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.
There is a lot of truth to this. People inevitably compare themselves to others. They feel poor if they're not earning as much as the people around them even if they're not objectively poor. Extroverts are more vulnerable to this than introverts.
Yeah, I always felt like a pauper there, even though relatively speaking I was making the average salary (which was pretty high in my eyes but not for SF). I think that renting is like throwing money out the window, so I chose to buy and live on the outskirts which meant a four hour commute each day which got old after a few years. When I look back on it I don't know how I did it. In the end, it really paid off though, as my house value doubled in four years and I was able to go to a lower cost area and buy something in a nice area for just a bit more than I got for my house in CA.
And while an introvert here, trust me, it was really tough on the ego saying I lived in X area when everyone else (even if they were renting) lived in better areas. They used to laugh at me when I took boxes home on the train but, hey, when it came time to move I didn't have to spend any money on boxes.
My parents were extremely frugal - but real estate was VERY important to them - so we lived in the most expensive area, in a great house! They were frugal in other areas, and spent the bulk of their money on the thing that mattered most to them - their home. And it worked out really well for them.
It was a great childhood, but I have different priorities - so I live in a much less expensive area, in a less expensive house - but I still get to enjoy all that Southern California has to offer. So many people assume that California has a high cost of living, but if you go a little inland, it can be cheaper to live here, than it is in lots of other states. It's really a great bargain! And I'm only two hours from downtown Los Angeles, and all it has to offer, and even closer to the beach, and I'm only 30 minutes from the mountains and snow in winter.
I think it's very possible to live on the outskirts of an expensive area, and still enjoy all the perks the expensive area offers - but spend far less on housing, than you would if you lived right in the thick of things.
The heat and smog in inland parts of SoCal are a turn off for many. Much of inland SoCal is full of soulless and dull cookie cutter suburbs. The COL in inland SoCal is still at least a bit above the national average while prevailing wages are typically below average, so it's still not all that good a deal for many. I'm sure there are some excpeptions and I'm glad it's working for you...but it doesn't work for a lot of people.
Yeah, I always felt like a pauper there, even though relatively speaking I was making the average salary (which was pretty high in my eyes but not for SF). I think that renting is like throwing money out the window, so I chose to buy and live on the outskirts which meant a four hour commute each day which got old after a few years. When I look back on it I don't know how I did it. In the end, it really paid off though, as my house value doubled in four years and I was able to go to a lower cost area and buy something in a nice area for just a bit more than I got for my house in CA.
And while an introvert here, trust me, it was really tough on the ego saying I lived in X area when everyone else (even if they were renting) lived in better areas. They used to laugh at me when I took boxes home on the train but, hey, when it came time to move I didn't have to spend any money on boxes.
Yeah, the Bay Area is not the place to live if you want to own a single family house and only earn the area's median income. I would never do a one hour commute let a lone a 2 hour one . I did the opposite of what you did. I had roommates until age 35. Then I upgraded to a studio apartment 5 years ago. if I never live in something bigger than a studio, that's fine with me. If I never own a house, that's fine. I keep my rent to a pretty low % of my income and sock a good amount away in my retirement plan, etc. (Most renters don't do this, unfortnately). I have been able to walk to work (1 block!) for the last 3 years. I can't tell you how much having no commute adds to my quality of life (and saves money, too).
I don't blame you about now wanting to spend money on boxes. Everyone where I work takes the empty boxes and no one thinks it's a big deal or makes fun of it. I guess I'm lucky to work in that kind of environment
I do know what you mean about social pressure, though. I'm an introvert & I feel it at times. The Bay Area is a very spendy oriented place, and there are some peope I can't hang around because I don't regularly drop $50 or $100 bucks every weekend on dinners out or visiting local attractions every weekend. I do fun stuff that costs money, but it's more on a selective & limited basis, not every weekend.
...The COL in inland SoCal is still at least a bit above the national average while prevailing wages are typically below average...
This wage aspect is truly ironic (even if Newport Beach Lifeguards can earn $90K)
My direct experience from living in the OC 30+ years ago and again just very recently looking for a spot *somewhere* within even 30 miles of the coast... is that CA real estate costs are the #1 factor in "affordability" (or lack thereof) there.
