Texas will become California (Houston, Austin: cost, moving to, homeless)

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by malcorub16

Texas also seems to have had significantly more wildfires this year and power outages last year akin to what's been happening in California the past 15 years. I don't recall wildfires ever being a problem in Texas in the past.

Eh, you'd be incorrect about that. Texas ranks anywhere between the second to the fith most wildfire prone state in the country depending on sources.

This year was greatly influenced by La Niña's drought .. but Texas does get wild fires. Areas in Central Texas were among the 5th most wild fire prone area in the country if I recall properly.

https://www.policygenius.com/homeown...ires-by-state/

Here are the 10 most dangerous states for wildfires based on the number of housing units at high to extreme risk of wildfire damage, according to Verisk Wildfire Analytics.

1. California
Number of housing units: 13,680,100

Number of properties at risk: 2,040,600

Percentage of housing units at risk: 15%

Worst year for insured wildfire losses: $14 billion (2017)

2. Texas
Number of housing units: 9,977,400

Number of properties at risk: 717,800

Percentage of housing units at risk: 7%

Worst year for insured wildfire losses: $530 million (2011)

3. Colorado
Number of housing units: 2,212,900

Number of properties at risk: 373,900

Percentage of housing units at risk: 17%

Worst year for insured wildfire losses: $450 million (2012)

4. Arizona
Number of housing units: 2,844,500

Number of properties at risk: 242,100

Percentage of housing units at risk: 9%

Worst year for insured wildfire losses: $120 million (2002)

5. Idaho
Number of housing units: 667,800

Number of properties at risk: 175,000

Percentage of housing units at risk: 26%

Worst year for insured wildfire losses: N/A

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by As Above So Below...

No, DFW gets more California transplants than Austin. Both get more than Houston.

Austin was already liberal. DFW is the area that has changed the most due to Californian in migration. Not Austin.

DFW gets more in total, but the share of transplants coming from CA is considerably higher in the Austin metro. Recent data published in the Houston Chronicle demonstrated this.

I do agree that Austin was already liberal, and had many CA-type policies, before its recent CA influx.

EDIT: And furthermore, IIRC, the SFBA was the major source of Californians moving to Austin, whereas the LA area was the major source for other Texas metros.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Eh, to be fair, Austin was very liberal before the Californian exodus. Many people leaving California are moderates or lean right. California is either very left or immigration now.

I doubt many of the "lean right" Californians move to Austin. They know the reputation of the place. I lived in the SFBA for awhile and often heard, "I would never move to Texas, except for Austin." This was in the early to mid 1990s. And these folks were definitely on the "liberal" side (or now, "progressive").

I don't doubt that less leftish folks from California, especially from SoCal, make up a major share of the folks moving to other locations in TX.

[TXStrat]

Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost

Everywhere is getting more expensive, and cities everywhere are turning more blue. And people in dozens of states are proclaiming that their state is turning into California.

If the reports are all true, California should be empty by now.

It's a pattern. Go to Seattle, and one of the hardest things to find, is someone that was actually born there. Bay area residents started moving to Seattle in 90s after pricing themselves out of San Francisco. The problem was, they brought their politics with them. Now Seattle is the same as the bay are they left.

It is cyclical. Move, wreak havoc, decry havoc, move.

[rabbit33]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

That said, the counter to this idea is that the SFBA and other West Coast metros have had great economic development success with tech etc. under this approach, and Austin seems to have as well, so why is it bad?

To be clear, I don't support their approach, just giving a devil's advocate argument that is probably in the head of many smug West Coasters.

.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by LocalPlanner

I doubt many of the "lean right" Californians move to Austin. They know the reputation of the place. I lived in the SFBA for awhile and often heard, "I would never move to Texas, except for Austin." This was in the early to mid 1990s. And these folks were definitely on the "liberal" side (or now, "progressive").

I don't doubt that less leftish folks from California, especially from SoCal, make up a major share of the folks moving to other locations in TX.

It would be nice to see analytics on the matter but Austin's burbs are still pretty nuetral overall and they have been growing faster than Austin proper so I wouldn't be shocked to see moderate to right leaning Californian relocatees moving there, especially if its for a job relocation or they're moving for affordability causes and they still want whats 'cool' and 'hip' without the aggressive state politics.

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

My true and honest opinion on all of it (as someone who also works in tech)... It's true that places like California attract strong talent for STEM and innovation. Austin seems to attract the spillover from places like San Francisco, Seattle, Boston, ect under the following premises:

- They want a lower CoL
- They want less extreme policies
- They are still entry - mid-level in tech and AUS is more forgiving in this area than SFO, SEA, BOS.
- They are being relocated

The high talent, especially coming from places like Harvard, and Stanford attracts a very 'woke' (for the lack of better words - not saying this to be offensive) talent base and thus not only does the talent follow, but so do the ideologies and political values. They are more likely to be liberal, but IMHO the progressive movement of white collar high salary liberals is a bit different than progressive movements found in minority or have-not groups. Through windowing actual elitists in control of tech companies and their high level employees, these are people who feel that their method of beliefs should be co-signed into law only because of their hierarchy and status in life. Truthfully their actual methodology isn't very different from high standing Republicans, they are just employing different methods masked to help society when it is really made for personal benefit or propaganda or promotes their ideology to make more people think in the fashion that they believe thus establish more control over the thoughts of people to manipulate their society.

It's a lumpsum deal... ...this is why its hypocritical for Abbott to invite all these tech companies here and expect them to obey his every rule, they very much have a mind and agenda of their own... and trust me when I say, it's -not- to save society from social issues. I do value their presence because I benefit from the tech presence, but I do not share their idealogy...and eventually I do feel I will be cut off from the bush when our ideals become too conflicting... These are people who want to control society in manipulative fashion.

I don't think California is going to economically fail, there is alot of money in STEM & Research, I just believe that their methodology is going to become very anti-American, until we eventually are rolled into a 'New America'. It won't be directly controlled by government. It will be controlled by corporations, and they really already do. They know what we like and where we go (Google), they know what we shop for (Amazon), they control our software and compute (Microsoft), they even control what we're allowed to see and agree upon (The news outlets and Media) they already have control over society, it doesn't have to come from Congress.

The whole idea that we're all going to go broke under a liberal leadership isn't entirely accurate, more like - we are going to be steered in a direction that profits them the most while limiting our personal freedoms, ideologies and rights.

Interesting (and maybe disturbing) "insider" perspective on tech. Does it really apply as much to other relocating CA firms like Schwab, McKesson, and Toyota though (who all went to DFW)?

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

It would be nice to see analytics on the matter but Austin's burbs are still pretty nuetral overall and they have been growing faster than Austin proper so I wouldn't be shocked to see moderate to right leaning Californian relocatees moving there, especially if its for a job relocation or they're moving for affordability causes and they still want whats 'cool' and 'hip' without the aggressive state politics.

Perhaps, though the suburban Austin counties have definitely moved leftward from where they were. Maybe that says more about how rightward they used to be rather than how liberal the transplants are.

[SanJac]

Twenty years ago I would have said Texas will never become California. Now I’m not so sure…

Look at Georgia and the Carolinas. I guess never say never…

[LocalPlanner]

Originally Posted by SanJac

Twenty years ago I would have said Texas will never become California. Now I’m not so sure…

Look at Georgia and the Carolinas. I guess never say never…

Haven't GA and the Carolinas received most of their transplants from the Northeast, and "halfbacks" from Florida (who often originally came from the Northeast)?