Do you enjoy living in San Francisco? (Los Angeles, San Diego: 2015, crime rates)

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

The real estate market in Mumbai India (or for that matter any large Asian city) is 100 times more competitive than SF and per sq ft price in desirable parts of Mumbai might be same as SF. That doesn't make Mumbai a desirable or nice place to live.. Also by your logic, Daly City is more desirable than San Diego because the median house price is higher and the inventory is lower!!!! The property market in SF is a result of housing shortage and it's not a result of desirability of SF! There are also plenty of places in bay area with more expensive real estate than SF.

Almost all CA homeowners stay put because it does not make financial sense to sell a home and loose the prop 13 advantage with a higher priced new home. This in turn also inflates real estate prices. I am sure given the choice almost everyone in foggy or rundown parts of SF would move down to the peninsula but they can't afford it. Now simpletons might interpret being stuck in a city to loving a city but I guess critical thinking is not everyone's forte

I gotta agree with Tulemutt on this one...and that doesn't happen all that often.

[Bayarea4]

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

You are institutionalized

Outside of city-data forum I have seen very few people who actually enjoy living in SF. Most of the population is transient and leave after realizing in a few years that the hype is not worth it!

"Institutionalized." Very funny. I don't bother going into other cities' forums and saying Wow, you poor thing, how awful it must be to live there! My friends who have lived there left because they hated it so much! Do you know why? Because I'm happy where I am. Happy people don't feel the need to pump up their egos by ridiculing other people's life choices.

[LongNote]

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

Not a single of my colleague from two different companies bought a house in SF even though pretty much all of them can afford it. Everyone bought in the peninsula or east bay! It's anecdotal but buying a million dollar house in nasty weather, crime and bad schools is not something most people like. The only one bragging about living in SF are the ones living in rent controlled apartment or with bunch of roommates and can't afford to buy anywhere in the bay area. They are stuck in SF!

Lol, have you ever actually been to SF? Nasty Weather? Behind Seattle, SF has the best climate of any city that I've been to or lived in. SF's crime isn't all that bad, BTW... Unless you consider prostitution to be a crime....

[HappyinCali]

I think that this is a legitimate question. I love the city and I love living here. However, I don’t like looking at my own reflection in the mirror and telling everyone how awesome things are. A lot of San Franciscans do.

The city has a lot of issues – it is quite dirty and the local government just can’t clean it up, despite its $10 bn budget. Some blocks are disgusting. The politics that result in incompetents like Mar and Mirkamiri being elected are also frustrating. The school lottery is dumb. People are largely not friendly and keep to themselves. I also think that the city is a bit provincial. We think we are all that, but we just can’t measure up to the truly great cities in the world. Property crime is really bad.

That said. I love it here. However, both my wife and I are well-paid non-tech professionals and are able to enjoy everything this city has to offer. If I were not as well paid, I would probably live elsewhere.

I always tell my brother that the best thing that ever happened to our family was coming to America. The second best thing was choosing the South, instead of the coastal cities (NYC was a very real possibility). We came to America with almost nothing, but with mom being a teacher and my dad blue collar, we were able to buy a beautiful 150k house in to the best school district in the state. I went on to attend a top 20 college and my brother is headed in that direction, too. If we had moved to SF, NYC, Boston, we probably would have lived in a crappy, cramped apartment next to a crappy school.

So, yes, I love it here and it is the right place for me. I hope I get to spent many many years here. But it would have been a terrible place for my newly immigrant family to move to. As with everything else in life, it depends on the circumstances.

[HappyinCali]

Originally Posted by LongNote

Lol, have you ever actually been to SF? Nasty Weather? Behind Seattle, SF has the best climate of any city that I've been to or lived in. SF's crime isn't all that bad, BTW... Unless you consider prostitution to be a crime....

Actually, crime is bad. Especially property crime and theft. Literally every single one of my friends has had a crime committed against them - from car break ins, to stolen motorcycles, to pick pocketing. That was not the case in NYC or the South.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

The real estate market in Mumbai India (or for that matter any large Asian city) is 100 times more competitive than SF and per sq ft price in desirable parts of Mumbai might be same as SF. That doesn't make Mumbai a desirable or nice place to live.. Also by your logic, Daly City is more desirable than San Diego because the median house price is higher and the inventory is lower!!!! The property market in SF is a result of housing shortage and it's not a result of desirability of SF! There are also plenty of places in bay area with more expensive real estate than SF.

