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

311–320 of 362 posts

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

#311

Post by travisjungroth »

senormenor wrote: post #301
xyzzyz wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is in fact weird. The entire question is, why don’t these immigrants stay in California? What do the find so repellent, or what do they find so attractive elsewhere that is not available in California?

If you believe conservative media and "anti-woke" Twitter, California is an unliveable wasteland where you can't walk two paces without stepping over homeless people, discarded needles and human feces, where crime (violent and non-violent) is skyrocketing, where people don't feel safe in their own homes, and where the only response by "progressive" politicians is to double down on their same bad policies that created…

There are small parts of California where that is absolutely true. A block of the Tenderloin is more likely to have shit and needles than not. Crime in SF is out of control. There’s also about 160 million other square miles where things aren’t so bad.

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

#312

Post by someonehere »

eplanit wrote: post #162

University of California doing "studies" to defend the state of California...right before a recall election of the Governor -- color me skeptical. I personally know > 10 people who have left (in disgust) in the past 2 years. I have a sister in Texas who is getting personally wealthy selling houses to Californians moving there. She's been selling for > 30 years and has never seen an influx like this from a single stat…

There was a point before the pandemic that here in SF the U-Haul off of Paul St was out of trucks and trailers. For weeks if not months at a time.

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

#314

Post by rayiner »

random314 wrote: post #266
rayiner wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Immigrants face unique constraints in their choice of where to live. Places that have lots of immigrants will attract more because of family-based migration and people’s desire to be closer to support networks. But that still indirectly comes down to the availability of jobs that will sponsor immigrants. My dad sponsored other members of our family to immigrate. They settled in New York City, because it’s a great pla…

> Immigrants face unique constraints in their choice of where to live. What you are saying is that California and New York are where the jobs are - hence the immigration. An H1B is equally valid in California and Tennessee. You can flip this argument for those leaving California as well. Out migration out of California should be discounted because the folks moving out are the ones who are no longer productive or comp…

> You can flip this argument for those leaving California as well. Out migration out of California should be discounted because the folks moving out are the ones who are no longer productive or competitive in states with higher productivity.

That formulation still makes California sound shitty!

> This comment also privileges the choices and constraints faced by 2nd generation immigrants over the choices and constraints of 1st generation immigrants, which is unnecessary

No, it avoids distorting the picture. Second generation immigrants and other native born Americans have much more freedom to go where they want, so their choices are more probative. First generation immigrants by contrast face a very restricted set of choices driven by immigration considerations.

> Most folks moving to Texas are moving to find a cheaper home

That’s exactly the conservative critique of California. It’s laws make housing expensive. Add to that crime and school boards more focused on taking Lincoln’s name off buildings than opening up and teaching kids in person. All that sucks for middle class people. And that critique isn’t rebutted by pointing out California has industries that suck in massive numbers of immigrants. In fact it’s the exact opposite. For a middle class person, it’s better not to have a small segment of the population making $750,000/year.

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

#315

Post by rayiner »

thetrb wrote: post #138
rayiner wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Moving from NYC to Long Island is slightly different than moving from California to Tennessee, so I don't really understand your point.

The point is that they didn’t move to NYC because they love NYC as a place. They moved there because a Bangladeshi network can help you get a job at Dunkin Donuts and sign up for various social services. Once they had their legs under them they left the city.

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

#316

Post by rayiner »

random314 wrote: post #158
rayiner wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This unfairly discounts the immigrants that California attracts , while counting folks who leave. To be consistent we must look at population growth as a whole, possibly split by age group. California will typically attract younger folks looking for work.

It discounts international immigration in from every state, so California isn’t especially penalized in that regard. It’s not unfair—all it does is separate the question of what makes a state a good destination for international immigrants (which involves very specific factors) and the question of what makes a state a desirable place to live for Americans who have unrestricted choices about where to live.

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

#317

Post by malshe »

rpearl wrote: post #226
malshe wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Texas and I whenever I go to California, I find it super expensive too! I am a unifier site professor and my salary is not very different from the professors in CA (State university salaries are public). I don’t know what is keeping those professors there.

