Buying in the Bay Area - What Can I Afford? (San Francisco: eviction, bars)

[CFL_City]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Map incomplete; doesn't include North Bay. Also seems to only accept high concentrations of extreme wealth as RBA. Map therefore invalid.

I actually think this is the reasoning behind some people including Livermore but not Concord.

Anyone who actually studies this sort of thing defines all the land in the 9 counties as the Bay Area, and for good reason. Even northern Sonoma is influenced tremendously by its proximity to other Bay Area towns (and Gualala is in Mendocino County, so that's why it doesn't count). Parts of Marin are cow towns...but they're still the Bay Area.

Proximity to Sacramento is not a factor. People commute to the Bay Area from Sacramento, anyway (there are two in my office)

Last, "Frisco" is fine. Not that I get too worked up about any of the nicknames.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by CFL_City

I actually think this is the reasoning behind some people including Livermore but not Concord.

Anyone who actually studies this sort of thing defines all the land in the 9 counties as the Bay Area, and for good reason. Even northern Sonoma is influenced tremendously by its proximity to other Bay Area towns (and Gualala is in Mendocino County, so that's why it doesn't count). Parts of Marin are cow towns...but they're still the Bay Area.

Proximity to Sacramento is not a factor. People commute to the Bay Area from Sacramento, anyway (there are two in my office)

Last, "Frisco" is fine. Not that I get too worked up about any of the nicknames.

Locales that are on the Central Valley map (posted earlier) are by definition: Central Valley, not Bay Area.
"Frisco" isn't "fine".
There's a petition before the court to initiate surveillance of your telephone and internet accounts.

[Senno]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Locales that are on the Central Valley map (posted earlier) are by definition: Central Valley, not Bay Area.
"Frisco" isn't "fine".
There's a petition before the court to initiate surveillance of your telephone and internet accounts.

I come down strongly against those in the Central Valley getting vainglorious and calling themselves Bay Area.

And Gilroy smells to much like garlic on occasion. I take splendiferously odiferous irritants into some account on occasion.

By the way, Doc is back on probation for calling Fresno a cowtown down in a CA general thread. Doc, slap that ankle monitor on.

[sliverbox]

I suppose what I find funny about how this general conversation is going is just how strongly people here feel about where they live in the Bay Area. After moving here I quickly saw that people in San Francisco NEVER left the city. People in the East Bay NEVER went to the city. People who lived on the Peninsula NEVER left the Peninsula. ALL of those mentioned above also felt that where they lived was a lot better than any of the others.

I find this all rather silly since you can actually see SF from the East Bay, those in Silicon Valley can easily be to any of these other places within 30-45 minutes, and yet these areas are totally foreign to one another's residents. The difference in prices is also outrageous: The house we bought in the East Bay for a little over 500k would cost probably between 800k-1.5 million in some parts of the Peninsula, some 40 minutes away. There is a HUGE amount of money people are willing to spend for some extra convenience.

[Senno]

Sliver, this is the most serious topic in the entire SF forum. It's why they had to bring in a Fresnan to arbitrate the matter.

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

There's a petition before the court to initiate surveillance of your telephone and internet accounts.

Petition denied. But the court is well aware of impertinence and is monitoring the situation.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

I suppose what I find funny about how this general conversation is going is just how strongly people here feel about where they live in the Bay Area. After moving here I quickly saw that people in San Francisco NEVER left the city. People in the East Bay NEVER went to the city.

This marks you as a relative newcomer. People in the East Bay go to the city ALL THE TIME. To shop, to go to museums, to go to the beach, to dine, for entertainment, or just to enjoy the city ambience. People all over the Bay Area will go anywhere in the Bay Area on weekends for the many entertainment events or free concerts going on. I don't know anyone who's as insular as you say. You are hereby declared "NBA"--not Bay Area.

