Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 17, 2013 at 2:43 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757913January 17, 2013 at 2:32 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757911
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=no_such_reality]…If someone gifted me that Buena Park house, I’d keep it and rent it. I know that area and it’s manageable for me as a rental. The Escondido house, is much less accessible being an hour plus without traffic to get to and I have no familiarity with the area.
The little rough gem in BP is sadly, probably a $2000+/month rental. I’ve lived in far worse when I was a renter.
And again, my real point with the BP house is that it’s essentially upper bounds for a $100K earner in Orange County without making yourself stupidly house poor. A living wage is 1/3rd of gross for housing. Well, they’re running close enough and that’s making $100K.[/quote]
Okay, I’m glad to hear this, NSR. A married $100K wage earner who is claiming three exemptions might take home ~$92K, no?
You have to agree that the BP house IS conveniently located. And the photos show it modernized and in pretty good shape (MUCH better than the Esco house) and it sits on a nice-sized lot. It’s lacking in curb appeal, which is fairly cheap to fix. However, its street and curbs look as though they need resurfacing (common in SD, as well).
Do houses in this area sell as principal residences or do they primarily sell to buy-to-let investors? And if they don’t usually sell as principal residences to the sub $100K crowd, why not? Are there any tasteful second stories in this area and is it worth it to put one on? If not, what price would a buyer have to pay for this property to make a second story pencil out (to preserve the backyard)?
I’m asking these questions to find out if typical “OC” buyers in this price range would tend to pass over a listing like this in favor of a big stucco box in the IE, causing them to wait in line on the 91 for 2 hrs daily. What other (SFR) choices to they have in the OC, NSR?
Lastly, can the kids take the bus from there to Knott’s Berry Farm on season passes? 🙂
NSR, WHO will likely buy this property and what will it sell for??
January 17, 2013 at 12:36 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757907Participant[quote=no_such_reality]As I said previously, rent it, sell it or live it. It all depends. It is RE, and location, location, location. If you don’t have a job or business in the area, rent it or sell it.
The even bigger thing is when was it given.
Either way, it’s a $300,000 windfall. It’s inheritance that smokes 99% of the population’s inheritances.
It is a silver spoon.
Do you know why? I’d sell it, take all but about $50K the proceeds pay my house down to a really low conforming loan and refi into a 15 yr fixed. I’d than make an extra principal payment while saving about $300/month for five years, then take the $50K rainy day money, along with another little rainy day pile and just pay it off. Provided I haven’t had great misfortune requiring me to hit the funds.
Again, I’m in OC, my business is in OC. Many people, live in OC. Hence, that little gem in Buena Park is reality for many. Just like the house in Escondido is reality in SD. The job markets are slightly different, commutes different, but economic realities are the same.[/quote]
NSR, since you are now stating and previously stated below (and I didn’t catch it) that you are an OC resident, I’m changing my offer. Your grandmother just left you her “nice little house” in Buena Park where she cooked Christmas dinner for you and your family every year when you were a child.
[quote=no_such_reality]Here’s a nice little house. Only $380,000 for 1100sf and 3/1.75.
To buy it you need what? A $100K income if doing a 3% FHA loan, PITI will then be about 27% of your gross.
That neighborhood? Not horrible, not great. Renting though, is even more expensive. And that’s now, it was even worse over the last decade.[/quote]
What are you going to do with it, NSR? I’m going to go out on a limb here and say you wouldn’t move your dog into it. Even though it’s a great rental area, you don’t like dealing with tenants who would live there so you would sell it and lose its low tax basis forever. You will apply the “windfall” sales proceeds to your gargantuan mortgage on your principal residence which you have *hopefully* taken out on a property west of the 405 fwy (in a good part of Cali).
[quote-CA renter][quote=no_such_reality][quote-bearishgurl]
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-120046895-932_W_2nd_Ave_Escondido_CA_92025
[/quote]…As for the Escondido house, think about the economic advantage of not having rent, what’s that? $1400-$2200 a month they’re not forking over? That’s if they could live in Escondido. If not rent it. As for fixing, well, rent to repairs is a pretty solid repair schedule. Imagine how poor their life would be if they weren’t left the house[/quote]….In the example you’ve given, it would be difficult to find tenants who would ALWAYS pay on time and not destroy the house. That neighborhood does not attract highly educated, high-income renters with stellar credit scores. It would be okay as a rental if one lived nearby and didn’t care much about how the tenants treated the house. It might be a good investment if the buyer could get it for a lower price, along with the extra lot, and then build a duplex (More? Zoning?) on the additional lot.[/quote]If I understand your posts correctly, you and CAR wouldn’t want to rent out this property even if you inherited it free and clear because it doesn’t attract W-2 high wage earners with stellar credit. I’m sure you’re both aware that the type of house which would attract such a tenant costs nearly twice as much (or more) than the two properties above and its high carrying costs wouldn’t make renting it pencil out.
