5 ms·

> There is an apocalyptic amount of people moving into California, and no one blames them for the overcrowding and the shifting culture. But when too many Calif

> There is an apocalyptic amount of people moving into California, and no one blames them for the overcrowding and the shifting culture. But when too many Californians leave California and settle in, say, Portland, they are blamed for ruining the place by way of simply being themselves. Part of this is where the money comes from. Poorer/lower-middle-class people (mostly) move into California, to work these jobs under varying amounts of duress. It's hard to complain about the kid who moved from Iowa/Wisconsin/Tennessee/etc, and is hoping their first real tech job at Uber or Facebook or Netflix justifies the move. That's why discussion moves to hating the companies, not the people. But when Californians leave, they leave wealthy (in comparison). Even if they were poor-ish in California, just the act of selling their home (or condo, or any unit, anywhere in the state) instantly propels them straight to the upper-class or upper-middle-class when they move to places like Idaho or Nebraska or Michigan. So, when they move here, and say things like "$200k for a beat up old house? That's nothing! A downpayment in California would be $200k!" -- it gets easy to hate the coastal person for their money. Because you sure as hell aren't earning that cash local -- Our hometown Gordon Foods corporate jobs aren't paying even 33% of the wages a corporate Uber Eats job does. Our local housing prices are no longer driven by local wages, they're driven largely by what percentage of coastal people are cashing out their wealth and dumping it into our hometowns (or what percent of coastal private equity funds are buying up our cities to rent back to us at inflated rates) ---- That's not to defend these actions, I am not saying this is right (no one should hate anyone over this). But it does at least help understand why the blame goes where it does. The blame follows the money. In California, that money comes from the companies. But in flyover-USA, that money is coming from the Californians (or NYC/Boston/DC/Seattle/Denver transplants), because you sure as hell aren't ever earning that much money from any local company here.

geebee 8y ago
Do you have any stats on the wealth distribution of people leaving California? This really is a situation where more demographic information would be helpful, since an average wouldn't tell you as much. Do the wealthy Californians tend to be old, retirees? Young with kids? Are half the Californians leaving well off, with other half largely penniless? Your assertion that "when Californians leave, they leave wealthy" may be true, but I would like to see it substantiated with some kind of cite. Having grown up in SF (I'm in my late 40s), I have, by this point, seen a lot of people leave (and arrive), and they run the gamut. I know a couple with two small kids who did what everyone in Portland fears most - they bought in SF during the housing bust, sold recently, collected 800k or so, and now own a house outright in Portland. I know a woman who grew up in Palo Alto in the 1970s and works as a documentary film maker. She left for Denver with nothing but the savings that can get you through a few months. Lots more, and they're anecdotes, but it's enough to make me suspect that "when Californians leave, they leave wealthy" isn't true often enough to make it a generally accurate statement, even if it does describe a substantial number of these cases.
- austincheney 8y ago
  California is bleeding something like 60,000 people each year just to Texas. The Californians moving to north Texas metros do not appear poor relative to neighboring Texans enjoying superior standards of living with deprecated wages compared to California. When I bought my Texas house about a decade ago the average house price in my metro was about $200,000 and now I think it is about $250,000. These average houses are individual units from 2500-3000sqft on a quarter acre lot. If you are able to sell an equivalent CA house for $2,000,000 you are moving in wealthy compared to Texans. It doesn't mean you can afford a mansion here though, because property taxes are about equal to CA property taxes at about 6.5% per year.
  - geebee 8y ago
    You did say "do not appear to be poor". Is there a chance you're noticing wealthy people, because they tend to be more noticeable? Yes, people who bought a house while ago in California, sell, and move to Texas would have a lot of money. But again, is this typical? I'm not saying it necessarily isn't typical, just that "it seems like", or "appears to be" isn't data. A lot of people leave California because they can cash in on their house, but a lot of people also leave because they'll never be able to get a foothold in the housing market. We really do need some data on this to have a meaningful conversation about it.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - austincheney 8y ago
      > Yes, people who bought a house while ago in California, sell, and move to Texas would have a lot of money. But again, is this typical? This was the business owner at my first job out of college. He sold his California home and used that money to bootstrap his business for two years and hire employees while also supporting himself and his family. The answer though is middle class people according to IRS data - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/californians-fed-up-with-housing-costs-and-taxes-are-fleeing-state.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/californians-fed-up-with-hou...
youeseh 8y ago
The mostly men who move to California for the tech jobs are called "tech-bros" and are hated on for various reasons and often blamed for inflated rents and the expensive housing market.
- youeseh 8y ago
  Oh wow, more downvotes than I anticipated. Just to clarify, I'm not saying that the blame and hate are deserved. I was countering OP's point that people don't blame job-migrants for rising prices in California.
jostmey 8y ago
"There is an apocalyptic amount of people moving into California," Really? New york is crowded. Chicago is crowded. The bay area is just spread out. It just feels crowded because California won't build upwards, which is a result of its backward housing laws, codes, and tax systems.
- bobcat9 8y ago
  I find the bay area TINY compared to the NYC sprawl.
malandrew 8y ago
It's not just the money either. It's the failed policies that Californians bring with them that got them in this high cost of living mess in the first place. People moved to these other states to avoid things like high taxes. Then when Californians move to these states, they start voting for policies that increase local and state taxes and policies that generally increase the cost of living.
- burlesona 8y ago
  I agree this is a key factor. Family members in the northwest are constantly complaining of the influx of Californians, specifically saying "they priced themselves out of California with their foolish policies and now they're repeating that stupidity here."
dimva 8y ago
If people moving to your area and investing lots of their own money in the local economy is a bad thing, your local policies, politicians, and probably politics are very useless. People investing money into the local economy should always be a good thing, and if the locals aren't capturing enough of that to mitigate the increase in costs, that's on them for voting in incompetent or evil politicians. Blaming the people coming in with money isn't going to solve anything.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