This very much disagrees with you: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/AAUP-2021-SurveyApp... A sampling of average overall salaries for professors: - UC Berkeley (ie bay area): $214,300 - UCLA: $234,200 - UT San Antonio: $130,900 - UT Dallas: $169,500 So an average Berkeley professor makes more than half again as much as an average UT San Antonio professor. And 25% more than UT Dallas.

Others have pointed out critical problems in your comparison. Clearly, you can't cherrypick the best universities in CA and compare them to second-best in TX. UTSA is not even an R1 university. Generally when people talk about top universities in TX, they refer to UT Austin and Texas A&M. In any case, neither UC Berkeley nor UCLA is a good representative of CA universities.

A major issue in looking at the averages at the entire university level like this is that you might be comparing apples to oranges. There are typically three ranks among research professors: assistant, association, and full. These positions can additionally have chairs. The salaries differ considerably across these ranks. Then there are teaching positions which are usually non tenure track. They may also have the same assistant, associate, and full professor positions but their salaries are much lower than the research professors. AAUP appendix has combined all of them into one single category.

Finally, this survey masks the salary differences among different disciplines. In American universities, B-school professors typically earn way more than other disciplines such as pure sciences, psychology, and engineering.

When we do salary comparisons (we have to do it while negotiating a raise), we pick out colleges/schools that are similarly ranked as ours and then we take average salaries of professors at the same position. As I mentioned, the salaries are public so this is possible although quite tedious.

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

#318

Post by malshe »

unishark wrote: post #237
rpearl wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This very much disagrees with you: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/AAUP-2021-SurveyApp... A sampling of average overall salaries for professors: - UC Berkeley (ie bay area): $214,300 - UCLA: $234,200 - UT San Antonio: $130,900 - UT Dallas: $169,500 So an average Berkeley professor makes more than half again as much as an average UT San Antonio professor. And 25% more than UT Dallas.

I'd suspect CA pays somewhat better, though it'd be countered to a degree by the high number of academics preferring to live in CA. But either way, Berkeley and UCLA versus UTSA and UTD? Are the latter two even ranked in the top 100? Berkeley has the 2nd most nobel prize winners in the US behind Harvard. UCLA has a solid number too.

I agree, it is a non starter. In any case I was not comparing average TX university salaries to just two universities in CA

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

#319

Post by malshe »

vel0city wrote: post #246
rpearl wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This very much disagrees with you: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/AAUP-2021-SurveyApp... A sampling of average overall salaries for professors: - UC Berkeley (ie bay area): $214,300 - UCLA: $234,200 - UT San Antonio: $130,900 - UT Dallas: $169,500 So an average Berkeley professor makes more than half again as much as an average UT San Antonio professor. And 25% more than UT Dallas.

You're forgetting income taxes and then add CoL on top of that. Sure you're making gross more but that $214k turns to ~$140k after taxes while that Texas $169k turns into ~$126k. So closer to a difference of about $14k. Then think that housing is way cheaper, gas is almost half the price, electricity can easily be had for 7c/kWh in DFW, etc. I just filled up this afternoon for $2.49/gal, what does gas cost out there…

Texas A&M professors might be keeping more than even a UCLA prof! College Station is a tiny town.

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

#320

Post by sbuttgereit »

travisjungroth wrote: post #311
senormenor wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you believe conservative media and "anti-woke" Twitter, California is an unliveable wasteland where you can't walk two paces without stepping over homeless people, discarded needles and human feces, where crime (violent and non-violent) is skyrocketing, where people don't feel safe in their own homes, and where the only response by "progressive" politicians is to double down on their same bad policies that created…

There are small parts of California where that is absolutely true. A block of the Tenderloin is more likely to have shit and needles than not. Crime in SF is out of control. There’s also about 160 million other square miles where things aren’t so bad.

This is true, but the bad places tend to also be the big population centers. This naturally means the same people that are content to allow these problems to fester are also politically dominant at the state level.
Post reply on HN