patrick.net

Buster says

Being that the SF Bay area has many more places of higher learning it will always have more educated people as well as attract the educated from outside the area.

Ah yes, the Smug (Left) Coast Talk, concomitant with the sentiment that the Bay Area is the Center of the Universe.

The Bay Area is not The Center of Universe. And it's not even the Center of California, though together with Cool and Hip L.A., it is the Junior Partner of the Smug (Left) Coast.

But even though the Bay Area is not The Center of The Universe, it is part of California, which as the population of the Red Counties grows, will together with its more bigger Socal Left Coast Partner, continue to be the Center Focus of Red Resentment.

B.A.C.A.H. says

But even though the Bay Area is not The Center of The Universe, it is part of California, which as the population of the Red Counties grows, will together with its more bigger Socal Left Coast Partner, continue to be the Center Focus of Red Resentment.

Perhaps you are transferring your Red Resentment onto the whole? If you take the time to look at the statistics at the link cited you will clearly see that your resentment is not shared by the younger generations.

Secondly, I am merely pointing out what the statistics show, namely, the more educated a person is, the less likely they are to harbor ill will toward gays and the more likely they are to embrace civil equality. Because the SF Bay area has more universities and colleges of higher learning I am making the correlation that the SF Bay area will likely have more residents that support civil equality vs. the interior of California with less institutions of higher learning.

Lastly, I have not made the claim that SF and the Bay area is the center of the universe. Actually, I don't believe that planet Earth is at the center either as it seems to be more of a third grade planet.

Having said all of that, clearly, you should follow what floats your boat. To get back on topic, what I am really saying is that one should live where one finds value. For instance, if you don't find value in areas such as SF that embrace more liberal views, higher education, technology clusters, proximity to the ocean, etc. then you are simply wasting your money as it is quite expensive to live in the area. You would be better off finding an area that contains the qualities that you value if they can be experienced at a lower cost.

So if the 'Red Counties' of central California match up more with what you are seeking than I would recommend that you relocate there as they can be experienced at a much lower price for what I suspect will provide a greater personal value to you....with perhaps the exceptions of rural areas such as Orange and San Diego counties that may offer the same.

Buster,
I am more liberal than you think, but I cringe when I hear the Smugness about our elite universities making us wiser/smarter/better than our "less educated" brothers and sisters.
I also cringe from local-in-your-face leftism, particularly taxpayer supported (while the state goes broke) ones like this one http://www.swopusa.org/old_site/avarenbio.php, sure to stoke and provoke asymmetric backlash.

Interesting what you write about values.
There are a few locals "left" around here, with deep roots, extended family, etc.
Also as someone else who posted on this thread pointed out, it does not have to be expensive to live "here". But if one immigrates to here and shares the perspective of other such persons that the only "here" here is either in Hip neighborhoods or The Fortress, then one would think so.

Interesting link. Actually I support legalized prostitution and the rights of sex workers. For transparency, I am not nor have I ever been a sex worker or utilized their services. I don't advocate spending ridiculous amounts of money arresting and jailing sex workers or the persons who choose to pay for such services. IMHO, this is the real waste of tax payers money by criminalizing activities and throwing away good tax payers money trying to stop activities that simply do not harm you or me.

I don't find this an elitist point of view, just one that makes financial and social sense. In a similar way, for example, I find it completely ridiculous filling up our courtrooms and jails with persons who choose to smoke pot. Costing us billions. While I don't smoke pot, those who do are not making my life less than grand.

Back to real estate. I often wish areas that embody qualities that I value were less expensive. My hunch is that I am not alone in putting a higher value on these locals as most things simply follow the laws of supply and demand and that these areas are more expensive because a lot of people want to live there. My favorite places such as SF, Vancouver, Copenhagen and Vienna are all terribly expensive places. So if your values are more in line with less expensive cost of living areas, instead of being resentful and angry, I personally would be counting my blessings...and my cash! :)

So if rents are high, that means local salaries and/or savings are high. And that means that local kids also have the good luck that there are a lot of high-paying jobs nearby.

IF ?

We learned in 2008-2011, what headhunters already knew for a long time, local salaries are NOT that high.

For example, many wrongly believed Google employees were HIGHLY paid, a false assumption since we found out this year 2011 Google implementated 10% compesation raise.. They actually have been paying less for several years.

The real High Tech industries face too much serious competition to just overspend like drunken sailor. We have serious budget constraints and its goal isnt to overpay employees because housing prices have inflated.

