Why is Pittsburgh so cheap? (Lebanon, Washington: condos, incomes, standard of living)

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Awesomo.2000

Pittsburgh is uneducated, dying, in decline, there are a bunch of empty houses in the city because no body wants to live in it, bla bla bla bla. I am getting so sick of the ignorance on this forum.

Firstly, I never said that "Pittsburgh is uneducated", rather I said comparing it to San Fransisco in this regard does not work well. But the city is declining (population wise) for decades that is a FACT. The city is also decentralizing, e.g., people are moving into the suburbs. Again a fact. These are the two major reasons why the city is so cheap. There are also a large number of empty houses to deny that fact is inane.

I never said anything about nobody wanting to live there.

Originally Posted by JoeP

If you had read my point it was that Pittsburgh has educational institutions on a very high tier which the only higher one being large regions with even more institutions like Philly, NYC, and Boston.

Pittsburgh has one educational institution on the "very high tier" and its only very good in a handful of things. But I don't think comparing cities by the number of universities is a meaningful measure. San Fransisco after all does not even have a good university in its city limits so even in this sense there is no real comparison. San Fransisco and Pittsburgh are apples and oranges.

I also don't know of anything culturally in Pittsburgh that is considered "one of the best in the country". But for a city of its size Pittsburgh does have a lot of cultural amenities.

[JoeP]

I don't like the city vs city threads that happen on this forum - I am only responding to what I read and I responded to the claim about education and I am correct in my response. Universities are part of the fabric of a region as much as iconic corporations etc.

Pittsburgh was hit hard, made a lot of progress and still has a long way to go, but having been one of the larger regions historically in this country made it have established quality universities and cultural institutions.

Also cities don't exist anymore - metropolitan areas exist or markets in many business industries like mine.

What's within outdated political boundaries are irrelevant unless one is speaking about intra-regional issues. I wish that most people in this forum could understand that.

[creepsinc]

Originally Posted by user_id

You can't wait for hundreds of thousand to be homeless, thousands to die, etc? Sorry, regardless of what you think of the people in San Fransisco your comment is utterly disgusting. Can't you critique a region without wishing their death and destruction? It must suck to be so hateful.

It must suck to be so uptight. It was tongue in cheek, but I do sort of subscribe to the Carlin point of view on natural disasters. I have no problem with Nature thinning the herd. And I didn't wish anything. It's a fact that it's coming.

[Yac]

Everybody please calm down and get back on topic.
Yac.

[Synopsis]

Pittsburgh is a beautiful city. If I could get a job in Pittsburgh, I'd go there in a heartbeat. The hills, the rivers, it's all beautiful.

[pittsteelerfan]

Originally Posted by creepsinc

SF hasn't ALWAYS been expensive. Up until the 70s, it was pretty affordable. Check your facts, dude.


Also, I've lived in both cities and there are more similarities than just hills. Row houses, for instance.

SF has ALWAYS been more expensive than Pittsburgh, and has ALWAYS been one of the most expensive cities in America. Before the 1970's, American cities were more on an equal playing field with each other. Remember, it was only one generation ago that most women stayed home to raise kids instead of being in the workforce.

In 2000', the average price of realestate in SF was $422,700. In 2007', it was $830,700. The poverty in SF is 10.5%. People living in SF with atleast a bachelor's degree, is 45%.

In 2000', the average price of realestate in Pittsburgh was $60,700. In 2007', it was $84,700. The poverty in Pittsburgh is 21% (exactly double compared to SF). People living in Pittburgh with atleast a bachelor's degree, is 26.2% (almost half compared to SF).

Now you can say all you want that SF wasn't always this expensive. Of course it wasn't, things go up. Mannhattan in 2000', the average price was $361,100, compared to 2007' it was $808,200. NYC wasn't exactly cheap in 2000', even though the realestate was much more affordable. In fact, those 2000' prices do look "cheap"! But anyone who spent years living there, will all say the same thing, "NYC has ALWAYS been expensive"!

So why is Pittsburgh so cheap then? Is it really 'that' underrated? YES and NO. It's not underrated for the 'working' class. Now everybody works, I'm talking about the guys who 'have' to take a shower as soon as they walk in the door from work. Cause they're filthy, and they stink. The blue collar types is what I'm talking about. But for a colledge educated person? I don't think Pittsburgh is "underrated".

It's not that Pittsburgh doesn't offer the things of these other 'trendy' cities, it does, maybe sometimes just on a smaller scale. One of the biggest problems about Pittsburgh, it NEVER became "trendy". I'm sure a lot of Pittsburgh'ers see this as a plus, just for the fact the prices reflect that. But cities that were labled "trendy", their populations grew along with their economies. Take cities like Seattle or Portland. Those two were probably the 'it' cities of the 90's. Pittsburgh has never seen that type of growth or national exposure.