geebee 8y ago

Do you have any stats on the wealth distribution of people leaving California? This really is a situation where more demographic information would be helpful, since an average wouldn't tell you as much. Do the wealthy Californians tend to be old, retirees? Young with kids? Are half the Californians leaving well off, with other half largely penniless? Your assertion that "when Californians leave, they leave wealthy" may be true, but I would like to see it substantiated with some kind of cite. Having grown up in SF (I'm in my late 40s), I have, by this point, seen a lot of people leave (and arrive), and they run the gamut. I know a couple with two small kids who did what everyone in Portland fears most - they bought in SF during the housing bust, sold recently, collected 800k or so, and now own a house outright in Portland. I know a woman who grew up in Palo Alto in the 1970s and works as a documentary film maker. She left for Denver with nothing but the savings that can get you through a few months. Lots more, and they're anecdotes, but it's enough to make me suspect that "when Californians leave, they leave wealthy" isn't true often enough to make it a generally accurate statement, even if it does describe a substantial number of these cases.

austincheney 8y ago
California is bleeding something like 60,000 people each year just to Texas. The Californians moving to north Texas metros do not appear poor relative to neighboring Texans enjoying superior standards of living with deprecated wages compared to California. When I bought my Texas house about a decade ago the average house price in my metro was about $200,000 and now I think it is about $250,000. These average houses are individual units from 2500-3000sqft on a quarter acre lot. If you are able to sell an equivalent CA house for $2,000,000 you are moving in wealthy compared to Texans. It doesn't mean you can afford a mansion here though, because property taxes are about equal to CA property taxes at about 6.5% per year.
- geebee 8y ago
  You did say "do not appear to be poor". Is there a chance you're noticing wealthy people, because they tend to be more noticeable? Yes, people who bought a house while ago in California, sell, and move to Texas would have a lot of money. But again, is this typical? I'm not saying it necessarily isn't typical, just that "it seems like", or "appears to be" isn't data. A lot of people leave California because they can cash in on their house, but a lot of people also leave because they'll never be able to get a foothold in the housing market. We really do need some data on this to have a meaningful conversation about it.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - austincheney 8y ago
    > Yes, people who bought a house while ago in California, sell, and move to Texas would have a lot of money. But again, is this typical? This was the business owner at my first job out of college. He sold his California home and used that money to bootstrap his business for two years and hire employees while also supporting himself and his family. The answer though is middle class people according to IRS data - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/californians-fed-up-with-housing-costs-and-taxes-are-fleeing-state.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/19/californians-fed-up-with-hou...

youeseh 8y ago

The mostly men who move to California for the tech jobs are called "tech-bros" and are hated on for various reasons and often blamed for inflated rents and the expensive housing market.

youeseh 8y ago
Oh wow, more downvotes than I anticipated. Just to clarify, I'm not saying that the blame and hate are deserved. I was countering OP's point that people don't blame job-migrants for rising prices in California.

jostmey 8y ago

"There is an apocalyptic amount of people moving into California," Really? New york is crowded. Chicago is crowded. The bay area is just spread out. It just feels crowded because California won't build upwards, which is a result of its backward housing laws, codes, and tax systems.

bobcat9 8y ago
I find the bay area TINY compared to the NYC sprawl.

malandrew 8y ago

It's not just the money either. It's the failed policies that Californians bring with them that got them in this high cost of living mess in the first place. People moved to these other states to avoid things like high taxes. Then when Californians move to these states, they start voting for policies that increase local and state taxes and policies that generally increase the cost of living.

burlesona 8y ago
I agree this is a key factor. Family members in the northwest are constantly complaining of the influx of Californians, specifically saying "they priced themselves out of California with their foolish policies and now they're repeating that stupidity here."

dimva 8y ago

If people moving to your area and investing lots of their own money in the local economy is a bad thing, your local policies, politicians, and probably politics are very useless. People investing money into the local economy should always be a good thing, and if the locals aren't capturing enough of that to mitigate the increase in costs, that's on them for voting in incompetent or evil politicians. Blaming the people coming in with money isn't going to solve anything.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]