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 said wealth - real estate, that is I'm not interested in real estate values because they are inflated in California. But, I also don't feel like trying to find the data, just thought I ask if you had it.
"In the Bay Area, according to a separate study that the report's backers commissioned from research firm Claritas, 5 percent of all households in the San Francisco and San Jose metropolitan areas have at least $1 million in financial assets. That was the highest percentage among the 18 regions included."
The Bay Area is arguably the wealthiest region in the US, you have yet to prove otherwise let alone suggest a region that is just as wealthy.
Quote:
No they are based on data and government policy.
So it's really nothing more than an educated guess/assumption then?
I can see why you think what you do about the Bay Area's future, it's just that the Bay Area has always done very well despite its seemingly anti-business, "leftist" policies that is supposedly suppose to turn it into another Detroit. It pretty much seems like you want the Bay Area to turn into another Detroit b/c you disagree with the prevalent ideology there.
The Bay Area is arguably the wealthiest region in the US, you have yet to prove otherwise let alone suggest a region that is just as wealthy.
What you posted includes real estate and was written in 2005 when it was even more inflated than it is now. I'm not interested in bubble real estate wealth, its not real. Regardless, I never suggested to have proved otherwise. I'm not interested in proving it in this thread, its not something that is easy to prove either way and is not particularly important to the point I'm making about the area. I'll say it for the third time, I'm not talking about what was the case about the bay area I'm talking about what the bay area is going to become in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
I can see why you think what you do about the Bay Area's future, it's just that the Bay Area has always done very well despite its seemingly anti-business, "leftist" policies that is supposedly suppose to turn it into another Detroit.
I will say it again, California wasn't the same in the 70's and 80's which is when Silicon valley was born. It has become a progressively worse place to do business. Regions don't raise and fall over night, it takes many years. But the numbers show that since 2000 technology has been slowly moving away from the bay area. Without its tech economy there really isn't much left but a FIRE economy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
It pretty much seems like you want the Bay Area to turn into another Detroit b/c you disagree with the prevalent ideology there.
No, I believe the bay area is going to decline because...this is what the data shows. The lefty policies in the bay area have destroyed the middle-class in the area, that is proof enough that they aren't effective fiscally.
Seriously, I don't even care. about this. But your comments here are just weird. The information isn't conflicting. I never said no single nurse makes $110k, I said that is much higher than what most nurses make. Sheri posted a pdf for a particular job. Clearly, not all nurses can get this inflated (what appears to be a government union) job. The median for nurses in the bay area is $70k, if someone doesn't believe me they can look it up just like I did.
For someone who says "I really don't care" how much she makes, you certainly took a lot of time and posted a lot of long winded posts to debunk Sheri's claim that she makes a certain amount of money as a nurse. Sheri's income isn't really unusual or even extraordinaryfrom what I've seen, so it really didn't occur to me that she was lying. Even if she was, if others claimed to be making the same level of income, I wouldn't be shocked, and I certainly wouldn't fault them for thinking they can afford to live in California.
For someone who says "I really don't care" how much she makes, you certainly took a lot of time and posted a lot of long winded posts to debunk Sheri's claim that she makes a certain amount of money as a nurse.
I made one post and others responded like yourself, I should have stopped with my initial post. I won't post again on it as its irrelevant.
Humanoid
This has been an interesting discussion & I admire your financial acumen. When it comes down to dollars & cent\sense some people will do better in other states [at least for a while]. Boiling it down to the bottom line, peace of mind is extremely important & we make life decisions accordingly.
I am a middle-class professional & have worked in some very interesting areas of the city. Perhaps luck is an ingredient in being able to enjoy life but also education. Maybe because I am a socialist the "feel" of California is a good fit. The romance of California has been my life. I look forward to a family reunion in Chico next week [the town I grew up in & love]. huge trees turning into vivid color
Humanoid
This has been an interesting discussion & I admire your financial acumen. When it comes down to dollars & cent\sense some people will do better in other states [at least for a while]. Boiling it down to the bottom line, peace of mind is extremely important & we make life decisions accordingly.
