Moved to the Bay for 1 year from out of state, moved back. My review of it. (San Jose: apartments, mortgage)

[honobob]

What annoys you more? Someone that lives in the Bay Area that complains or someone that does not live here that complains? Wouldn't your post be more productive on some flyover board?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

Bay Area, home of the slumdog millionaire

LA/OC, home of the $30K a year millionaire with bad credit:
https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/cred...-america-2015/

Rank by Average Metro Credit Score
17) SF Bay Area
124) LA/OC

Even SD ranks higher than LA/OC lol.

[18Montclair]

Concord is like a cross between Reseda and Thousand Oaks. One thing about the Bay Area that is different from SoCal, up here every city no matter how bad their reputation has good to really good areas as well.

[livinfairfax]

We'll all being living in a tube and dream within the matrix. Thanks musk.

[04kL4nD]

Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical

Yea and great beaches, great weather, great shopping, great looking people, and a great economy. Sounds awful!


I love when people who lived SD for a few years present themselves as experts on SoCal

OC combines the absolute worst aspects of SD and LA. I know you can't afford to live there and live in some slummy part of LA instead, but if you did, I'm sure you'd probably either be in LA or SD doing something more exciting than sitting on the 405 or going to a mall whenever you got the chance.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by SocSciProf

Mathematically Neutrino78x is dead-on correct.

Indeed, I am correct.

Social scientifically, Neutrino78x is fatally incorrect. The reason he is incorrect is that "middle class" is a poor name for the concept social scientists signify with the label. Non-social scientists often assume this means "someone in the middle" but what it really means is someone far enough above subsistence to be able to afford health care, retirement, improving lifestyles for any children, and some serious discretionary income left over.

I understand that. I got an A in sociology btw. The professor did ask me my source for certain paragraphs in one of my papers because "they sound rather bookish" but I assured her that I wrote them. My English teacher in college said I would likely encounter such problems.

In any case, a middle class family in the Bay Area can have everything you mentioned without owning a single family home. You can live in a two bedroom apartment or condo and still have all those features.

QED.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by AZJD

Neutrino I agree with your logic if one is living IN a city like SF. Or very, very close by. You don't buy SFH's unless you are extremely wealthy.

Well, if you live in the Bay Area, you live in such a place. At least, the larger cities such as Silicon Valley, San Francisco, Oakland.

My point is that it is beyond ridiculous that a high paying job (I consider $100k or more a high paying job,

That's not a high paying job around here, man. That's middle class. 100k is the median income. I agree that it is a high salary but it is middle class for this region.

I don't see how an educated, highly compensated person with children would WANT to live in a 1964 built, 800 sq ft 2 bed /1 bath condo with a car port.

Because they want the benefits of living in this region, as opposed to having a huge house but living out in the middle of nowhere. We want the cosmopolitan atmosphere, the community, the cultural amenities, etc. It is like the story of the country mouse and the city mouse. The country mouse wants to live isolated from other people and enjoy nature. The city mouse wants to be where everything happens, to be a part of it, connected to others and to the world.

If you're a city mouse, you want to live in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Berlin, etc.

If you're a country mouse, you don't mind Scottsdale, Arizona.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by neutrino78x

Well, if you live in the Bay Area, you live in such a place. At least, the larger cities such as Silicon Valley, San Francisco, Oakland.



That's not a high paying job around here, man. That's middle class. 100k is the median income. I agree that it is a high salary but it is middle class for this region.



Because they want the benefits of living in this region, as opposed to having a huge house but living out in the middle of nowhere. We want the cosmopolitan atmosphere, the community, the cultural amenities, etc. It is like the story of the country mouse and the city mouse. The country mouse wants to live isolated from other people and enjoy nature. The city mouse wants to be where everything happens, to be a part of it, connected to others and to the world.

If you're a city mouse, you want to live in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Berlin, etc.

If you're a country mouse, you don't mind Scottsdale, Arizona.

I agree with this mostly. Although I'd mention that "Silicon Valley" isn't a city. I think you meant to say SJ .

At any rate, where the bay area falls flat when compared to other areas (and where most people seem to struggle to adjust when coming here) is that our sphere of unaffordability is very, very large. Even compared to top hitters like NYC, LA, Boston, DC, etc...the bay area compares quite poorly.

As an example, in the bay area, there is no north jersey kind of situation where you can find decent proximity to the big city and can still have decently-affordable housing.The bay area's equivalent in affordability is really the Central Valley now, unfortunately. And that's not a good thing, for obvious reasons.

This is actually one of our biggest issues facing us as a region, I believe. It's not so much an issue that the interior areas (SF, peninsula, SJ, Oak, etc) aren't affordable (just like other major cities aren't), but rather that our exterior areas aren't very cheap by comparison.

Graph out housing costs 30 mins out, 1 hr out, and 2 hrs out in SF/SJ vs. other cities, and you'll see my point. It's somewhat related to some points brought up in the OP...1 hour out and he still feels house poor.

Much of this is geographic...we have the bay and large ridges that spread out development in clumps or linear strips. But I think we should at least try to make an impact. Ultimately, we shouldn't be left with weird situations where people are traveling 60-80 miles one way to find any semblance of affordability.

That's very much not sustainable (or healthy) for the region as a whole, and I hope its addressed in a serious way.

[sav858]

The Bay Area has pretty challenging geography but it's made worse by the fact that so many jobs are concentrated along the Peninsula, an area that has little room to expand and virtually zero desire too as well. I saw this today and it's amazing that despite the robust economy with tech employment being the highest its ever been overall its still below its peak in the South Bay and East Bay while its up 30% in SF and San Mateo counties:

Tech jobs in Bay Area surpass dot-com era's peak - Mercury News

SF isn't too bad as it has a lot of public transit options but even then they are straining capacity with BART. Caltrain stops well south of downtown too. But San Mateo County is so inaccessible for much of the East Bay and all of the North Bay. You only have two narrow bridges connecting to the sprawling office parks from the East Bay. Forget the North Bay with having to cross the GGB and drive through SF on surface streets.

I get the reason for wanting to be on the Peninsula but its forcing people into really crappy commutes because they can't afford to be on the other side of the bay. I honestly don't know how anyone not in tech can live in that area. It's insane that such a dull, average suburban area like Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Mountain View, etc...command prices of a city like SF or exclusive wealthy enclaves like Beverly Hills or La Jolla.

At least places like NYC and DC are relatively centralized and have better housing options within a reasonable commute of job centers.

[Perma Bear]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Concord is like a cross between Reseda and Thousand Oaks. One thing about the Bay Area that is different from SoCal, up here every city no matter how bad their reputation has good to really good areas as well.

Stockton?