Is Texas the promised land for those fleeing the recession? (San Antonio: crime, house)

[jread]

Originally Posted by Nomadic9460678748

I found Portland to be MUCH prettier than Austin.

Agreed!

And hey, at least Sacramento and Portland can get their rail systems up and running.

And agreed!

[hound 109]

Originally Posted by ElectroPlumber

I think that this is the $64,000 question for me too. My only real problem with CA (I live in Sacramento) is the inability to get ahead of the cost of living. Even with a pretty good salary (mid-60's) the cost of housing, (whether renting or owning) together with the fact that everything costs more out here, just eats you alive. Also, I lost 15% of my salary due to the budget mess out here and probably will not get it back for years due to the state's problems.

Nobody out here (at least people that I know) are getting raises so we are also losing the additional purchasing power equal to inflation, even if it is small, 2 - 3% per year adds up.

The question I ask myself, as a native Texan, is do I return to my home state or wait for things to get better out here? But, will things ever really get better in CA during my working lifetime?

On the other hand, I am concerned that there are so many people flooding into Austin, Dallas and Houston, that these areas will also experience problems with too many people chasing too few jobs and eventually start to look like CA. There are many, many requests for information from people in CA who want to move to Austin. Also, I do have a job here--I don't have one in Texas.

I don't need to know what Texas is like--I was born and lived there for a long time--but I really wish I could figure out whether it will look like CA in a few years and have the same problems.

Excellent post.

Nice to see someone intelligently weighing the pros & cons as opposed to the "Grapes of Wrath in Reverse" posts that i've been seeing. Lots of people have decided to move here.....but have no clue what it's like here, much less a job.

[eepstein]

Well if you are talking about just city sizes here, than Sac is slightly smaller than Austin, that is true. I still am not sure where you are getting the "cultured" part from. Sac also has many more suburbs than Austin does, thus giving it the higher overall population. Both cities are growing fast, but I think Austin is growing a little faster. But again, Austin falls horribly short of Sacramento (and Portland) in nearly every catagory with the exception of job growth (last few years) and cost of living in its suburbs.

At this point in time, Austin and Sacramentos cost of living isn't all that much different. The real estate crash in Sac has caused many homes to be worth 1/2 of what they were just 5 years ago. Central parts of both cities, housing will be fairly similar. However, unlike Sac, you can actually get significantly cheaper housing by moving 10-20 miles out of the city. Not so much the case in Sac because housing remains fairly high throughout most of the metro area. (unless your talking about Elk Grove or someplace like that which is a DUMP)

Sac suffers from a lot of the same "inferiority" complex that Austin does. Although both are state capitals, they both rank 4th within their states as far as metro population, infastructure, and popularity. I would actually say that its a tad worse in Sac just because the bohemoth bay area is within 60 miles. Austin is more than 150 miles from coporate centers like Houston and Dallas.

I suspect once the economy improves and California once again RULES the country and a good chunk of the world, temporary transplants currently living in Dallas, Houston, SA, and Austin will be heading back in droves. Because of its better cost of living, I could easily see Metro Sac topping 4 or 5 mil in the next 20-30 years. One of my top areas for possible relocation once the economy out there turns around (which it will).

Originally Posted by jread

No, they are not statistically exactly the same. What I'm saying is that the general feel and culture is comparable between the two, though Austin certainly "feels" more cultured to me. Numbers aren't every thing, either, because while Sacramento's metro has a larger population and a higher density per square mile, the city itself is smaller and does not take up as large of an area. Portland is the same story... it felt a lot smaller than Austin even with a metro population similar to Sacramento's.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by eepstein

I suspect once the economy improves and California once again RULES the country and a good chunk of the world, temporary transplants currently living in Dallas, Houston, SA, and Austin will be heading back in droves. Because of its better cost of living, I could easily see Metro Sac topping 4 or 5 mil in the next 20-30 years. One of my top areas for possible relocation once the economy out there turns around (which it will).

Do you think a rising economy fixes all of California's problems? In a few years CA's accumulation of deficits (at the state level) could approach $100B. How will they pay for that? Just by riding the increase in employment and collecting income taxes? If the housing market returns to normal - the cost of living will simply reach pre-recession levels of unaffordability. Will they get better at accounting tricks like delaying state payroll by a day to push the expense into the next fiscal year?

If by chance a rising economy puts money in the state government's hands - will they exercise discipline and not spend it right away?

I'm not so confident.

I think the longer CA transplants live in Texas the less likely they are to leave. Sure - some will want to go "back home" to CA. But I think far more will stay than return.