Sure Pittsburgh is rich in history, but how much of that is recent? If it wasn't for our beloved Steelers, what in Pittsburgh would be grabbing any kind of headlines.

A lot of people like living in "trendy" cities. Are they overrated? Sure they are. But who in the world hasn't heard of San Fransico or NYC or LA? And people will continue to pay higher prices to live in those cities. Even if it means they have to rent forever.

And for you to say that SF has similiar rowhouse's, is a stretch to say the least. Whoever reads this, if you haven't been to SF, simply go over to the SF forum. The first thread is SF pics. Tell me SF doesn't look like a Mediterranean city. Almost everything is white or an 'off white' there. And their victorian homes don't look like there sitting in Pittsburgh either. The bay area is much different than Pittsburgh. Being in the Pacific Heights nabe of SF, is much different than being in the Hill District of Pittsburgh. The housing stock alone is much different, besides the feel between the two.

I keep hearing how people are leaving Pittsburgh cause of the "jobs". Really? With housing as cheap as it is in Pittsburgh, how much does one have to generate a year? Not very much, especially compared to other major metro areas. And if 'these' people who are leaving Pittsburgh cause of "jobs", ain't some of them blue collar workers. Do they really think they'll make more in the sunbelt or other major metros? The sunbelt doesn't pay anything. And other major metros have high immigrant populations who drive the wages WAY down (a problem Pittsburgh doesn't have).

Almost every bar in Pittsburgh, has a 'guy' who makes a living by doing 'odd' jobs. You know the type, jack of all trades, master at none. One day he's painting someone's bedroom, the next day he's cleaning someone's gutters out, next day he's cleaning someon'e cellar out, etc etc. Sometimes he might go a few days without a job, but is always able to eek a living out. There ain't too many places left in America that you can do this. Illegal Mexicans cornered the market on this type of work.

So, there must be other reasons besides "jobs" why people continue to move out of Pittsburgh. And why Pittsburgh can't attract any new people to the city.... Saying that Pittsburgh is somehow "America's best kept secret", may have been true 20 years ago. But not in the era of the internet. It wouldn't take someone long to google around and find out that Pittsburgh is one of the cheapest of the major metros. People know, they just ain't biting. I could never move back Pittsburgh, and I was born and raised there. How about someone coming from a city like San Fransico, who was born and raised there? You think culture shock wouldn't happen? Sure the view from MT. Washington is beautiful. But so are many views from SF and the Bay area in general.

Some of the things you're saying, are leaning towards 'false' pride. Nothing wrong with hometown pride, even if you're a transplant to Pittsburgh. But saying something that's not true, doesn't make it true.

[creepsinc]

Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan

SF has ALWAYS been more expensive than Pittsburgh, and has ALWAYS been one of the most expensive cities in America. Before the 1970's, American cities were more on an equal playing field with each other. Remember, it was only one generation ago that most women stayed home to raise kids instead of being in the workforce.

In 2000', the average price of realestate in SF was $422,700. In 2007', it was $830,700. The poverty in SF is 10.5%. People living in SF with atleast a bachelor's degree, is 45%.

In 2000', the average price of realestate in Pittsburgh was $60,700. In 2007', it was $84,700. The poverty in Pittsburgh is 21% (exactly double compared to SF). People living in Pittburgh with atleast a bachelor's degree, is 26.2% (almost half compared to SF).

Now you can say all you want that SF wasn't always this expensive. Of course it wasn't, things go up. Mannhattan in 2000', the average price was $361,100, compared to 2007' it was $808,200. NYC wasn't exactly cheap in 2000', even though the realestate was much more affordable. In fact, those 2000' prices do look "cheap"! But anyone who spent years living there, will all say the same thing, "NYC has ALWAYS been expensive"!

So why is Pittsburgh so cheap then? Is it really 'that' underrated? YES and NO. It's not underrated for the 'working' class. Now everybody works, I'm talking about the guys who 'have' to take a shower as soon as they walk in the door from work. Cause they're filthy, and they stink. The blue collar types is what I'm talking about. But for a colledge educated person? I don't think Pittsburgh is "underrated".

It's not that Pittsburgh doesn't offer the things of these other 'trendy' cities, it does, maybe sometimes just on a smaller scale. One of the biggest problems about Pittsburgh, it NEVER became "trendy". I'm sure a lot of Pittsburgh'ers see this as a plus, just for the fact the prices reflect that. But cities that were labled "trendy", their populations grew along with their economies. Take cities like Seattle or Portland. Those two were probably the 'it' cities of the 90's. Pittsburgh has never seen that type of growth or national exposure.

Sure Pittsburgh is rich in history, but how much of that is recent? If it wasn't for our beloved Steelers, what in Pittsburgh would be grabbing any kind of headlines.

