NY Times article: California Dreams Settling for 1 Bdrm apt (Los Angeles: condos, crime)

[smokingGun]

Originally Posted by simbared

Exactly. My son and his wife just bought a nice house in Anaheim, and they are far from wealthy. There are still plenty of opportunities to make good money AND find a decent place to live in SoCal.

I think the main problem is that ppl who're polled for these whiny articles don't consider Anaheim or Diamond Bar acceptable places to live their hipster startup social-media-fueled lifestyle. They want Downtown, Westside, Hollywood, Mid-Wilshire... any neighborhood with vegan restaurants, tattoo parlors, "mixologist" bars, MCM furniture, vinyl record shops etc.

[RudyOD]

Originally Posted by smokingGun

I think the main problem is that ppl who're polled for these whiny articles don't consider Anaheim or Diamond Bar acceptable places to live their hipster startup social-media-fueled lifestyle. They want Downtown, Westside, Hollywood, Mid-Wilshire... any neighborhood with vegan restaurants, tattoo parlors, "mixologist" bars, MCM furniture, vinyl record shops etc.

Minus the MCM furniture, you just described downtown Santa Ana. LOL

Personally, I wouldn't mind settling into a condo lifestyle (which is the only real affordable housing left). What do I do mind is this faux density so often seen in SoCal, with hella expensive condos that promote 'urban living' without the actual urban amenities...like, you know, decent public transportation, or being able to walk everywhere (or at least to a local restaurant, bar, grocery store, etc). I know Anaheim has been building a lot of these type of housing recently, but I don't find it appealing...it still feels very suburb-ish.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by smokingGun

I think the main problem is that ppl who're polled for these whiny articles don't consider Anaheim or Diamond Bar acceptable places to live their hipster startup social-media-fueled lifestyle. They want Downtown, Westside, Hollywood, Mid-Wilshire...

You're exactly right.

[woodsart]

My wife and I are middle class in LA, and we don't feel particularly poor. We somehow manage to live relatively well on around $80K a year. We take vacations, at least one one-week trip somewhere nice each year along with long weekend trips at least every quarter. We have two dogs and two horses. We drive decent cars and have hobbies. We buy new stuff when we need it, though we're huge fans of flea markets anyway. We eat well, and eat out probably more than we should. BUT we have very little debt compared to most Americans, and we don't feel like we have to spend tons of money to go out and have a good time (we've sorted out many excellent cheap bars and restaurants and other stuff to do in LA). Maybe that is the difference.

We currently rent a one-bedroom cottage in a nice neighborhood with an excellent walkscore (we're two blocks to the metro). We are currently looking at buying a 2-bedroom house in a not-as-great but acceptable neighborhood, still near DTLA. We will trade a great walkscore for a not as great one in order to own rather than rent and expand our living space. We will have to cut back on how much we spend on extras for about a year, but it isn't impossible.

No, we will never own a McMansion, but we prefer arts, cultural events, decent weather, proximity to mountains and beaches (in only an hour any direction), cultural diversity, great variety of food, and lots of cheap/free things to do to a giant home in many of the areas (like Texas) that some people have gone to. I travel to many American cities for work every year and while I'd trade LA for another city on the West Coast (if I didn't love my job as much as I do), I wouldn't trade it for anywhere else. Frankly, everywhere else seems to have sucky weather. And most of the other cities do not have excellent abundant cheap food and entertainment. But then, I grew up in So Cal. I guess it's just what you feel is your cup of tea.

[MassVt]

Originally Posted by Duck King

California attracts dreamers, it always has.

Tons of people head west thinking they're going to make it big, their life will magically change overnight, etc. Most last anywhere from six months to a couple years before they head back home.

I think the city's pretty much reached it's apogee, population growth in LA is virtually zero, it's no longer expanding.

Contrast that to places like Arizona, Texas, Florida, Virginia, the Carolinas, etc., they're all growing out of control, strong economies, low unemployment, ridiculously cheap housing, etc.

There's also a huge demographic shift underway, white flight has been going on for decades, largely unskilled latino immigrants have taken their places. Also, you have you understand a ton of those people sharing apartments also collect welfare/SSI/etc. and work cash jobs.

How much longer will any of this last? Who knows? Look at what's happening to Chicago at the moment, MASSIVE population declines, there's a HUGE exodus from the city. It's imploding.