NSR, the reality is, you actually really like your “stressful lifestyle” in having to produce X amt of thousands every month to survive and even if push came to shove, you wouldn’t change a thing about your life.
There’s really nothing wrong with this, but you sort of lamented here that those who were “given a house” in Cali were living a fabulous, carefree life filled with “discretionary income” falling from trees to do whatever they wanted with.
[quote=no_such_reality]….Negative connotations aside of your post, you make our point, you need to down-grade your material lifestyle or make $200K plus to be in the good parts of Cali. And unless someone left you a house, $100K in Cali is lower middle income existence and it just gets worse as you go down from there. And I’m OC/LA where the housing and expense issue is even more pronounced than SD….[/quote]
Based on your posts, NSR, I don’t think you’re interested in living the “stress-free life” of an “heir-occupant” on even $100K per year! You might be surprised to learn that all of the “heir-occupants” I am acquainted with live on small pensions, disability checks, UI, worker’s comp and SS (or a combination of the above). Two are still working (as a tow-truck driver and maintenance worker) and thus ALL of these “heirs” likely have annual incomes between $14K and $35K! “Humble” boomers in jeans, these people are only children, surviving children (their sibling[s] died) and usually took care of their surviving parent until they died and maybe both of them at one time.
CAR is correct that there are often multiple “heirs” on CA estates leaving behind long-owned RE. But sometimes the more “well-heeled” siblings living out of county are okay with giving their disabled sibling a “life estate” in the property if they promise to maintain it and pay the taxes and insurance premiums, especially if that sibling has taken care of their infirm parents for several (or many) years of their lives. That “heir-occupant” cannot borrow off the property without the signatures of the other owner(s) so it is kept free and clear for the life of the disabled sibling/former caregiver. Sometimes a elder parent with more than one child expressly leaves their house to the child who has taken care of them (who most needs it) and has other assets to distribute to other children.
The typical “heir-occupant” under age 65 living in a $250K to $450K neighborhood in CA usually qualifies for “lifeline” utility rates and some qualify for Medi-Cal or CMS. They pick and eat their own fruit from their backyard and shop at Grocery Outlet, the Navy Commissary, local produce stands, swap meets and thrift stores. They don’t have any credit cards. They still use their parents’ old TV, furniture, carpet, flooring and even their vehicle and have basic cable or rabbit ears. Those who have cell phones have prepaid plans and basic phones with voice only. Some are still taking care of their deceased parent’s pets.
Some of them are physically unable to maintain their landscaping and house properly and have to get help from friends, relatives and neighbors.
Without their parents’ home to live in, most of them would no doubt be homeless and their more highly-educated, non-disabled sibling(s) realize this.
Are these “heir-occupants” happy and “stress-free?” I don’t know. They likely have their problems too and some are in poor health. I’m sure they are aware, however, that this is as good as life gets for them :=]
ParticipantI forwarded this map to my “Gen Y brethren” (kids) up north and they got a big kick out of it. They refer to SD as the “Whale’s Vagina” every time they travel here, lol . . .
January 16, 2013 at 3:01 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757843Participant[quote=no_such_reality]BG, again, you’re missing the point. Taxes are high and are one component of the high expenses it takes to live here. Meanwhile opportunities are falling and the Gen-Y you like to rail against in Cali has lower expectations than their parents. We’ve had that discussion before, areas where the up coming generations have lower expectations than the current generation stagnate and decline.
Housing and other expenses attribute greatly to the housing disconnect and the general dissatisfaction with SoCal once people are done with their single years.
There is a continued pressure on the upper middle class that influences out migration of that critical tax and consumer base. As people begin to look elsewhere, they are seeing more opportunity, less government interference, less expenditures and equal quality of life issues.
California, through tax policy, regulation and good fortune is accelerating the income divide between the haves and the have nots with the the middle ground disappearing. We as society in California will not survive the continued drain on quality jobs and lowered quality of life expectations for middle income $50K-$150K people and people starting out from college.
When I say good areas, I mean desirable. IOW, coastal. In LA/OC that’s west of the 405. In OC, almost all SFRs sub-$400K are in neighborhoods that are either bad as in dangerous or have a high concentration of one ethnicity. OC is fairly self segregated. As you move inland, particularly, the IE, I see no reason not to move to Phoenix, SLC, Denver, Texas. You’ve got the same climate and you’re two hours from the beach anyway.
Here’s a nice little house. Only $380,000 for 1100sf and 3/1.75.
