6 ms·

Texas, here we come: Migration to the lone star state

21 points by cwan 16y ago

njharman 16y ago
> High earning New Yorkers and Californians can take home between 9% and 11% more of their income by moving to Texas Wages in Austin are significantly less than San Francisco or Seattle and I suspect NY too. Don't kid yourselves you will be bringing home less money. Sales and property taxes are high too. But considering costs esp housing it's probably a net gain. I wish I could recommend you not come to Austin (because influx of peoples will change what Austin is) But I can't cause Austin flippin rocks. [qualifications for judgment include; 3yrs Austin, 14yrs SF, 3yrs Seattle, many months in SoCal, Phoenix, Baltimore, Toronto, Melborne, all over Germany, Prague, Bangkok]
- exit 16y ago
  so since you reject the articles financial argument, what is it you find "flippin rocks" about austin?
  - njharman 16y ago
    > But considering costs esp housing it's probably a net gain.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- enjo 16y ago
  I left Austin for Denver. Two pretty similar cities but (for me at least) Denver has a much nicer climate, with even more to do nearby. While there is a (low) state income tax, property taxes are MUCH lower. We pay a bit less in Taxes than when we lived in Texas overall. I also much prefer the neighborhoods in Boulder/Denver to what Austin has to offer. Here is a nice chart with effective tax rates measured various ways: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_...
- natrius 16y ago
  On average, moving from San Francisco to Austin will considerably increase your disposable income. http://swz.salary.com/costoflivingwizard/layoutscripts/coll_start.asp http://swz.salary.com/costoflivingwizard/layoutscripts/coll_...
ronnier 16y ago
My concern with regard to the large amount of people moving to Texas is that they'll then advocate the same policies they just fled from.
- ktsmith 16y ago
  That's exactly what happened in Nevada during the housing bubble. You could sell a shack in CA for a huge amount of money and buy a McMansion on an acre for next to nothing in NV. As that trend continued you could see a distinct uptick in the rate at which CA influence was happening in the schools, laws etc.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  This is a legitimate concern with foreign immigration as well, although people expressing this concern are usually criticized as racists.
- geebee 16y ago
  These policies may eventually find their way to Austin. I don't think the people who fled them will advocate them, but keep in mind what "fleeing" means - somebody is pursuing you. These folks may eventually catch up. One big difference between San Francisco and Austin is that SF has been a wealthy city for a while now, whereas Austin is still on the way up. The more money there already is, the more incentive people have to focus on getting that money than creating new wealth. As Austin gets bigger, wealthier, and more established, it's hard to believe that some people won't see jobs, benefits, apartments, and vacations as things people "get" rather than "create." SF, while unimpressive in this regard, really isn't that different from any other old city (Boston, NY come to mind). The advantage these old cities have is they are, well, much more interesting places to live than most of the new cities. It sounds like Austin is in that magical spot where it is both new and interesting, a rising star that doesn't have the baggage yet.
mattj 16y ago
I think they read the totally wrong thing from this data. People move to Portland, Austin, or Seattle due to the much higher perceived quality of life. Low taxes are nice, but that's really just a side benefit.
arohner 16y ago
At my last corporate job (in Austin), we interviewed an engineer currently at Apple. We asked him why he was moving. He answered "I can work at Apple for $120k/year, and pay $1m for a house, or I can work in Austin for $100k/year, and pay $200k for a house". This was pre-bubble and I didn't fact check his numbers, but are the cost of living in SV numbers correct?
- preview 16y ago
  I have lived in SV, and I currently live in Austin. The $1M for a house is not completely out of line, It does depend on how far you're willing to drive and if public school quality is a factor. I think is $200k for Austin is a little low. It is possible to buy a home in Austin for $200k. Like all things housing, location is very important as is public school quality. If you don't care about the quality of the schools and don't mind a commute, then it is possible.
- enjo 16y ago
  Not exactly... and it's most definitely not an apples-to-apples comparison. That $200k house in Austin is in a suburb. All of those nice walks to the grocery store? Gone. All of those nice close local eateries? Gone. You can find that in Austin, but the price jumps up pretty significantly.
  - wmf 16y ago
    Isn't a $1M silicon valley house also in suburbia?
    - kscaldef 16y ago
      Depends on what you mean by suburbia. Most of Palo Alto, Menlo Park, etc are what I'd think of as "dense suburban". It's generally walkable to restaurants & shopping.
      - natrius 16y ago
        It'll cost you more than $200k, but dense suburban housing is still more affordable in Austin than it is in the Bay Area.
antidaily 16y ago
At this rate it's going to be tough keeping Austin weird.
- robotron 16y ago
  No kidding.... we keep getting an influx of people seduced by the charm of Austin who then turn around and force the charm to go away (see the recent destruction of the Cathedral of Junk for an example). I know, I'm making sweeping generalizations. The infrastructure is definitely not set up for all of these new people. Anyway, that's my doom-and-gloom for the day. Welcome to Austin?
  - natrius 16y ago
    Most of the things people blame newcomers for in Austin are actually caused by people who've been in Austin for a while. The noise complaints don't come from the people in the shiny new condos, but people succumb to their base instinct for class warfare and blame problems on people who aren't like them. I don't think the city did anything wrong by trying to make sure the Cathedral of Junk didn't hurt anyone.
kscaldef 16y ago
There's definitely some cherry-picking going on here. The migration patterns for Manhattan don't support the low-tax theory at all.
p3ll0n 16y ago
Forbes had an interesting article http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0607/opinions-houston-immigration-job-growth-on-my-mind.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0607/opinions-houston-immi... recently that had a narrower focus (Houston) but touches on many of the same topics ... innovation, job growth and immigration ... and how they have helped Texas stay ahead of the curve during the recession.
natmaster 16y ago
Guys, taxes are good. The government knows how to spend your money better than you.
davidw 16y ago
Note the astute comment 2nd from the top pointing out that a lot of the Californians are headed to Oregon, which is not a "low tax" state. Oregon's taxes are actually fairly progressive: no sales tax (which tends to hit lower income people more), and a higher income tax, IIRC. Basically, they're moving there because it's indubitably cheaper, and the quality of life is higher (not such a rat race).
j_baker 16y ago
This could be an example of Simpson's paradox[1]. You can't determine where people are moving based on which map has the most black lines. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpsons_paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpsons_paradox
natmaster 16y ago
Ok, now I have to ask: do you guys actually think high taxes are good? Please respond with comments, rather than just up/down voting this.