A lot of people like living in "trendy" cities. Are they overrated? Sure they are. But who in the world hasn't heard of San Fransico or NYC or LA? And people will continue to pay higher prices to live in those cities. Even if it means they have to rent forever.

And for you to say that SF has similiar rowhouse's, is a stretch to say the least. Whoever reads this, if you haven't been to SF, simply go over to the SF forum. The first thread is SF pics. Tell me SF doesn't look like a Mediterranean city. Almost everything is white or an 'off white' there. And their victorian homes don't look like there sitting in Pittsburgh either. The bay area is much different than Pittsburgh. Being in the Pacific Heights nabe of SF, is much different than being in the Hill District of Pittsburgh. The housing stock alone is much different, besides the feel between the two.

I keep hearing how people are leaving Pittsburgh cause of the "jobs". Really? With housing as cheap as it is in Pittsburgh, how much does one have to generate a year? Not very much, especially compared to other major metro areas. And if 'these' people who are leaving Pittsburgh cause of "jobs", ain't some of them blue collar workers. Do they really think they'll make more in the sunbelt or other major metros? The sunbelt doesn't pay anything. And other major metros have high immigrant populations who drive the wages WAY down (a problem Pittsburgh doesn't have).

Almost every bar in Pittsburgh, has a 'guy' who makes a living by doing 'odd' jobs. You know the type, jack of all trades, master at none. One day he's painting someone's bedroom, the next day he's cleaning someone's gutters out, next day he's cleaning someon'e cellar out, etc etc. Sometimes he might go a few days without a job, but is always able to eek a living out. There ain't too many places left in America that you can do this. Illegal Mexicans cornered the market on this type of work.

So, there must be other reasons besides "jobs" why people continue to move out of Pittsburgh. And why Pittsburgh can't attract any new people to the city.... Saying that Pittsburgh is somehow "America's best kept secret", may have been true 20 years ago. But not in the era of the internet. It wouldn't take someone long to google around and find out that Pittsburgh is one of the cheapest of the major metros. People know, they just ain't biting. I could never move back Pittsburgh, and I was born and raised there. How about someone coming from a city like San Fransico, who was born and raised there? You think culture shock wouldn't happen? Sure the view from MT. Washington is beautiful. But so are many views from SF and the Bay area in general.

Some of the things you're saying, are leaning towards 'false' pride. Nothing wrong with hometown pride, even if you're a transplant to Pittsburgh. But saying something that's not true, doesn't make it true.

First of all, I was responding to your post that said SF has ALWAYS been (presumably meaning throughout its history) one of the most expensive cities in the country. I took issue with that, and you briefly mentioned the 70s and then jumped right back to post-internet boom late 90s and 2000s, completely missing my point.

Secondly, I suppose I know nothing about any similarities that *I* perceive between the two cities, having actually lived in both. I've done more than look at pictures, I've LIVED the two cities. Have you? If not, then you're not as qualified to comment. Note that I didn't say you didn't have the right to comment, just that your comments don't hold the same water as one of the probable relative handful of people here to have lived in both cities.

[pittsteelerfan]

Originally Posted by creepsinc

First of all, I was responding to your post that said SF has ALWAYS been (presumably meaning throughout its history) one of the most expensive cities in the country. I took issue with that, and you briefly mentioned the 70s and then jumped right back to post-internet boom late 90s and 2000s, completely missing my point.

Secondly, I suppose I know nothing about any similarities that *I* perceive between the two cities, having actually lived in both. I've done more than look at pictures, I've LIVED the two cities. Have you? If not, then you're not as qualified to comment. Note that I didn't say you didn't have the right to comment, just that your comments don't hold the same water as one of the probable relative handful of people here to have lived in both cities.

You think SF wasn't "expensive" during the "Gold Rush"? How about when they had that big earthquake that devasted like half the city? You think those apt rents, or house's weren't commanding top dollar? SUPPLY and DEMAND! SF was "expensive" long before the "internet boom". Apparently, Pittsburgh lacks in the DEMAND department, otherwise the realestate prices would be MUCH HIGHER!

I've 'been' to SF a few times, pics ain't showing me nothing I don't know from 'first hand' experience.

'If' you did live in SF, I really don't know how you're saying that the house's look alike?.....

[creepsinc]

Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan

'If' you did live in SF, I really don't know how you're saying that the house's look alike?.....

You're actually questioning where I lived for 4 years?


One word, genius: Victorian*.




*Yes, I'm aware that "Victorian" refers to an era more than any one style, but the fact that Pittsburgh and S.F. are two of the largest and most well-known Victorian cities in the country renders your argument ridiculous. Pittsburgh is more intact, since many of S.F.'s Victorian "nabes" fell victim to the urban renewal wrecking balls, but Pittsburgh isn't sometimes called "The Poor Man's San Francisco" for nothing.

[creepsinc]

It's great to know that I can use "ignore" and know for certain that I'm not missing anything at all.