Why Is Philly Cheaper Than Other East Coast Cities? (Philadelphia: mortgage, to buy)

[pman]

boston is overpriced, there's no two ways about it. the fact that they pay more to live the same way, to house the same amount of people (or less) means they are wasting capital. median home prices are not simply a function of how much you make (demand) but also supply and supply is determined by regulations as much as anything else. what's next, someone is going to tell me residential power is more expensive in MA because they make more money? I don't think so. everything is more expensive in new england and has been for at least a century and back then, Philadelphia was the wealthiest city in the country

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by Clark Park

Philly is more blue collar, working class, has more immigrants than Boston. Philly is bigger than Boston. We have more minorities - more African-Americans, more Hispanics, more Jews, more Muslims.

Eh...not quite.

Philly definitely has fewer immigrants than Boston. The black population in Boston skews West Indian with a sizeable Cape Verdean and West African contingency. The Hispanic community is also larger and more diverse. And there are definitely more Asians in the Boston region. Just compare the average classroom in Central or Masterman to the average classroom at Cambridge Rindge and Latin and you'll see a very marked difference.

Originally Posted by Clark Park

I think Boston is expensive, not only because it has the old money and the family dynasties, but because it is a more "European-style" city that is far more elegant and refined than Philly. Boston has Ivy-League Harvard, which has something like an 18 Billion dollar endowment, compared to our Ivy-League University of Pennsylvania which has an endowment of less than half of that.

Harvard has a $32 billion endowment. Stanford, by comparison, has a $16.5 billion endowment. Penn has a $6.8 billion endowment.

Originally Posted by Clark Park

On the other hand, as an Arts capital, Philly overtakes Boston. Boston has an excellent art museum, but ours is better. Our art schools like the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art, the University of the Arts, Hussian, Moore College, etc. make Philly a #1 city in the realm of fine arts.

An argument could be made for that. But Boston is very strong in that regard as well with the Berklee College of Music and other performing and visual arts institutes.

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool

u said people in general are paid better and not just the big shot lawyers

Yes, I did.

Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool

so like i said, nyc jobs that pay 40% and 100% more are not considered "in general", its only a few % of the total work force so you cant say things like: "in general people get paid much better in nyc", when its so few that do

I didn't say everybody made 40 percent more. I said that people in general make more, which is true. You're the one who pointed out that "they don't make 40 percent more," which may be true, but higher salaries are only a reason why NYC is more expensive than Philadelphia. But in general, a secretary working in Midtown Manhattan is probably bringing home a check that's a good 20-25% larger than a secretary working in Center City. It's not uncommon for a secretary/admin here to rake in six-figures, which is practically unheard of in the Delaware Valley.

Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool

u CAN say tho that in general, philly people are way better off than nyc people cuz in general philly pay is only slightly lower while COL is way lower, this is what its like for the majority of people
wall st goons with 100% bonuses are not the majority

This thread has nothing to do with "who's better off," which is hard to determine anyway.

[OleSchoolFool]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

Yes, I did.



I didn't say everybody made 40 percent more. I said that people in general make more, which is true. You're the one who pointed out that "they don't make 40 percent more," which may be true, but higher salaries are only a reason why NYC is more expensive than Philadelphia. But in general, a secretary working in Midtown Manhattan is probably bringing home a check that's a good 20-25% larger than a secretary working in Center City. It's not uncommon for a secretary/admin here to rake in six-figures, which is practically unheard of in the Delaware Valley.



This thread has nothing to do with "who's better off," which is hard to determine anyway.

i dont kno where ur getting these figures bout secretaries making 6 figures in nyc, esp nowadays, but anyway, its not hard to determine whos better off, thats why many people move out of nyc/northern nj to places like philly or the south to raise kids and what not cuz they can actually afford a decent home there, higher nyc salaries are NOT enough to compensate for the extremely high COL here period,they might be 1.5 times more than the cheaper city if ur lucky, but COL is 2-3 times more, the math will never add up if u want the same QOL (unless ur in the 1% income bracket) decent apts in north jers with regular things like parking and washer/dryer in unit cost $1700, 2k+ in nyc, the same typa apts u can get for $700 in many places plus eryth else is cheaper too
i don kno bout boston, but philly historically has been a lawyer hub, either way tho it doesnt matta which has more elite lawyers, like i said thats not the main factor, chicago has more rich people than boston but is still a lot more affordable

[rotodome]

If everyone moved to, or lived in, every city for exactly the same reasons, and had the exact same priorities, then you could make a determination about "who's better off" based on which place gave you the best dollar value for your rent.

