Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-13-2011, 05:06 PM
 
Location: The High Seas
7,372 posts, read 16,012,366 times
Reputation: 11867

Advertisements

Rich people tend to live in the big houses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-13-2011, 05:24 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,168,702 times
Reputation: 32581
The truly rich would never respond to this thread.

They don't want you to know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 06:50 PM
 
Location: CA
1,253 posts, read 2,945,311 times
Reputation: 1362
Who cares? Well I guess you do. The wealthy people I know live in Studio City and West Hollywood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 06:51 PM
 
Location: Armsanta Sorad
5,648 posts, read 8,055,531 times
Reputation: 2462
Most of the rich reside in LA's Westside, Baldwin Hills, and the southern parts of the Valley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 08:41 PM
 
4,213 posts, read 8,305,577 times
Reputation: 2680
There are so many rich people in LA.

But I have to disagree with the above two posters saying that Studio City, West Hollywood, and Baldwin Hills are rich areas.

Don't get me wrong. Studio City and West Hollywood are very upscale areas. Some super rich celebrities live there. Rent is insane in West Hollywood. However, most residents of those two areas are not particularly rich. West Hollywood is mostly renters. Studio City has a lot of modest small homes. (I'd consider the hills in between WeHo and Studio City to be rich)

Baldwin Hills is solidly upper middle class.

The truly rich areas, where nearly everyone is rich, include but are not limited to: Bel Air, Holmby Hills, Hancock Park/Windsor Square, North Santa Monica, North Beverly Hills, Pacific Palisades, Brentwood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 09:46 PM
 
Location: CA
1,253 posts, read 2,945,311 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
There are so many rich people in LA.

But I have to disagree with the above two posters saying that Studio City, West Hollywood, and Baldwin Hills are rich areas...
I never said they were. I said the wealthy people I know live there. Read again. Wealthy people love to save money and they will still think like everyone else and live in areas that are less expensive. Like you just said, there are so many rich people in LA. Many celebrities live in Studio City and West Hollywood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 10:07 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,440 posts, read 28,597,011 times
Reputation: 7477
Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
There are so many rich people in LA.

But I have to disagree with the above two posters saying that Studio City, West Hollywood, and Baldwin Hills are rich areas.

Don't get me wrong. Studio City and West Hollywood are very upscale areas. Some super rich celebrities live there. Rent is insane in West Hollywood. However, most residents of those two areas are not particularly rich. West Hollywood is mostly renters.
If an area being mostly renters means it's less affluent than an area that's mostly homeowners,it would follow that Westchester and Culver City are the most affluent westside neighborhoods, as they are the ONLY westside areas with homeowner majorities. While those are nice areas those are middle class areas, not wealthy areas. The wealthier areas have a higher percentage of renters, not only West Hollywood and Studio City, but also Santa Monica, Brentwood, etc. etc.

In L.A. - the more affluent the neighborhood the lower the percentage of homeowners, in general. Also, in L.A., location is much more important than the size of a house. A house or apartment building in Beverly Hills looks exactly like a house or apartment building in Inglewood, but because of the location it's considerably more expensive.

Not all of Studio City, West Hollywood, and Baldwin Hills are super-wealthy, but a significant part of all three neighborhoods are super-wealthy, and those are definitely rich neighborhoods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 10:47 PM
 
4,213 posts, read 8,305,577 times
Reputation: 2680
^Didn't quite say that. And where are the super wealthy in Baldwin Hills and Studio City? I know WeHo has the "Hills" (which I guess is pretty much the city of LA) and some super expensive condos on the Strip and just north of it, but other than that what is WeHo? A ton of apartments off Santa Monica Blvd and Melrose, and some small mostly one story homes. Studio City is some nice apartments and smaller one story homes. Baldwin Hills is affluent but megarich doesn't come to mind.

This is all opposed to Bel Air or north Beverly Hills which is all homes and usually two or three story homes on large plots of land. You will rarely find a home the size of one in Beverly Hills in Studio City or WeHo.

I'd say apartments are generally prettier and better maintained in nicer areas like SM and WeHo. I've driven by apartments in lower income areas and they all look the same and rundown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 10:57 PM
 
Location: USA
2,362 posts, read 2,995,891 times
Reputation: 1854
There's a lot of wealthy homeowners in LA that aren't U.S. citizens. Lots of rich folks from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, etc. that live in Beverly Hills, Bel Air, Pacific Palisades and Malibu for a few months out of the year. It's like summer cabins for oil moguls.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2011, 11:53 PM
 
Location: Earth
17,440 posts, read 28,597,011 times
Reputation: 7477
Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled la native View Post
^Didn't quite say that. And where are the super wealthy in Baldwin Hills and Studio City?
In Studio City they're south of Ventura, and as you get into the hills the more expensive it gets.

Baldwin Hills has Baldwin Hills Estates.

Quote:
I know WeHo has the "Hills" (which I guess is pretty much the city of LA) and some super expensive condos on the Strip and just north of it, but other than that what is WeHo? A ton of apartments off Santa Monica Blvd and Melrose, and some small mostly one story homes.
Very expensive one story homes, and many of those apartments are not cheap at all. Some of the most expensive apartment buildings in the L.A. area are in WeHo.

Quote:
Studio City is some nice apartments and smaller one story homes.
They may be small, but if they're south of Ventura, they're very expensive. Nor are they cheap north of Ventura either. It's the location, not the size.

Quote:
This is all opposed to Bel Air or north Beverly Hills which is all homes and usually two or three story homes on large plots of land. You will rarely find a home the size of one in Beverly Hills in Studio City or WeHo.
You will in the Studio City hills and canyons. WeHo USED to have many homes like that but nobody wanted to waste the land. (I believe the last of the old mansions is on Laurel just south of Sunset.) The homes were knocked down to build apartments as a more efficient use of the land which would bring in more money than wasting it on a large SFR with a large lot. Remember that L.A. didn't have zoning until 1950 and I highly doubt the county and BH had zoning at the time. I'd guess BH instituted zoning some time in the '50s.

Most of BH's population doesn't live north of Sunset, fwiw.

Quote:
I'd say apartments are generally prettier and better maintained in nicer areas like SM and WeHo. I've driven by apartments in lower income areas and they all look the same and rundown.
They're better maintained and in more desirable locations but they often look similar from the outside and have the same architecture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:46 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top