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.
Isn't it a stretch to blame CA fiscal problems in 2010 on Prop 13 which became law more than 30 years ago?
Prop 13 enjoyed a Grass Roots Ground Swell of popularity to make it the law of the land.
As to business... at least yearly there is a movement to strip business property of Prop 13 predictability and shift even more of a burden on business.
If Prop 13 type law is responsible for California Problems... how can you explain the 47 other States also in a fiscal hole?
Prop 13 limited the States ability to take local tax dollars out of the community without voter approval...
Like Jazzlover stated earlier, Californians want services but cheap out when it comes to paying for them. Prop. 13 has been exacerbating fiscal problems during every downturn since it was passed. However, as this is the Colorado forum I really don't think it's appropriate to argue much more about it here. There are always plenty of opportunities over on the CA forum.
Outside of the larger metro areas you mentioned above, there's not really anywhere else in the state that's affordable AND practical to relocate from a jobs/career standpoint for most people. Most of the central valley cities are downright dreadful places to live with the worst air pollution in the country (much worse than LA), bad crime problems, the highest unemployment rates in the nation. Take away all that, and that leaves an incredible amount of scenic mountain and desert areas that are sparsely populated or even totally uninhabited. So in my view, just about any medium to large sized city in the intermountain west/ desert southwest is a better choice than California's B or C tier cities. And anyway, Vegas and Phoenix are basically outposts of southern California, and Reno is basically an outpost of northern California.
This still seems somewhat odd to me. You've got a state that is the size of most other countries with scores of B and C tier cities. It seems that you'd have some options there for most types of careers and that at least some of these cities would have some combination of reasonable affordability and a decent quality of life. However, if your criteria is finding a 500K+ metro area to maximize job potential then I can see why you might look at it as LA, SF, SD, SAC vs. Denver, SLC, Albuquerque, Seattle, etc. In that case the comparison is more between major western urban areas then CA vs. CO per se.
Well, I have to disagree with JazzLover; some Californians want some services, and are more than willing to pay for them! But not just Californians; people from Utah, Georgia, Texas, NM, etc. etc. (I hate it when people get lumped into groups on this forum. Not all people from CA or TX or HI or anyplace else are ALL alike.)
I came from CA 15 years ago simply because CA was not the same state I grew up in. Crowds and traffic were one thing, but they started over-taxing (and it is even worse now), and they allowed rampant building. Used to be, if you lived in the South Bay area, everyone could see the ocean, even if you lived inland. But then 25 story condos were allowed to be put up right on the beach, and goodbye a great view for all. Then the schools got bad, and the teachers had to spend most of their day teaching how to speak English. Crime escalated (like in all cities) and people from everywhere understandably, moved in because of good jobs, but pretty soon, those jobs disappeared. Cost of living, taxes, pollution and crime went up, while air, water and quality of living went down. Oh, and even though many people paid high prices for health care, many great hospitals had to close down because they were told they could not turn away illegal immigrants. (BTW, I have nothing against immigrants. But when so many are taking from a system and not paying taxes into it, mathematically, it just doesn't work!)
The sky used to be blue, the water used to be blue, the air used to be clean, and it was basically safe. No longer.
I came from CA 15 years ago simply because CA was not the same state I grew up in. Crowds and traffic were one thing, but they started over-taxing (and it is even worse now), and they allowed rampant building. Used to be, if you lived in the South Bay area, everyone could see the ocean, even if you lived inland. But then 25 story condos were allowed to be put up right on the beach, and goodbye a great view for all. Then the schools got bad, and the teachers had to spend most of their day teaching how to speak English. Crime escalated (like in all cities) and people from everywhere understandably, moved in because of good jobs, but pretty soon, those jobs disappeared. Cost of living, taxes, pollution and crime went up, while air, water and quality of living went down. Oh, and even though many people paid high prices for health care, many great hospitals had to close down because they were told they could not turn away illegal immigrants. (BTW, I have nothing against immigrants. But when so many are taking from a system and not paying taxes into it, mathematically, it just doesn't work!)
The sky used to be blue, the water used to be blue, the air used to be clean, and it was basically safe. No longer.
Does that answer your question??
Substitute "Colorado" for "CA" in this post and change the ocean references to the mountains and you just described where Colorado is heading--from the same causes and with the same ultimate bad outcome.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."
Substitute "Colorado" for "CA" in this post and change the ocean references to the mountains and you just described where Colorado is heading--from the same causes and with the same ultimate bad outcome.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."
As someone whose family goes back 5 generations in Colorado and who also primarily grew up in Coastal CA and lived through what was so eloquently described by justmyopinion, I can, with some confidence, opine that, with the exception of Aspen/Vail type places, the negative changes in CA were/are VASTLY more intense and annoying than ANYTHING seen in CO past/present and (likely) future. That's why I always chuckle to myself when folks like jazzlover grumble SO much about the changes experienced by CO, when compared to CA, CO remains comparatively idyllic and untouched.
First (end the essentially fundamental) difference is that houses in neighborhoods anywhere remotely resembling "safe" here in CO don't start at $800K for a tiny two bedroom ... which means a family can actually be raised in CO on one professional income. This is a MAJOR difference between the two states. The point at which professional CO families are required by financial forces outside their control to have two spouses working to even attempt to have children is the point at which I will listen to Colorado natives complaining about "change" without smirking in disdain.
In CO, I can live in the foothills, see thousands of stars in the clear air at night, and still have a 10 minute commute to work in the downtown of a metro area. Try doing that in CA. I can send my kids to one of the best public school systems in the state and give my spouse the freedom to decide when/if to go back to work. Try doing that in CA.
