U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-31-2017, 02:54 PM
 
Location: In the heights
20,111 posts, read 21,722,272 times
Reputation: 10216

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Does it really matter that much where the jobs are concentrated? NOLA101 and I made the point earlier that these cities tend to be very expensive well beyond their municipal boundaries.

The discussion here is not supposed to be about Chicago and Philadelphia's economic standing relative to the rest of America. It's supposed to be about why Chicago and Philly are cheaper than other prominent US cities like SF, Boston, DC, etc. Wages is a big part of the answer.
Wages are a big part, and then there are some specifics in regards to development constraints in many of the other cities whether geographic or social/legal. Add to this is the appeal of the two as foreign investment targets for real estate which has not warped things as strongly as they have for LA, SF, and NYC (and to a lesser degree, Boston). Chicago is catching on with the ultra luxury high-rises, but there's still plenty of room near the city center due to the abrupt public housing clearings and rezoning of land from industrial use.

Even with lower wages, Philadelphia and Chicago likely have lower cost of living to wage ratios. I don't think that makes these cities less attractive or a bad choice for moving to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-31-2017, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,787,463 times
Reputation: 11185
Vancouver seems to be a city whose high housing prices are almost entirely buoyed by foreign investment.

The same is true for certain pockets of the Miami metro though housing prices across the region are relatively low. Miami is more geographically "constrained" than any city in the Northeast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 03:00 PM
 
Location: In the heights
20,111 posts, read 21,722,272 times
Reputation: 10216
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
But this is tangential to the OP, no? He asked why Chicago and Philadelphia are more affordable than a few other select U.S. cities. The question is not whether someone earning X in NYC is worse off or better off than someone earning Y in Philadelphia.

Why do you think the DC region is more expensive than the Philadelphia region?
DC is unique in never having a major blue collar and manufacturing work force so it never hit that slip-up. Its desirability/prices has been compounded by a large federal investment in infrastructure and very stringent height requirements within the city. All of this is in addition to the robust job growth due to the federal government which reasonably grew as the country became more and more populous and the economy got larger.

The relative affordability of Chicago and Philadelphia is an interesting question overall though because they and their comparison cities have a lot of different factors shared and specific.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 03:22 PM
 
7,177 posts, read 3,866,252 times
Reputation: 7537
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Vancouver seems to be a city whose high housing prices are almost entirely buoyed by foreign investment.

The same is true for certain pockets of the Miami metro though housing prices across the region are relatively low. Miami is more geographically "constrained" than any city in the Northeast.
Vancouver placed restrictions on foreign investment, and a lot of that money moved down to Seattle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 03:23 PM
 
Location: The City
21,945 posts, read 30,797,404 times
Reputation: 7489
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
I've been told before on C-D that the only reason certain cities have high salaries is because the COL is so high. That seems backwards to me.


that is backwards, high demand and paying and jobs fuel demand and also drive COL


then at a critical mass if the demand to locate the jobs continues there then becomes and equilibrium and higher salaries are required are continued to attract and sustain employment


this can eventually have an inverse trend, a bubble if say jobs no longer value the cot of being there and wont continue to pay the higher wages they can move out Also economic changes effect this.


Say the Govt reduced spend by 20%, DC would likely deflate in housing cost


Or a tech bubble burst in the Bay where substantiating the salaries no longer were attractive to companies and there was a 20% (arbitrary and large numbers as a percent for effect) reduction in these jobs the value of SF real estate would deflate etc.


Philly and Chicago have very modest job growth and additions of these higher paying jobs coupled with large ability to generate new real estate they don't see the growth rates of real estate value




does that make either of these places bad or undesirable, no not really but it does mitigate real estate price growth


I personally love both Chicago and Philly as well as others on the expensive list


These two offer for a relative value in many ways but also don't have the same economic growth and attraction in the current state for a multitude of reasons
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
27,611 posts, read 24,787,463 times
Reputation: 11185
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
DC is unique in never having a major blue collar and manufacturing work force so it never hit that slip-up. Its desirability/prices has been compounded by a large federal investment in infrastructure and very stringent height requirements within the city. All of this is in addition to the robust job growth due to the federal government which reasonably grew as the country became more and more populous and the economy got larger.
It hasn't really been the federal jobs that have made the area so expensive in recent years. I remember reading an article a few years ago about how no major corporation had a Washington, DC office in the 1960s. In 2017, there are virtually no major corporations that lack a presence in Washington, DC. Law firms have also exploded in size and prominence since the 1970s. These are things that are indirectly related to the federal government, but it's not the federal jobs that have caused the astronomical rise in the price of real estate in the region.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...ocracy/390822/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 03:52 PM
 
Location: The City
21,945 posts, read 30,797,404 times
Reputation: 7489
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
It hasn't really been the federal jobs that have made the area so expensive in recent years. I remember reading an article a few years ago about how no major corporation had a Washington, DC office in the 1960s. In 2017, there are virtually no major corporations that lack a presence in Washington, DC. Law firms have also exploded in size and prominence since the 1970s. These are things that are indirectly related to the federal government, but it's not the federal jobs that have caused the astronomical rise in the price of real estate in the region.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...ocracy/390822/


but it is all fueled by growth and concentration of jobs and services to DC from the Govt expansion and consolidation


very few companies have located to DC without a tie to the govt while many relocated to be in the mox for many defense jobs etc. And the legal growth is a direct impact of DC politics and related law needs to support it


to win govt contracts it makes sense to have a large presence where the dollars are allocated


I work in the Pharma industry and we need office in North Jersey, Philly, Boston, Bay for the same resons, where the dollars and contracts are
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 04:04 PM
 
Location: West Hollywood
2,201 posts, read 4,000,343 times
Reputation: 1704
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post

In NYC you don't need parking, so would not be an issue. .
Have you ever actually LIVED in NYC?

I'm curious because you speak of New York almost always like we're strictly talking about Manhattan, and the other boroughs are not to be taken into consideration.

Nobody needs parking in Manhattan, but the 1% often do like having their own cars. Parking in Manhattan is still a commodity to be had and it has a presence in newly constructed luxury condos.

Outside of Manhattan, many people still have cars, especially in Queens. Available parking in residences is a hot commodity in many pockets of all of the boroughs where access to the subway is more limited or where driving is more commonplace.

We should probably be specific about what parts of NYC we're talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
1,875 posts, read 2,545,387 times
Reputation: 1153
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
San Francisco and Boston are physically tiny cities that have priced out poverty. DC is right behind them. NYC is NYC. The housing in all of these cities is also inflated by foreign investment.


Philly and Chicago are much larger cities than Boston/SF/DC and have much more poverty.
Philadelphia, is the "city of homes"-with a multitude of affordable rowhomes. This helps to keep prices stable on every level.
Same goes with how expensive Seattle has gotten.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-31-2017, 05:05 PM
 
1,414 posts, read 674,823 times
Reputation: 1882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nafster View Post
Have you ever actually LIVED in NYC?

I'm curious because you speak of New York almost always like we're strictly talking about Manhattan, and the other boroughs are not to be taken into consideration.

Nobody needs parking in Manhattan, but the 1% often do like having their own cars. Parking in Manhattan is still a commodity to be had and it has a presence in newly constructed luxury condos.

Outside of Manhattan, many people still have cars, especially in Queens. Available parking in residences is a hot commodity in many pockets of all of the boroughs where access to the subway is more limited or where driving is more commonplace.

We should probably be specific about what parts of NYC we're talking about.
When comparing, it's always just Manhattan. There is an agenda, and Queens and the Bronx just don't fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top