[eepstein]

I dont know the exact timeline of when CA will be able to get it's act together again. It continues to be a big mess out there. What I do know is that CA has been down before and risen back again. It has the 8th largest economy in the world. It is simply too big and powerful NOT to be able to get back up on that horse again and RIDE!! Now, again, the timeline is kind of a TBD. I am hoping that the next governor can be a little more helpful than AAHHHHNOLD. I don't think he's horrible, but he certainly hasn't helped the situation out there too much.

Housing will ALWAYS be more expensive in California. You will simply always be paying for things that few other places provide. 1) Nearly perfect climate 2) Beautiful scenery 3) Endless outdoor opportunities 4) Ethnic Diversity from all over the world Thats just to name a few. That stuff doesn't come cheap.

Originally Posted by hoffdano

Do you think a rising economy fixes all of California's problems? In a few years CA's accumulation of deficits (at the state level) could approach $100B. How will they pay for that? Just by riding the increase in employment and collecting income taxes? If the housing market returns to normal - the cost of living will simply reach pre-recession levels of unaffordability. Will they get better at accounting tricks like delaying state payroll by a day to push the expense into the next fiscal year?

If by chance a rising economy puts money in the state government's hands - will they exercise discipline and not spend it right away?

I'm not so confident.

I think the longer CA transplants live in Texas the less likely they are to leave. Sure - some will want to go "back home" to CA. But I think far more will stay than return.

[centralaustinite]

California's pension obligations are overwhelming! Until that is taken care of (probably by municipalities and possibly the state declaring bankruptcy to break union contracts, it is hard to see how they can get out their predicament. And nothing draws people to a state like hordes of angry state and municipal workers (prison guards, cops, etc) who are furious that they will never see 4x their income as their pension!!

It is a mess on top of a mess!

[jread]

Originally Posted by eepstein

Housing will ALWAYS be more expensive in California. You will simply always be paying for things that few other places provide. 1) Nearly perfect climate 2) Beautiful scenery 3) Endless outdoor opportunities 4) Ethnic Diversity from all over the world Thats just to name a few. That stuff doesn't come cheap.

Yep, no state in the U.S. can compare to CA when it comes to those four things.

[G Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by centralaustinite

California's pension obligations are overwhelming! Until that is taken care of (probably by municipalities and possibly the state declaring bankruptcy to break union contracts, it is hard to see how they can get out their predicament. And nothing draws people to a state like hordes of angry state and municipal workers (prison guards, cops, etc) who are furious that they will never see 4x their income as their pension!!

It is a mess on top of a mess!

This whole thing is such an overstatement! I know there are some examples of abuses, but the vast majority of retirees get reasonable, small pensions. I am a retired county employee (a California county), and I get about 20% of my former income, plus health care coverage for my husband and I. It is so easy for people to take a tiny piece of information and blow it wildly out of proportion to justify their extreme positions. And people from outside of California just love get into that "Who's on top now" attitude. Makes them feel superior. Can't you (and others) just let California solve its problems without you throwing stones?

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by G Grasshopper

This whole thing is such an overstatement! I know there are some examples of abuses, but the vast majority of retirees get reasonable, small pensions. I am a retired county employee (a California county), and I get about 20% of my former income, plus health care coverage for my husband and I. It is so easy for people to take a tiny piece of information and blow it wildly out of proportion to justify their extreme positions. And people from outside of California just love get into that "Who's on top now" attitude. Makes them feel superior. Can't you (and others) just let California solve its problems without you throwing stones?

I'm sure it varies... people I went to school with that went into law enforcement get anywhere from 40k to one at 180k yearly retirements plus medical...

A very good friend is the city manager for a Bay Area City... her biggest problem in Public Safety Pensions... the projections, under current obligations will take all city revenue... it really is unsustainable...

Locally, the city of Vallejo has the same problem... except it is happening now...

I'm not blaming the employees... but it sure looks like no one was minding the store...

Working in Healthcare... there is zero retirement except what the employee has taken out.... no match, no profit sharing, no stock plan and medical for a family of 3 costs the employee around $400 a month... It wasn't this way 20 years ago or even 15... most of the severe cutbacks started a little over 10 years ago...

The ironic thing is those doing the same medical jobs for the county and state and prison system have pay parity plus tremendous benefits...

It wouldn't be anyone business, except it is all funded by public money.

[G Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

The ironic thing is those doing the same medical jobs for the county and state and prison system have pay parity plus tremendous benefits...

I was a physical therapist. We did not have parity with the private sector, but did have good benefits. Although our pension plan is not generous, at least it is a fixed benefit plan, which is rare. Still, I could have been making much more if I had not chosen public service.