Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think Austin could be a great place if you have the right expectations
This thread is about a family "thinking of moving from California to Texas", it is not the place to start a flame war on Austin's nightlife (which I think you see) since you moved your topic to a new thread. Thanks.
I beg to differ with those who state that California and Texas/Austin are nothing alike. True there are some huge differences but there are also some similarities between the states that most other states don't have in common.
1. Both states have historically been people magnets, attracting people from all across the US due to their dynamic, diverse economies.
2. Suburban areas in Texas and California contain huge numbers of recent transplants and tend to be economically conservative in the political leanings (not so much socially conservative).
3. Both states have large Mexican American populations, the majority of which have long family histories here in the United States.
4. Residential design in Texas is much closer to that of California than that of the East Coast. The vast majority of city dwellers in Texas as in California, live in low slung single family or multi-family buildings that sprawl from close to the city center to the outer limits of the metro area. Most people in NY, Boston, Philly, etc. live in highly compact high rise communities and have no yards to maintain.
5. Like California, Austin in particular has a very activist environmentalist minority that seems that is very influencial on the local level. This is part of the reason that real estate costs in Austin are somewhat higher than the rest of Texas (special regulations and development requirements) and that many Austin roads are stretched beyond capacity (i.e. it is much tougher to get a needed road built here than in Dallas).
6. The automobile rules the roost in both Texas and California. Public transportation is an unrealistic option for the vast majority of people living in Texas cities as it is for the vast majority of people living in California cities.
8. Despite it's reputation to the contrary, California is not as liberal through and through as most people assume it to be. How could the state that gave us Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Pete Wilson, Darryl Gates and a good number of America's best known right-wing talkers be a liberal bastion? I also recall the Simi Valley jury viewing the LA police mob beating a complicit Rodney King to a pulp and completely dismissing all charges. Most white voters in California as in Texas tend to vote Republican. The vast majority of minority voters in both states tend to vote Democratic. As the Republican Party continues to antagonize minorities of every stripe and Texas's Hispanic and black populations continue to grow, this trend will ultimately lead to Texas becoming as blue as California.
9. Texas and California look very similar in terms of racial demographics although California has a significantly larger Asian American population (California: 42% White, 7% Black, 37% Hispanic, 13% Asian, 1% other -- Texas: 47% White, 12% Black, 37% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 1% other).
10. Both states are large geographically and each has at least 4 distinct major metropolitan areas (> 1 million in population). The only other state in this category is Florida.
If I can just make a quick point, after threads get long, they tend to lose focus....after all, the OP question was surely answered on the first page, so the 3rd page on tends to just take on a new life, sometimes in entirely new directions....this one is already 7 pages long....normal conversation goes off in tangents....this may have a little bit, but, one, it doesn't mean it can't refocus, or won't, and, also, perhaps that next area is very germane, but just looking at things a different way. What is a PURE way of dealing with a topic? If any topic even mildly complex is dealt with, it should be quite open-ended and willing to provide a deeper context in which to understand the main topic, and clarify it....any radio talk show that is superb will do the same thing, not to mention actual round table chats, or University symposia.....
I would say that, after a OP's question is answered, which is largely the point of threads, they have a large tendency to ramble around the main topic, variations on a theme, so to speak...people just simply create what they will out of a topic they see, and work with it....so, there is no shame or problem if things vary a bit....whan a thread had finished working its way through the point, people will lose interest anyway, and it will end of its own accord....
I beg to differ with those who state that California and Texas/Austin are nothing alike. True there are some huge differences but there are also some similarities between the states that most other states don't have in common.
1. Both states have historically been people magnets, attracting people from all across the US due to their dynamic, diverse economies.
2. Suburban areas in Texas and California contain huge numbers of recent transplants and tend to be economically conservative in the political leanings (not so much socially conservative).
3. Both states have large Mexican American populations, the majority of which have long family histories here in the United States.
4. Residential design in Texas is much closer to that of California than that of the East Coast. The vast majority of city dwellers in Texas as in California, live in low slung single family or multi-family buildings that sprawl from close to the city center to the outer limits of the metro area. Most people in NY, Boston, Philly, etc. live in highly compact high rise communities and have no yards to maintain.