21 points by cwan 16y ago

> High earning New Yorkers and Californians can take home between 9% and 11% more of their income by moving to Texas Wages in Austin are significantly less than San Francisco or Seattle and I suspect NY too. Don't kid yourselves you will be bringing home less money. Sales and property taxes are high too. But considering costs esp housing it's probably a net gain. I wish I could recommend you not come to Austin (because influx of peoples will change what Austin is) But I can't cause Austin flippin rocks. [qualifications for judgment include; 3yrs Austin, 14yrs SF, 3yrs Seattle, many months in SoCal, Phoenix, Baltimore, Toronto, Melborne, all over Germany, Prague, Bangkok]

exit 16y ago
so since you reject the articles financial argument, what is it you find "flippin rocks" about austin?
- njharman 16y ago
  > But considering costs esp housing it's probably a net gain.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
enjo 16y ago
I left Austin for Denver. Two pretty similar cities but (for me at least) Denver has a much nicer climate, with even more to do nearby. While there is a (low) state income tax, property taxes are MUCH lower. We pay a bit less in Taxes than when we lived in Texas overall. I also much prefer the neighborhoods in Boulder/Denver to what Austin has to offer. Here is a nice chart with effective tax rates measured various ways: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_...
natrius 16y ago
On average, moving from San Francisco to Austin will considerably increase your disposable income. http://swz.salary.com/costoflivingwizard/layoutscripts/coll_start.asp http://swz.salary.com/costoflivingwizard/layoutscripts/coll_...

ronnier 16y ago

My concern with regard to the large amount of people moving to Texas is that they'll then advocate the same policies they just fled from.

