Southern California → Worst Places To Live

We have the best weather and some darn fine places to live (especially Hemet ) but according to this article four of our little bits of paradise were ranked as four of the "five most miserable cities" in the US, and eight of our cities ranked in the twenty most miserable places to live. As a proud native Californian I'd sure like to see this turn around but it will take a complete house cleaning (and sanity) in Sacramento to bring back jobs and property values.

Bottom feeding five: »realestate.yahoo.com/pro ··· 011.html

quote:

---

Located in the state's Central Valley, Stockton has been ravaged by the housing bust. Median home prices in the city tripled between 1998 and 2005, when they peaked at $431,000. Now they are back to where they started, as the median price is forecast to be $142,000 this year, according to research firm Economy.com, a decline of 67% from 2005. Foreclosure filings affected 6.9% of homes last year in the Stockton area, the seventh-highest rate in the nation, according to online foreclosure marketplace RealtyTrac.

Stockton's violent crime and unemployment rates also rank among the 10 worst in the country, although violent crime was down 10% in the latest figures from the FBI. Jobless rates are expected to decline or stay flat in most U.S. metro areas in 2011, but in Stockton, unemployment is projected to rise to 18.1% in 2011 after averaging 17.2% in 2010, according to Economy.com.

---

Bottom 20: »www.forbes.com/2011/02/0 ··· =yahoore

Mike, I'll save you a complaint. I didn't create the statistics I'm just reporting what the experts found in the hope that people will do something to turn it around.

8 of the top 20 miserable places to live are in California.

It should be noted what criteria were used to establish this list:A pro sports team's success/failure is hardly a viable barometer...unless one is determined to include Cleveland.

I would also toss out the housing metrics as useless in that the entire country has felt this to one degree or another.

Unemployment, violent crime, local government corruption, tax rates, commute times, and (not used here) cost of living ratio to average household income, and perhaps weather should be the only considerations.

With respect to property values in California (and elsewhere for that matter), current values are normalized. So there should be no need to create a new real estate bubble. (see chart above)

Unfortunately I now feel the jobs situation is also "normalized". There will be no new large scale manufacturing in California, or anywhere else in the country for that matter. This 9% national/13% [U3] California unemployment rate will be the ongoing norm and we might as well get use to it.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

You know what, live where it makes you happy, who cares what others say. You can chase a dream of the "perfect" place your whole life, only to find out it doesn't exist.

I agree about sports teams but the rest is still important if you're one of those stuck underwater.

The unemployment rate is only normalized if we allow it. Unfortunately the government, both state and federal, have created this situation by pushing unionization, over regulating, and over taxing. In parts of the country where the state stays out of the way (right to work, low state taxes, light regulation) manufacturing flourishes. Unfortunately the federal government is working hard to end that and to make us entirely dependent on imported energy and imported goods and services. We can continue voting the bums out in 2012 or we can live with high unemployment and fewer freedoms. The latest U3 reports were so bogus it's not funny. Another 1.4M people gave up looking for work so they aren't counted anymore. Real numbers are closer to 18/22% and rising. It takes 150k new jobs per month to keep up with population growth so last month's 35k is just a deepening hole.

»www.shadowstats.com/alte ··· t-charts

I fully concur with respect to 22% total unemployment as a more accurate rate. However there are immutable, underlying fundamental dynamics that simply must be taken into consideration ongoing.

1.) Technology/Automation have permanently replaced 100x more jobs than the affect (effect?) of illegal immigration and piss-poor government policies combined.

2.) Excluding illegal immigration, the population growth in the U.S. (and all industrialized nations) is flat.

3.) There are now 10,000 people/day retiring, and this will continue on average for the next 19 years.

(Which begs the bonus question: So if 10,000 people are leaving the workforce per day, 300,000 per Month, why aren't they being replaced? bonus answer below)

What we are entering is a a new economic environment with NO net-new consumers, or net-new Producers. Even worse, the producing population is actually decreasing. There are about 4 million births each year now, or about 11,000 per day. There are 10,000 people retiring per day + the number of unemployed! This is a vicious cycle. Companies won't hire until there is new demand, justifiably so. Unemployed people create little demand, and retired people create less demand. Moreover, the retired people are a resource drain on the existing workers as they have to help pay their retirements via taxes and company earnings (remember how GM was paying for 1 retiree for every 3 employees actually working).

My layman's analogy: imagine a city like Stockton, which had growth up to 350,000 residents. New people would move in and new people would enter the productive workforce. This dynamic created both new producers who were also new consumers. Which in turn created new demand for everything like housing, everything that went inside a house, and cars, and supermarkets, etc.

The day Stockton stopped increasing its population is the day much of the demand ceased to exist. No need to build a new house, as there was no new consumer there to buy it, nor buy anything to put inside of it, nor a new Audi for the driveway, nor food from the supermarket to stock the pantry.

At the same time, all of the industries were getting more and more productive by using technology and automation. 20 years ago, when Stockton was only 100,000 in population, businesses needed 100,000 workers to output goods and services for 100,000 people. Now the very same businesses need 200,000 workers to output goods and services to satisfy 350,000 people.

So the day of reckoning cometh.

Industry now has more output capacity than demand. Demand is capped by population growth. Ergo no new consumers. Ergo no new creation of jobs.

Our countries economic growth has been driven by population growth.

Japan has the same issues. The day their population growth went flat (negative actually), is the day they went into a permanent recession. That was in 1991.

I have thought long and hard about this, and I believe the "Japanification" of America, is inevitable.

Bonus answer: The new employment we see now, are the replacements for those retiring. Only it's more like a 3:1 ratio. Where 3 people retire, and only 1 is hired to replace them.

I grew up in manufacturing and stay on to of it. What you are quoting is the old myth that automation net-net replaces workers. It does not. Someone has to design the machine, someone will build the parts to make the machine, someone has to assemble the machine, someone has to run it, still more keep it running. We do all of those better than anybody else (so far). Those people are all creating demand for products. Those are all skilled and semi skilled jobs that pay decently (without unions) because of supply and demand for skilled labor. Those are the jobs and industries of the future and the jobs that our state and federal government are driving off shore as fast as they can. Well those jobs and all of the jobs involved in developing out own plentiful natural resources. Those are being regulated out of existence.

Censor those pics - that's Ayn-Randite porn!

I used to build and service automated systems. What you wind up with is lower costs driving greater demand and more machines being installed needing more people to maintain them. You do wind up with fewer total people based on finite markets but what you have left make more money than hand assemblers and buy goods that they would not have otherwise been able to afford which brings employment for others that making other desirable items and a rising standard of living for everybody. The monkey wrench in the works is government restricting access to cheap raw materials and energy. Believe it or not those that made buggy whips, and buggies, and shod horses and of course muleskinners found other employment once the horseless carriage became popular.

i don't think i needed a recent article to tell me that stockton and modesto are shitty places to live. in fact, they've been that way for at least 30 years, at least as far as people in NV are concerned.

you get rid of the cow poo smell, i still wouldn't live there. it's just too nice to live just 30 minutes further east.

Or 1 hour west.