5. Like California, Austin in particular has a very activist environmentalist minority that seems that is very influencial on the local level. This is part of the reason that real estate costs in Austin are somewhat higher than the rest of Texas (special regulations and development requirements) and that many Austin roads are stretched beyond capacity (i.e. it is much tougher to get a needed road built here than in Dallas).
6. The automobile rules the roost in both Texas and California. Public transportation is an unrealistic option for the vast majority of people living in Texas cities as it is for the vast majority of people living in California cities.
8. Despite it's reputation to the contrary, California is not as liberal through and through as most people assume it to be. How could the state that gave us Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Pete Wilson, Darryl Gates and a good number of America's best known right-wing talkers be a liberal bastion? I also recall the Simi Valley jury viewing the LA police mob beating a complicit Rodney King to a pulp and completely dismissing all charges. Most white voters in California as in Texas tend to vote Republican. The vast majority of minority voters in both states tend to vote Democratic. As the Republican Party continues to antagonize minorities of every stripe and Texas's Hispanic and black populations continue to grow, this trend will ultimately lead to Texas becoming as blue as California.
9. Texas and California look very similar in terms of racial demographics although California has a significantly larger Asian American population (California: 42% White, 7% Black, 37% Hispanic, 13% Asian, 1% other -- Texas: 47% White, 12% Black, 37% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 1% other).
10. Both states are large geographically and each has at least 4 distinct major metropolitan areas (> 1 million in population). The only other state in this category is Florida.
Good points, K....the obvious similarities are the pop size and the hispanic element, along with the border they both share with Mexico..but there are some lesser points...both were originally natural resource magnets, cal maybe even more so...Texas had/has very arid land, so nothing of consequence, short of cotton with mega-irrigation, can grow there, and the land is best grazed per cattle...California's first boom was natural resource related((gold strikes)....oil was a large element just like Tex, though cal's tapped out far more quickly...I believe there are still active oil rigs in cal....the central valley is, to this day, the main source of our nations fruits and vegetables...I remember driving through it at night in the summer, around Merced, with the top down on my convertible, and smelling the food literally all over....reminded me very much of the rural parts of Illinois I grew up near, actually looked flat and similar....
That being said, they are very different, in so many ways....there is no reason for them TO be similar...they are at quite a distance from each other...Cal was thriving as a missionary outpost already in the 1600's per Spain long before most of the USA was settled at all, even before the colonies were up and running, so it is very much the oldest settled part of the nation, along with St. Augustine fla, jamestown, and Massachusetts Bay...Texas was never more than an outpost of that same Spanish Empire(Yes, they were both part of New Spain, another similarity)...DFW is a new city built of whole cloth...Houston the same...Austin was the first established city in Texas, hence the capitol...San Antonio was the first frontier outpost in the same, per the Alamo....
Different sets of euro immigrants settled both states..Texas has a huge huge German immigrant population, as well as a huge in-migration from other parts of the south back in the 1800's when it was getting settled...much of the latter is scotch-irish stock, the same that populated Kentucky and the Carolina's.......California's population largely cam from the midwest and New England...very very much so, long before they got their unique wave of Asian immigrants in the mid-late 1800's...if they did not cut that off, which was so sad, they would have had FAR more chinese and japanese there..I would have to say it prob would have been 20-25% Oriental...As it stands, they still have the highest % of orientals AND Asians of any state, I believe about 12%.....
Texas went through a period of independence of sorts from the federal gov't, and this when the fed was only about 60+ years old, and shortly before the entire southern half would split from the same, so, to say the least, the fed influence was never a factor in Texas, prob the least of all states.....shortlly after they became a state, after the republic period, they seceded from the union and joined the confederacy...suffice it to say, Texas and Texans have never fully subscribed to the notion of federal power, up to today's Waco incident...always a large streak of "we can do it ourselves, thank you" in Texas...
california was always far more wedded to the national agenda, though they have had their libertarians strains as well....many of the first stirrings of rebellion, especially in thsi century, came from california, and spread its way throughout the country, so cannot at all say Cal lacks a streak of independence and rebellion as well...