Certainly we saw industries and salaries boom in the 70s and 80s but we didnt see home prices or rents skyrocket compared to 1998-2008...

Buster says

My hunch is that I am not alone in putting a higher value on these locals as most things simply follow the laws of supply and demand and that these areas are more expensive because a lot of people want to live there.

So why did prices fall in SF/LA region from 1989 to mid 90s and more recent. Or better question, why didnt prices inflate in the 80s to the same degree as it did in the past 10 years, 1998-2008. See chart above... Supply/Demand or just Irrational Exhuberance?

Its still the same California that existed for several decades... Did you ever contemplate that certain parties (like realtors) were exaggerating and inflating the perception of California living. Why was it much more cheaper in decades past ?

Buster says

Secondly, I am merely pointing out what the statistics show, namely, the more educated a person is, the less likely they are to harbor ill will toward gays and the more likely they are to embrace civil equality. Because the SF Bay area has more universities and colleges of higher learning I am making the correlation that the SF Bay area will likely have more residents that support civil equality vs. the interior of California with less institutions of higher learning.

Do some fact checking first...

You will find during the tech boom 1970-1990, places like Santa Clara County was more right wing GOP voting block than left wing Democrats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County,_California#Government_and_politics

The current view you state, has been around for some 5-10 years a best, but it certainly not what has been happening in places like SCC for the past 30 - 40 years. In reality the highly educated population of SV were more "guns and religion" as Obama would say.

The media has done a great job rewriting history and brainwashing people.

Wacking Hut says

One way to rationalize the market is to move away from high-priced areas and save up cash in low-cost areas.

Local employers have already done this, they moved jobs to low cost areas.

I find two kinds of GOP-identifying folks in my decade in this country. The rich affluent types who are primarily fiscal conservatives...most of these folks do not much care as much about the gay/abortion/flag issues but more about reducing taxation and what they think is too much welfare. There is another set of the "guns and religion type" as obama would say who think they can be the rich affluent types in the near future. I dont think there are too many of the latter in the SV area.

Going back to the original question: As an immigrant, I would never leave the Bay Are due to its multiculturalism, ease of assimilation, plentiful jobs and good weather. Only NYC compares favorably but is too crowded for my taste.

House and rental pricing are completely crazy at times in the SF Bay Area but EllieMae had it pretty much right on Maslow's heirarchy ;)

You can live anywhere in the US or even the world, but kind of like art, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. No one makes that beholder pay the price until they decide to open their wallet and do it.

That being said, I have lived in the SF Bay Area for many years. One cost advantage is not paying a ton for heating and air conditioning. A few other advantages are the property taxes, overall beauty of the area and the amount of opportunity it brings to living here.
There are many negative things: home prices, rental prices, traffic, smog, but the pros out weigh the cons.

I've lived in the midwest and while it's tempting to move back out there I feel like I'm out of the loop not really on the cutting edge of all that's happening. That's one reason I like the bay area.

Buster gave three reasons why he would never want to live in WV: 1) need to live in a gay friendly environment, 2) climate, 3) work.

1) I'd say this is more mythical blue state thinking about red state people. The media creates the impression that gay phobia is rampant outside of major urban areas. The truth is homophobes are not particular to any one place. Not any more, not from what I have seen firsthand. I have gay neighbors here in WV! And I have not met anyone who has issues with gay people or at least anyone who is impolite enough to say so. When you live in a small town, people make an effort to get along. I am also an immigrant myself by the way, and, other than a friendly question or two, this has been a non-issue. WV has the highest % of native born inhabitants of any state; even so, my little town contains Chinese, Vietnamese, and Salvadorans, who all seem to fit in quite well. In fact, I've noticed less racial tension here than in the Bay Area; for one thing, I'm not afraid when I see black men walking towards me on the street at night.

2) Getting my first taste of winter here. Brrrr. But summer was lovely and so was fall, loved the fireflies and the colors of the trees. The Bay Area had a lot of drizzle and fog; it feels good to bask in sunshine on my porch. I'd call it a wash.

3) Sadly true. If you aren't self-employed or if your company won't let you telecommute, don't come here. No biotech at all and local wages are low. My husband and I are able to telecommute, and this is what made everything possible. I'm not saying it's for everyone, but if your work is portable like ours, quality of life issues are something to consider.

"You lived 25 years in an 800 sf apartment? The problem isn't California, the problem is that you couldn't afford to live here."

