Remember when you could get a 1700 square foot mid century modern palace in the San Mateo Highlands for 35000 in 1968? (neighborhood, living in)

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

You could look in Portland or Seattle? More rain, certainly, but the weather is still very pleasant there (and they're both great cities).

Or what about around San Luis Obispo? Or even parts of LA/OC/SD?

I'm sure there are options within your price range somewhere?

Those towns are the same price as places like Hayward ca or Vallejo what's the point?

[likealady]

I see you conveniently skipped over my reply
You fit your username very well. Always negative about the future.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

2225 Bunker Hill Dr, San Mateo, CA 94402 | Zillow
That wasn't even 50% higher than the Median price in 1968 which was $24500. Anyone who says there wasn't more opportunity or wasn't easier back then is full of it.

35,000 was a lot of money in 1968. I remember when we paid 31,500 for our split level, 2000 sq foot house in Novato in 1968.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by nmnita

35,000 was a lot of money in 1968. I remember when we paid 31,500 for our split level, 2000 sq foot house in Novato in 1968.

Novato was the Los banos of back then, it's pretty far from much of the Bay Area, even SF

[beb0p]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Chicago is about to actually lose its #2 spot to Los Angeles, as I said multiple it's on the decline.
I'm not trying to trash them, believe me I wish they had decent weather and weren't decaying rust belt cities but it makes it very scary to potentially buy a 100k lemon. Remember those postwar middle class families with the dad who worked at the us steel mill with a pension? Those cities are a relic of the era when that was the norm across the country. Nowadays the jobs and businesses are condensing on coastal cities much to the changrin of those who hate stupid housing prices.
I don't care how the economy is in the Bay Area, it's home no matter how bad it gets, you can't just get up and walk away from that.

A big reason why Chicago's population peaked in the 1950s is because Blacks were not allowed to live in any other neighborhoods/suburbs beside south side Chicago and they over packed neighborhoods like Bronzeville, which were three times the maximum capacity at its peak. its peak population were achieved by segregation and racism; and it was unhealthy. Using that number as a measure is going to mislead you.

You are still harboring out dated idea of what the rust belt is. You think Uber would test their biggest innovative product in a decaying city?

Look, I'm not trying to get you to move. Just merely pointing out that there are affordable homes in vibrant cities. You don't have to live there but affordability is not a fleeting thing for those who do.
.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by beb0p

A big reason why Chicago's population peaked in the 1950s is because Blacks were not allowed to live in any other neighborhoods/suburbs beside south side Chicago and they over packed neighborhoods like Bronzeville, which were three times the maximum capacity at its peak. its peak population were achieved by segregation and racism; and it was unhealthy. Using that number as a measure is going to mislead you.

You are still harboring out dated idea of what the rust belt is. You think Uber would test their biggest innovative product in a decaying city?

Look, I'm not trying to get you to move. Just merely pointing out that there are affordable homes in vibrant cities. You don't have to live there but affordability is not a fleeting thing for those who do.
.

Citation?
Vibrant is a very strong term for those cities. It's really a shame they're not at their peak like they were in the 50s because it meant not everyone and their brother was trying to live in California and boosting the cost of living in the stratosphere. I wish those factories came back with pensioned manufacturing jobs and the hipster techies returned to their roots in the Midwest. This country should not consist of the feudalistic California cities, NYC, etc and the poverty stricken Midwestern/rust belt cities that peaked harder than a high school quarterback. I would be wealthy in the rust belt but here I am living in poverty because of the extreme income inequality.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Citation?
Vibrant is a very strong term for those cities. It's really a shame they're not at their peak like they were in the 50s because it meant not everyone and their brother was trying to live in California and boosting the cost of living in the stratosphere. I wish those factories came back with pensioned manufacturing jobs and the hipster techies returned to their roots in the Midwest. This country should not consist of the feudalistic California cities, NYC, etc and the poverty stricken Midwestern/rust belt cities that peaked harder than a high school quarterback. I would be wealthy in the rust belt but here I am living in poverty because of the extreme income inequality.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but it doesn't seem like you've traveled much. Have you been to Chicago? It's incredibly vibrant (I'd argue more vibrant than SF in many ways).

I agree with you that income inequality is a gigantic problem in this country (particularly pronounced and acute in coastal cities). And yes, part of this is due to "middle class" incomes not going as far as they used/keeping up with inflation. It's definitely not a Bay Area-specific problem.

[04kL4nD]

I mean it's Perma Bear. He doesn't even know that LA has been the #2 city in the US population-wise since the 90s...

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by 04kL4nD

I mean it's Perma Bear. He doesn't even know that LA has been the #2 city in the US population-wise since the 90s...

I don't keep track of recent events, who can when the ussr can strike is with nuclear icbms at any moment!

[TR95]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Citation?
Vibrant is a very strong term for those cities. It's really a shame they're not at their peak like they were in the 50s because it meant not everyone and their brother was trying to live in California and boosting the cost of living in the stratosphere. I wish those factories came back with pensioned manufacturing jobs and the hipster techies returned to their roots in the Midwest. This country should not consist of the feudalistic California cities, NYC, etc and the poverty stricken Midwestern/rust belt cities that peaked harder than a high school quarterback. I would be wealthy in the rust belt but here I am living in poverty because of the extreme income inequality.

Please just stop, you are showing an incredible amount of ignorance. Do you realize how many financial jobs are in downtown Chicago. Much more than SF and the pay is very similar and guess what it blows doors off SF as a city. Now, I would never ever live there with 40 mph winds and the winters, but for people in the midwest, south and east coast relocating there for those jobs it is incredible. Also, plenty of manufacturing jobs still in the Chicago MSA. You really have no idea what you are talking about. You might want to leave your little bubble of wherever it is you live, because you obviously have not lived your life outside of it along with your $50g govt job.