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by Charles

Are the rents high because owners conspire to keep certain demographics out?

Or, does the demand for the existing supply drive rents higher?

Probably a combination of both, though I doubt anyone would admit it. Also, there's the inescapable fact that government responds to money and influence, which leaves the little people out of the loop, to their disadvantage.

For instance, just north of Laguna Beach on PCH, there used to be a trailer park which spread up an arroyo from where it emptied into the ocean. It was built long before Laguna became a haven for the wealthy, but it became an eyesore and constant irritation for the wealthy as they passed by, even though it was neat and well maintained.

Someone wanted to tear it down and build expensive condos and the local government fell in line with that desire. The little folks who lived there fought back, but eventually lost out because they lacked the money and influence. Today, it's gone and I assume the condos have gone up. Scratch another relatively inexpensive place for regular folks to live.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by stillkit

For instance, just north of Laguna Beach on PCH, there used to be a trailer park which spread up an arroyo from where it emptied into the ocean. It was built long before Laguna became a haven for the wealthy, but it became an eyesore and constant irritation for the wealthy as they passed by, even though it was neat and well maintained.

Someone wanted to tear it down and build expensive condos and the local government fell in line with that desire. The little folks who lived there fought back, but eventually lost out because they lacked the money and influence. Today, it's gone and I assume the condos have gone up. Scratch another relatively inexpensive place for regular folks to live.

Out of curiosity, what was the mechanism? How were the homeowners forced to sell? Were they renting and did the owner of the entire lot just sell to a developer?