To buy it you need what? A $100K income if doing a 3% FHA loan, PITI will then be about 27% of your gross.
That neighborhood? Not horrible, not great. Renting though, is even more expensive. And that’s now, it was even worse over the last decade.
As for the Escondido house, think about the economic advantage of not having rent, what’s that? $1400-$2200 a month they’re not forking over? That’s if they could live in Escondido. If not rent it. As for fixing, well, rent to repairs is a pretty solid repair schedule. Imagine how poor their life would be if they weren’t left the house.[/quote]
A few things here, NSR.
First, Gen Y DOES have much higher expectations than generations prior, in working conditions, living conditions and in the material gadgets they can’t live without. It doesn’t matter where they live. These preferences are generational.
I KNOW this TV show is staged, but House Hunters (HGTV) was touring with FTB’s in Michigan, Wisconsin and Alabama over the weekend. All were in the $200K range and wanted to be close to work (had mostly established urban choices) but I couldn’t believe the (lame) reasons these buyers gave their agent for “rejecting” a property:
“It has Formica countertops.”
“These (newish) appliances aren’t stainless steel.”
“This parquet flooring (in good cond) needs to be replaced before I would move in.”
And most incredulous of all, “I don’t like the `flow’.”
Jeez, how can they complain about “flow” in their respective price ranges? Am I missing something? With everything else they have to deal with, is a middle-income FTB supposed to be concerned about “flow?”
And how picky do you think a FT FHA or VA buyer should be and still be able to consummate a deal with a “real” equity seller?
In my mind, these are all RIDICULOUS reasons for rejecting a property located in the area a buyer needs to live in.
All of the buyers were lured further out by their agents due to their “complaints” about dated features and two made a deal outside of their stated location parameters and chose to “commute.” Or at least the one who was going to do the “commuting” did so to make his spouse “happy.”
And the one whose spouse hated the color of the appls bought that property and replaced the perfectly good white appls with SS models prior to move in :=0
I don’t think the depiction of Gen Y buyers on HGTV is too far off from reality.
***
I DO believe SD salaries are not as proportionate to the cost of living here as are salaries in other major cities, both in and out of CA.
I don’t understand what you mean by the phrase “… once people are done with their single years.”
Of course, one can’t easily raise a family in the studio apt they lived in their college years but why is there such a “housing disconnect” here if one went to college in SD or other part of SoCal and are already familiar with the local area? They (and their new spouse) are both making good salaries now, no? Those salaries are MUCH bigger than generations past made at the same age. Are you saying that SD is fine for Gen Y to live in as long as they are single?
***
Regarding your “coastal parameters” being “a good area of Cali,” do you think past generations typically bought their first (or second) homes within those parameters? If they couldn’t, why do you think YOU should be able to?
***
Sorry, but SLC and Denver are much, MUCH colder than the IE. When the last time you’ve been in either city in the winter, NSR? Phoenix is MUCH hotter than the IE at least 7 months per year. Most of TX is VERY flat and is subject to high humidity, high winds, chiggers and ice storms.
All the above are actually good places to live. And Denver, CO RE is more expensive than all of those places (as well as the IE) for many reasons other than cold weather. All I’m saying here is that you get what you pay for in life. If you want to leave So Cal, just know what you are getting into first.
***
Your “nice little house” sample in Buena Park is conveniently located … yes. But it can be beat hands-down in price and build quality in many urban and close-in suburban areas of SD. The FHA allows at least a 38% back-end ratio, IIRC.
***
From your comments here, I still don’t understand how YOU, as an heir, would deal with or dispose of the Escondido home you just inherited. And exactly what is wrong with Escondido? Would whatever was seemingly wrong with Esco be somewhat mitigated if you got the property for “free?” Would it be too much work for you to fix up to rent out? If not, would you lease it out? And don’t forget that it has an adjacent parcel that grandma never did anything with …
I’m curious as to your responses re: a “free” house given to you so you can have a “stress free” life in Cali.
January 16, 2013 at 12:35 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757831Participant[quote-no_such_reality]….Negative connotations aside of your post, you make our point, you need to down-grade your material lifestyle or make $200K plus to be in the good parts of Cali. And unless someone left you a house, $100K in Cali is lower middle income existence and it just gets worse as you go down from there. And I’m OC/LA where the housing and expense issue is even more pronounced than SD….[/quote]
IIRC, you are a SD North County resident, NSR. Let’s assume your grandmother on your mom’s side with whom you spent many weekends swinging on her tree swing as a child enjoying the view and good family times and remember them fondly, has recently died. She was widowed at 44 and you just found out she has left you her home and adjacent lot, free and clear with Prop 13 “protection” on it. Taxes are currently $505 annually, per SD Assessor.
