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

Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 718 posts

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#261

Post by GhettoChild »

newnewpdro wrote: post #254
GhettoChild wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people in California are this way though. All of my family who still lives out there pay a premium to watch the same TV shows I watch and to watch Netflix while sitting on their behinds indoors. Very few people are out hiking every possible minute or going out to the coast even when living nearby.

I'm inclined to agree with you, and would say that many folks living in the expensive parts of California aren't even leveraging the majority of what makes it so expensive to live where they do. I lived in the SF bay area for over a decade, and when employed by the tech industry and spending all my free time outdoors it was very worthwhile. But whenever I stopped working in the lucrative positions there, the math sto…

There is a lot of focus on the expensive parts of CA because thats where the jobs are. If you need to be employed you pretty much have to live in or around the expensive parts and thus it makes sense for people in that situation to relocate. If someone does not need to work or works remotely then one of the cheap parts of the state does make sense.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#262

Post by kaikai »

Proziam wrote: post #253
weiming wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tongue-in-cheek comment that I've read somewhere is that folks flee Democrat-run cities due to high taxes and mismanagement and move elsewhere, but then continue voting Democrat to bring back the same policies they wanted to escape from.

I live in Henderson, NV and can at least anecdotally confirm that what you're describing is true. People moving from California, many of whom cite 'safety' reasons, maintain pro-regulation and anti-gun stances, despite Henderson's murder rate being 1/5 that of Oakland, 1/2 of LA, and 1/2 of San Francisco.

Are you proposing that Henderson is safer than these large cities because there's less gun control, rather than other factors?

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#263

Post by mbesto »

throw51319 wrote: post #132
mbesto wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having lived in NYC, SV, London and Chicago, living in Austin has been dream. That being said, it's pretty clear it's heading towards Seattle levels, which is quickly headed towards SF levels of societal issues.

What about it has been a dream? Very curious as I live in nyc right now and want to make a change. How has NYC stacked against these other places?

I love NYC.

Here are the downsides of NYC that I don't miss (relative to Austin):

- High income tax

- Far from anything west coast (skiing, mountains, outdoors, SF/LA, etc)

- Cold winters. Much easier to get to the caribean in the winter.

- Hard to get "out" of the city during the summer that doesn't have stupid logistics (e.g. hamptons). You can get to one of the lakes 15~60 min depending on where you live in Austin.

- Everyone talks about work (austin, people don't care what you do for a living)

Downsides of Austin:

- It's a small town. If you're social, you'll know everyone in about a year.

- Opportunity is limited.

- Satellite airport (gotta connect via HOU and DFW)

- Summers get HOT.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#264

Post by mbesto »

rayiner wrote: post #126
mbesto wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI - Austin is as blue as they come (and way less of the neoliberalism you see in SV). Houston from what I can tell has become much more liberal too (partly because a large influx of Katrina refugees). Hot take - with all of the migration to Texas, this state will be blue in the next 10 years. The only "conservative" things you find in those areas is (1) big trucks (2) guns (3) tobacco (4) sports. Not much different…

> Hot take - with all of the migration to Texas, this state will be blue in the next 10 years. And will have all the problems of California, New York, etc. in another 10-20 years after that.

Exactly.

EDIT - To be fair. Many of the geographical issues with Chicago, LA, SF and NYC are about being land/water locked on an adjacent side(s). Less of an issue in TX.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#265

Post by m_ke »

tmh79 wrote: post #228
m_ke wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manhattan has a glut of luxury condos that are sitting vacant but Williamsburg, Bushwick, Greenpoint and LIC have seen a boom ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-building-boom-pushes-new-york... ) over the past few years. Commercial real estate has gone up a lot as well and has led to a ton of vacant retail space. My father had a carpentry shop in bushwick and just had his land lord triple their rent.

They have seen a "boom" relative to 2009-2012 when literally zero new housing was built, they have not seen a boom relative to 1900 - 2009, especially when accounting for business cycle. I understand that you are seeing what you perceive to be a lot of housing construction, but relative to historical trends and population/household size trends, there is very little housing construction happening in NYC.

The "boom" is relative to all of 2000s. Look at the number of permits in 2015 [1], especially in the outer boroughs.

My argument, as someone who grew up in Brooklyn and Queens, is that building new housing doesn't really drive the prices down. I have a lot of friends who had to move or shut down their small businesses because of the rising costs.

[1](https://www.buildingcongress.com/advocacy-and-reports/report...)

[2](https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/buildings/html/dob-development-r...)

