Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 362 posts

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#211

Post by seanmcdirmid »

handmodel wrote: post #209
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only exceptions are if you grew up in NYC, Boston, DC or a few other cities. And pretty much all Hawaiian transplants.

Sure. But Hawaii is very small. Less than 0.4% of the US population. People have brought it up many times on this discussion thread.

If you live on the west coast, people fleeing the high COL of Hawaii is pretty common. Also Alaska. The west isn’t cheap, I think a lot of people would be surprised by prices in Montana (and not just because Californians are bidding up housing prices).

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#212

Post by handmodel »

strikhedonia wrote: post #188
handmodel wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is the third highest cost of living state: https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/most-expens... Everyone knows that California is not just LA and SF. But also Florida isn't just Tampa/Miami and Arizona isn't just Phoenix. The big cities in CA are more expensive than the big cities in other states. The rural areas in CA are more expensive than the rural areas in other states. Pointing out that th…

Your link doesn’t support your argument. California’s COL index will be dominated by the fact that it’s one of the nations most urban states, with two of the largest and wealthiest metro areas. Indeed, my experience is that there are parts of CA that aren’t significantly more expensive than my Midwestern home state.

I'm not trying to be that annoying - but are you sure the cheap parts of CA are comparable to the cheap parts of your state?

The cheapest parts of CA are probably going to be as expensive as right outside a Cleveland or Pittsburgh.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#213

Post by kelnos »

snek_case wrote: post #147
rayiner wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The version of that argument I tend to see is more refined than that: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2021/04/19/ . National Review just had an entire issue on the subject. The thrust of the argument is that what made California great was that it was a great place to move and raise kids in the suburbs with lots of opportunities. The changes in California are hitting those people the hardest. And those people…

I worked at big tech in California for a bit, and, anecdotally, all of my coworkers stated that they didn't plan to retire in California, because it's just so expensive it makes no economic sense. It seems the plan for many people who come in California to work at big tech is to make big money for some number of years and then move out. I ended up leaving, in part because I didn't love the culture there, and some of…

I agree with you that a lot of people here consider themselves transient and don't work to put down roots, but I've personally found enough people who actually want to stay here to make it worthwhile to me (but I've certainly experienced some sadness when good friends move away). Everyone's mileage will vary in that regard, of course.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#214

Post by throwawayboise »

deep-root wrote: post #44

A "back of the napkin" calculation seems to indicate there is no mass exodus. On mobile, but here is the typical annual CA pop change stats for the past decade, give or take: --Incoming-- - 400K domestic immigrants[1] - 180-200K international immigrants[2] - 450K births[4] Subtotal: ~1.1M --Outgoing-- - 600K domestic emigrants[1] - 250K deaths[4] - ?? intl emigrants (anyone know?) Subtotal: ~850K Typical annual net c…

> 50-80K excess deaths

COVID was part of this, but Boomers are also reaching dying age.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#215

Post by dragonwriter »

rayiner wrote: post #126
deep-root wrote: post #44

A "back of the napkin" calculation seems to indicate there is no mass exodus. On mobile, but here is the typical annual CA pop change stats for the past decade, give or take: --Incoming-- - 400K domestic immigrants[1] - 180-200K international immigrants[2] - 450K births[4] Subtotal: ~1.1M --Outgoing-- - 600K domestic emigrants[1] - 250K deaths[4] - ?? intl emigrants (anyone know?) Subtotal: ~850K Typical annual net c…

I’m skeptical about counting international immigrants here. International immigration is a function of a very specific thing, in California’s case a measure of H1-B sponsor companies. If Indians come to California so they can get an H-1B from Facebook, but their kids them move to Tennessee because of poor quality of life in California, then that’s consistent with the “exodus” theory in my opinion. I’m an immigrant fr…

> I’m skeptical about counting international immigrants here. International immigration is a function of a very specific thing, in California’s case a measure of H1-B sponsor companies.

Most years, California has had more net inbound (not gross) international migration than the national H-1B cap. You are greatly exaggerating the role of the H-1B in California stats.

> If Indians come to California so they can get an H-1B from Facebook, but their kids them move to Tennessee because of poor quality of life in California, then that’s consistent with the “exodus” theory in my opinion.

