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

711–718 of 718 posts

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

#711

Post by magduf »

sudosteph wrote: post #133
magduf wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised; I've met plenty of people that talk about how much they like warm weather and want to move south for that reason. Personally, I lived in Arizona for a while and have no desire to live in a hot climate again.

I think it's the snow that really gets people. It just interferes with everyday life in a way heat doesn't (ie, limiting car usage and driving safety until it's cleared). This mostly applies to car-oriented lifestyles though - since walking in high heat vs snowy or icy conditions are both quite risky. Also, there is actually a pretty strong correlation between shoveling snow and heart attacks in older folks: https://…

These sound like good reasons not to live in a car-based, suburban lifestyle. People in Manhattan don't have these problems.

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

#712

Post by Fjolsvith »

oblio wrote: post #574
nodesocket wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also moved from SF to Nashville, TN. Lot's of factors: - Cost of living - Housing - I am self employed (no state taxes) - Attitude, entitlement, hypocrisy - Petty crime rampant (drug use, break ins, theft, defecation) - Extreme political climate in SF/CA

What does the last point mean, in practice?

Could it mean that a person must be guarded with their political views or face societal ostracizing and career stagnation?

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

#713

Post by malandrew »

defen wrote: post #578
malandrew wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me started on this. I helped an friend get into below market rate (BMR) housing in SF. She paid approximately $330k with almost no money down for a 2 bedroom, 2 bath condo in the center of Hayes Valley. Today, equivalent market rate units in her building sell for $1.5k to $2m. Basically, there is a supply of homes that are available to you at three points: 70%, 90% and 110% of the median income. How these t…

> She paid approximately $330k with almost no money down for a 2 bedroom, 2 bath condo in the center of Hayes Valley. Today, equivalent market rate units in her building sell for $1.5k to $2m. How does that work if/when she wants to sell the place? Is there some sort of cap on what she can sell it for?

She can only sell it for the purchase price adjusted for changes in the median income. If the median income in the city goes up (which it does over time because lower income renters are eventually forced out of the city), then she can sell it for more. It obviously won't increase as fast as market rates, but it will go for more than she purchased it. The house needs to be sold back through the BMR program. It can only be willed if her heir(s) also qualify for the BMR program at the time of death.

At the end of the day, she gets the benefit of not having to tie up cash in home equity. While other people are paying $6000 or more a month in a lease, she's paying a little over $2000 a month in a lease and gets to put all the excess she has into more liquid assets like an index fund.

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

#714

Post by atomi »

dang wrote: post #662
filoleg wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good for you, I totally respect that. Which, unfortunately, isn't something I am able to say about a lot of Californian expats.

Please don't take HN threads further into regional flamewar (or any flamewar). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You got a tough job buddy.

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

#715

Post by wahern »

api wrote: post #658
messick wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is a “one party state” because Gov Pete Wilson and the CA GOP went after the racist vote in the mid 90’s to get re-elected by heavily supporting Prop 187, which denied all state services to undocumented immigrants. Until then, it was relatively conservative. Turns out that (thankfully) there aren’t enough racists for keep control of the state government, and since then the CA GOP has become basically irrel…

In the long term I think the national GOP is doing this by going after racists, extreme fundamentalists, and other fanatics. The fanatic vote is political cocaine: temporary high, then you need more and more, then your non coke head friends drift away, then you are strung out.

> then your non coke head friends drift away, then you are strung out.

Alas, that may be more wishful thinking than reality. :( There are countless countries around the world, both in modern history and today, that prove the dynamic can be sustained indefinitely.

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

#716

Post by kelnos »

mbesto wrote: post #682
kelnos wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, in CA it's massive SUVs that keep trying to run me over.

Or Prius's.

The Priuses are smaller, but are so quiet that they sneak up on you... and then it's too late ;)

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

#717

Post by kelnos »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #420
kelnos wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Property taxes are paid on the sale price. No, property taxes are paid on the assessed value, and assessments don't just happen at sale time. Only CA has this weird freeze-taxes-at-time-of-sale thing. > It is not a punitive tax to fund new entrants. No one is claiming it is. Hell, it isn't great even for homeowners who are "protected" by Prop 13, because if they want to move (say a widow/widower whose kids have mov…

What’s wrong with never wanting to move? Out of homes people paid off after 30 years of mortgage? Why should we promote the notion that tax paying citizens should become transients due to tax burden? So tax the descendents. Property rights are one of the reasons why this country was founded..primary homes need to be protected from predatory taxes and redistribution of wealth.

I never said there's anything wrong with never wanting to move. I just said that Prop 13 mainly protects incumbents who never want to move, and creates a really bad situation for everyone else.

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

#718

Post by kelnos »

vineyardmike wrote: post #503
kelnos wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that in most areas the government is primarily voted in by existing landowners, who don't want more housing, and don't care if lower-income renters are being forced out. The non-landowners are either not abundant enough, or only plan to live here for a short enough period of time that they don't bother to get involved in local politics.

While this is the whole "NIMBY" thing... is that really a problem? No one complains that Americans can't vote in Britains elections, to set their laws. The whole point of voting is that the people who actively live there get to decide what happens to their city.

I think the cause and effect is intertwined. Many of the people who now plan to only stay for a few years have that attitude because they feel disenfranchised and locked out of the planning process, while at the same time being priced out of the ability to put down roots.
Post reply on HN