I am a middle-class professional & have worked in some very interesting areas of the city. Perhaps luck is an ingredient in being able to enjoy life but also education. Maybe because I am a socialist the "feel" of California is a good fit. The romance of California has been my life. I look forward to a family reunion in Chico next week [the town I grew up in & love]. huge trees turning into vivid color
There are many things I like about California, in fact the whole point of thinking about a cost benefit analysis is that I think there are benefits to leaving here! If there were no benefits, then the analysis would be trivial.
Anyhow, people are very bad at doing an honest cost benefit analysis though and your post really just speaks of emotion. I think you have to put this sort of thing to the side and really think about the benefits of living here versus other areas that have a lower cost of living. You have to really think for example is paying $7,000+ extra (in taxes, if you're married making 150k+ a year) a year worth it. That's 600 dollars a month you wouldn't have to pay if you lived in Texas, Washington etc. Is it really worth it to pay double for the same house just to live in California? One has to first determine what it costs extra to live in California (most don't even get this far...) and then ask yourself in a frank and honest matter whether its worth the cost. What else could you do with the money, etc.
Now, for some it may be worth it. I suppose I just think if most really analyzed their situation they'd find that it wasn't.
There is a bit of an age component too, I'm fairly young and so am thinking about things from this point of view. The cost to live in this state is much higher for me than say my grandma who owns her house (bought many years go when housing in California was cheap), pays $800 in property tax and next to nothing in state taxes. Moving for financial reasons makes no sense in her case (in fact she is likely to pay more in other states). But that is the fundamental problem in California, the older generations in California have passed policies that benefit them (like propping up real estate via regulations, tax law etc) while putting Generations X and Y under the bus (more so Y and the younger half of X) by making it rather expensive to live here. In the end, things will re-align as we will just leave.
What you posted includes real estate and was written in 2005 when it was even more inflated than it is now.
Did you even read the article???
"About 2.5 million Americans, or almost 1 percent of the population over age 15, have more than $1 million in financial assets such as stocks, bonds and bank accounts, according to a study published Thursday by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch & Co. The report did not factor in the value of people's primary residences, which obviously would increase the number of millionaires. "
Not sure how the hell you missed that one...
Quote:
I'm not talking about what was the case about the bay area I'm talking about what the bay area is going to become in the future.
No, you talk about what you THINK the Bay Area is going to become in the future. It's nothing more than personal opinion/speculation on your part.
Quote:
No, I believe the bay area is going to decline because...this is what the data shows. The lefty policies in the bay area have destroyed the middle-class in the area, that is proof enough that they aren't effective fiscally.
The data shows the wealthiest and one of the most EDUCATED regions in the country. The data also shows it has a lower unemployment rate than the rest of CA and SoCal.
You don't have any REAL proof or examples that the Bay Area is going to decline at all to anywhere near the level of Detroit and Pittsburgh. The Bay Area has a lot more human capital that puts up there with other major world cities that always manage to survive bad times overall. The fact that you even put the Bay Area on the same level as Detroit and Pittsburgh just exemplifies how absurd your "predictions" are.
It's nothing more than your personal opinion and bias against Bay Area "lefty" policies. Amazing how people like you always complain about "lefty" policies yet those places that have them are the most desirable places to live on top of being affluent and educated. I honestly think you want to see it fail b/c that would somehow prove you and others right about their "lefty" policies, but it won't. Lefty policies haven't seemed to destroy Europe.
I left the Bay Area a few months back, and it was mostly due to the high cost of living. My ex still lives there, but at +300K per year is no problem for her to afford a nice home and still save.
Despite the nice climate and great scenery, if not for the San Jose Sharks and the fishing opportunities (saltwater/Sierra flyfishing) I find little else to miss besides a few great friends.
Great place to live, but there are plenty of other places that provide for a more affordable and balanced quality of life. Will miss the area but look forward to new places and possibilities.
I didn't, there are a number of real estate related financial assets. Anything from mortgage backed securities to REITs. Even the equities market is in many senses pseudo-wealth. The article is from 2005, right in the at the end of the biggest growth in pseudo-wealth this nation has ever seen. I'm interested in the bay areas, real wealth. That is really hard to measure though, but it will become apparent in the next few years.
But, an interesting quote from the article:
"Despite the high percentage of local millionaires, the Bay Area had the lowest growth among millionaire households from 2003 to 2004. "
This is just another way of saying the area is not growing. Start-ups are going else where and the established order is blocking out new comers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
The data shows the wealthiest and one of the most EDUCATED regions in the country. The data also shows it has a lower unemployment rate than the rest of CA and SoCal.