Lots of California international immigration is family-based, often with sponsors who themselves immigrated and went through the whole process in CA.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#216

Post by Spooky23 »

maxk42 wrote: post #78
deep-root wrote: post #44

A "back of the napkin" calculation seems to indicate there is no mass exodus. On mobile, but here is the typical annual CA pop change stats for the past decade, give or take: --Incoming-- - 400K domestic immigrants[1] - 180-200K international immigrants[2] - 450K births[4] Subtotal: ~1.1M --Outgoing-- - 600K domestic emigrants[1] - 250K deaths[4] - ?? intl emigrants (anyone know?) Subtotal: ~850K Typical annual net c…

Excellent information! So what this tells me is based on migration alone, (since births / deaths are not indicative of intent to migrate) California has been flat at best, not counting an unknown number of international emigrants - so that number is likely lower. Given that those net immigration numbers have been dropping faster in the past couple years, we may indeed be seeing the tide turning on California immigrat…

If you’re not growing you’re dying.

The thing about states like New York and California is the the fringes rot while everything is great in the core. The areas that are doing gangbuster business may be healthy at the moment, but other areas are dying.

I don’t know California well, but I know New York, and that upstate and western NY have been in free fall for years with some exceptions. Industry left in the 80s… cities like Syracuse are husks. Agriculture has been in decline for a long time and dairy, once the strongest ag industry, is in a death spiral as industry consolidation and subsidized fake products take over. Even NYC is not as resilient as it was… financial services pay the bills much more so than in the past.

California is obviously different, but I can’t imagine there aren’t parallels. Once the bell-weather tech giants start diversifying their physical locations that’s going to have a real impact.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#217

Post by Trias11 »

kelnos wrote: post #208
Trias11 wrote: post #205

"Similarly, the research found no evidence of millionaire flight from California...". This nonsense is clearly peddled by local politicians trying to save their faces. I moved from CA to Vegas which automatically boosted my income by +10%. With covid times where major employers allowing people work from home - this is logical move for tens of thousands of people. No houses for sale in decent Vegas neighborhoods here,…

Your anecdotes are not data. This research paper is, and I expect it's a lot more representative than your anecdotes are.

These are my real life experiences and real life observations.

You can swallow whatever illusion you being fed by your local politician, close your eyes and assume it's a reality. You're intended audience.

Tens of thousands of former californians ain't buying more of their taxes and neither more of their BS any more.

Where voting with hands doesn't help - people are voting with their feet.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#218

Post by kelnos »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #203
astrange wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're wrong about that. The reason California is expensive for them is because the state is set up to be easy to retire in - they're just paying for all the retired boomers. If they stay long enough, they'll get to exploit the next generation too.

Gonna be the [citation needed] guy here again. I've lived in the SF Bay Area for nearly 20 years, know other people who moved here around the time of the first dotcom boom and a few more who actually grew up here (they exist), and of that group of a couple dozen friends and acquaintances ranging in age from around 30 to over 60, the number of people who believe California will be "easy to retire in" is precisely zero…

And on top of that, the property tax system makes it really hard to move into a different (even much smaller) place when you're in your retirement years. Rhat has changed recently to be a bit better (people over 65 now have a lot more flexibility in transferring their existing property tax assessment to a different property), but I think that only serves to drive your point home that things can and do change over time, policy-wise.

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#219

Post by dragonwriter »

fridif wrote: post #182
deep-root wrote: post #44

A "back of the napkin" calculation seems to indicate there is no mass exodus. On mobile, but here is the typical annual CA pop change stats for the past decade, give or take: --Incoming-- - 400K domestic immigrants[1] - 180-200K international immigrants[2] - 450K births[4] Subtotal: ~1.1M --Outgoing-- - 600K domestic emigrants[1] - 250K deaths[4] - ?? intl emigrants (anyone know?) Subtotal: ~850K Typical annual net c…

The influx of 100k people working warehouse jobs does not outweigh the 1,000 software engineers who left and will never return

California's larger number of domestic outmigrants tend to be lower income than the smaller number of domestic inmigrants. The people coming in are more likely to be software engineers, the people going out more likely to be the warehouse workers (or, even more likely, retirees.)

Re: California exodus is a myth, UC research project finds

#220

Post by kelnos »

wolverine876 wrote: post #66

From another source, about people leaving San Francisco: * "Among the 50 most populous U.S. cities, 15 shrunk during the pandemic" Top three: 1) Baltimore (-1.42%), 2) San Francisco (-1.39%), 3) San Jose (-1.3%) * Of people leaving SF: 72% moved elsewhere in the Bay area, ~20% moved elsewhere in California. The next most popular destination was Washington state, the majority going to Seattle. Source: https://www.sfch…

That's actually much smaller than I expected for SF. 1.39% isn't really a lot at all; even in absolute number terms it's something on the order of 10,000 people.
Post reply on HN