True, CO does not look "the same" as when my grandfather left ranch homestead (outside of Wray) in the 1920's to make his way in the "big city" (Denver), but as someone who's seen the demographic-economic forces affecting both places, folks in CO should be down on their knees in thanks for how good we still have it here. Of course, that's not how humans do things. We just complain no matter what, unless we've actually seen worse.
Prop 13 enjoyed a Grass Roots Ground Swell of popularity to make it the law of the land.
Indeed. And who among us, when presented with a too-good-to-be-true opportunity to almost entirely cease paying our bills and transfer the burden over to the next generation or three, would not jump at such a chance, human nature being what it is? In fact, it was such a sweet deal for those fortunate enough to own homes in CA in 1978 that we've all, in effect, decided to take the concept national!
As someone whose family goes back 5 generations in Colorado and who also primarily grew up in Coastal CA and lived through what was so eloquently described by justmyopinion, I can, with some confidence, opine that, with the exception of Aspen/Vail type places, the negative changes in CA were/are VASTLY more intense and annoying than ANYTHING seen in CO past/present and (likely) future. That's why I always chuckle to myself when folks like jazzlover grumble SO much about the changes experienced by CO, when compared to CA, CO remains comparatively idyllic and untouched.
First (end the essentially fundamental) difference is that houses in neighborhoods anywhere remotely resembling "safe" here in CO don't start at $800K for a tiny two bedroom ... which means a family can actually be raised in CO on one professional income. This is a MAJOR difference between the two states. The point at which professional CO families are required by financial forces outside their control to have two spouses working to even attempt to have children is the point at which I will listen to Colorado natives complaining about "change" without smirking in disdain.
In CO, I can live in the foothills, see thousands of stars in the clear air at night, and still have a 10 minute commute to work in the downtown of a metro area. Try doing that in CA. I can send my kids to one of the best public school systems in the state and give my spouse the freedom to decide when/if to go back to work. Try doing that in CA.
True, CO does not look "the same" as when my grandfather left ranch homestead (outside of Wray) in the 1920's to make his way in the "big city" (Denver), but as someone who's seen the demographic-economic forces affecting both places, folks in CO should be down on their knees in thanks for how good we still have it here. Of course, that's not how humans do things. We just complain no matter what, unless we've actually seen worse.
That just depends on where Colorado is on "the curve of destruction." It's actually an exponential curve that parallels population growth. California hit the steep part of the curve a few decades before Colorado, and thus has already seen the very nasty loss of quality of life that brings. Unfortunately, Colorado is stupidly following the same curve, just 20 years behind. As our population grows exponentially, so too will our loss in quality of life. The people who believe that California-type problems won't happen here--and won't be here quite soon unless we change course--are horribly misguided.
Indeed. And who among us, when presented with a too-good-to-be-true opportunity to almost entirely cease paying our bills and transfer the burden over to the next generation or three, would not jump at such a chance, human nature being what it is? In fact, it was such a sweet deal for those fortunate enough to own homes in CA in 1978 that we've all, in effect, decided to take the concept national!
I was not old enough to have voted for Prop 13 at the time... I thankful each and every day those before me had the wisdom to make it law.
As someone that bought at the peak of the market my benefit is having a modicum of predictability in my future tax increases... just as I opted for a fixed rate mortgage... predictability is not a bad thing and can even be argued... fiscally prudent.
Make no mistake... the few I know that relocated to Colorado did so after carefully considering the stakes... one came right out and said giving up Prop 13 weighed the heaviest on their minds.
It's one thing to live in a great place and another, through no fault of your own, be taxed to the point you must sell...
Sister of my very good friend and neighbor lived 33 years in Colorado Springs... they really enjoyed their years until the winter and cold took their toll... they sold a beautiful home in Colorado and bought a condo in Santa Monica... they couldn't be happier at this stage in life.
Remember, all it takes to increase taxes over Prop 13 limits is voter support... 55% for school infrastructure and 2/3 for other things... the voters where I live have been very generous... so much so Property Tax is now more than 50% above straight Prop 13.
Oh... I wouldn't call my $9100 yearly property tax on a 1956 1700 square feet ranch style home with Formica counters and linoleum floors as an example of almost ceasing to pay my bill
That just depends on where Colorado is on "the curve of destruction." It's actually an exponential curve that parallels population growth. California hit the steep part of the curve a few decades before Colorado, and thus has already seen the very nasty loss of quality of life that brings. Unfortunately, Colorado is stupidly following the same curve, just 20 years behind. As our population grows exponentially, so too will our loss in quality of life. The people who believe that California-type problems won't happen here--and won't be here quite soon unless we change course--are horribly misguided.
Very true.. the old adage of "As California goes... so goes the nation" is alive and well.
Things that were only in California decades ago are now universal...
That just depends on where Colorado is on "the curve of destruction." It's actually an exponential curve that parallels population growth.
I would make the argument that pop growth is only one factor and not the determining one. While pop growth may determine overall character, like how urban an area is, the way we grow (physically) and the social factors of a place are equally important, as are some factors out of our control like geography.
If we choose to grow at lower densities with lots of asphalt and having to drive everywhere, we end up with bad traffic situations and open spaces and natural areas disappearing. If on the other hand we choose to grow wisely with more compact communities, protected open space and river corridors, and transit options, a place may be more livable.
I spent plenty of enjoyable time visiting places like Montreal or living in San Francisco, where I didn't need to drive, where the city was pleasant and nature was always a short bike ride or drive away, and where things were more or less safe. On the other hand, I spent time in much less pleasant cities where you had to drive everywhere in bad traffic and where crime and poor schools were the norm. I purposefully address both environmental and social dimensions b/c I think both are key. I know in CA issues of housing cost add complexity.
I know there are endless details to be debated, my point is that two places can have the same metro population yet feel very different and vary greatly in quality of life and in how much natural land they pave over and environmental impact they have.
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.