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#266

Post by vondur »

wwweston wrote: post #113
vondur wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people aren’t bothering to report crimes now. The police won’t do anything about it. You can pretty much get away will minor property crimes/theft now without any repercussions.

If we're making assertions contrary to data and treading on unfalsifiable positions, then I suppose the source is anecdotes, and I suppose mine are as good as any: I lived in Los Angeles in the early 90s for two years, and visited frequently through the rest of the decade. Experienced petty crime on at least 3 occasions, had a few close calls with violent crime, saw the Rodney King riots unfold, and heard some pretty…

My neighborhood is plagued with crime. Cars getting broken into repeatedly, stuff getting stolen from houses. Businesses getting broken into. This is around Long Beach.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#267

Post by kube-system »

kaikai wrote: post #262
Proziam wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Henderson, NV and can at least anecdotally confirm that what you're describing is true. People moving from California, many of whom cite 'safety' reasons, maintain pro-regulation and anti-gun stances, despite Henderson's murder rate being 1/5 that of Oakland, 1/2 of LA, and 1/2 of San Francisco.

Are you proposing that Henderson is safer than these large cities because there's less gun control, rather than other factors?

I think they're proposing that Henderson's lack of California-flavor gun-control hasn't caused it to be unsafe.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#268

Post by GhettoChild »

JauntTrooper wrote: post #251
jedberg wrote: post #55

Every person I know who's left California did it because of housing costs (except for one, who did it to get away from "the damn liberal government that wants to take my guns"). We have a major housing cost crisis in this state, as well as a big NIMBY problem. There have been good solutions run up through the state house, that either fail to pass or get so watered down they are no longer effective, in large part beca…

We moved from San Francisco to New York City after having kids mostly due to housing and public schools. We miss the city and our friends, but couldn't see ourselves there long term. New York City is expensive, but there are areas of relative affordability that feel much more accessible, comfortable, and safer than the Bay Area.

are you limited to those two cities?

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#269

Post by reaperducer »

milkytron wrote: post #244
reaperducer wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

folks flee Democrat-run cities due to high taxes and mismanagement and move elsewhere, but then continue voting Democrat This does seem to be the case. If you look at the voting statistics for cities where Californians are fleeing -- Boise, Las Vegas, Reno, Salt Lake City, etc -- those cities are rapidly turning blue. But I don't know if they continue voting Democrat "to bring back" their old laws and lifestyle so mu…

> But I don't know if they continue voting Democrat "to bring back" their old laws and lifestyle so much as they're just used to voting a particular way and continue to do so. I think the way people vote tends to reflect their beliefs. And generally, beliefs don't change often or drastically.

I think the way people vote tends to reflect their beliefs. And generally, beliefs don't change often or drastically.

I see a lot of people who vote based on how they've always voted, rather than based on their actual beliefs. It's part of the tribalism of it all.

Three data points:

In West Virginia there is an expression called Yellow Dog Democrat, which means that the person would vote for a yellow dog before he voted for a Republican.

In Chicago, for the better part of the last century, the policies and positions a lot of the so-called Democratic Party politicians would be considered to be very Republican in other states.

One set of my in-laws lives what would be considered by many to be a redneck lifestyle, deep in the woods, surrounded by guns and beer and American flags, and cobbled-together vehicles, and talking smack about Bernie Sanders being a Communist and such. But guess what? When they go to vote, they vote Democrat simply because they always have.

It's the reason in some elections in some places you have the option (or sometimes the requirement) of pushing one button and voting for everyone on that party's ticket, rather than being forced to choose each candidate on their own merits.

Re: Goodbye, New York, California and Illinois – Hello where?

#270

Post by GhettoChild »

harimau777 wrote: post #111
jedberg wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems perfectly reasonable to me that people would want to protect themselves if they don't have any assurances that developers won't just build ugly tower blocks. If developers want to build ugly tower blocks, and people would actually buy those blocks, why stop them? Just because I bought my house ten years ago doesn't give me the right to stop someone from building something "ugly". At least, it shouldn't. It…

What gets built next to someone's home can affect their quality of life (e.g. due to noise, pollution, increased traffic, blocking sunlight, blocking views, etc.). So I don't see why they shouldn't have a say. It's no different than any other negative externality.

Now that I live in Houston which does not have zoning in the typical sense I prefer that things get done ASAP instead of people arguing for years for the right to build more housing on a lot that they already own. This contributes to the obscenely high cost of living in certain parts of the country.
Post reply on HN