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.
So joe is raising rent because he can ,now others LL will do the same because Joe is doing it? Goal is take much as possible from the person due the fact they have "disposable" income. Talking about highway robbery.. Easy terms its not hard to have a Low COL its just business wants to max out their retail fees because the person has a increase in salary. Then this drives out the person making $10 a hour now..
Where did you want this planetoid delivered, buddy?
I'm not saying it's any good thing. I'm not sure it's even curable short of full-blown Socialist control. But if you suddenly have 500,000 highly compensated workers after 300,000 desirable residences, it's simple market forces (like continual overbidding, which is a daily reality here in the Denver area) that drive the prices up. It's not always a clear linkage as to why other costs go up, but you're not generally going to find discount grocers in a million-dollar suburb, even if those houses sold for $100k originally. And once the spiral of housing prices, Trader Joe's, Starbucks and BMW dealers starts... that tide is definitely going to lift all boats, at least regionally.
You want to live somewhere like that? Fine. Qualify economically or overthrow the gummint and take over San Francisco with the rest of the socialist mob. You want a low COL? Accept that it has to be in a more modest - but possibly still very livable - region.
But you're basically whining that you can't live in Seattle on $50k and have loads of spending money. I'll refrain from comments that might seem rude, here.
So joe is raising rent because he can ,now others LL will do the same because Joe is doing it? Goal is take much as possible from the person due the fact they have "disposable" income. Talking about highway robbery.. Easy terms its not hard to have a Low COL its just business wants to max out their retail fees because the person has a increase in salary. Then this drives out the person making $10 a hour now..
Yes, that's typically how it works! If you don't want to pay an insane amount of money to someone to live in their property then the goal should be to buy your own house or property! That's simple economics! Most goods and services will cost more in an area that has higher wages and vice versa.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,754 posts, read 58,128,451 times
Reputation: 46247
yes, generally... but there are a zillion ways to gain wealth / make a living apart from wage income (employment).
I suggest you do that sooner than later, as wage income is a target for taxation.
There are plenty of high paying careers in low COL areas.
During my earning yrs... I enjoyed income tax free living, High West coast wages (regional) and lived in a very low COL area (20 minutes from metro). BUT... my wealth / success was only 'enabled' by employment, NOT created and sustained by employment / wage income.
America has large state/local variation in cost of housing, and in taxes. Food and most consumer-goods cost essentially the same everywhere. A sack of apples will cost about the same in rural Nebraska as in San Francisco; actually, possibly more in rural Nebraska, because of the higher delivery-costs.
Taxes SOMETIMES rise with the local rise in wages, but not always. For example, Seattle is low-tax (there is no state or local income tax), whereas my part of Ohio is moderate-tax (about 5% marginal state and up to 2.5% marginal local income tax). California and New York State are famously high-tax. But there are parts of California and New York state that are low-wage, economically stagnant... and yet, their taxes are still high.
The really highly locally-varying cost is real-estate. In my proverbial "neck of the woods", the job-market isn't exactly stellar, and that is reflected in the low cost of housing. Housing is laughably low-priced, compared to say that in a middling market (Dallas, Atlanta), let alone a hot market (San Francisco, NYC, DC). But I reiterate, that our food prices, our gas prices, our prices for lawn-care or child-care or root canals or electricity or clothing or whatever else, aren't particularly low, and are comparable to prices paid in all but the most stratospheric markets (Manhattan, for example).
yes, generally... but there are a zillion ways to gain wealth / make a living apart from wage income (employment).
I suggest you do that sooner than later, as wage income is a target for taxation.
There are plenty of high paying careers in low COL areas.
During my earning yrs... I enjoyed income tax free living, High West coast wages (regional) and lived in a very low COL area (20 minutes from metro). BUT... my wealth / success was only 'enabled' by employment, NOT created and sustained by employment / wage income.
