Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to expand?
The rampant homelessness and drug use for one, the putrid mess that is downtown SF for another.
[deleted]
California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
21–30 of 118 posts
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#22If you are a tech person, I'd say you should seriously consider the Silicon Prairie.
For example, it doesn't surprise me this article emphasizes Nebraska. Whereas this article mentions not owning a home in California, you can readily afford a home out in the Midwest. If you don't want that, grab a two-bedroom apartment that costs you less than a $9,00 per month. Insane commutes don't exist.
Places like Kansas City have Google Fiber and other places like Lincoln and Omaha don't have Google Fiber, but still gigabit Internet or even 300Mbps Internet plans (for $60/month)
For a while, the fastest growing company in Nebraska was a tech startup called Hudl (https://www.hudl.com/)--which you really can't even call a startup anymore since they're big enough to be building their own buildings now.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#23Don’t worry, the #1 quality-of-life state is North Dakota so clearly the methodology is wack. Have you ever heard someone say: “man, when I finish my internship, I hope I can go to North Dakota where there is lots of happiness?” No. Because it’s -40° there half the year.
As much as I'd like to buy a house outside of California, I can't imagine living in cold weather constantly. I really need sunlight/warmth, and I can't help but feel like I would miss California's weather.
Luckily, there are plenty of other states with similarly nice weather.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to expand?
The rampant homelessness and drug use for one, the putrid mess that is downtown SF for another.
I believe other states send us their homeless cause here you can find places you wont actually freeze to death in winter. It may skew things a bit. Not sure.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#25Here are the criteria: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/quality-of-...
Among the measures used to evaluate states' natural environments are drinking water quality, air quality and total toxic chemical pollution per square. The ranking also considers how much each state puts its citizens at risk for long-term, chronic health effects from pollution. Social environment, on the other hand, investigates how involved people are in their communities. Two of the measures, community engagement and social support, are based on surveys where people shared how often they participate in community events and how often they spend time with family members, friends and work colleagues. Political involvement was also determined by evaluating average voter turnout at the 2016 presidential and congressional elections.
North Dakota -- a desolate wind-swept plain littered with fracking wells -- is #1 for Quality of Life, which makes me seriously question the metrics used here.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#26Don’t worry, the #1 quality-of-life state is North Dakota so clearly the methodology is wack. Have you ever heard someone say: “man, when I finish my internship, I hope I can go to North Dakota where there is lots of happiness?” No. Because it’s -40° there half the year.
Here are the metrics they used for quality of life: Community Engagement Social Support Voter Participation Drinking Water Quality Low Industrial Toxins Low Pollution Health Risk Urban Air Quality
Was like...a survey of the happiness of the population not at least one of the metrics they used?
It seems...like a really silly metric not to include in a quality of life ranking.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to expand?
The rampant homelessness and drug use for one, the putrid mess that is downtown SF for another.
Also California is a huge place, not just SF and LA. We have as many national parks as Alaska, 100's of some of the most beautiful state parks and 100's of county parks. Many states have much worse drug problems per capita. Any country of 39M people and the economy we have is going to have upsides and downsides.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#28Does this apply to tech workers in the Bay Area? Because it seems like the quality of life should be very high with what they're getting paid.
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#29Came back from walking along the beautiful Santa Cruz coast this afternoon and read this. All I can think is this is a genius way to slow down the immigration rate until legislation and housing developments can catch up :)
Have you ever been to Angel Falls? Or Parque Nacional Henri Pittier? Or Bahía de Cata beach?
Well, all those places are stunningly gorgeous! And in Venezuela.
So what's your point?
Re: California’s quality of life is the worst in the country?
#30I've mentioned this a few times here on HN, but I fled California (San Francisco) in January for Nashville, TN and couldn't be happier. I moved over my California LLC and businesses to a Tennessee LLC (no state income tax). People for the most part are super friendly (almost awkward friendly), and that southern hospitality is really a thing. Costs are out of control, lawmakers and California state laws are backwards…
Counterpoint: Tennessee is very religious and also backwards as hell[1], and if you aren’t white you will have a difficult time fitting in.
[1]Just one recent example: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tennessee-lawmakers-pass-...