Decades ago if you said Chicago would collapse, people would assume you're mentally insane. It was such an important city (just like Detroit, the "Paris of the West").

Chicago is not imploding. This is utter nonsense.

[MItoBH]

Originally Posted by Duck King

Right, and that's in a similar light to say Mexico City. One can point to San Angel, Polanco, Las Lomas, Jardines del Pedregal, Santa Fe, etc. and say el D.F. is a playground for "the wealthy".

Meanwhile, in the rest of the city, 25% of people are living in shanty towns. It boasts one of the world's largest concentration of homeless children, is highly polluted/congested/etc.

Established types aren't flocking to LA, it lacks the sophisitcation/culture/history of true world class cities. There's a handful of arriviste garbage along the coast, the usual suspects: real estate, entertainment, etc., aside from that it's largely a service industry / working class environ. Who wants to be an island in an ocean of dysfunction and misery? Relegated to a tiny enclave? That's no different than modern-day Boer in South Africa.

[Mister 7]

I am by no means saying it's not expensive to live here, but it's doable.

We have been here since march; my husband makes about 75k (but only brings home like 48 after insurance, taxes, 401k, etc) and I am still looking for work, and we make it. We live in a really nice neighborhood in western hollywood, too, where rent definitely isn't cheap.

Things are a little tight, with me not working yet (finding work is a bi*ch in this city, even with experience and a college degree...just a little tidbit for future transplants), but we get by just fine and bills get paid.

One thing that really helps is that you can have an absolute blast here without spending a dime.

So much to do for extremely cheap or free. Go downtown, pay $1.75 for a subway ticket and just walk around all day. Hike Runyon and enjoy the views. Go to the Observatory. Walk around Wilshire, etc. It's endless.

[nightlysparrow]

Shirt has the glyph for the sign Cancer

[jm1982]

Did the New York Times think California should be cheap?

Also, I don't get these people that are just SHOCKED when they see the prices of homes with their realtors.

Do they not have the internet?...pretty easy to look up home prices with Redfin,Zillow,Trulia,etc.

Also agree about a lot of people not wanting to live in the more trendy areas of town .

In 2010 I bought my house in the valley in an area where a lot of people in L.A have probably never driven through or could point out on a map.

I had pretty cheap rent at my Hollywood apartment about $1000 for a one bedroom..but to buy a 4bedroom house was about $128 more per month..on a 15yr note.

Of course there are other expenses to owning ..but if I had done a 30yr it probably would of just been a bit more than rent on the one bedroom.

I know for a fact that many renters in that area and other parts of L.A could of easy bought the same house or one similar but chose not too.

Of course things are different and the market has gone up quite a bit ....but I don't think the people that had the chance to buy back then should be complaining now.

This is why it's 'risky' to rent in a place like L.A if you plan on being here a while..prices can go up a lot pretty fast and it's pretty easy to get priced out when wages are flat.

I think a big issue is that a lot of people don't do their research and look at price trends.

I wish I had the capability to buy more property back then when prices were so low.

I remember also looking at homes in Vegas and Phoenix selling for $30k or less that had sold for much more at the height of the market and those had gone up a lot too.

I didn't get the part in the article about banks buying up homes as rentals...Maybe they meant hedge funds or private equity funds...I don't know of any banks that want to be in the rental business..they usually want to get out of them.

There are still affordable homes in Central Valley ..bakersfield area ,etc...

So saying all of California is unaffordable is a little crazy.

There are probably still even some areas where you can live mortgage free or close to it.

Buying a duplex and living in one unit and renting out the other.

For example this one they are asking $65,000 ..one unit rents for $650 and the other for $450/mo.

416 Whitlock St, Bakersfield, CA 93307 is For Sale - Zillow

No, it's not Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Studio City, Silver Lake, Echo Park,etc
But if people want to have affordable housing and still be in California and relatively close to L.A
These are the places they will have to consider or "settle for" ...

Anything in the city of L.A is not going to be affordable for the average worker bee with stagnant wages in this country.
Yes there are people that make $100k or over ...but they are a small percentage of the population.

Median HOUSEHOLD income in L.A is like $56k ...household not per person.

Perhaps people are starting to wake up and we will see more people moving out of state or out of the L.A region..especially if they want to be homeowners.

[thelopez2]

Bakersfield is part of California?

http://www.city-data.com/forum/31880179-post191.html