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.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,150,566 times
Reputation: 3145
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cbink
The prices completely depend on your perspective. I would say $50/month for insurance is way too low for the majority of people. I have two cars (albeit both new so higher premiums) and pay closer to $200/month. Not saying that's average but I'd say somewhere around the $100-120/month mark was a more realistic number for the majority. Having said that, I don't think the difference in the cost of car insurance between Houston and other cities has much effect compared to other factors such as housing.
I would state that I perhaps think there's an expectation to drive bigger cars and SUVs in Houston. Although this isn't a cost of living expense persay, for many reasons driving a bigger car here is more practical (safety, quality of roads, idiots in jacked up trucks). I would also say that a nicer car becomes more of a priority when you're spending a lot of time in it. My daily roundtrip commute is circa 50 miles. It's a damn site more pleasurable in a comfortable car with what some would call unnecessary luxuries but it means I'm in a much better mood if I'm sat in traffic (something my wife has commented on since I bought my last car in March).
I guess my point is that the argument isn't cut and dry. Yes, you can get cheaper housing here dependant on location and I would definitely say you get more for your money but there are hidden expenses to doing so. I live out in the 'burbs in a new house (1 yr old circa 3,600 sqft sat on 1/3 acre). It's energy efficient but I still run $300/month on elec, up to $200/month on water (no, that's not a typo - sprinklers and an expensive MUD district!) and then there are HOA fees as many developments here are master planned and do have fees (albeit not that large in the grand scheme of things) and don't even get me started on property tax (3.5%...!). Still, I'd rather take the additional expenses and live in a far nicer house and I think that really is the selling point of Houston.
This is exactly my point. Nobody said anything about being unhappy with life or having twisted values. It's simply a matter of culture influencing lifestyle. Issues like perceived safety, bad roads, long commutes--as one assimilates into a city's way of life, he tends to let factors such as this influence his lifestyle and purchase decisions.
Even Jek said he's looking to buy a car now, when he didn't have one in Chicago. Shouldn't that be counted in the COL of Houston? At the same time, my Mini is a perfect SF car, where having a car of any kind is a luxury and utility of the car is less of a concern, due to smaller living spaces, no lawn care, no children for the great majority of us, etc. it's not a great Houston car. Do people in Houston drive and love Minis? Of course they do, but they are very far down the bell curve from the masses who drive much larger, more expensive utility vehicles, where weekend runs to Lowes, car seats, cheap gas, etc. are more part of the lifestyle. It's not a judgment, just an observation.
When dealing with all the factors involved in a typical Houston household--lawn care, utilities, driving distances, property taxes, etc. and adding in admittedly discretionary expenses reflected in the lifestyle, such as larger spaces for heating and cooling, larger, less fuel efficient cars for moving people and things, more furniture to fill more rooms, landscaping costs for the lawn, etc., the comparison starts to take on some variables that make it harder to calculate.
We have had this discussion before. The errors come in trying to calculate what a Houston lifestyle would cost in a city like SF. It's a silly exercise, because a Houston lifestyle is not only nearly impossible to attain in SF, it isn't desired by people who are drawn to SF. The reverse is also true.
A simple running of the numbers would tell you that I'd need to quadruple my salary to have the same lifestyle in SF that I had in Houston. In terms of salary, however, mine was a lateral move to SF. My expenses are about the same, though where that money goes now is very different. I'm still funding my retirement and still putting money into savings. I spend a lot less on vacations and toys now, but enjoy life a lot more. Furthermore, where I was close to maxed out in my job in Houston, I am more mid-level in SF, with lots of room to grow and a much more vibrant market for my profession. So, the upside becomes another factor, which I understand goes both ways, depending on the individual.
Again, I get it. SF is way more expensive on the surface...and even when you dig in a little deeper. And for a certain kind of living that seems to appeal to a lot of people, it doesn't come close to Houston's affordability. For more urban living-true city life, with all the amenities-however, not only is Houston not really much cheaper in my experience, in many respects, it doesn't offer it at all, at any price, or its approximations' value proposition to someone in SF is not very high, comparatively speaking.
This is exactly my point. Nobody said anything about being unhappy with life or having twisted values. It's simply a matter of culture influencing lifestyle. Issues like perceived safety, bad roads, long commutes--as one assimilates into a city's way of life, he tends to let factors such as this influence his lifestyle and purchase decisions.