For much of this time, my husband and I had a combined income of $200k. That should have been enough in CA, at least in theory. I looked it up; only 8% of families in America have a higher income.

It was really all about priorities. Sometimes my husband and I would talk about buying a house or moving to a bigger apartment. Then we'd look at the Bay Area prices and reflect on what we would have to give up. We valued our free time so we lived close to work where housing prices were especially high, higher than we could afford. I remember one time we went to look at a 2 bedroom, 1 bath house that was for sale across the street from us in Albany; it was $750k, and not that much bigger than our apartment. We ran the numbers and they were shocking.

We had higher priorities. We didn't want our kid to go into debt with student loans, so we paid her way through college. We paid for her music lessons. We saved for retirement and helped our relatives. We traveled. We paid off student loans. We had no debt; during two periods of extended unemployment, we lived simply but adequately because we had savings to tide us through.

The problem with the Bay Area was that it forced us to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. We could have more space but only if we spent a huge amount of income on housing. We could take care of responsibilities, with enough cash for emergencies and a luxury or two, but only if we compromised on housing. When we were younger we wondered how others could afford to buy. We wondered what we were doing wrong. We wanted to get out of our little apartment quite badly, but the numbers didn't add up. Later we learned the truth; out friends couldn't afford those houses. Many went bankrupt. Their kids were saddled with big college loans.

I don't regret not buying a house in the Bay Area; I feel fortunate that we resisted temptation. I do regret that I dragged my heels on relocating outside of CA. Living here, we live well AND we have a great house.

Paperback Writer, your story is such a load of BS. You spent 25 YEARS in the Bay Area and had an income up to 200k and could never afford a house and stayed in a 800sf apartment?

Just sounds like stupid planning to me. Albany/El Cerrito/Berkeley was totally affordable through the mid 1990s. You should be in the East Bay with a paid off house and a $1000 prop 13 yearly tax bill by now instead of living in WV.

Paperback Writer says

The problem with the Bay Area was that it forced us to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. We could have more space but only if we spent a huge amount of income on housing. We could take care of responsibilities, with enough cash for emergencies and a luxury or two, but only if we compromised on housing. When we were younger we wondered how others could afford to buy. We wondered what we were doing wrong. We wanted to get out of our little apartment quite badly, but the numbers didn't add up. Later we learned the truth; out friends couldn't afford those houses. Many went bankrupt. Their kids were saddled with big college loans.

Oh BS! 30 years ago my FIL bought a 2400sf house in Orinda on his single middle class salary and paid it off in 10 years. He has tons of money in savings, a paid off condo in Danville with a transferred tax bill of less than $1000 a YEAR. I don't know a single person that was an adult in the Bay Area 30 years ago that doesn't have a nearly paid off house (or paid off), low prop taxes, and that didn't benefit greatly from the bubble that happened.

Poor planning. Bummer. But don't blame it on living in the Bay Area!

Paperback Writer says

My fears about leaving California did not turn out to be true. Our quality of life is better. In California we coexisted with a random bunch of people on our street who spoke different languages and whom we never got to know no matter how many years went by. We live in a community now.

Congratulations! You found your home. Much of what you've written here, though, is generalization. In fact, I would argue that to truly have a "Mayberry" experience you'll need to live in Manhattan or San Francisco. The liquor store, the grocery store, and the convenience store one block from where I live are all family-owned. I know all the owners and they know me and my family. It was the same in my last place in San Francisco. When I visit my parents in rural Colorado, people there mostly shop at Wal-Mart, or similar.

I would write much of what you've written, but about San Francisco.

Maybe Patrick likes earthquakes?

Paperback Writer says

For much of this time, my husband and I had a combined income of $200k. That should have been enough in CA, at least in theory.

Paperback Writer says

The problem with the Bay Area was that it forced us to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. We could have more space but only if we spent a huge amount of income on housing.

Yep. B*llsh*t.

There's been lotsa places that are affordable for a household income of 200K. Even for those can't stand to live around regular folks and insist on Enclaves for Hipsters and Fortress Enclaves for Tiger Parents that genuflect to API Diety.

Maybe SFAce, a numbers guy, can chime in here and "run the numbers" to prove it.

Tude says

I don't know a single person that was an adult in the Bay Area 30 years ago that doesn't have a nearly paid off house (or paid off), low prop taxes, and that didn't benefit greatly from the bubble that happened.

Tude, I know folks around here like that.

I also know folks around here in that demographic who did not do so well "cashing in on the equity" for all sorts of reasons running the gamut of medical bills and tuition to conspicuous consumption.

