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.
LA by a long shot, actually, then DC, then depends on factors but toss up between NYC and SF. Also depends. LA and NYC are the most expensive for billionaires looking for that $100M house, but for the average person LA is not all that expensive if your persoective is from the other 3.
Things change if you compare your wage to how expensive the city is. Then it would probably DC as the cheapest, I would guess.
Through the process of elimination, I immediately removed the San Francisco Bay Area as there is just no way to justify that it is in contention for the cheapest/least-expensive of the four. Also these rent prices that are displayed above are across the entire MSA market and these aren't median or averages that fixate prices from only the apartments leased in a quarter. These prices take into account ALL apartments in a market area for the most recent quarter of the year.
^^^Right, so it accounts even for rent control in San Francisco. Market rent for a studio in SF is approaching a whopping $3K if you try to rent something *right now*, however, you could be in a quaint and cozy little studio in a 1900s building and have lived there for many years (or have been legally/illegally passed down someone's apartment) and are only paying $1000 or somewhere around there.
Most rental apartments are of the 1-2 bedroom variety, not 3-4+ bedrooms. So in that area, LA appears to be cheaper than the rest. Understandably, DC has the cheapest housing. Even within the district, if your perspective is New York City or CA, DC is super super cheap, and also for what you get (tends to be much nicer, and more spacious housing in DC for A LOT less).
For renting, my understanding is that DC has gotten quite expensive in its desirable parts, like within the District. But compared to Manhattan/Brooklyn/NNJ or practically anywhere in the Bay Area, it's pretty cheap. My experience with rentals in LA is that they are probably by a noticeable margin the cheapest of the 4, and most people in the urbanized parts of all 4 of these areas are renters, not homeowners. Avg rents in Santa Monica are higher than anywhere else by a long shot in LA, and I find rentals in SM to be pretty damn cheap, especially for being in friggin Santa Monica! A nasty rat infested studio in the Tenderloin in SF will be priced the same as an updated 1 BR blocks from the beach in SM, LA's most expensive rental area. That's a stark contrast.
Statistically, New York and San Francisco are the two areas with the highest cost of living (roughly equal) and LA and DC (also roughly equal) are a little less expensive.
Easily LA. LA is cheaper with regards to rent, food, utilities, etc over NYC, SFO, and DC. The only thing more expensive in LA is gas but even that might be on par with NYC metrocard prices.
That said, I'm pretty sure LA wages are lower than all of the above cities as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist
My experience with rentals in LA is that they are probably by a noticeable margin the cheapest of the 4, and most people in the urbanized parts of all 4 of these areas are renters, not homeowners. Avg rents in Santa Monica are higher than anywhere else by a long shot in LA, and I find rentals in SM to be pretty damn cheap, especially for being in friggin Santa Monica! A nasty rat infested studio in the Tenderloin in SF will be priced the same as an updated 1 BR blocks from the beach in SM, LA's most expensive rental area. That's a stark contrast.
Couldn't agree more. If you look around you can actually STILL find a decent prices to rent in Santa Monica and majority of the Westside. Heck, you can even do that in parts of Brooklyn that are adjacent to Williamsburg. But apparently it's darn near impossible ANYWHERE in the city of San Francisco.
San Francisco has just skyrocketed in cost in recent years because of the tech boom. Rent in LA and SF used to be similar to each other back in 2009-2010. Insane what has happened up there.
Definitley don't see a lot of houses in Arlington for under 400k.
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.