Even Jek said he's looking to buy a car now, when he didn't have one in Chicago. Shouldn't that be counted in the COL of Houston? At the same time, my Mini is a perfect SF car, where having a car of any kind is a luxury and utility of the car is less of a concern, due to smaller living spaces, no lawn care, no children for the great majority of us, etc. it's not a great Houston car. Do people in Houston drive and love Minis? Of course they do, but they are very far down the bell curve from the masses who drive much larger, more expensive utility vehicles, where weekend runs to Lowes, car seats, cheap gas, etc. are more part of the lifestyle. It's not a judgment, just an observation.
When dealing with all the factors involved in a typical Houston household--lawn care, utilities, driving distances, property taxes, etc. and adding in admittedly discretionary expenses reflected in the lifestyle, such as larger spaces for heating and cooling, larger, less fuel efficient cars for moving people and things, more furniture to fill more rooms, landscaping costs for the lawn, etc., the comparison starts to take on some variables that make it harder to calculate.
We have had this discussion before. The errors come in trying to calculate what a Houston lifestyle would cost in a city like SF. It's a silly exercise, because a Houston lifestyle is not only nearly impossible to attain in SF, it isn't desired by people who are drawn to SF. The reverse is also true.
A simple running of the numbers would tell you that I'd need to quadruple my salary to have the same lifestyle in SF that I had in Houston. In terms of salary, however, mine was a lateral move to SF. My expenses are about the same, though where that money goes now is very different. I'm still funding my retirement and still putting money into savings. I spend a lot less on vacations and toys now, but enjoy life a lot more. Furthermore, where I was close to maxed out in my job in Houston, I am more mid-level in SF, with lots of room to grow and a much more vibrant market for my profession. So, the upside becomes another factor, which I understand goes both ways, depending on the individual.
Again, I get it. SF is way more expensive on the surface...and even when you dig in a little deeper. And for a certain kind of living that seems to appeal to a lot of people, it doesn't come close to Houston's affordability. For more urban living-true city life, with all the amenities-however, not only is Houston not really much cheaper in my experience, in many respects, it doesn't offer it at all, at any price, or its approximations' value proposition to someone in SF is not very high, comparatively speaking.
Horses for courses really.
I moved here from London and I much prefer it for many reasons that I won't bore you with! Part of it is definitely adapting to your environment. It's very easy to slip into that mindset here with SUVs etc and I try and make the most of the abundance of golf courses (not that I've got any better). For me, I have a family now and no longer need nor want a particuarly urban lifestyle and in that sense Houston does suit me. I can enjoy travelling to other places on vacation to get my fix of big cities should I so desire and in the meantime can make the most of what Houston does offer for me.
I think it just grates on Houstonites a bit that people often say, oh it's so cheap to live in Houston when it just isn't as straightforward as the houses are cheaper. However, I can straight up say I live far better than I ever could in London for the same money!
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,150,566 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cbink
Horses for courses really.
I moved here from London and I much prefer it for many reasons that I won't bore you with! Part of it is definitely adapting to your environment. It's very easy to slip into that mindset here with SUVs etc and I try and make the most of the abundance of golf courses (not that I've got any better). For me, I have a family now and no longer need nor want a particuarly urban lifestyle and in that sense Houston does suit me. I can enjoy travelling to other places on vacation to get my fix of big cities should I so desire and in the meantime can make the most of what Houston does offer for me.
I think it just grates on Houstonites a bit that people often say, oh it's so cheap to live in Houston when it just isn't as straightforward as the houses are cheaper. However, I can straight up say I live far better than I ever could in London for the same money!
But to your final point about "all the liberals down here that say we should all live together and hold hands and be happy"--well, most of us liberals find Memorial or the Woodlands as distasteful as a run down housing project since there is such massive evidence of inequality in both settings.
No offense, but the upscale liberal areas generally cited tend to be high income whitopias lacking even Asians. It's not that inequality doesn't exist, but rich white liberals don't like seeing it, and therefore tend to self-segregate so that they end up living among other rich white liberals. This is why they tend to fight off low-income housing tooth and nail with zoning restrictions and environmental lawsuits. Fortunately, disparate impact lawsuits are starting to break down the legal fortifications enacted by liberal strongholds. In time, low-income minorities are coming to liberal whitopias via federally-mandated housing projects whether they like it or not. The beauty of Houston is that it lacks zoning, so the kind of self-segregation you tend to see in liberal whitopias is non-existent.
No offense, but the upscale liberal areas generally cited tend to be high income whitopias lacking even Asians. It's not that inequality doesn't exist, but rich white liberals don't like seeing it, and therefore tend to self-segregate so that they end up living among other rich white liberals. This is why they tend to fight off low-income housing tooth and nail with zoning restrictions and environmental lawsuits. Fortunately, disparate impact lawsuits are starting to break down the legal fortifications enacted by liberal strongholds. In time, low-income minorities are coming to liberal whitopias via federally-mandated housing projects whether they like it or not. The beauty of Houston is that it lacks zoning, so the kind of self-segregation you tend to see in liberal whitopias is non-existent.
