Where to live? Job offer in Beverly Hills, couple with 3 kids. (Glendale: buy, schools)

[znlwovuhrjw]

You could always move to a state for a number of years to sock money away until you can afford going to California; for example:

9 Sargents Pl LOT 97, Gilford, NH 03249 is For Sale | Zillow

Paralegal salary in this region is on average $44,000/yr with no income or sales tax. Your property tax would be $300/yr and you would have all the space needed for your family. Supposing that you are completely avoiding spending too much, you could probably get $300,000 saved up in 5 years if your husband is making about the same money and you were in the 15% federal tax bracket (Below $74,900/yr). You could eventually afford something like this:

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/12...80384223_zpid/

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by Westbound and Down

With horrendous commutes would be my guess, or they live in very sketchy areas.

I can't imagine contemplating a move to Los Angeles on such a low salary with children in tow. I am retired, and do not care one bit about "schools" in choosing where to live - so I am not limited in the least by the decisions that parents of school aged children have to make - and I still could not imagine living in Los Angeles on that salary even without the children to consider.

And you know this how? Doesn't sound like you have ever lived in LA. Not everyone does horrendous commutes or lives in sketchy areas if they don't. Don't "guess" about situations you don't know about.

People live in places like Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena, or the Valley and live/ work in those places or commute downtown(not that difficult). Not everyone is sitting on freeways for two hours doing commutes.

You're right about not enough of a salary with kids in tow, but you're wrong about a single person not being able to live decently on that salary.

[Westbound and Down]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

And you know this how? Doesn't sound like you have ever lived in LA. Not everyone does horrendous commutes or lives in sketchy areas if they don't. Don't "guess" about situations you don't know about.

People live in places like Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena, or the Valley and live/ work in those places or commute downtown(not that difficult). Not everyone is sitting on freeways for two hours doing commutes.

You're right about not enough of a salary with kids in tow, but you're wrong about a single person not being able to live decently on that salary.

Wrong, friend-o. I have lived in Los Angeles, worked in an office building at the corner of Wilshire and Westwood for many years.

Stick to the case of the OP and quit worrying about my knowledge or life experience. The job is in Beverly Hills - her commute to BH from Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena or the Valley - your suggestions - would be horrendous. Her job isn't in those locations - it will be in Beverly Hills.

I prefaced my opinion on the income she will get even as a single as MY opinion, having lived, I imagine, a few more years than you and in a few more places than you, too. I have lived on the east coast, the west coast, and places in between - including Austin, TX - and I know how much income someone needs to live on in all of those places. I would never describe $42k as "decent" for Los Angeles, not even for a single person.

[Cloudwalker]

If you do continue looking at LA, look at Palms or Culver City. It's generally a very quick commute to BH and you can find 2 bedroom apartments there for under $2000 (but highly unlikely to find 3 bed or sfh at that price). Culver City has it's own school district and reasonable schools, and you can find good elementary schools in LAUSD, but you have to do your research on that, schools vary considerably.

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by Westbound and Down

Wrong, friend-o. I have lived in Los Angeles, worked in an office building at the corner of Wilshire and Westwood for many years.

Stick to the case of the OP and quit worrying about my knowledge or life experience. The job is in Beverly Hills - her commute to BH from Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena or the Valley - your suggestions - would be horrendous. Her job isn't in those locations - it will be in Beverly Hills.

I prefaced my opinion on the income she will get even as a single as MY opinion, having lived, I imagine, a few more years than you and in a few more places than you, too. I have lived on the east coast, the west coast, and places in between - including Austin, TX - and I know how much income someone needs to live on in all of those places. I would never describe $42k as "decent" for Los Angeles, not even for a single person.

Try reading the post correctly before commenting.

I never said the OP should move to those areas, I said that on that salary with that size family to move to LA isn't realistic. I said she shouldn't move to CA period.

My comments pertained to the misinformation you gave stating that you "guessed" that people in LA either did horrendous commutes or must live in sketchy areas, that is simply not true.

Many people in the LA area live and work close to home.

[znlwovuhrjw]

Originally Posted by Cloudwalker

If you do continue looking at LA, look at Palms or Culver City. It's generally a very quick commute to BH and you can find 2 bedroom apartments there for under $2000 (but highly unlikely to find 3 bed or sfh at that price). Culver City has it's own school district and reasonable schools, and you can find good elementary schools in LAUSD, but you have to do your research on that, schools vary considerably.

$20,000+/yr rent...

[Westbound and Down]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

Try reading the post correctly before commenting.

I never said the OP should move to those areas, I said that on that salary with that size family to move to LA isn't realistic. I said she shouldn't move to CA period.

My comments pertained to the misinformation you gave stating that you "guessed" that people in LA either did horrendous commutes or must live in sketchy areas, that is simply not true.

Many people in the LA area live and work close to home.

You should check your reading comprehension.

My post that evidently twisted your panties in a bunch was in reply to the OP who questioned how people, like her sister-in-law or whomever, who is making $12.50 an hour, can "make it" in LA. The truth is that the vast majority can't without either a bad commute or living in a sketchy area, or maybe sleeping on someone's couch.

How you construe my comments as implying that EVERYONE in Los Angeles has either a bad commute or lives in sketchtown is ridiculous. Of course some people live near their jobs. But NOBODY making $42k to support a family of 5 lives anywhere near Beverly Hills...

[909er]

And you call me a "CA cheerleader"....LOL.

Wrong, knowledge is not cheerleading, and you need to quit commenting on me or I will report you. Mods - this is my official cease and desist to seain dublin for trolling.

[aamor1987]

I'm thinking I definitely will need a higher paying job. 42k seems low to me for a paralegal in L.A., I honestly expected 50k minimum., this particular employer may not be they way to go. I'm thinking I could take this job initially even if i am just "getting by" financially and simultaneously look for a higher paying job.

[aamor1987]

Originally Posted by Cloudwalker

If you do continue looking at LA, look at Palms or Culver City. It's generally a very quick commute to BH and you can find 2 bedroom apartments there for under $2000 (but highly unlikely to find 3 bed or sfh at that price). Culver City has it's own school district and reasonable schools, and you can find good elementary schools in LAUSD, but you have to do your research on that, schools vary considerably.

Thanks, I will check that area out. One of my family member actually mentioned Culver City as well.