Both states have huge military-industrial complexes, though Califorina far far more so than Texas..LBJ brought much of that, including NASA, to Texas in the 60's, and they have some large military bases/installations, but absolutely nothing on a par with california.....Cal is the center of it all per military installations AND military contractors, not to mention the Universities, especially Cal Tech and Stanford, that have been on the cutting edge of military research....actually, the early 90's california recession was largely because of the slowdown in military contracts and employment in military/industrial related jobs during that time....
Most important though, is the political differences, and the pop trends...
California is closely trending towards a flat population growth, and the only thing keeping pop growing now would be the fertility and migration of hispanic immigrants and us citizens, as well as other immigrants....anglos are largely bailing out enmasse from the state to all points out, and have been for quite some time....blacks, having far less means than the anglos to move out, are largely staying in place, and caught in-between the anglos and hispanics.....Cal is losing its lustre, and burnishing its reputation per its state fiscal insolvency, and is chasing jobs out of state per its high corporate and personal income taxes, as many other states in the midwest and east are....
Texas is vibrant now, and attracting HUGE numbers of people. It is very much going through one of its growth stages right now...it remains very attractive to companies looking to get away from a high fixed-cost base in other states, and is looking even better to those who lack job prospects/a future in their respective states....Texas is growing, and thriving, and Cal is dying now...that would be the last, and most germane point per the two.
Given time, Cal should get back on its feet...for the time being Texas looks far more attractive for those looking for a better life...
Good points, K....the obvious similarities are the pop size and the hispanic element, along with the border they both share with Mexico..but there are some lesser points...both were originally natural resource magnets, cal maybe even more so...Texas had/has very arid land, so nothing of consequence, short of cotton with mega-irrigation, can grow there, and the land is best grazed per cattle...California's first boom was natural resource related((gold strikes)....oil was a large element just like Tex, though cal's tapped out far more quickly...I believe there are still active oil rigs in cal....the central valley is, to this day, the main source of our nations fruits and vegetables...I remember driving through it at night in the summer, around Merced, with the top down on my convertible, and smelling the food literally all over....reminded me very much of the rural parts of Illinois I grew up near, actually looked flat and similar....
That being said, they are very different, in so many ways....there is no reason for them TO be similar...they are at quite a distance from each other...Cal was thriving as a missionary outpost already in the 1600's per Spain long before most of the USA was settled at all, even before the colonies were up and running, so it is very much the oldest settled part of the nation, along with St. Augustine fla, jamestown, and Massachusetts Bay...Texas was never more than an outpost of that same Spanish Empire(Yes, they were both part of New Spain, another similarity)...DFW is a new city built of whole cloth...Houston the same...Austin was the first established city in Texas, hence the capitol...San Antonio was the first frontier outpost in the same, per the Alamo....
Different sets of euro immigrants settled both states..Texas has a huge huge German immigrant population, as well as a huge in-migration from other parts of the south back in the 1800's when it was getting settled...much of the latter is scotch-irish stock, the same that populated Kentucky and the Carolina's.......California's population largely cam from the midwest and New England...very very much so, long before they got their unique wave of Asian immigrants in the mid-late 1800's...if they did not cut that off, which was so sad, they would have had FAR more chinese and japanese there..I would have to say it prob would have been 20-25% Oriental...As it stands, they still have the highest % of orientals AND Asians of any state, I believe about 12%.....
Texas went through a period of independence of sorts from the federal gov't, and this when the fed was only about 60+ years old, and shortly before the entire southern half would split from the same, so, to say the least, the fed influence was never a factor in Texas, prob the least of all states.....shortlly after they became a state, after the republic period, they seceded from the union and joined the confederacy...suffice it to say, Texas and Texans have never fully subscribed to the notion of federal power, up to today's Waco incident...always a large streak of "we can do it ourselves, thank you" in Texas...
california was always far more wedded to the national agenda, though they have had their libertarians strains as well....many of the first stirrings of rebellion, especially in thsi century, came from california, and spread its way throughout the country, so cannot at all say Cal lacks a streak of independence and rebellion as well...