Everything else costs a bit (or a lot) more too, just as you have said, and if it were just the RE or just the everything else... it would have been a lot easier to justify making the buy-in I was looking to do for family reasons as much as anything.
But beyond the RE price aspect, which has always been a fairly constant low level insanity out there, the current government/debt issues there became the tip point in the decision to turn east (again) instead.
Well, by the time that those family reasons solidify (about ten more years worth) hopefully the CA state debt issues will have been resolved too... and I can reconsider. Not yet though.
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger ...The COL in inland SoCal is still at least a bit above the national average while prevailing wages are typically below average...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
This wage aspect is truly ironic (even if Newport Beach Lifeguards can earn $90K)
My direct experience from living in the OC 30+ years ago and again just very recently looking for a spot *somewhere* within even 30 miles of the coast... is that CA real estate costs are the #1 factor in "affordability" (or lack thereof) there.
Nit pick
Newport Beach (or any of Orange County) isn't really considered inland SoCal.
The heat and smog in inland parts of SoCal are a turn off for many. Much of inland SoCal is full of soulless and dull cookie cutter suburbs. The COL in inland SoCal is still at least a bit above the national average while prevailing wages are typically below average, so it's still not all that good a deal for many. I'm sure there are some excpeptions and I'm glad it's working for you...but it doesn't work for a lot of people.
I love the heat and the sun, and I live in any area with bright blue skies the majority of the year - so smog isn't an issue either.
But you're right, inland isn't for everyone - and for that I'm grateful! I love that we have open space out here, and fewer suburban developments. It will never be as crowded as the coastal areas, and for me that's a big plus!
Its not about controlling the conversation, its about appropriately following the conversation, in particular the context of the comments.
Right, I asked that and mentioning a correlation (with no support at all) between renting and not being frugal doesn't address it. As a said before, you seem to want to infer a causal relationship between renting and lack of frugality, but a correlation even if true doesn't support that.
if you want to sound intelligent, can you at least not repeat the same exact words over and over that you think make you sound intelligent?
are you trying to suggest that as a group renters are more frugal than home owners? remember, im talking about in the real world not in theory.
if you want to sound intelligent, can you at least not repeat the same exact words over and over that you think make you sound intelligent?
are you trying to suggest that as a group renters are more frugal than home owners? remember, im talking about in the real world not in theory.
That's a very interesting question. Before the meltdown, I would have said homeowners were more frugal. Now, not so sure. It would seem that renting is actually maybe a better way to go.
However, there are the intangibles that determine whether one can be a renter or not or homeowner or not. For example, I can't stand noise coming through walls so I'd be a lousy renter. This is a huge part of the reason I live in a detached dwelling.
That's a very interesting question. Before the meltdown, I would have said homeowners were more frugal. Now, not so sure. It would seem that renting is actually maybe a better way to go.
However, there are the intangibles that determine whether one can be a renter or not or homeowner or not. For example, I can't stand noise coming through walls so I'd be a lousy renter. This is a huge part of the reason I live in a detached dwelling.
i think there is no doubt that renting can turn out to be the more financially sensible option. but separately from that point, as a group im sure you will find renters arent more frugal people. they are more likely to live paycheck to paycheck, if they find themselves with a chunk of money they are more likely to buy some fancy new thing than save the money, they are less likely to be investing their money, etc.
i think there is no doubt that renting can turn out to be the more financially sensible option. but separately from that point, as a group im sure you will find renters arent more frugal people. they are more likely to live paycheck to paycheck, if they find themselves with a chunk of money they are more likely to buy some fancy new thing than save the money, they are less likely to be investing their money, etc.
Now, this assumes that all you say is true and that not living from paycheck to paycheck makes one happier, etc.
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.
. I did the opposite of what you did. I had roommates until age 35. Then I upgraded to a studio apartment 5 years ago. if I never live in something bigger than a studio, that's fine with me. If I never own a house, that's fine. I keep my rent to a pretty low % of my income and sock a good amount away in my retirement plan, etc. (Most renters don't do this, unfortnately). I have been able to walk to work (1 block!) for the last 3 years. I can't tell you how much having no commute adds to my quality of life 
(and saves money, too).