Its one of the wealthiest when you define wealth in a rather narrow way, not in a more meaningful way. Regardless, the unemployment rate of the bay area is high and indicates the area is not doing well. Comparing it to CA in general isn't saying much at all. Its odd that you are citing its unemployment rate to indicate that the area isn't declining, when it in fact shows the opposite. Perhaps you think this refutes my claim that Southern California is going to do better. It doesn't. What I mean there is that Southern California has more to build a real economy on so when all is said and done, it should come out stronger than Northern California. I base this on my experience of business in both cities not hard economic data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
You don't have any REAL proof or examples that the Bay Area is going to decline at all to anywhere near the level of Detroit and Pittsburgh.
There is no "hard proof" in economic forecasting. I'm forecasting the future of the bay area. I have stated a few items that I'm basing my claim on. I'm not going to go into greater detail because that isn't what this thread is about. You seem to be more interested in suggesting my motivation for making the claims though, which is banal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
The fact that you even put the Bay Area on the same level as Detroit and Pittsburgh just exemplifies how absurd your "predictions" are.
Actually it exemplifies your ignorance of both these cities and their history. Have you even stepped foot in either of these cities?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
Amazing how people like you always complain about "lefty" policies yet those places that have them are the most desirable places to live on top of being affluent and educated.
They are the most desirable to only particular people. I don't care how affluent on area is, that is just another world for established wealth. Established wealth just gets in the way of start-ups, they don't like nor want competition.
Liberalness and universities go hand and hand, that is why there is a correlation there. The people in universities whether students, professors or researchers live in ivory towers. The better the university the bigger the tower. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I also don't take these people very seriously. They exist outside of the real business world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858
I honestly think you want to see it fail b/c that would somehow prove you and others right about their "lefty" policies, but it won't. Lefty policies haven't seemed to destroy Europe.
Again, I base my view on the data. If you haven't noticed, Europe is not doing well in any sense. I have never stated that liberal fiscal policy would "destroy" the bay area, I said they will make it decline. Detroit, Pittsburgh etc are all still around. They weren't destroyed, they just slowing declined.
Anyhow, you can respond but I'm not going to talk about south vs north California, what degree the bay area is wealthy, or whether its going to decline or not.
I started this thread to talk about essentially the cost benefit analysis of living in California vs other locations with lower cost of living.
To just give an example of the different costs between California vs other areas take Austin, TX. Austin, TX has a low unemployment rate and a good job market. Take the example of a married couple (no kids) making $150k a year. In terms of just taxes and real estate here is how they compare:
CA TX
Income tax........$600/month...........$0
Property Tax......$416/month...........$458/month
Mortgage...........$2,500/month........$1,260/month
The real estate numbers are based on a house that costs $500,000 assuming down 20% and 30/fixed mortgage. Where as Austin is $250,000 assuming 20% down and 30/fixed. Comparable homes are roughly half the cost in Austin vs major California cities/areas. And just in case anybody doubts this here are some listings from Austin:
10128 Channel Island, Austin, TX, 78747 - MLS ID#6806022 - Single Family Home Real Estate - REALTOR.com® (http://www.realtor.com/search/listingdetail.aspx?loc=Austin%2c+Texas&ml=8&mxp=25 0000&bd=4&typ=1&sqft=7&pfbm=10&sid=5655c3920acb46f 18fed0f3b2af5aea4&lid=1104067497&lsn=3&srcnt=512 - broken link)
15204 Bowling LN, Lakeway, TX, 78734 - MLS ID#2872416 - Single Family Home Real Estate - REALTOR.com® (http://www.realtor.com/search/listingdetail.aspx?pg=4&srcnt=512&srcnt=512&sid=56 55c3920acb46f18fed0f3b2af5aea4&loc=Austin%2c+Texas &ml=8&mxp=250000&bd=4&typ=1&sqft=7&pfbm=10&fhpg=4& lid=1096594460&lsn=36 - broken link)
There are ton of such homes. These would be at least $500,000 in any major city (or close suburb) in California right now.
So that is an extra $1,798/month just for the pleasure of living in California and doesn't even include the fact that a number of other things are cheaper in Texas.
So I ask what in California is worth $1,798/month?
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.
huge trees turning into vivid color