Both states have huge military-industrial complexes, though Califorina far far more so than Texas..LBJ brought much of that, including NASA, to Texas in the 60's, and they have some large military bases/installations, but absolutely nothing on a par with california.....Cal is the center of it all per military installations AND military contractors, not to mention the Universities, especially Cal Tech and Stanford, that have been on the cutting edge of military research....actually, the early 90's california recession was largely because of the slowdown in military contracts and employment in military/industrial related jobs during that time....
Most important though, is the political differences, and the pop trends...
California is closely trending towards a flat population growth, and the only thing keeping pop growing now would be the fertility and migration of hispanic immigrants and us citizens, as well as other immigrants....anglos are largely bailing out enmasse from the state to all points out, and have been for quite some time....blacks, having far less means than the anglos to move out, are largely staying in place, and caught in-between the anglos and hispanics.....Cal is losing its lustre, and burnishing its reputation per its state fiscal insolvency, and is chasing jobs out of state per its high corporate and personal income taxes, as many other states in the midwest and east are....
Texas is vibrant now, and attracting HUGE numbers of people. It is very much going through one of its growth stages right now...it remains very attractive to companies looking to get away from a high fixed-cost base in other states, and is looking even better to those who lack job prospects/a future in their respective states....Texas is growing, and thriving, and Cal is dying now...that would be the last, and most germane point per the two.
Given time, Cal should get back on its feet...for the time being Texas looks far more attractive for those looking for a better life...
I agree with you that Texas is a better option for most people right now, primarily due to the fact that California's real estate market values have grown at an unsustainable rate over the last decade while the values in Texas have grown more gradually. A good portion of the wealth that drove California's economy over the last decade was derived from those high property values and when they hit their inevitable wall (the banking collapse), California's economy tanked.
Most white voters in California as in Texas tend to vote Republican. The vast majority of minority voters in both states tend to vote Democratic.
Source material for this claim?
In the five presidential and gubernatorial elections conducted in California since 2000, more whites have voted for the Republican candidate 4 out of 5 times with the exception being Obama in 2008. In those same elections the vast majority of blacks and hispanics have voted for the Democratic candidate all 5 times. Asians voted for the Democratic candidate 4 out of 5 times, with the exception being Schwarzeneggerover over Angelides in 2006. These numbers come from the LA Times and CNN exit polling listed below. I'm going to presume that I don't need to post these numbers for Texas, as they are fairly similar.
2000 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Bush over Gore 49 to 47
African Americans in California voted for Gore 85 to 14
Latinos in California voted for Gore 75 to 23
Asians in California voted for Gore 63 to 33
2002 Gubernatorial Election
Whites in California voted for Simon (R) over Davis (D) 46 to 43
African Americans in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (R) 79 to 10
Latinos in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (R) 65 to 24
Asians in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (D) 54 to 37
2004 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Bush over Kerry 51 to 47
African Americans in California voted for Kerry 81 to 18
Latinos in California voted for Kerry 63 to 32
Asians in California voted for Kerry 66 to 34
2006 Gubernatorial Election
Whites in California voted for Schwarzeneggerover (R) over Angelides (D) 63 to 32
African Americans in California voted for Angelides (D) over Schwarzeneggerover (R) 70 to 27
Latinos in California voted for Angelides (D) over Schwarzeneggerover (R) 56 to 39
Asians in California voted for Schwarzeneggerover (R) over Angelides (D) 62 to 37
2008 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Obama over McCain 52 to 46
African Americans in California voted for Obama 94 to 5
Latinos in California voted for Obama 74 to 23
Asians in California voted for Obama 64 to 35
I agree with you that Texas is a better option for most people right now, primarily due to the fact that California's real estate market values have grown at an unsustainable rate over the last decade while the values in Texas have grown more gradually. A good portion of the wealth that drove California's economy over the last decade was derived from those high property values and when they hit their inevitable wall (the banking collapse), California's economy tanked.
