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

California’s population shrinks for third straight year

sacbee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 413 posts

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#231

Post by kube-system »

klardotsh wrote: post #131
xnx wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. I haven't researched moving costs at all, but I'd probably buy all new stuff and still save money at those prices.

These numbers are from /dev/urandom or perhaps /dev/null, or maybe they hired white-glove movers and car transporters and flew first class to their destination or something. I moved Chicago to Seattle for like $2-3k all-in (counting plane tickets) in 2017, leaving only couches and beds behind (just wasn't worth bothering to move the cheap Ikea-grade stuff I had). Seattle-Vancouver in 2018 and, a year later, back, wer…

If you’re in the position to do the work yourself, then yeah, it can be done cheaper. Just like anything is cheap if you do it yourself.

But it’s easier said than done for those with a sizable family, more possessions than fits in 26’ truck, a lack of time, or lack physical strength.

If you hire someone to do it, it’s expensive.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#232

Post by TulliusCicero »

dragonwriter wrote: post #116
TulliusCicero wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I take a dim view of "approve more density or we'll sue you". That's more than nothing, sure, but it'll inevitably lead to less housing than just outright requiring various upzoning rules, as various cities do the minimum or even less and fight things in court. Like, the state already had targets set for cities for a long time, and most cities just kinda ignored them. I know the newer regulations have more teeth, but…

> I take a dim view of "approve more density or we'll sue you". That's not the rule. The rule is “approve developments such that you meet state housing requirements or lose your ability to deny planning approval to otherwise legally-compliant developments”. There is no suing involved: the requirements are known up front, and the consequence of not meeting them is automatic . > Like, the state already had targets set…

These are fair points, thank you for bringing them up.

I admit I'm still skeptical that the cities won't find a way to tie this shit up in courts, but it's be great to be proven wrong.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#233

Post by inferiorhuman »

trzy wrote: post #189
inferiorhuman wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$150/night is about as cheap as you'll find in the Bay Area. It'll be too small for a family, probably in a shitty area. A few years ago you might've been able to swing that, but now? No.

I routinely travel to South Bay and 150/night is absolutely a reasonable estimate for a hotel.

Sure you can find hotel rooms for $150/night, but for moving a family? As I said they're going to be too small or in too rough of a neighborhood. For instance the Extended Stay in San Rafael starts around $120/night after all the taxes and fees. It's also downwind of a sewage treatment plant, right next to 580, and in a fairly industrial area.

At that price point in the city you've got options with, e.g. Travelodge, and you can choose between being right next to the freeway or in the middle of the meth epidemic. For a single occupancy room $150 would potentially get you something comfortable, but for moving a family? Not so much.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#234

Post by Supermancho »

RC_ITR wrote: post #165
renlo wrote: post #157

How smug are Californians that those who always disagree with them always “must be Republicans”? They really said people are leaving the state because of “political reasons” (ie, “they’re Republicans, aka, ‘non-regrettable attrition’”)? Couldn’t be all of the other reasons could it. I say this as a California native who left for a litany of reasons, last of them being the politics.

What are you on about? What is this in response to? Please comment on the article, not your personal biases.

The quotation marks are misleading, as they do not appear in the story or comments.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#235

Post by usednet »

foreverCarlos wrote: post #172
renlo wrote: post #157

How smug are Californians that those who always disagree with them always “must be Republicans”? They really said people are leaving the state because of “political reasons” (ie, “they’re Republicans, aka, ‘non-regrettable attrition’”)? Couldn’t be all of the other reasons could it. I say this as a California native who left for a litany of reasons, last of them being the politics.

The only people I know personally who left California in the last 2-3 years were pretty apolitical but definitely left-leaning socially. Around a dozen of them. All left due to the cost of living, none were ever "accused" of being republican. To me it sounds like you are mostly regurgitating some toxic Twitter-talk.

