Anyone in Pittsburgh familiar with Boston? (Sewickley, Belmont: mineral rights, sale, apartment)

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by Hopes

Glad you mentioned those neighborhoods. Lawrenceville is actually the main neighborhood that has retained a lot of it's Irish residents.

Most have scattered throughout the metro area over the generations. There's a large representation of people of Irish decent in the entire region.

Regent Square, where I lived, also used to be a big Irish neighborhood. It is now pretty much just a mix, but we still have some popular Irish bars (Ryan's and Murphy's), the Irish Centre of Pittsburgh is over basically in Frick Park, and so on.

Oh, and I am 1/16th Irish, which sounds about right for Regent Square these days.

[BrianTH]

By the way, the story of Pittsburgh's white-ethnic blue-collar neighborhoods is pretty much the story of these neighborhoods in general in the United States. As of the start of WWII, cities like Pittsburgh contained many of these neighborhoods. But after WWII, between the GI Bill, increasingly high-paying unionized industrial jobs, and so on, people in these neighborhoods started having increasing upward economic mobility. Meanwhile, as a society we were investing heavily in car culture, and suburbanization was taking off. So that began a migration of people from these neighborhoods into new-built, and more mixed-ethnicity, suburbs.

Then along came the Civil Rights Era and a northern/urban migration of African-Americans, which led to "white flight". And in ill-fated attempts to slow down suburbanization and white flight, cities engaged in large-scale development projects that actually just hastened the decline of many of these neighborhoods. And then came the industrial contractions of the late 1970s and 1980s, which undermined the jobs base for these neighborhoods and drove many of their young people to other regions of the country entirely in pursuit of work.

It is actually amazing any of these neighborhoods survived this gauntlet at all. And now cities are becoming cool again, and first artists and hipsters and urban pioneers, and eventually DINCs and BoBos and empty-nesters, and finally families interested in shorter commutes and a more urban lifestyle, are looking for urban residences. And so many of the white-ethnic blue-collar neighborhoods that made it past all the forces of decline after WWII are now finally succumbing to gentrification.

Which probably isn't a bad thing--these neighborhoods have been much romanticized, but they were also a product of systematic ethnic and economic segregation. In any event, the gentrification process isn't instantaneous, and in interior cities like Pittsburgh there is still plenty of extra capacity due to former population declines. So in neighborhoods like Polish Hill, Lawrenceville, and Bloomfield, you still have a mix of white-ethnic working class people and these new urbanites. But the former are aging and more and more of the latter keep coming, so the writing is on the wall.

[JoeLeaphorn]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

The highways under the city and the twice the density in half the space certainly sounds great about Boston. But the economics of it, Boston probably twice the costs as well, certainly makes Pittsburgh favorable.

Not as favorable as you might think. First of all, the cost of living in Boston is about 1.45 times greater than that in Pittsburgh. However, in many professional areas, salaries in Boston are proportionally greater than in Pittsburgh.

Property taxes in Boston are about twice that in Pittsburgh. But home values in Boston are roughly 4 times greater so that, proportional to value, Boston residents pay far less in property taxes.

You also have to consider the cost of discretionary travel and recreation. I know a lot of people who go to the coast (or the Cape) in summer and the mountains in winter. I don't know too many people who travel to Pittsburgh for vacation in either season.

As others have said, it depends on what you are looking for. If you like a vibrant city life with convenient access to New York, Vermont and the Cape, Pittsburgh isn't it. If you want to settle into a place where you don't have to make a great deal of money to live, comfortably, don't mind a stagnant political landscape, a state legislature that is twice as big as it needs to be, and don't mind paying insane rates for property taxes, Pittsburgh is it.

[JoeLeaphorn]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

The other part I'm wondering...for those who know Boston. Is it or has it become, or has it always been, just very YUPPIE in general? Tons of great universities, and I love education, intelligence, and everything else. But I'm not into the collegiate look of frats, people that look like they are in frats, and the preppy shirt collar goes up look that comes with it.

Both cities have their "charm". I see more faux "gangsta" fashion in Pittsburgh than I do in Boston but Boston, being so much more dense, there is a certain dilution of fashion such that you don't notice it much. In Cambridge, just across the river, there is little that is preppy about the fashion (and some great restaurants and bars).

[pic-chic]

If you're worried about the "preppy" atmosphere in Boston, that will depend entirely on where you are. There are plenty of what we used to call "euro-trash" as well as plenty of kids who have too much money and are free of mommy and daddy for the first time. BUT, most of these people are found right around the campuses and in the higher end clubs (Lansdowne St and such). And by October they've all realized they have to spend time studying or they're going back home, so you don't see them as much.

Culturally, there's really little comparison between the cities. Same with fashion. It's relatively conservative up there fashion-wise, but still on the forward edge, not last year's stuff. And you won't see a mullet within 70 miles of Boston (there's New Hampshire for that).

You can walk most of Boston if you're in the mood, but the public transportation system is great. There's plenty of history (the Freedom Trail, Bunker Hill, Old Ironsides, etc..) and several museums.

I lived in Waltham for several years. It's outside the city by about 9 miles and it takes 1/2 hour to get into most of the city (during non rush hour). But it's cheaper and it's on the T. Parking in Boston is hard to find and very expensive. Also a big problem in Southie. I can't tell you much about Southie because I never lived there. What I've heard is that some areas are still very "old southie" and are resistant to new people (not necessarily race-related, but because they don't know your family for 5 generations).