But people live in and move to cities for a countless number of different reasons, so I don't think you can really do that. If it was that simple, then it would be a no-brainer for all of us to move to Columbia SC or someplace for the objective "best" quality of living.

But in reality, you only live once, and looking for the best dollar bargain is not often the most important thing in the quality of one's life. At least not in my opinion.

[OleSchoolFool]

Originally Posted by rotodome

If everyone moved to, or lived in, every city for exactly the same reasons, and had the exact same priorities, then you could make a determination about "who's better off" based on which place gave you the best dollar value for your rent.

But people live in and move to cities for a countless number of different reasons, so I don't think you can really do that. If it was that simple, then it would be a no-brainer for all of us to move to Columbia SC or someplace for the objective "best" quality of living.

But in reality, you only live once, and looking for the best dollar bargain is not often the most important thing in the quality of one's life. At least not in my opinion.

yea, obviously erything is not the same for erybody, and ur rite that QOL can mean a lot of different factors so lets use standard of living term instead, which solely focuses on economic factors and how much u can get for your money
some people will sacrifice their standard of living to get other amenities they want like culture, city vibrancy and great entertainment options
but here we are strictly talkin bout COL and bajan keeps tryin to say that many people in nyc make a buncha money, therefore its hard to say whos better off financially
it is not

[BajanYankee]

Originally Posted by OleSchoolFool

yea, obviously erything is not the same for erybody, some people will sacrifice QOL to get other amenities they want like culture, city vibrancy and great entertainment options
but here we are strictly talkin bout COL and bajan keeps tryin to say that many people in nyc make a buncha money, therefore its hard to say whos better off
it is not

Correction: You're talking about who's better off.

I'm addressing the OP, which asks why Philadelphia is cheaper than other EC cities.

[2e1m5a]

Originally Posted by rotodome

If everyone moved to, or lived in, every city for exactly the same reasons, and had the exact same priorities, then you could make a determination about "who's better off" based on which place gave you the best dollar value for your rent.

But people live in and move to cities for a countless number of different reasons, so I don't think you can really do that. If it was that simple, then it would be a no-brainer for all of us to move to Columbia SC or someplace for the objective "best" quality of living.

But in reality, you only live once, and looking for the best dollar bargain is not often the most important thing in the quality of one's life. At least not in my opinion.

Well said and I agree, but I don't think this discussion should really be about NYC.
I think it should be comparing Philly, Boston, DC/Baltimore.

NYC is our London or Tokyo. It is where the most opportunity is and where the highest demand for real estate and business is.
It offers amenities and urbanity that cannot be duplicated anywhere in the country.

The COL there, while outrageous, makes complete sense.

DC and Boston do not offer more than Philadelphia (Unless you are in Government or Defense Contractor).
Even if they did, the Cost of Living is so much higher that the differences would have to be pretty gaping.
It is many people's opinion (including my own) that Philadelphia actually offers more anyway.

[OleSchoolFool]

Originally Posted by BajanYankee

Correction: You're talking about who's better off.

I'm addressing the OP, which asks why Philadelphia is cheaper than other EC cities.

u the one that started this issue, and u WERE tryin to say that philly jobs pay way less so thas y the appropriate cheaper COL, u were talkn bout 100% bonuses in nyc and tryin to justify the higher COL and u WERE tryin to say the higher salaries are high enuff to cover the COL in nyc, dc and boston, which they are not
and u keep tryin to say that good paying jobs make a place expensive, and the fact is that places like chicago and houston are less expensive than boston, while still have more wealth than boston so its not the main factor

[OleSchoolFool]

Originally Posted by 2e1m5a

Well said and I agree, but I don't think this discussion should really be about NYC.
I think it should be comparing Philly, Boston, DC/Baltimore.

NYC is our London or Tokyo. It is where the most opportunity is and where the highest demand for real estate is.
It offers amenities and urbanity that cannot be duplicated anywhere in the country.

The COL there, while outrageous, makes complete sense.

DC and Boston do not offer more than Philadelphia (Unless you are in Government or Defense Contractor).
Even if they did, the Cost of Living is so much higher that the differences would have to be pretty gaping.

yep, nyc is expensive cuz of hype and status, not cuz of wealthy people here, there is not enuff housing and land to accommodate eryone who wants to live here
and i agree with the bolded, jus like nyc, dc and boston salaries are not high enuff for average person to compensate for the higher COL