ktsmith 16y ago
That's exactly what happened in Nevada during the housing bubble. You could sell a shack in CA for a huge amount of money and buy a McMansion on an acre for next to nothing in NV. As that trend continued you could see a distinct uptick in the rate at which CA influence was happening in the schools, laws etc.
yummyfajitas 16y ago
This is a legitimate concern with foreign immigration as well, although people expressing this concern are usually criticized as racists.
geebee 16y ago
These policies may eventually find their way to Austin. I don't think the people who fled them will advocate them, but keep in mind what "fleeing" means - somebody is pursuing you. These folks may eventually catch up. One big difference between San Francisco and Austin is that SF has been a wealthy city for a while now, whereas Austin is still on the way up. The more money there already is, the more incentive people have to focus on getting that money than creating new wealth. As Austin gets bigger, wealthier, and more established, it's hard to believe that some people won't see jobs, benefits, apartments, and vacations as things people "get" rather than "create." SF, while unimpressive in this regard, really isn't that different from any other old city (Boston, NY come to mind). The advantage these old cities have is they are, well, much more interesting places to live than most of the new cities. It sounds like Austin is in that magical spot where it is both new and interesting, a rising star that doesn't have the baggage yet.

mattj 16y ago

I think they read the totally wrong thing from this data. People move to Portland, Austin, or Seattle due to the much higher perceived quality of life. Low taxes are nice, but that's really just a side benefit.

arohner 16y ago

At my last corporate job (in Austin), we interviewed an engineer currently at Apple. We asked him why he was moving. He answered "I can work at Apple for $120k/year, and pay $1m for a house, or I can work in Austin for $100k/year, and pay $200k for a house". This was pre-bubble and I didn't fact check his numbers, but are the cost of living in SV numbers correct?

preview 16y ago
I have lived in SV, and I currently live in Austin. The $1M for a house is not completely out of line, It does depend on how far you're willing to drive and if public school quality is a factor. I think is $200k for Austin is a little low. It is possible to buy a home in Austin for $200k. Like all things housing, location is very important as is public school quality. If you don't care about the quality of the schools and don't mind a commute, then it is possible.
enjo 16y ago
Not exactly... and it's most definitely not an apples-to-apples comparison. That $200k house in Austin is in a suburb. All of those nice walks to the grocery store? Gone. All of those nice close local eateries? Gone. You can find that in Austin, but the price jumps up pretty significantly.
- wmf 16y ago
  Isn't a $1M silicon valley house also in suburbia?
  - kscaldef 16y ago
    Depends on what you mean by suburbia. Most of Palo Alto, Menlo Park, etc are what I'd think of as "dense suburban". It's generally walkable to restaurants & shopping.
    - natrius 16y ago
      It'll cost you more than $200k, but dense suburban housing is still more affordable in Austin than it is in the Bay Area.

antidaily 16y ago

At this rate it's going to be tough keeping Austin weird.

robotron 16y ago
No kidding.... we keep getting an influx of people seduced by the charm of Austin who then turn around and force the charm to go away (see the recent destruction of the Cathedral of Junk for an example). I know, I'm making sweeping generalizations. The infrastructure is definitely not set up for all of these new people. Anyway, that's my doom-and-gloom for the day. Welcome to Austin?
- natrius 16y ago
  Most of the things people blame newcomers for in Austin are actually caused by people who've been in Austin for a while. The noise complaints don't come from the people in the shiny new condos, but people succumb to their base instinct for class warfare and blame problems on people who aren't like them. I don't think the city did anything wrong by trying to make sure the Cathedral of Junk didn't hurt anyone.

kscaldef 16y ago

There's definitely some cherry-picking going on here. The migration patterns for Manhattan don't support the low-tax theory at all.

p3ll0n 16y ago

Forbes had an interesting article http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0607/opinions-houston-immigration-job-growth-on-my-mind.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0607/opinions-houston-immi... recently that had a narrower focus (Houston) but touches on many of the same topics ... innovation, job growth and immigration ... and how they have helped Texas stay ahead of the curve during the recession.

natmaster 16y ago

Guys, taxes are good. The government knows how to spend your money better than you.

davidw 16y ago

Note the astute comment 2nd from the top pointing out that a lot of the Californians are headed to Oregon, which is not a "low tax" state. Oregon's taxes are actually fairly progressive: no sales tax (which tends to hit lower income people more), and a higher income tax, IIRC. Basically, they're moving there because it's indubitably cheaper, and the quality of life is higher (not such a rat race).

j_baker 16y ago

This could be an example of Simpson's paradox[1]. You can't determine where people are moving based on which map has the most black lines. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpsons_paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpsons_paradox

natmaster 16y ago

Ok, now I have to ask: do you guys actually think high taxes are good? Please respond with comments, rather than just up/down voting this.