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.
I like how this guy wants to stretch his money, which could be done practically anywhere in the country besides southern California, Bay Area, or NYC itself, but then he wants "year-round temperate weather with easy access to culture, food, art, music, and health care."
There are a good 30-50 cities that can offer him the culture, food, art, music, and health care pieces. But the "year round temperate weather" will be a harder find. I'm assuming that means he neither wants snowy or cold wet winters nor hot and/or humid summers. That eliminates a huge swath of the world. I mean, San Diego or Orange County come to mind for me, but he wants somewhere he can retire nicely on 3.5M. He can retire cheap, or he can move to a cheaper area where access to culture, art, and music is more occasional.
He wants essentially California, but doesn't want to pay for it. He can choose several of those thing for cheap but not all of them put together. That's what world class cities offer and is why they're expensive. LOL! This reminds me of a couple posters here who wanted it all without paying for it, and cried about the unfairness of the world as a result.
Last edited by redguard57; 01-17-2020 at 04:19 PM..
I like how this guy wants to stretch his money, which could be done practically anywhere in the country besides southern California, Bay Area, or NYC itself, but then he wants "year-round temperate weather with easy access to culture, food, art, music, and health care."
There are a good 30-50 cities that can offer him the culture, food, art, music, and health care pieces. But the "year round temperate weather" will be a harder find. I'm assuming that means he neither wants snowy or cold wet winters nor hot and/or humid summers. That eliminates a huge swath of the world. I mean, San Diego or Orange County come to mind for me, but he wants somewhere he can retire nicely on 3.5M. He can retire cheap, or he can move to a cheaper area where access to culture, art, and music is more occasional.
He wants essentially California, but doesn't want to pay for it. He can choose several of those thing for cheap but not all of them put together. That's what world class cities offer and is why they're expensive. LOL! This reminds me of a couple posters here who wanted it all without paying for it, and cried about the unfairness of the world as a result.
Seems like south Florida is what he is describing, live on the outskirts of Miami.
Why not some areas of the Carolinas? Charleston, Charlotte, the Research Triangle... not perfect weather but fewer of the nightmare traffic jams that they'd have in CA. I once drove from San Francisco Airport to Chico. Ugh. I don't think I ever got above 40 mph and most of the time it was slower. Having world-class culture nearby but it's a 3-hour drive and a fortune to park the car isn't very valuable. I lived in NNJ for 25 years- close enough that it was a popular commuter town and I rarely went there except for business, Too much of a PITA.
Nashville would be another good choice although I've had some bad traffic jams driving through there.
Florida has nothing in common with California besides being ocean side. People are different, education levels are different and the entire vibe is different. Florida has a lot of snow birds and is a vacation destination. This is a very transient state and much of what is here is setup to service these people.
Most of Florida is a humidity pit. You start to see a mild seasonal change in the Northern parts of the state (North of Orlando) but summers are hot regardless and south of Orlando is pretty warm all year.
Miami is mostly a **** hole. Fort Lauderdale not far behind but the western areas are ok. Palm beach is a nice as it has some culture, close to the South to plug yourself and is nice by Florida standards. If you want small town feel Jupiter is nice but very expensive, you'll be traveling for culture.
As you go North from there you start to get lower COL, much lower average incomes and more red neck outside of the cities. Going North you start hitting smaller cities and you aren't going to find much culture in Stuart or Port St lucie. North of that is no mans land where most of the population has one foot on the banana peel and the other in the grave until Orlando.
Orlando is a fun city if you enjoy the Theme Park / Tourist trap stuff. We like that area.
I'm not a fan of the west coast of Fl, the ocean water there is trash from the Mississippi but the beaches are nice.
What we found is the "best" way to do it is to have a place up in Canada for the summer months and a place in Florida for the winter months. Ping and pong between them.
Sorry I live here in OC, not much here in terms of culture, not comparing to NYC. I also don’t think food is comparable either. I could be wrong. But we’re not in the boondocks either. We have some culture, it depends on what you really want. This is why I travel frequently, I get better temperature in Hawaii in the winter, maybe a bit better fish, better seafood in the summer from Maine, better culture in London, etc.. California is best for the outdoors like hiking, camping, beaching, etc.. but there’s not everything in one place.
I like how this guy wants to stretch his money, which could be done practically anywhere in the country besides southern California, Bay Area, or NYC itself, but then he wants "year-round temperate weather with easy access to culture, food, art, music, and health care."
There are a good 30-50 cities that can offer him the culture, food, art, music, and health care pieces. But the "year round temperate weather" will be a harder find. I'm assuming that means he neither wants snowy or cold wet winters nor hot and/or humid summers. That eliminates a huge swath of the world. I mean, San Diego or Orange County come to mind for me, but he wants somewhere he can retire nicely on 3.5M. He can retire cheap, or he can move to a cheaper area where access to culture, art, and music is more occasional.
He wants essentially California, but doesn't want to pay for it. He can choose several of those thing for cheap but not all of them put together. That's what world class cities offer and is why they're expensive. LOL! This reminds me of a couple posters here who wanted it all without paying for it, and cried about the unfairness of the world as a result.
People always want it all. What else is new?
There is no perfect paradise. We all must make trade offs.
With a minimum of $3M in assets, this guy can draw a near bullet proof income of 90k, and a still conservative one of 120k if he takes out 4%. For a single person, that should be plenty to live a decent life in CA. Maybe not in SF proper or tony suburbs, but pretty much anywhere else.
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.