Yes, it's more expensive up there. Don't forget there's also more snow up there. They do know how to plow, so the roads are cleared much faster, though.


You really need to visit both cities for several days and decide which has the better feel for you.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

....these neighborhoods have been much romanticized, but they were also a product of systematic ethnic and economic segregation....

The OP needs to realize that Irish neighborhoods, even in Boston, aren't really Irish immigrant neighborhoods. They're not even 2nd or 3rd generation Irish immigrants. The Irish came to the United States so long ago that they are completely integrated into society.

Today's Irish act Irish by wear green and drinking green beer on St. Patricks day. Even the Irish Festival is pathetic---filled with cheap tourist items and nothing authentic. The food isnt' even authentic. Irish bars and restaurants aren't much better.

If someone wants an Irish experience, they really need to move to Ireland because they aren't going to find it anywhere in the United States.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by JoeLeaphorn

Not as favorable as you might think. First of all, the cost of living in Boston is about 1.45 times greater than that in Pittsburgh. However, in many professional areas, salaries in Boston are proportionally greater than in Pittsburgh.

Property taxes in Boston are about twice that in Pittsburgh. But home values in Boston are roughly 4 times greater so that, proportional to value, Boston residents pay far less in property taxes.

It's still cheaper to live here even though salaries are lower.

It's 34% cheaper to live in Pittsburgh over Boston.

Housing is 70% cheaper in Pittsburgh. High property taxes don't surpass that 70%!

Originally Posted by JoeLeaphorn

You also have to consider the cost of discretionary travel and recreation. I know a lot of people who go to the coast (or the Cape) in summer and the mountains in winter. I don't know too many people who travel to Pittsburgh for vacation in either season.

That's funny. Of course you don't know people who vacation in Pittsburgh since you live here!

Southwestern Pennsylvania brings in 5.1 billion per year in tourism revenue! That's nothing to sneeze at!

[BrianTH]

In the professional fields I know well, Boston salaries are in fact higher than Pittsburgh salaries, but not the 40-50% higher they would need to be in order to offset the higher cost of living--more like half that (meaning around 20-25% higher). And you also tend to work longer hours and have longer commutes to get those salaries, so the gap is even higher if you consider it on a per hour basis.

As for property taxes, what really matters to an individual household is their taxes paid, not the tax rate. So if you have to pay more in property taxes for a comparable house, it is cold comfort to note that because that house also cost you so much more to buy, your property tax rate is lower.

Finally, I've been to the Cape, Martha's Vineyard, and so forth, and they are all perfectly nice, but to my tastes not inherently nicer than the resort/recreational areas near Pittsburgh (the big thing they have that we don't have is the ocean, but I am more a mountains and woods guy). Of course it is true they are much more popular, but I don't view that as a positive: it makes those areas harder to get to, more crowded, and most of all much more expensive, particularly when it comes to rentals/buying.

[BrianTH]

So this is handy, an occupational pay comparison from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ncspay.pdf

With the nation as a whole benchmarked at 100, Boston overall was 111, and Pittsburgh was 95. So Boston was about 17% higher than Pittsburgh, which was about my impression.

They have some specific categories too. For example, for "Management, business, and financial", it was Boston 105, Pittsburgh 88, so that is Boston about 19% higher. For "Professional and related", it was Boston 108, Pittsburgh 94, so about +15%.

So again, Boston pay is in fact higher, but not enough higher to make up for the much higher cost of living.

[JoeLeaphorn]

Originally Posted by Hopes

It's still cheaper to live here even though salaries are lower.

It's 34% cheaper to live in Pittsburgh over Boston.

And yet Boston is much more populous. Go figure. If the cost of living was the sole consideration of a person moving, it might make a difference to your argument. Yet nearly all of the regions of the country with stable or growing populations are more expensive to live in. So why is Pittsburgh still losing population? Obviously there is more to it than cost.

Housing is 70% cheaper in Pittsburgh. High property taxes don't surpass that 70%!

Depends upon how long you live in your house doesn't it? In about 22.5 years I'll have paid the price of my house in property taxes. I could live in a house almost 7 more years before saying the same thing in Boston.

Furthermore, the 70% number is not entirely relevant, is it. When I moved to Pittsburgh I had to buy a house which was bigger than what I needed or wanted because I didn't want to take the capital gains hit that early in my life. The house that I lived in in Chicago had less square footage than what I have, now, and it was everything that I wanted and needed.

What matters is not, strictly, the cost but the value.

That's funny. Of course you don't know people who vacation in Pittsburgh since you live here!

When I lived in Boston, Chicago, DC, and other places, it was much more common to talk to a person on the street who was just visiting than it is in Pittsburgh, unless you are standing in the airport or the Carnegie.

Southwestern Pennsylvania brings in 5.1 billion per year in tourism revenue! That's nothing to sneeze at!

SWPA is a big territory and I've seen various numbers besides $5.1 billion. That $5.1 billion, if it is to be believed, generated about $500 million in tax revenues. In Chicago (the city, alone, not the region), $11.8 billion in tourism spending brought in only about $656 million in tax revenues. You get more bang for your buck touring Chicago.