Also, I really don't like the fact that bankers and government (both Dem and Rep) are in a giant conspiracy against the public to get them into as much mortgage debt as possible.

Thats such Bullshit... for gods sake, did you ever try telling people .. buyers who were overbidding, overpaying they were nuts ! High home prices were not sustainable in the long run. Even when you try to explain that CA prices fell from 1989 to mid 90s, the same buyers were in denial.

No! many had crazy ideas that it was the norm home prices never fall and appreciate double digit indefinitly.

We have a society which doesnt take responsibility for their own actions... how pathetic.

See video below... Shiller states 'one third believed homes would appreciate 50% due to new reality'

http://www.youtube.com/embed/d__GPqOVNbE&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLE56D69691F1F2C13

Bay Area simply too special to leave. I myself have landed here and not planning to move out after living in different parts of the world. Great weather, lots of high paying jobs, diverse population. While I am renting, I could possibly buy comfortably, I am still sitting on the fence. All thanks to Patrick.net.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Paperback Writer says

The problem with the Bay Area was that it forced us to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. We could have more space but only if we spent a huge amount of income on housing.
Yep. B*llsh*t.
There's been lotsa places that are affordable for a household income of 200K. Even for those can't stand to live around regular folks and insist on Enclaves for Hipsters and Fortress Enclaves for Tiger Parents that genuflect to API Diety.
Maybe SFAce, a numbers guy, can chime in here and "run the numbers" to prove it.

How would I know. Paperback already said their priority is to pay:

1) College 100%
2) Lessons
3) Retirement
4) Travel
5) Savings/Rainy Day fund
6) Relatives first

200K is about 130K after tax. That is still limited resouce. If those are the priorties, it doesn't leave much for housing. 2/1 700K in albany in 2006 would not make sense, but anything prior to (2002) was probably affordable.

My mom afforded her home on near minimum wage raising three kids (20-40K income between 1992-current), Now it is worth 700K with no mortgage. Home was her #1 priority. As far as I'm concerned 200K income in 1990 could have easily bought in prime Palo Alto worth 1.7M today.

SFace says

Now it is worth 700K with no mortgage.

like hell. you are still living the california bubble dream. nice credit card logo. as if.

Opamp says

Bay Area simply too special to leave. I myself have landed here and not planning to move out after living in different parts of the world. Great weather, lots of high paying jobs, diverse population. While I am renting, I could possibly buy comfortably, I am still sitting on the fence. All thanks to Patrick.net.

do not worry. you will get your tit in the wringer soon enough. all thanks to tru believers!!!

Paperback Writer says

My husband and I are able to telecommute, and this is what made everything possible. I'm not saying it's for everyone, but if your work is portable like ours, quality of life issues are something to consider.

Paperback Writer says

Then we'd look at the Bay Area prices and reflect on what we would have to give up. We valued our free time so we lived close to work where housing prices were especially high, higher than we could afford.

Hmm....

My fears about leaving California did not turn out to be true. Our quality of life is better. In California we coexisted with a random bunch of people on our street who spoke different languages and whom we never got to know no matter how many years went by. We live in a community now. We see the kids in our new neighborhood trick-or-treating and riding bikes; they wave and say hello. People visit, share produce from their gardens, take turns mowing lawns. The librarian knows my name and goes the extra mile to help me get books; the postman knows my name and is similarly helpful. I have made more friends here in a month than in years in the Bay Area.

There are plenty of places in bay area where all of the above is true and more, except maybe the languages part.

I left Marin after struggling for 5 years. Like many, I thought that Norcal was the greatest place in the U.S. Three years later, I am happy to say that leaving the Bay Area was the best decision I've ever made. Housing here in Hawaii is cheaper...yes cheaper. Sure, gas and food are about 20% more expensive, but rent is about a third of what I paid in Marin. I once paid $1650 to rent a 650 square foot apartment in the most dank, fog-ridden block in Mill Valley. Today, I drop $1000/mo for a beautiful 3 bedroom house on acreage with ocean and country views. Good riddance to the 415...alohas.

Personally I like living on a street with people from different areas around the world. They have some very interesting stories. I came from a Midwestern town where almost all families had lived there for a few generations, so it's quite different. Both have their own appeal, but I prefer the mix here.

And yet my own rent is less than $3K/month and the asking price for similar places is about $2M in my neighborhood. Seriously.