Think beyond the J-O-B
Its actually getting harder to find a High wages in a Low COL. I assume i was doing that my self. Work in austin, but live in killeen. It is cheaper by far, but slowly raising their prices. Because the high market rates is pushing people out of austin to outer part of towns. This is causing others to try and get austin rental rates in a min wage hour town.
But I reiterate, that our food prices, our gas prices, our prices for lawn-care or child-care or root canals or electricity or clothing or whatever else, aren't particularly low, and are comparable to prices paid in all but the most stratospheric markets (Manhattan, for example).
OP seems to be bemoaning the specific link between pay levels and COL cutting into "disposable" income, not basic consumer costs. I'd agree that in certain rough views, most equivalent households have equivalent food and household product costs.
But you're basically whining that you can't live in Seattle on $50k and have loads of spending money. I'll refrain from comments that might seem rude, here.
That right there. If you want your rent to stay the "same" as your salary increases then you should look into buying a home or condo. Your mortgage will stay the same.
There are plenty of high paying careers in low COL areas.
Any quick cites on that?
Quote:
BUT... my wealth / success was only 'enabled' by employment, NOT created and sustained by employment / wage income.
Trust funds and inheritances change the whole picture. I own my house outright (my third); the lack of any mortgage costs is a huge boon to my daily economic choices. But I didn't pull a six-figure check out of... thin air. It represents the first 25 years of my economic adult life (and some very frugal thinking, and a bit of luck here and there.) Not a reasonable observation, no matter how much you're promoting a nonstandard career path. (I do, as well... but I never lose sight of the realities, either.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2
Its actually getting harder to find a High wages in a Low COL.
Working in The City and living over in The Sticks has always been an option. The problem is that The Sticks tend to get more expensive if they're a bedroom community for high earners, and then lower earners have to push further out... losing quality of life, most likely, and acquiring the manifold costs of a long commute.
The big thing is, the actual amount of the salary, often does not mean much. When salaries in any field are adjusted for the local cost of living, can actually have considerably more buying power than in an over inflated cost of living area.
Just because a computer/software engineer can earn $125,000 in the Silicon Valley, does not mean they can live as well as they can in many other far less expensive cost of living areas with less income.
The total income one earns, does not mean as much, as what you can do with the it, and often the lower paid area will give you a far superior life style, due to the difference in the cost of living.
And some people that are really good at their job, can earn the same top money no matter where they live due to their unique talents, and can live at half the cost in some less cost of living area of the country. They can live on half their salary, owning a very nice upscale home, autos, etc., and invest the other half.
The amount of income is not near as important as what you can do with the money you earn.
I know one woman that contracts jobs adapting a very big program that will run entire companies with multiple facilities, that lives on a sail boat in the Caribbean area, doing her job with a satellite phone and satellite internet service. Sails and lives a great life, and makes more than nearly anyone in the Silicon Valley.
Another woman (now deceased) that did the same as a part time basis, while working for a major company in their field, as head of their software department, earning as much as $400 an hour part time, adjusting computer programs for companies around the country.
A man that left his job as head of the software/computer department of a major company that went to an island off of South America for 3 times a top salary, to spend a year with housing furnished setting up a software system. His wife adjusted a major program (same as the other woman) for companies around the world, and made very, very top money from her extra bedroom.
If you are good enough, you don't have to live in the Silicon Valley, to be a top IT professional to earn very top money, and even if not in the category as the 4 people mentioned above, when your income is adjusted for cost of living. It is not the amount you receive each month, but what the money you earn will buy.
Many years ago I had a reputation as a technical manager in an area that was in demand, and I was living in the Dallas, Texas area.
I received two job offers about the same time, one from a technology company that had good pay and benefits and superior stock options but required a move to the SF area, and one from a major bank in Manhattan that had salary, benefits, and bonuses that would double my compensation.
After evaluating the taxes, housing, COL, and daily demands for both me and my family I concluded both jobs would be losers for me. I stayed in Texas.
Over time I probably would have had a little more money but a lesser quality of life.
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.