I've lived in the Bay Area for my entire life and am considering leaving only because it's not progressive enough. The Bay and most of California is only progressive on inconsequential social issues. Housing? Homelessness? Fucking Houston Texas is more progressive than us.

Frankly, I blame the venture capitalists. They have turned what was once a vibrant region I loved into a soulless husk of itself though money. Our local politics have become unbearaable. Anything that would slightly impact a VC donor is immediately shot down.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#236

Post by gedy »

nocoiner wrote: post #219
Aloha wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in Los Angeles, and moved to DFW from Seattle, I'm solar powered, while houston is a little too hot for me, DFW is quite pleasant. As it turns out I'm solar powered, I'd love to go back to Los Angeles, but I'll never be able to afford it again.

But DFW is hotter than Houston? Houston is more humid and can sometimes feel warmer, but DFW is typically 5-15 degrees hotter on the same day in Houston, and the heat there is comparatively bone dry.

The humid heat in Houston is a kick in the ass, Dallas is more bearable to me at least.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#237

Post by rmk »

Hardly surprising, considering that the state has failed massively to tackle homelessness and is perpetually on the edge of ecological ruin. Massive, long-lasting drought that may turn the most fertile soil in perhaps the entire world into a dustbowl, and failure to bury power lines + casual arson causing massive wildfires that regularly burn down lots of property. Of course, this doesn't even account for the major problem that will ruin the entire west, which is the rapidly shrinking Colorado river and its watersheds.

The law and order situation in the cities is also poor, and open drug use has turned LA, SF and Oakland into urban hellscapes that are an eyesore.

The entire country is in a phase of migration to the south. Westward migration continues but the main trend is migration to the South which is relatively unencumbered by wacko environmental regulation prone to abuse and a lower tolerance toward crime. Also has a better water situation I suppose and overall courteous and friendly people also.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#238

Post by AndrewKemendo »

I just had a massive realization and I want to start sharing it around. It's funny that this happened to be on the front page at the same time

I think we're at a major inflection point in society and need to make some MASSIVE intentional changes to how we live

https://kemendo.com/blog/TEOTWAWKI.html

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#239

Post by gedy »

throwntoday wrote: post #190
chrisdhoover wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I left because it was becoming intolerable. The politics were driving a lower quality of life for me. I’m not on the red or blue team. The problem is there is no longer political balance. Without a check on power, quality of life which includes costs but not limited to money were getting progressively worse.

> I'm not on the red or blue team. Careful, I have said the same and many assumed it meant I'm far right. The extent of my conservative beliefs are wanting very small government, being anti-war, and wanting a balanced budget. I'm pretty egalitarian otherwise but I don't think that's enough to appease those who invest their lives in identity politics.

> I don't think that's enough to appease those who invest their lives in identity politics.

This is the weird one for me - I'm not sure how it took over the left to where younger people are confused that my father was a serious leftist/communist before identity/racial politics took over, and since he totally rejected identity politics they assume he was some sort of right-winger, which is bonkers if you knew him.

Re: California’s population shrinks for third straight year

#240

Post by ggm »

At 300k to 400k, how many could be accounted for by lockdown/student effects? Australia where I live is 26m down by similar order of magnitude that many due to insufficient in migration, and drops on tertiary students from overseas. (Queensland, my home state which is very like California according to some, is a net inwards growing population. People like Sunshine and beaches)

How much is net decline by excess deaths? Probably a low 20k-30k figure (based on AU excess mortality. Web says 28k), but perhaps CA population had excess older demographic Sunbird type people and they relocated?

It would also cut across all classes. I wonder how much is work forced translocation, by the company more than the individual. If Boeing (bad example I know given its Seattle not Los Vegas, so ignore the out of state issue please) stopped an entire line but jobs open up on the east coast for other production lines then internal relocate is cheaper than hire local sometimes.

The Californian economy is huge. Is it maybe moving to fintech and IPR with labour cost out of state?

Post reply on HN