The Affordable Housing Shortage Hits Dallas Almost As Hard As California Metros (San Diego: 2014, apartment complex)

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Low income households make up the majority of Californians moving to TX, now it's getting to expensive there as well...
https://www.bisnow.com/dallas-ft-wor...ac-2-89522#ath

Still not nearly as pricey as California.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Shooting Stars

I have NEVER read anywhere that the majority of Californians moving out of state are low income - the majority are middle income.

https://www.ocregister.com/2017/04/2...d-intensifies/

EXCERPT from above article:

"A dive into Internal Revenue Service data shows distinctly that, while poor people are indeed leaving, the largest group of outmigrants tends to be middle-aged people making between $100,000 and $200,000 annually.

They may not be ideal algorithm creators for Facebook, but they do constitute the solid middle ranks critical to any healthy economy.

Indeed, since 2010, the Golden State has seen an overall net outflow of $36 billion from these migrants (and that counts only the first year of income).

The biggest gainers from this exchange are where Californians are moving, to such places as Texas, Arizona and Nevada. That some California employers are joining them in the same places should be something of a two-minute warning for state officials."

you might want to look more ...

Low-income folks moved out, high-income folks moved in

People making $55,000 or less a year were mostly moving out of California between 2007 and 2016, the report found, while people making more than $200,000 a year moved in.

More of those residents with lower income were moving to states like Texas, Nevada and Arizona. And more of those with higher incomes were coming into California from states like New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.
Leaving California: Here's who's moving out, who's moving in. - The San Diego Union-Tribune

California exports its poor to Texas, other states, while wealthier people move in
BY PHILLIP REESE
preese@sacbee.com

March 05, 2017 04:00 AM
Updated March 12, 2017 02:57 PM
California exports more than commodities such as movies, new technologies and produce. It also exports truck drivers, cooks and cashiers.

Every year from 2000 through 2015, more people left California than moved in from other states. This migration was not spread evenly across all income groups, a Sacramento Bee review of U.S. Census Bureau data found. The people leaving tend to be relatively poor, and many lack college degrees. Move higher up the income spectrum, and slightly more people are coming than going.

About 2.5 million people living close to the official poverty line left California for other states from 2005 through 2015, while 1.7 million people at that income level moved in from other states – for a net loss of 800,000. During the same period, the state experienced a net gain of about 20,000 residents earning at least five times the poverty rate – or $100,000 for a family of three.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/ca...#storylink=cpy

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Shooting Stars

Californians, who obviously are not low income, are blamed for skyrocketing prices in Austin, TX, which have gone up higher than Dallas and Houston. Californians are attracted to Austin.

California's mess has been distorting other markets for a while.

https://www.kvue.com/article/news/in.../269-396030496

EXCERPTS:

"The Defenders looked at wages and home prices over the last 26 years in the city and found family incomes rose 97 percent. At the same time, median home prices rose 290 percent."

"It's tough not to blame everything on the 160 people who move here every day, and for some they blame California. A recent study looked at where all of the people moving here are coming from and it's primarily California."

Don’t see how California’s mess is distorting other markets. Anyplace becomes more expensive as it becomes more successful and desirable. Population is growing and growth is almost all competing for coastal urban centers. Seattle and Portland on the west coast as examples. Growing and growing expensive in their own right.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

You seem a little too emotional about this. The fact of the matter is, rental rates in TX are rising very fast, so much so that there is now a shortage of affordable units in every major city there...we already see TX surpassing the Central Valley...

Average Rent April 2018:
Austin $1500
Houston $1350
Dallas $1300
Sacramento $1300
Ft Worth $1100
Reno $1100
San Antonio $1050
Fresno $950
Bakersfield $900
Las Vegas $900

https://www.walletwyse.com/articles/...l-price-index/

Austin will probably catch San Diego soon enough, Dallas is not really the huge bargain for lower income renters that it used to be. Houston too.

but you are comparing the prices for rentals in the major metro areas of Texas with the Ca. central valley. That is like comparing apples with cantaloupe. bananas. Of course as cities grow rents increase and yes, Austin has really changed in the past 20 or so years, but what you are taking as the gospel truth is far from that and yes the total cost of living does have to be considered.

[OyCrumbler]

That report is odd in that the Greater Boston area, with its affluence and prosperity somehow lands at number 3 for the least severe with nearby Providence, part of the same CSA, at number 1. What possibly accounts for that?

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by nmnita

but you are comparing the prices for rentals in the major metro areas of Texas with the Ca. central valley. That is like comparing apples with cantaloupe. bananas. Of course as cities grow rents increase and yes, Austin has really changed in the past 20 or so years, but what you are taking as the gospel truth is far from that and yes the total cost of living does have to be considered.

Because these are the places Coastal Californians are likely to consider moving to...I should have been more clear.

[Shooting Stars]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Don’t see how California’s mess is distorting other markets. Anyplace becomes more expensive as it becomes more successful and desirable. Population is growing and growth is almost all competing for coastal urban centers. Seattle and Portland on the west coast as examples. Growing and growing expensive in their own right.

You are kidding, right? If California is contributing the majority of newcomers to any given metro area, and the prices only then become uncoupled from local incomes, then YES, California's mess is distorting that market. That is the case for Austin.

Dallas and Houston's prices have not gone into the stratosphere as much as Austin because fewer Californians choose those cities.

This is not a new concept. As far back as I can remember, different places have complained about Californians discovering their town and jacking up prices.

I myself live in the mountains of North Georgia right now. Twenty or more years ago, prices here were lower before retirees and newcomers like myself jacked up prices. It's still a very reasonable place for real estate, as long as you aren't a local who was born here. What seems reasonable to us, is expensive historically for the area.

This scene is played out everywhere, but California's population size means that when a substantial number of Californians leave for a specific location, they really have a financial impact on that location.

You can go back 20 years and find articles talking about this. It's nothing new!

[Shooting Stars]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

IRS data has it's usefulness but Id rather rely on actual census data for this as it covers everyone...

How does IRS data not cover everyone?

Are you saying the people leaving are so poor they don't even pay taxes?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

That report is odd in that the Greater Boston area, with its affluence and prosperity somehow lands at number 3 for the least severe with nearby Providence, part of the same CSA, at number 1. What possibly accounts for that?

Maybe they have more subsidized housing available or perhaps lots of areas that haven't really gentrified so there is a good supply of housing for low-income people. Vegas was the #1 for having the least amount of affordable housing for low income people even though it's also seen as a cheap, affordable alternative to coastal CA. That could be because much of it's housing is new so not a lot available on the lower end. I'm not really sure, some metro areas must just have different levels of available housing for different income levels but I'm curious to know why too.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Shooting Stars

How does IRS data not cover everyone?

Are you saying the people leaving are so poor they don't even pay taxes?

Im saying census data is more comprehensive, not to mention more current-I know the IRS database, it's really slow.

Furthermore, the assertion that more lower income folks move to TX from CA really is in line with the sorts of jobs Texas is creating vs California.

Rick Perry created millions of jobs but incomes actually declined in Dallas...that'a because the new jobs didnt pay as well as the jobs lost.

In 1999, median household income in Dallas County — where 50 percent of residents make more and 50 percent make less — was nearly $62,000.

In 2015, it had dropped to just under $52,000.

“It was a stark decline that we weren’t even expecting when we did this analysis,” said Frances Deviney, chief operating officer at the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities.

“That’s huge. In Texas, it was only 2 percent,” Deviney said. “We couldn’t believe the massive drop that was happening in Dallas County and what it meant for people’s opportunities.”

Why Low Unemployment In North Texas Doesn't Mean Families Are Financially Secure | KERA News