I'd move just to get away from the speed bumps. Don't know how you can stand them.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Paperback Writer says

For much of this time, my husband and I had a combined income of $200k. That should have been enough in CA, at least in theory.

Paperback Writer says

The problem with the Bay Area was that it forced us to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. We could have more space but only if we spent a huge amount of income on housing.

Yep. B*llsh*t.

There's been lotsa places that are affordable for a household income of 200K. Even for those can't stand to live around regular folks and insist on Enclaves for Hipsters and Fortress Enclaves for Tiger Parents that genuflect to API Diety.

Maybe SFAce, a numbers guy, can chime in here and "run the numbers" to prove it.

Actually, it's probably true for Paperback Writer's situation. I don't know if after tax 200K is 130K, more like 110K-120K (assuming AMT etc) and wasn't tax higher during Clinton's period? And, 200K consistently for past 25 years?! In addition, ones' willingness to spend on vacation/food are not necessarily the same as others who are more readily to spend on house. Maybe, the satisfaction gained from having a house just doesn't measure up to the money spent for Paperback Writer.

I don't know what price range in terms of house Paperback Writer was considering buying and was in a location that would not compromise their life styles. But, I could comment on what we think since we haven't bought one yet ... everything we look, any that's decent and move-in ready is probably around 700K - 800K (half a century old house at San Carlos, I'm avoiding the prime areas but east bay is out of questions for us bcos of the commute (not so much on the length but BART is not as convenient as caltrain for me) ... and I work in SF while my husband works in Santa Clara). That will translate into a monthly payment of 4K+. We do not have kids, but if we plan to have two kids, that will be additional 3K daycare every month. To maintain reasonable life style, I think we need to have 5K (including saving, after all, one can't live paycheck by paycheck) every month after all those expense. In short, if we want to buy a house that we consider worthwhile, i.e. 700-800K, we need to make $15K after tax every month (not counting bonus as there are always unexpected spending). That will be at very least a base salary of $150K each. So, for us, an annual income of 350K would indicate 700K house as the affordability line. So, index the current 200K to earlier times against inflation, I don't know what would be the alternatives for her after all her priorities.

SparrowBell says

any that's decent and move-in ready is probably around 700K - 800K

It depends on what you consider "decent".

We live in a neighborhood that Hipsters and techie immigrants would probably sneer at, but where a couple of years my oldest kid got accept to all the UC's she applied to except UCB and UCLA, even though she went to K-12 that did not have the "elite" API's that so many yuppies/techies worship. Several classmates of hers did go to Berkely/UCLA though, and a handful to Ivies/Stanford/Cal Tech; so I cannot blame the K-12 for holding back my kid.

It's OK to live around Hispanics and it's OK if your kids don't go to the most elite API score K-12. Just need to be open minded about the ethnicity of your neighbors, and pay very close attention to the opportunities offered by the K-12's. Just looking at the API is a cop-out.

PockyClipsNow says

I didnt see sunlight for 6 weeks in Austin in winter - mind cannot comprehend how that is possible but crappy weather is the norm in the world.

Try living downwind (southeast) of the Great Lakes in the winter. You won't see sunlight for 6 MONTHS ;-)

But hey, at least I'm not a debt serf like I would be in CA.

I moved out from the Bay Area in late 09 and bought my home in Sacramento in 2010. I don't miss the bay at all except on those super hot summer days, but I'm close enough to the Sierra that we can escape just as easy. My mortgage is almost under 200k and I just refinanced to 3.875, so I now pay less for it than I paid for my last apartment in Santa Clara. Anything decent down there would be double the price easily

PockyClipsNow says

Also the mexican food in TX is crap by CA standards. How in the hell that can that happen with a high hispanic population? Tex-Mex. its crap. They replace the good parts with chili and corn, blah. just a rant. BBQ there is top notch though so it evens out.

I have lived in Austin, ABQ and SF Bay Area. I have to say that you just weren't eating in the right places if you didn't like the Tex-Mex or Mexican. So many choices. Authentic, trendy, open all hours. Did you ever eat at Chuy's? More on the trendy side, but awesome food.

toothfairy says

Renting

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/pen/apa/2815195851.html

Here is another. That makes 2. I can find at least 1 a day on craigslist with a simple search. When I was looking to rent about 2 years ago there were many that I checked out, not just one.

The problem in your thinking is that people should put in great effort when renting money, but should not shop around when renting a house. To me they should be the same effort.

And another 1m+ home for rent at half. Just saying...

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/apa/2811580914.html