[Senno]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

This marks you as a relative newcomer. People in the East Bay go to the city ALL THE TIME. To shop, to go to museums, to go to the beach, to dine, for entertainment, or just to enjoy the city ambience. People all over the Bay Area will go anywhere in the Bay Area on weekends for the many entertainment events or free concerts going on. I don't know anyone who's as insular as you say. You are hereby declared "NBA"--not Bay Area.

Even Fresnans go to SF on occasion.

I don't find this person NBA, but do find insufficient evidence to prove insular people are in the bay area.

The court also notes that it's not fun to act pretentious if you are only acting pretentious around the other residents in the particular city you live in.

The court would strike the testimony (j/k) but finds that Sliver may wish to file an appeal with the Bakersfield appeals court and the record must be maintained.

[sliverbox]

I've lived here 13 years. Most of the east-bayers I know seldom go to the city because frankly, its sort of a pain in the ass, and SF itself is clogged and congested compared to the East Bay ( except maybe Berkeley which has its own brand of messiness). But anyway, I am pretty happy just hanging out in Oakland or other east bay environs. I think there are definitely "city people" who like big cities and then there are those who dislike them and thus don't live or go to them as a result.

Its all about personal preference.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by sliverbox

I suppose what I find funny about how this general conversation is going is just how strongly people here feel about where they live in the Bay Area. After moving here I quickly saw that people in San Francisco NEVER left the city. People in the East Bay NEVER went to the city. People who lived on the Peninsula NEVER left the Peninsula. ALL of those mentioned above also felt that where they lived was a lot better than any of the others.

I find this all rather silly since you can actually see SF from the East Bay, those in Silicon Valley can easily be to any of these other places within 30-45 minutes, and yet these areas are totally foreign to one another's residents. The difference in prices is also outrageous: The house we bought in the East Bay for a little over 500k would cost probably between 800k-1.5 million in some parts of the Peninsula, some 40 minutes away. There is a HUGE amount of money people are willing to spend for some extra convenience.

This is something I've noticed too with some people in the Bay Area, and have always found it interesting. I consider myself somewhat of an enigma as I'm in SF, the peninsula, the South Bay, and the East Bay (mainly Oakland, Berkeley, or Alameda) at least 2-3 times each, every week. I have found it funny how reluctant many people are to traveling over to the next county, or even the next town...usually the comment is "why would I ever go waaaay over there?" This is especially amusing since, as you say, you can see many of these places that are "too far" in the distance. From my apt, I can see SF, many parts of the peninsula, and Oakland/parts of the East Bay across the bay...these places don't look very far, and that's because they aren't. They can all be easily reached in less than hour (even with traffic).

Two great cases of this thinking: my friend in Alameda who, before hanging out with me, would almost refuse to leave the island unless held at gunpoint (he still usually only leaves the island to play hockey with me in Oakland...but takes all backroads through Alameda/Bay Farm to get there), and my g/f from SF who, until meeting me, almost never left the city limits of SF...and rarely crossed the Bay Bridge (only to visit her relatives in WC). I make it a point to get them traveling to various parts of the Bay Area most weekends...they're always amazed when stumbling on a new (to them) town/park. "I never knew this place existed before!" is a pretty common comment.

I think it's because I come from such a boring place that I find this thinking so foreign. I'm constantly amazed at CA and the Bay Area. Why wouldn't you want to explore the entire area and learn as much about it as possible? So many great gems in this area...I know I'm gushing, but I do think some people forget how good we have it here in CA. And if you don't take advantage of it all, what's the point of paying all of this money to live here?

[sliverbox]

I dunno...
I guess I'm just a boring person or something because if allowed, I could spend days at the house. I will say this as an Alamedan, and that is its basically a totally self-contained city on an island. Its very bikeable, walkable, and fairly uncongested. Plus it has good food, bars, and so on. So I can see why some people are reluctant to leave. On a nice weekend its pleasant enough just to bike around the island. I feel that a lot of residents here are real homebodies.
That said... I DO like Oakland a lot and I got there probably at least twice a weekend. Honestly, I prefer Oakland way more than SF because at least to me it feels more laid back. Doesn't hurt that I can get there in 5 minutes.