U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
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)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 01-09-2009, 05:38 PM
2,144 posts, read 6,350,982 times
Reputation: 1518


All jobs aren't created equal...

NYC's financial industry includes some 10% of jobs in NYC but pays ~40% of NY's taxes....IIRC, the avg Goldman employee (incl secretaries and IT support, etc) earned ~$600K in '08

Suspect most companies (and their employees) enjoy a more efficient QOL when based in suburban places like Plano, TX, rather than any ancient downtown setting, esp in states w/high income tax rates

Will be interesting to see how long TX can keep a 0% state income tax as it ages....

Always amused by elitist accusations of sprawl being negative....for most middle-income people, esp w/kids, suburbs are far cheaper, safer, more pleasant....and more convenient to suburban offices than any urban setting like NYC or SF or Chicago, which is really just home of affluent yuppies

Besides, most of world's greatest creative, wealth-creating industries, like tech, are based in suburban office parks that sprawl ~40mis from PaloAlto to SanJose, not in some silly downtown office tower in SF....and vast majority of the smartest engineers choose to live in suburbs near PaloAlto and drive self everywhere...clearly not much interest in urban living or mass transit among highly educated, affluent techies...hmmm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 01-09-2009, 06:27 PM
Location: Villanova Pa.
4,908 posts, read 12,525,636 times
Reputation: 2631
Originally Posted by rickowens View Post
Very opinionated driven characterizations there. Opulent wealth? LA has the highest poverty rate when compared to Chicago, NY and both of those metros have much higher median incomes.
The point was in the beginning and middle of its life cycle LA was a fairly wealthy city with a remarkable location, it should have been the premier city of the west coast. It got entirely too big, lost its way and is not aging gracefully. I find it amusing that locals in Texas get all geeked up about clamoring for the same type of growth that has helped make LA a shell of a city it should be. Consider yourself the oceanless,palm tree less,San Gabriel-less LA of the year 2075. Thats the path you are on and its not a good one.

Originally Posted by rickowens
What does that have to do with Texas? Fact is, it is not happening in Texas. Houston, Dallas, Austin's economies are strong and LA's is down the toilet.
Living in the now is a very dangerous mindset. You need to look upon the past to help guide you in the future.

I'm talking about the future.

Metro Dallas added nearly 200,000 people last year.Atlanta Phoenix and Houston were not too far behind. The day comes when excessive growth like the sunbelt is experiencing backfires.

What Does LA have to do with Texas? Consider it a warning signal, an alarm. LA's location should have deemed it the best city in the usa if it were developed correctly, it wasnt and its paying the price today as it is a shadow of what it should be drowning in its self inflicted debt caused by overpopulation. LA's dynamic growth is much older than Dallas,Atlanta and Houstons. Judgement day is coming for the sunbelt cities and the bigger they get the harder the fall will be.

13 of the wealthiest 15 counties in the usa are in the suburbs of Wash + NYC who use strict anti development guidelines to ensure against decline. They learned from experiemce I dont believe the sunbelt cities have.

Originally Posted by rickowens

No, Houston's population is booming because of it's healthy income, not because of their building of wal-marts and strip malls.
I agree 100% Houston,dallas Atlantas economies are very healthy right now.But thats not the point. La's economy was very healthy back in the 50's 60's 70's before it grew out of its britches, aged, and became the repository for illegal aliens and lower socio economic masses.

Philaldephias economy was booming in the 60's and I love the city but truth be told the only thing keeping Philly metros head above water is their dynamic high end anti-development suburbs.

Quantity is an eventual curse. Quality is what a city should strive for. You cant tell me with 200,000 people per year moving into Dallas that its all professional high end influx.Thats a ridiculous notion.

Last edited by rainrock; 01-09-2009 at 06:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2009, 06:53 PM
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,223 posts, read 13,835,010 times
Reputation: 3545
DFW had 150,000 last year, not 200K.
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.

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

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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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