What is wrong with California?

[Uncle Ted]

That, and you got in when the gettin' was good. My uncle, a guy that ran a ton of marathons and was ostensibly healthier than any of siblings who died last year, bought a house in the late 70s in Hillsborough, CA and all he was was a dentist. I doubt there are too many dentists buying homes like his in Hillsborough nowadays. The median price for a home is now $1.45 million. The median household income is over $200k a year.

When LA retires he is going to cash out selling his house, move to Texas next door to Niku, and live like a king.

[wuapinmon]

That's why so many jealous folks from other states root for its demise.

I'd never root for its demise. A healthy California = a healthy America. I just prefer humidity and pine trees.

[LA Ute]

I'd never root for its demise. A healthy California = a healthy America. I just prefer humidity and pine trees.

I know you don't root for California's demise. I was just being a California homer. I agree, it would be good for the country if California were to regain its financial sanity.

When LA retires he is going to cash out selling his house, move to Texas next door to Niku, and live like a king.

The current plan is to spend the fall and winter on Balboa Island and the spring and summer in Salt Lake. This will probably never happen but it is fun to contemplate.

[RobinFinderson]

Pretty typical of a "progressive". Promoting more spending and sharing of the wealth, but don't really care if the wealth leaves and goes somewhere else.

I really don't get it. Do they really think there is this huge amount of wealth out there being hidden and if only we could get our hands on it.

lol! You saw the chart that Ted posted. The outbound income per cap. is $24k. Do you think you are going to find a lot of people in Austin who are going to work for $24k/year?

Realize that I am speaking from a totally selfish perspective here, since my good liberal side wants to believe that CA can keep its poor. But maybe we can't. Lets send a whole slew of companies with thousands of $24k/year jobs to Texas, and then a whole slew of Californians who are willing to work for $$24k/year will follow them, and then our roads will be less congested, our schools will be less expensive, our welfare bills will go down, and our state health programs for the poor will get cheaper. PLEASE, Texas, take our poor people and all of their poor people problems.

[Viking]

I sympathize with the silicon valley worker. It's more expensive but like going to NYC, it can be like paying one's dues that you will always have.

[RobinFinderson]

I sympathize with the silicon valley worker. It's more expensive but like going to NYC, it can be like paying one's dues that you will always have.

Exactly. Another thing people don't realize about all of your low-rent states... so you go to TX, live well, but make significantly less than your CA counterparts. What happens? You end up a TX barnacle, because the shock of seeing what it costs to visit (or heaven forbid, relocate to) nice places takes all of the fun out of traveling.

[Pheidippides]

Exactly. Another thing people don't realize about all of your low-rent states... so you go to TX, live well, but make significantly less than your CA counterparts. What happens? You end up a TX barnacle, because the shock of seeing what it costs to visit (or heaven forbid, relocate to) nice places takes all of the fun out of traveling.

Nice try. I make more than my NY or LA counterparts on the average.

[FMCoug]

I'd never root for its demise. A healthy California = a healthy America. I just prefer humidity and pine trees.

Pretty sure CA had more pine trees than SC. Which is what is great about CA. There is literally just about everything you could imagine right in the state.

Except stifling hot and sticky humidity. I'll give you that one. Plenty humid along the coast though. But the good kind.

[RobinFinderson]

Nice try. I make more than my NY or LA counterparts on the average.

Good for you. I'm not saying that there aren't good jobs in TX. If you are good at what you do, and you are in a field with high demand, I imagine you will find commensurate salaries wherever such jobs are to be had. But also realize, your line of work represents an itsy-bitsy sliver of the jobs we are talking about. If the average per cap salary of someone fleeing CA to go to TX is $24k, that means that there are a LOT of low paying jobs (less than $24K) balancing out the good jobs, like the one you have. Those $24k people might really enjoy a better quality of life in TX, due to lower costs, but they are also going to become TX barnacles.

[Viking]

Nice try. I make more than my NY or LA counterparts on the average.

Your honor, let the record show "Nikuman" paid his NY dues. However, he joined the bridge and tunnel crowd at one point.

[Uncle Ted]

lol! You saw the chart that Ted posted. The outbound income per cap. is $24k. Do you think you are going to find a lot of people in Austin who are going to work for $24k/year?

