People are not leaving CA due to taxes and regulation. (Bakersfield: apartment, renters)

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Is it just me or have others noticed how traffic went for tolerable a few years ago to insane at times around the Bay Area?

Not me because I don't drive. Although I think it is amusing to fly by the stop and go traffic on 87 while going 55 mph on light rail.

San Francisco is especially bad and commute times are getting worse.

Not sure how much more prosperity the region can stand?

Why are you using a car to commute? I can only understand driving a car to work if you work at weird times or you have to drive to different sites and can't use a company vehicle stored at work.

But this is yet another reason why density is better. Living closer to work makes your commute easier.

[tikkasf]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Seems a little odd as many of the expensive places in California have strict rent control and also an abundance of those with housing subsidies...

SF, Berkeley, Oakland and many other smaller cities have rent control... Oakland even passed a moratorium on all rent increases...

2 of the tenants living in the apt building I live in, have lived there over 30 years....It's a rent controlled bldg. in SF.


A well maintained building on the same block consists of 2 flats. The owner lives in the top flat, the flat below the owner has a family with a dog living there.....they are section 8.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Not me because I don't drive. Although I think it is amusing to fly by the stop and go traffic on 87 while going 55 mph on light rail.



Why are you using a car to commute? I can only understand driving a car to work if you work at weird times or you have to drive to different sites and can't use a company vehicle stored at work.

But this is yet another reason why density is better. Living closer to work makes your commute easier.

My car is my service van which is a mobile workshop... drill press, welder, pipe and electrical supplies.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by tikkasf

2 of the tenants living in the apt building I live in, have lived there over 30 years....It's a rent controlled bldg. in SF.


A well maintained building on the same block consists of 2 flats. The owner lives in the top flat, the flat below the owner has a family with a dog living there.....they are section 8.

My tenant has been here since 1988... did not increase the rent for a number of years and now slapped with the moratorium... no good deed goes unpunished.

I have friends and they raise rent each year... the only question is how much.

[zzzzmore]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Speaking of anecdotal. Hmmm.

The problem with your declaration [of a "bust"] is actual statistics don't support that. At all. Even remotely. Just the opposite. In fact, that reality of statistical proof is what this thread is founded solidly on. Lower income folks being replaced by higher income folks isn't a bust ... well, except for the lower income people. But not for the state. It may be unpleasant for some (including me), but truth is truth, like it or not.

Take out SF and tell me what the UE rate is for the state. Tell me what the poverty rate is and average income is? Remember, take SF out.

Tell me what the Central Valley average income is since 1990 and what the UE rate is since 2001?

Let me spare you the details - SF is completely and solely carrying the entire state. When you remove it, the truth of how crushed many people are in CA becomes visible in the stats.

[zzzzmore]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Speaking of anecdotal. Hmmm.

I have a much better one :

Heard over breakfast in the east bay "Yeah my daughter (grown up) is with some guy now. He's down in a tent on the beach. She's living with him and They seem to like it. I guess that's what kids do the days."


Heard in a state much farther east "Well she just graduated and took a job with some accounting firm. And There's a planned community strong schools nearby her work I want to get her to take a look at."


Don't get much more clear than that.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

You mean there's a relationship between the two things? Who knew?

No, there's not in the case of California. Lower income people are in the lowest tax tiers. Many pay no state income tax whatsoever.

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

They're very much affected by over regulation. Their biggest cost is housing costs. California has very restrictive building zoning policies that make it difficult or impossible to build, and those same policies drive up the cost of projects that do get built.


Since housing is most people's biggest expense, it's more than fair to say regulations are driving people out.

Yeah, but no. As others note, such as:

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

Seems a little odd as many of the expensive places in California have strict rent control and also an abundance of those with housing subsidies...

SF, Berkeley, Oakland and many other smaller cities have rent control... Oakland even passed a moratorium on all rent increases...

As always, tyger, you fail to acknowledge the obvious: "Build it and they will come." Make more available. More people will move here and compete for the new inventory. Um, driving up the prices. Because that's how intoxicating California is. As demonstrated historically.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by zzzzmore

Take out SF and tell me what the UE rate is for the state. Tell me what the poverty rate is and average income is? Remember, take SF out.

Tell me what the Central Valley average income is since 1990 and what the UE rate is since 2001?

Let me spare you the details - SF is completely and solely carrying the entire state. When you remove it, the truth of how crushed many people are in CA becomes visible in the stats.

You're kidding, right?




Look up the county by county unemployment rate here: Map .
Tell me what the major urban centers are running for stats.


Hint:
All the heavily populated urban center counties are running between 2.9 and 4.9 % UE.
San Francisco is 2.9%
Los Angeles is 4.3%.
San Diego is 4.2%
Sacramento is 4.9%

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by zzzzmore

I have a much better one :

Heard over breakfast in the east bay "Yeah my daughter (grown up) is with some guy now. He's down in a tent on the beach. She's living with him and They seem to like it. I guess that's what kids do the days."


Heard in a state much farther east "Well she just graduated and took a job with some accounting firm. And There's a planned community strong schools nearby her work I want to get her to take a look at."


Don't get much more clear than that.

What is humorously loud and clear is your refusal to read statistics as you feed on anecdotal stories.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Mr5150

Study finds that most people leave due to having low income. They can't afford to live here. So they move to cheaper states. Most who leave have household incomes of less than $50,000 and do not have a college education.

So much for the idea that the rich and productive are the ones who leave.

The site did not let me copy and paste so read the article here:

High Housing Costs Are Driving Californians Out in Droves - Curbed LA

And the LA Times said the same thing:

The state overall has been losing people to other parts of the country since the 1990s. A snapshot of more recent U.S. Census migration numbers shows that nearly three-quarters of those who have left California for other states since 2007 earn less than $50,000 a year.

Business News - Los Angeles Times

Actually if you think about it, they are leaving due to high taxes and overall col, but yes, it is the lower income who are exiting, certainly not those in the higher income brackets.