It seems as though Portland is much more affordable than Seattle area? (house prices, refrigerator)

[EnricoV]

But the cost of rentals are more-or-less tied to the cost of purchasing property.

[Haley James]

I work in the area and I would stay away from anything east of 82nd. Of course not everyone who lives there is involved with drugs or illegal activities but there is a lot of drugs and drug related crime.

[UrbanAdventurer]

Originally Posted by EnricoV

But the cost of rentals are more-or-less tied to the cost of purchasing property.

Actually rent drives property values, not the other way around. There is a correlation between high rents and high property values (of course), but they don't move in lock-step.

[EnricoV]

Originally Posted by UrbanAdventurer

Actually rent drives property values, not the other way around. There is a correlation between high rents and high property values (of course), but they don't move in lock-step.

Doesn't matter which drives which .... what I said is they are tied to one another. So housing prices are a fairly judge of expenses, whether one rents or buys.

[wanderbygrace]

Originally Posted by UrbanAdventurer

For most people it boils down to Oregon's state income tax vs. Washington's sales tax. It depends highly on your spending habits but I'd assume most people would come out ahead in WA. I know I'd have roughly $300 extra dollars in my pocket every month in Washington, all else being equal. Obviously some sales tax would nibble out of that, but in my case, not much.

If just comparing sales tax vs. income tax, you would have to go into drastic debt to come out ahead in OR. Both taxes average about 9% (more/less depending on the locale in WA), therefore, you would have to spend more money on sales taxable goods/services, which aside from monthly payments on major items (e.g. car) is usually a fairly small percentage of your actual expenses, in WA than you actually could have made in OR before you would hit the break even point. It would be a statistical freak anomaly if anyone actually did that.

[EnricoV]

But the assumption that the only difference in taxes are income and sales is erroneous. The government needs (or so they say) the money to operate. They will get it somewhere.

The 2010 (most recent statistics I could find) figures puts Washington's tax burden at 9.3% (or $4,261 on an average income of $45,854) and Oregon's at 10% (or $3,729 on an average income of $37,432).

[wanderbygrace]

Originally Posted by EnricoV

But the assumption that the only difference in taxes are income and sales is erroneous. The government needs (or so they say) the money to operate. They will get it somewhere.

The 2010 (most recent statistics I could find) figures puts Washington's tax burden at 9.3% (or $4,261 on an average income of $45,854) and Oregon's at 10% (or $3,729 on an average income of $37,432).

I never assumed that.

Naturally, income, sales, and property taxes are the three biggest money makers for a government (at least if looked at as direct taxes to an individual). The OP had concluded that the property taxes evidently didn't matter, as he/she knew what the rents were, and (home) property taxes would be in the rent. Therefore, that left a look at the other two.

[EnricoV]

Originally Posted by wanderbygrace

I never assumed that.

Naturally, income, sales, and property taxes are the three biggest money makers for a government (at least if looked at as direct taxes to an individual). The OP had concluded that the property taxes evidently didn't matter, as he/she knew what the rents were, and (home) property taxes would be in the rent. Therefore, that left a look at the other two.

I didn't mean to imply that you, personally, did. Sorry if you took it that way. Just that most people seem to. Comparing apples to oranges and thinking you've got a good comparison is faulty. You have to look at the entire tax burden. The government will get their money. Somehow.

[Nell Plotts]

There are hidden costs that often aren't seen when you compare Portland to Seattle. About 15 years ago we built a home in Seattle metro. Husband is an architect so he had Portland prices nailed. When we came to purchase the same thing in Seattle is was significantly more expensive, excluding sales tax, when purchased from the SAME WHOLESALER! Not what we expected.

Granted, this was 15 years ago but I have no reason to think that this has changed.

[wanderbygrace]

Originally Posted by Nell Plotts

There are hidden costs that often aren't seen when you compare Portland to Seattle. About 15 years ago we built a home in Seattle metro. Husband is an architect so he had Portland prices nailed. When we came to purchase the same thing in Seattle is was significantly more expensive, excluding sales tax, when purchased from the SAME WHOLESALER! Not what we expected.

Granted, this was 15 years ago but I have no reason to think that this has changed.

I feel your husband's pain on this one, as I was controller for a developer/general contractor back in Ohio that did development/construction around the country. It was insane the difference in prices from the same vendor, dependent on where you were building.