You can have good mass transit or affordable housing, but not both. This sucks.
>> "...but not both." What about Chicago. Way cheaper than New York, and has the second best train system in the country.
It is worth noting that Chicago Public Schools is functionally insolvent and the City of Chicago has a $20B pension liability (relative to a $7.8B annual budget). Pension payments have been routinely deferred ("pension holidays") to balance the budget. Bankruptcy is inevitable at this point.
Denver has so many wonderful things, but this undercurrent of "I hate all the new people" is so gross. I've encountered it in situations where I'm literally handing money over to someone who is bitching about people moving here.
Let me guess; you are one of those new people and are resentful that people you are freeloading and mooching off of are resentful that you are destroying the community and society they built over time. Its the same thing in Austin, even though Austin has really be fully deconstructed at this point and it is nothing like the nice place it once was. It's become ever more exclusive, ever more restricted, ever more douch…
I'm one of those in the 1/3rd, currently in the process of moving to the Denver/Boulder area. I knew on paper the housing would be cheaper, but what's stood out to me is how much less crowded it is: You can go to stores and find parking, and not wait 15 minutes at the cashier. You can go to restaurants and actually get a table. You can make unprotected left turns. Things are busy during rush hour, but outside of that…
What does "you can make unprotected left turns" mean? I'm from the UK so I guess this is the US equivalent of turning right at a set of traffic lights... but what significance does "unprotected" have?
I think it means without the green turn arrow that indicates oncoming traffic has a red light. I've never heard this term before, though.
Thanks to technology, the supply of land is not really the constraint on housing supply in most of San Francisco, and especially not in most of the Bay Area.
What technology are you referring to?
At the extreme, these things can hold a lot of people without too much land:
Thanks to technology, the supply of land is not really the constraint on housing supply in most of San Francisco, and especially not in most of the Bay Area.
I'm sure the fact that there's an increasing trend of empty Chinese investment properties isn't helping. I grew up in Cupertino, and when I visit my parents there, I'm rather shocked at how downhill the neighborhood has gone in parts. It's crazy that these old 70's tract homes go for 1.5 million. Even more insane is that they're bought and then left empty to go downhill. Literally broken windows and paint falling off…
I live in Cupertino, near DeAnza college and the Garden Gate elementary school, and I see no sign of broken windows or peeling paint. The prices are crazy.
I'm not sure what developments you are referring to, but the Main Street and Hills developments are running shuttle buses to caltrain. The one by the Oaks shopping center certainly seemed ill-advised, but it got shut down by the city council.
We made a pact with the devil when as a society we decided to believe that our primary homes would also double as investment vehicles that will appreciate in value and help us fund our retirement.
Except no one decided that - it falls naturally out of the facts that homes are expensive (and therefore represent a large chunk of the wealth of most people) and that homes do not depreciate very much as a result of people living in them.
Except that voters in California effectively did decide that, with Prop 13. In other states, property tax is effectively a liability for the owner. Texans pay roughly 3% of the current value. That is a lot-- keep in mind that mortgage interest is only slightly higher than 3% (and loan is based on the initial purchase price, ie it doesn't go up like property tax). In California, Prop 13 is essentially an entitlement for the owner, who only pays roughly 1% of the value, and that value is not increased along with the market (only tiny increases are allowed).
I'm one of those in the 1/3rd, currently in the process of moving to the Denver/Boulder area. I knew on paper the housing would be cheaper, but what's stood out to me is how much less crowded it is: You can go to stores and find parking, and not wait 15 minutes at the cashier. You can go to restaurants and actually get a table. You can make unprotected left turns. Things are busy during rush hour, but outside of that…
What does "you can make unprotected left turns" mean? I'm from the UK so I guess this is the US equivalent of turning right at a set of traffic lights... but what significance does "unprotected" have?
Denver has so many wonderful things, but this undercurrent of "I hate all the new people" is so gross. I've encountered it in situations where I'm literally handing money over to someone who is bitching about people moving here.
Let me guess; you are one of those new people and are resentful that people you are freeloading and mooching off of are resentful that you are destroying the community and society they built over time. Its the same thing in Austin, even though Austin has really be fully deconstructed at this point and it is nothing like the nice place it once was. It's become ever more exclusive, ever more restricted, ever more douch…
I can't follow any of this. I'm not sure how moving some place, getting an apartment, getting a job, paying taxes, etc. (aka "living") constitutes "mooching and freeloading". I think you need to take Rhetoric 101 again.