Almost all CA homeowners stay put because it does not make financial sense to sell a home and loose the prop 13 advantage with a higher priced new home. This in turn also inflates real estate prices. I am sure given the choice almost everyone in foggy or rundown parts of SF would move down to the peninsula but they can't afford it. Now simpletons might interpret being stuck in a city to loving a city but I guess critical thinking is not everyone's forte

Um no, Andy. Those places, like Mumbai, that you cite, ARE, in fact, highly desirable, more so than SF to those people who are competing for those properties. That's the definition of desirable. Desirable is subjective to each individual. Desirable is not "what andyadhi says is peachy-keeno".

And lmfao about your comment

The property market in SF is a result of housing shortage and it's not a result of desirability of SF!

Andy, ask yourself "why is there a housing shortage in SF?" what defines "a shortage?" Uh, more people desiring to live there than housing units? Maybe?

You are right about one thing though: critical thinking is not everyone's forte.
Fo' sho'.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

Actually, crime is bad. Especially property crime and theft. Literally every single one of my friends has had a crime committed against them - from car break ins, to stolen motorcycles, to pick pocketing. That was not the case in NYC or the South.

Pretty vague declaration here. Violent crime rate for NYC is very close to SF. Property crime is notably lower in NYC. But to simply say "the South" is pointless. Atlanta, GA, for example, has MUCH higher crime, both violent and property, than SF.

[HappyinCali]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Pretty vague declaration here. Violent crime rate for NYC is very close to SF. Property crime is notably lower in NYC. But to simply say "the South" is pointless. Atlanta, GA, for example, has MUCH higher crime, both violent and property, than SF.

ok. If you compare the bad areas of Atlanta to the whole of SF, then yes, it is similar. My point is that the good areas have a lot lower crime. SF is mostly "good areas" yet there is a ton of crime. The Richmond is a good area. Yet my friend's motorcycle was stolen and my car broken into. That doesn't happen in good areas in the South.

Again, my comment was specifically to property crime and I called out NYC, a muich denser urban center and you conceded that point. Comparing SF to College Park is about as relevant as it is comparing it to Cobb County. The only reason I mentioned the South is because I lived there and I knew one person who was a victim of a crime - a mugging. In NYC, that number was zero. In SF is 100% of my friends.

[Tallysmom]

So -- I'm pretty done. Got a few more years before we can cash out and go back home... but we will go back home. It's more personal than not -- like I hear a lot of people say, it's hard to find real friends here -- lots of a flaky acquaintances, but no one who I could turn to if something horrible happened (not taking money, talking support). So I am headed back home to family. Who would be there. Because, unlike a lot of families, we really all get along.

With my housing costs so crazy low (bought in 1987, did use house like an ATM) and our frugalista lifestyle, costs aren't the issue, but food costs have gone a little crazy, and frankly -- the fresh foods are better at home.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

ok. If you compare the bad areas of Atlanta to the whole of SF, then yes, it is similar. My point is that the good areas have a lot lower crime. SF is mostly "good areas" yet there is a ton of crime. The Richmond is a good area. Yet my friend's motorcycle was stolen and my car broken into. That doesn't happen in good areas in the South.

Again, my comment was specifically to property crime and I called out NYC, a muich denser urban center and you conceded that point. Comparing SF to College Park is about as relevant as it is comparing it to Cobb County. The only reason I mentioned the South is because I lived there and I knew one person who was a victim of a crime - a mugging. In NYC, that number was zero. In SF is 100% of my friends.

Now hold on here a minute. I'm not comparing bad areas of Atlanta to good areas or the whole of SF. I am providing stats on each entire city. You have trotted out several anecdotals as representative of crime in large cities. That's BS. You're also really trying to tell us that no motorcycles are stolen in the south? No car break-in's in the south?

Do you know anything at all about logic? Laws of chance? Statistical science?