Realize that I am speaking from a totally selfish perspective here, since my good liberal side wants to believe that CA can keep its poor. But maybe we can't. Lets send a whole slew of companies with thousands of $24k/year jobs to Texas, and then a whole slew of Californians who are willing to work for $$24k/year will follow them, and then our roads will be less congested, our schools will be less expensive, our welfare bills will go down, and our state health programs for the poor will get cheaper. PLEASE, Texas, take our poor people and all of their poor people problems.

I was wondering when someone would notice that. Did you also notice that LA is gaining two of these $24K/year workers for every one they are losing? It is interesting that the poor are moving to LA.

[Mormon Red Death]

I was wondering when someone would notice that. Did you also notice that LA is gaining two of these $24K/year workers for every one they are losing? It is interesting that the poor are moving to LA.

California seems to be losing the middle class. The guy making 85k a year can't buy a 500k two bedroom house. So he moves to Phoenix/Vegas/Salt Lake/portland or texas where he gets most of the stuff in SOCAL but he can still have a house.

[Uncle Ted]

California seems to be losing the middle class. The guy making 85k a year can't buy a 500k two bedroom house. So he moves to Phoenix/Vegas/Salt Lake/portland or texas where he gets most of the stuff in SOCAL but he can still have a house.

Yes, I agree that the middle class in California seems to be eroding away.

I was talking to an engineer a few weeks who most likely makes pretty good money at a large fruit company. He is looking for a house that he and his wife can afford. He said the only homes in his price range are absolute dumps. Both of them are very discouraged in their house hunt. At the same time this company is wondering why they have so many engineering positions open that they can't fill. Now that this couple has a baby he is seriously considering leaving this company and taking a job out of state so he can afford a home that is in an area with good schools for their child.

Also, the data seems to back this up...

Moving a little closer to home in the State of California, we can see much of the reason for the continued slide in the home-buying market that used to be one of the economic drivers our state. According to a recent study by the Public Policy Institute of California in San Francisco, the systematic erosion of the middle class in California has been rather pronounced over the past three decades, and has fallen from nearly two-thirds – 60 percent – in 1980 to less than half – 48 percent – today. The middle class in California is defined as individuals making between $44,000 and $155,000 annually.

In addition, the poorest Californians – those making $19,100 per year or less – lost more than 20 percent of their income between 2007 and 2010. The highest income earners – those in the top 10 percent – lost just 5 percent of their income and average 12 times the income of the poorest workers.

If anything, the current recession has polarized the richest and poorest income earners while leaving the middle class with its lowest share since 1985. After adjusting for California’s higher cost of living, almost half of the families – 43 percent – are considered low-income. Concurrently, 9.3 percent – or one in 10 – are considered high income. The state also has the highest level of poverty – classified by under- or non-employment – currently at 16.3 percent. This is the highest rate since 1980.

Without a large, strong and healthy middle class the government will not have the tax revenue to pay for all the social programs the poor will demand no matter how much they try to tax the rich. The fact is the middle class pays most of the tax revenue that is collected.

[wuapinmon]

Pretty sure CA had more pine trees than SC. Which is what is great about CA. There is literally just about everything you could imagine right in the state.

Except stifling hot and sticky humidity. I'll give you that one. Plenty humid along the coast though. But the good kind.

Not sure how to check the data, but if we combine SC, GA, and AL, roughly the same size as CA, I'd guess that there are way more pines here than there. But, I used to think that there was no way that anyone had more peaches than SC. CA has more CLING peaches than all other states, not to mention free stones.

[NorthShoreCoug]

lol! You saw the chart that Ted posted. The outbound income per cap. is $24k. Do you think you are going to find a lot of people in Austin who are going to work for $24k/year?

Realize that I am speaking from a totally selfish perspective here, since my good liberal side wants to believe that CA can keep its poor. But maybe we can't. Lets send a whole slew of companies with thousands of $24k/year jobs to Texas, and then a whole slew of Californians who are willing to work for $$24k/year will follow them, and then our roads will be less congested, our schools will be less expensive, our welfare bills will go down, and our state health programs for the poor will get cheaper. PLEASE, Texas, take our poor people and all of their poor people problems.

Income per capita is different than household income.

Consider an LDS family with 4 kids and a SAHM. The dad could be pulling down $150k per year, yet if they moved out of state, the outbound income per capita would be only $25k - because the 6 family members all rely on that $150k.

So to state "Lets send a whole slew of companies with thousands of $24k/year jobs to Texas, and then a whole slew of Californians who are willing to work for $$24k/year will follow them..." simply doesn't even come close to properly interpreting the data.