I disagree that inflated real estate values were the IMMEDIATE driver causing Cal's current problems, but the root causes lay beneath....RE values were the "surface" cause, but real wealth was behind the RE values, they just became unmoored and unregulated. California has had a very very solid economic footing in so many ways over the last 50 or so years, say post WW2. Those aforementioned military/industrial related jobs, the movie/entertainment industry, the computer and related industries, agriculture, finance(Wells Fargo, Bank of America), and so on created huge pockets of wealth, and it was shared liberally across the board. The problem is that there became a huge disparity of wealth in the state in the 80's...The rich got far richer, and jacked up real estate values for the rest, who ended up chasing after them for 20 years(early 80's till now)...In the 50's-70's, even in the SF Bay area, housing was quite normal compared to the nation as a whole. Average folks were able to swing a house, and they appreciated normally...In the 80's, huge wealth disparities took off far more in CAl than the rest of the country, who eventually began echoing that disparity themselves...in a nutshell, the middle-class began to get squeezed, first out of wealth, then out of housing, and finally out of the STATE itself...
California became a place where only the mega-wealthy could enjoy the perks of big-city living, and all the rest were forced to find housing on the margins of metros, with mega-long commutes, creating traffic coagulation and sprawl in all the large metros..when mortgages became unmoored from regulation like everything else in the 80's, and the wealth disparity became wider and wider, RE values became unmoored as well....
This is what has happened in California..greed and disparity of incomes have destroyed their middle and working class...they have simply been priced out of their own state....Texas, while having its own problems with disparity of incomes, like any other state, still has not sold its working and middle class completely out quite yet, and still affords them the opportunity of landing affordable housing, and a living wage/cost of living.
Living in California has simply become a frill few can afford anymore, and real estate values are simply a reflection of the polarizing of wealth in that state that destroyed and chased out their own middle and working class from the same. The possibility of California thriving with only the rich, poor, and illegal remainss an open question.
I agree with you that Texas is a better option for most people right now, primarily due to the fact that California's real estate market values have grown at an unsustainable rate over the last decade while the values in Texas have grown more gradually. A good portion of the wealth that drove California's economy over the last decade was derived from those high property values and when they hit their inevitable wall (the banking collapse), California's economy tanked.
California's did that to themselves, now they want to come over here and do the same thing. Just stay put and wait for your bail-out.
In the five presidential and gubernatorial elections conducted in California since 2000, more whites have voted for the Republican candidate 4 out of 5 times with the exception being Obama in 2008. In those same elections the vast majority of blacks and hispanics have voted for the Democratic candidate all 5 times. Asians voted for the Democratic candidate 4 out of 5 times, with the exception being Schwarzeneggerover over Angelides in 2006. These numbers come from the LA Times and CNN exit polling listed below. I'm going to presume that I don't need to post these numbers for Texas, as they are fairly similar.
2000 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Bush over Gore 49 to 47
African Americans in California voted for Gore 85 to 14
Latinos in California voted for Gore 75 to 23
Asians in California voted for Gore 63 to 33
2002 Gubernatorial Election
Whites in California voted for Simon (R) over Davis (D) 46 to 43
African Americans in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (R) 79 to 10
Latinos in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (R) 65 to 24
Asians in California voted for Davis (D) over Simon (D) 54 to 37
2004 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Bush over Kerry 51 to 47
African Americans in California voted for Kerry 81 to 18
Latinos in California voted for Kerry 63 to 32
Asians in California voted for Kerry 66 to 34
2006 Gubernatorial Election
Whites in California voted for Schwarzeneggerover (R) over Angelides (D) 63 to 32
African Americans in California voted for Angelides (D) over Schwarzeneggerover (R) 70 to 27
Latinos in California voted for Angelides (D) over Schwarzeneggerover (R) 56 to 39
Asians in California voted for Schwarzeneggerover (R) over Angelides (D) 62 to 37
2008 Presidential Election
Whites in California voted for Obama over McCain 52 to 46
African Americans in California voted for Obama 94 to 5
Latinos in California voted for Obama 74 to 23
Asians in California voted for Obama 64 to 35
Where are the TX numbers? Your claim included an "as in Texas".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