I agree with everything you said. And the irony is of course, on paper, Houston should be a liberal heaven with the no zoning as it's truly the only place really in the US that could have true diversity and integration between different groups both ethnically and economically. Yet they can't get out of here fast enough and run back to the coasts to their 100% rich white neighborhoods.
This is exactly my point. Nobody said anything about being unhappy with life or having twisted values. It's simply a matter of culture influencing lifestyle. Issues like perceived safety, bad roads, long commutes--as one assimilates into a city's way of life, he tends to let factors such as this influence his lifestyle and purchase decisions.
Even Jek said he's looking to buy a car now, when he didn't have one in Chicago. Shouldn't that be counted in the COL of Houston? At the same time, my Mini is a perfect SF car, where having a car of any kind is a luxury and utility of the car is less of a concern, due to smaller living spaces, no lawn care, no children for the great majority of us, etc. it's not a great Houston car. Do people in Houston drive and love Minis? Of course they do, but they are very far down the bell curve from the masses who drive much larger, more expensive utility vehicles, where weekend runs to Lowes, car seats, cheap gas, etc. are more part of the lifestyle. It's not a judgment, just an observation.
When dealing with all the factors involved in a typical Houston household--lawn care, utilities, driving distances, property taxes, etc. and adding in admittedly discretionary expenses reflected in the lifestyle, such as larger spaces for heating and cooling, larger, less fuel efficient cars for moving people and things, more furniture to fill more rooms, landscaping costs for the lawn, etc., the comparison starts to take on some variables that make it harder to calculate.
We have had this discussion before. The errors come in trying to calculate what a Houston lifestyle would cost in a city like SF. It's a silly exercise, because a Houston lifestyle is not only nearly impossible to attain in SF, it isn't desired by people who are drawn to SF. The reverse is also true.
A simple running of the numbers would tell you that I'd need to quadruple my salary to have the same lifestyle in SF that I had in Houston. In terms of salary, however, mine was a lateral move to SF. My expenses are about the same, though where that money goes now is very different. I'm still funding my retirement and still putting money into savings. I spend a lot less on vacations and toys now, but enjoy life a lot more. Furthermore, where I was close to maxed out in my job in Houston, I am more mid-level in SF, with lots of room to grow and a much more vibrant market for my profession. So, the upside becomes another factor, which I understand goes both ways, depending on the individual.
Again, I get it. SF is way more expensive on the surface...and even when you dig in a little deeper. And for a certain kind of living that seems to appeal to a lot of people, it doesn't come close to Houston's affordability. For more urban living-true city life, with all the amenities-however, not only is Houston not really much cheaper in my experience, in many respects, it doesn't offer it at all, at any price, or its approximations' value proposition to someone in SF is not very high, comparatively speaking.
Dal, you know, SF is not the "only" alternative to Houston. SF aside, back to the OP point, sure there are hidden costs here as there are everywhere including Orlando, FL. But pound for pound, across the country, the costs here are trivial. Let's try to put the SF vs Houston thing to rest as I highly doubt the avg American is sitting there thinking they will either move to Houston or SF. SF competes more with Seattle and probably LA or NY. Houston probably competes more with Dallas, Charlotte and Atlanta.
And all those expenses you listed above you have in just about every city with the exception of SF I guess. I stand by my argument that this debate is silly as there really is no comparison, Houston dollar for dollar is cheaper then most large cities. Maybe not by a huge gap, and no one on here is saying that. But it's cheaper. And even if it's 5% cheaper, compound that 5% over 30 years and it probably puts a few million in your bank account.
Houston is the armpit of AmeriKa. Seriously, how else would you get highly educated people here without cheap housing and high paying jobs? It just wont happen otherwise, Houston has nothing to offer except corn syrup and tons of children.
That's like saying that three centuries ago, New Amsterdam was the armpit of the world, that no one would brave the venereal disease (the Americas' gift to the world: syphilis), the malaria, the yellow fever and the hostile Indians without cheap land and bountiful harvests. People always go to where the money is. Would anyone live in the run-down slums of NYC without the high-paying jobs?
Houston is the armpit of AmeriKa. Seriously, how else would you get highly educated people here without cheap housing and high paying jobs? It just wont happen otherwise, Houston has nothing to offer except corn syrup and tons of children.
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.
