Which is a better city to live in? Grosse Pointe Shores or Menlo Park (CA)?

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by xfactor85

If money is not a factor, Menlo Park 100%. Can't buy the nice weather and also you are close to SF vs being on the boarder with Detroit. Much more offers in terms of hiking and scenic trails as well.

The problem is $$$. In Grosse Pointe a house would be half as much as Menlo Park. However, you tend to get what you pay for....

546 6th Ave, Menlo Park, CA 94025 - Zillow

The real shame was that the prices in Metro Detroit and Bay Area were pretty similar in the late 80s. Shame that my parents decided to move to Detroit vs SF. Dad had a job offer in SF and Detroit. The SF job paid slightly less.

They paid 120k for a house in a nice suburb of Detroit in 1987 that is now worth roughly 175k. Had they bought a house in SF area for that amount their house would be worth more than 500k.

You do know SF is in a real estate bubble, right? Those houses aren't supposed to be those prices because most of the people who live there can't afford them.

No one in their right mind is going to pay $800K for a closet. Unless you're one of the handful of college geeks that works for Google and discretionary spending is your middle name or maybe they plan on redeveloping all that with better housing. Doesn't matter how nice the weather is, it's not worth $800,000 for a shack. Mountains and hiking trails aren't worth that much and neither is the water. There's so many other places where you can find the same amenities for more affordability that it makes no sense for MP to have prices like that. Sure, GP doesn't have those amenities over MP, but the amenities MP does have is not worth those prices.

I'd assume people who make the area median income are struggling somewhat hard to live a daily life in MP. In fact, the median income is higher in GP than it is in MP which doesn't make any sense. Why would people making more money live in the cheaper area?

[Bhaalspawn]

IF money is not an issue...Menlo Park hands down. The San Francisco Bay Area >>> Detroit -- provided that money is not an issue.

[xfactor85]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

You do know SF is in a real estate bubble, right? Those houses aren't supposed to be those prices because most of the people who live there can't afford them.

No one in their right mind is going to pay $800K for a closet. Unless you're one of the handful of college geeks that works for Google and discretionary spending is your middle name or maybe they plan on redeveloping all that with better housing. Doesn't matter how nice the weather is, it's not worth $800,000 for a shack. Mountains and hiking trails aren't worth that much and neither is the water. There's so many other places where you can find the same amenities for more affordability that it makes no sense for MP to have prices like that. Sure, GP doesn't have those amenities over MP, but the amenities MP does have is not worth those prices.

I'd assume people who make the area median income are struggling somewhat hard to live a daily life in MP. In fact, the median income is higher in GP than it is in MP which doesn't make any sense. Why would people making more money live in the cheaper area?

I'm not sure how big of a real estate bubble there is in SF. A lot of the purchases in the Bay Area are from Asian home buyers from China and India. Many of them look towards the US as a safe haven to park their money. As long as the Chinese government is repressive, pollution is out of control and there is some form of social unrest, the wealthy, which there are a lot of people who fit that range, will continue to purchase homes in the Bay Area and the coasts. Furthermore, it isn't just Asians but Europeans as well from Russia and other countries purchasing as well. Why? because SF Bay Area is a destination. This will keep prices somewhat high in the short and middle run.

Unfortunately, Metro Detroit and other secondary rust belt cities will likely miss on the investments.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by xfactor85

I'm not sure how big of a real estate bubble there is in SF. A lot of the purchases in the Bay Area are from Asian home buyers from China and India. Many of them look towards the US as a safe haven to park their money. As long as the Chinese government is repressive, pollution is out of control and there is some form of social unrest, the wealthy, which there are a lot of people who fit that range, will continue to purchase homes in the Bay Area and the coasts. Furthermore, it isn't just Asians but Europeans as well from Russia and other countries purchasing as well. Why? because SF Bay Area is a destination. This will keep prices somewhat high in the short and middle run.

Unfortunately, Metro Detroit and other secondary rust belt cities will likely miss on the investments.

The point is, how worthwhile are the investments if it drives prices out of reach for 90% of the population? I'm not arguing that Metro Detroit is more desirable than San Francisco, but it's becoming less and less of a place for average middle class earners let alone college students with minimal income.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by xfactor85

I'm not sure how big of a real estate bubble there is in SF. A lot of the purchases in the Bay Area are from Asian home buyers from China and India. Many of them look towards the US as a safe haven to park their money. As long as the Chinese government is repressive, pollution is out of control and there is some form of social unrest, the wealthy, which there are a lot of people who fit that range, will continue to purchase homes in the Bay Area and the coasts. Furthermore, it isn't just Asians but Europeans as well from Russia and other countries purchasing as well. Why? because SF Bay Area is a destination. This will keep prices somewhat high in the short and middle run.

Unfortunately, Metro Detroit and other secondary rust belt cities will likely miss on the investments.

The point is, how worthwhile are the investments if it drives prices out of reach for 90% of the population? I'm not arguing that Metro Detroit is more desirable than San Francisco, but it's becoming less and less of a place for average middle class earners let alone college students with minimal income. That's going to hurt the city in the future if either those who can't afford it start to move out or prices come crashing down making all those investments worthless.