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.
We are looking at the Charlotte area for retirement and from a financial standpoint, the SC suburbs of Charlotte make more sense (property taxes, cost of housing). But clearly not everyone is moving to the SC suburbs, so what are we missing? We'd like to spend around 350,000 for a 3BR/2Bath house in a safe area. We'd like to be no more than 15 minutes from grocery stores/Home Depot, so not in a rural location, but safety is important. Since we'll be retired, traffic congestion is less of an issue. Other than the financial benefits of the SC suburbs, are either the NC suburbs or the SC suburbs better? If so, why?
Are you looking in Rock Hill? I don't think there is a single 3BR/2Bath single family home in Fort Mill, Tega Cay, or Indian Land on the market for $350,000 so I'm guessing you are looking at Rock Hill. Are you considering a townhome to try to get into the Fort Mill area?
Rock Hill real estate in general will be cheaper than other areas on the SC-side due to the public school system being so-so, local economy still transitioning as manufacturing left (requiring some people to commute to Charlotte for higher paying jobs), and the distance from Charlotte employment / entertainment. Some neighborhoods are also a bit more spotty on crime in Rock Hill.
For Fort Mill, Tega Cay, and Indian Land... I'd say pricing rivals or is higher than some of the NC side suburbs.
My in-laws retired here about 12 years ago. They choose to live north of the city near us and my bil's family. Everything you named you wanted, that's what my in-laws have. They moved into our neighborhood about 7 years ago for the house they wanted. It's a 3/2 all one level, and they paid about 25K less (but that was also 7 years ago). There are grocery stores/Lowes/Home Depot, and many restaurants.
I also think they chose NC because my FIL is a retired Fed worker, and when they moved here, NC was one of a few states that didn't tax the fed pensions. I'm not sure if that is still the case.
We are looking at the Charlotte area for retirement and from a financial standpoint, the SC suburbs of Charlotte make more sense (property taxes, cost of housing). But clearly not everyone is moving to the SC suburbs, so what are we missing? We'd like to spend around 350,000 for a 3BR/2Bath house in a safe area. We'd like to be no more than 15 minutes from grocery stores/Home Depot, so not in a rural location, but safety is important. Since we'll be retired, traffic congestion is less of an issue. Other than the financial benefits of the SC suburbs, are either the NC suburbs or the SC suburbs better? If so, why?
Tons of people are moving to the towns that edge on Charlotte. Ft. Mill, Rockhill, and a few others have grown tremendously in the past decade. Lancaster, S.C. is a booming retirement center. South Carolina does have lower taxes. In that respect, the advantage of North Carolina is that retired teachers, military retirees, and other state and federal retirees don't pay state income tax. But yes, the border towns are nice and desirable. I was surprised to see that Charlotte wasn't even in the top 100 cities for violent crime, especially considering that Charlotte has such a high population.
I was surprised to see that Charlotte wasn't even in the top 100 cities for violent crime, especially considering that Charlotte has such a high population.
It's a common misperception to believe crime rates are higher than reality (a symptom of reading a lot of local news, especially compared to the amount of national news we read). But the most popular "top 100" lists for this topic unfairly compares cities with populations of 10K to those with >250K. We know economic opportunity has a negative correlation with crime rates and a positive correlation with population/density.
In a nutshell, there should be some expectation for rural places to have more of crime per capita than urban places where a lot of people have access to good paying jobs, schools, and places to spend money.
It's a common misperception to believe crime rates are higher than reality (a symptom of reading a lot of local news, especially compared to the amount of national news we read). But the most popular "top 100" lists for this topic unfairly compares cities with populations of 10K to those with >250K. We know economic opportunity has a negative correlation with crime rates and a positive correlation with population/density.
In a nutshell, there should be some expectation for rural places to have more of crime per capita than urban places where a lot of people have access to good paying jobs, schools, and places to spend money.
The top 20 lost that I posted was not for small cities or towns. That is why the cities listed were of populations of at least 250,000. A shooting in a small town has more of a dramatic effect on the per capita rate for shootings than it does in larger places. If I had posted a list of violent crime or murder rates of all cities and towns, the places listed would naturally be much different. The list is taken from information from the FBI and other sources that record crime information and statistics. Of course, there is crime that isn't reported, but there probably isn't a recorded number of that.
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.
