Probably fine to visit or work part of the year, but wouldn't plan on staying there permanently. I left in November. Just sick of the f'ing LA traffic and high prices, looking to buy a house.
This is about what I could afford with a 30min-1hr commute in LA. Built in the 1930s, 835 sqft, complete shit hole: http://www.trulia.com/property/3132180093-1550-W-Colegrove-Ave-Montebello-CA-90640#photo-1
This is what I could easily afford out here in Indiana. Built in 2013, 2,450 sqft, beautiful home: http://www.trulia.com/property/3121512075-5515-Covington-Dr-Charlestown-IN-47111#photo-1
Let me guess, LA is #1, and SF/SJ #2. It's a problem for sure.
Because it's in Indiana
As usual it's location location location. It's cheaper because no one wants to live there.
As long as you can tolerate the massive collective and individual egos of a giant mesh of douche-bag extraordinaires in their own mind, by tolerate I mean ignore, you'll be hard pressed not to find satisfaction with the environment and weather.
It's not that you're an asshole if you live in California, it's just that a ton of fucking assholes are here. Mostly on the motorways, but they are busy yupping it up everywhere. The kind of folks, and i've heard it more the once from some real uppities, think their shit (literally) is better than others.
Let me guess, LA is #1, and SF/SJ #2. It's a problem for sure.
I work with 5 people that relocated themselves and their families from SoCal to out here. They all love it. We'll enjoy vacationing there, but fuck living.
Uhhh, CA has it's downfalls, but I wouldn't go as far to say rural Indiana is better than CA. I think I'd rather even take CA over rural Indiana. I need the amenities of an actual city.
California is going to turn into a giant desert with this drought.
He lives in Alameda.
That would be a good option if I didnt already have a place at my Dads. Not sure I need my own separate house at this point in my life. If things start to change, like finding a SO in SF, than maybe I would reconsider.Serious response: Have you considered renting a place here just for a few months during the winter? My Father-In-Law has a house in Rancho Mirage he rents to a Chicago snow bird for 2-3 months a year every year... sucks because he's there now and we can't use the place. I'll be out there in May though with my wife and son for Memorial Day weekend.
California is the most logic choice because of cheap rent at my Dads house and a semi-established relationship with friends. Its much easier to go someplace with roots vs going out all by yourself.There are many other towns/cities without the weather of Chicago that aren't in California. A great compromise might be Denver (if you still want to be in a city). It has winter, but not the death-grip black-ice winters of the upper midwest. Sunny 300 days a year, but you still have four seasons, laid back, reasonably priced. Then there's the south or not-quite-so south, like Nashville. Many, many other cool cities in this country - Seattle, New Orleans, Charlotte, and a thousand smaller towns within an easy drive of those cities if you want to catch a ball game or a symphony orchestra.
You're young, you have little tying you down. Get out and explore.
It doesnt make sense to own property in Chicago right now for a whole list of political and financial reasons. Also, with my job I have no clue where Im going to be in 2 years so why even consider buying property.Ok. Let's say I make $150k a year. What neighborhood would I be living in?
Technically, I do IT consulting but I would not be getting a salary bump since the company did not request for me to move. However, Im hoping that the cheaper rent will offset the Midwest salary.San Diego is not even that expensive. Bay Area on the other hand... if you aren't in tech and taking advantage of the location and opportunities, it may not be worth it. For $800/month in SF, worth it though.
I have lived in the Midwest my whole life so I'm used to dealing with crappy winters. Every year it's always been depressing as I feel trapped in my apartment, never able to really get outside and do things. Even with proper clothing it's not fun to have dig out your car every 3-4 days. It would be OK if it lasted 2 months, but 4-5 months is painful. This year has been a particularly rough winter and got me wondering if warm weather climates are worth making a move for.
Visiting my Dad is San Francisco has been a breath of fresh air. Grass and trees are actually green, not dead looking a snow covered. The bay is beautiful and there are a ton of fun things to do outside. Even with fog it still feels sunny and cheerful. People seem more relaxed and focused on enjoying life.
Since I do consulting my job is location agnostic. I don't really want to leave my home in Chicago but am really sick of winter. Theoretically, I might be able to get away with living in San Francisco for Dec-April and Chicago from May-November. I'm 26, single, earn good salary, and still have a few more years before I settle down. But is it worth the hassel? The only things holding me back are a few friends, half my family, and the fact that everything is way cheaper in Chicago.
As long as you can tolerate the massive collective and individual egos of a giant mesh of douche-bag extraordinaires in their own mind, by tolerate I mean ignore, you'll be hard pressed not to find satisfaction with the environment and weather.
It's not that you're an asshole if you live in California, it's just that a ton of fucking assholes are here. Mostly on the motorways, but they are busy yupping it up everywhere. The kind of folks, and i've heard it more the once from some real uppities, think their shit (literally) is better than others.
I live affordably in the 'heart of the bay area' where I can walk to the local BART (above ground subway type train), but I had an attempted burglary again 3 hours ago.
A couple miles away are nicer homes with much lower crime.