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-120046895-932_W_2nd_Ave_Escondido_CA_92025
Would YOU live in it? Would YOU move your family into it? Would you do repairs/improvements on it? Would YOU live there for the rest of your life in order to pay NO MORTGAGE and LOW TAXES and live “stress-free” in Cali (with lots of discretionary income)? OR would you immediately mortgage it and invest in the stock market or buy another rental and/or vehicles and bling. Would you rent it out and keep paying your current mortgage? OR would you immediately sell it and lose the Prop 13 “protection” on it forever?
The truth is that the vast majority of these “heirs” who were fortunate enough to be “left a house” in CA moved into it before or shortly after the death of the owner and will live out the rest of their lives in residence and perhaps even pass it on to their children. They weren’t “picky” about anything regarding the property, i.e. location, size, condition, etc. They simply did as much work they could afford to do on it when they took title of it (or did NO work if they couldn’t afford to at the time) and moved in. They don’t have a “glamorous lifestyle” but can live, eat and pay for their utilites (often at “lifeline rates”).
MOST of these heirs didn’t mortgage their “inherited” properties to death to buy vehicles and bling. And many of the ones who did lost their longtime family homes to foreclosure.
So, what would YOU do, NSR??
And where do you consider to be the “good parts of Cali?”
January 16, 2013 at 11:29 AM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757826Participant[quote=earlyretirement][quote=SK in CV]
So none of them actually left because of the tax increase on very high income taxpayers.[/quote]I know many people that have moved out of San Diego. Most of them were former college classmates. But quite honestly none of them moved out of California due to the high taxes. They moved out because they couldn’t find a good job where they could make as much as other places. I’m quite sure they would have stayed had they been able to find decent jobs for their experience/education.
And I have to say that most of them were living way above their means for many years. Many of them took out equity of their homes (using them as a virtual ATM machine) and eventually lost their houses.
But high taxes didn’t have anything to do with it.[/quote]
I agree with you than pay scales in SD are an issue when compared with other large cities in CA and elsewhere.
ER, are you originally from SD or another part of CA?
January 16, 2013 at 11:22 AM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757824Participant[quote=no_such_reality]BG, I know plenty of those Asian and East Indian immigrants. Many are in debt up to their eyeballs. And that’s inspite of both of them being highly educated, highly employed and frankly, they’re wondering how to get off the financial treadmill too.
I also know plenty that are working their backsides off scraping to build wealth and get enough capital to open that 2nd franchise or buy the next rental.
BTW, have been to fly-over land lately? Asian and East Indian immigrants are common.
Negative connotations aside of your post, you make our point, you need to down-grade your material lifestyle or make $200K plus to be in the good parts of Cali. And unless someone left you a house, $100K in Cali is lower middle income existence and it just gets worse as you go down from there.[/quote]
Yes, I’ve been to several hospitals in “flyover land” in recent years visiting relatives and noticed that nearly all the new resident/interns as well as many physicians and PAs are of Eastern Indian descent.
And when I was researching the effects of fracking on water quality here a few weeks back, I noticed that most of the petroleum engineering students (and some teachers) at OU were of East Indian descent.
I don’t think most of these immigrants grew up with a “silver spoon.” And many of their parents obviously sacrificed mightily to send them to college in the US. They will go wherever the best opportunities for themselves are. They don’t have a “need” to live close to a coast. Any place in America is better than their homeland, due to the better economic opportunities they present. Economic opportunity is the only reason most of these immigrants sought permanent residency in the US after graduation, IMHO.
Contrast the immigrants to an American Gen X/Y who had their own horses in TX … while growing up in a 4400 sf home on daddy’s ranch (that their dad and other relatives built on land long-owned by family members). That individual (even if only a HS Grad) is NOT going to be happy with what they can “afford” to live in in SD, no matter HOW much they and/or their spouses make. Even as a military spouse stuck in SD Navy Housing or Camp Pendleton, my experience was that these “silver-spoon types” typically hate the lifestyle here, whether living in military quarters … or not.
The CA coastal housing disconnect is not fixable because it is part of the transplanted resident (or soon-to-be transplant who may or may not take the transfer on offer due to this “disconnect”). It is psychological but I will stop short of saying it’s a “problem.” It’s only a “problem” for those who are chronically disenchanted with the tradeoffs they must make to live in a particular locale. Since it’s a “free country,” they are free to leave (as the OP is finally doing here). And agents/brokers are free to see thru this “disconnect” early on and fire these “buyer” clients, freeing them up to find someone else to help them find what they are looking for in their price range, lol.
January 16, 2013 at 10:23 AM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757818Participant[quote=no_such_reality][quote=SK in CV][quote=no_such_reality]However, my point was to counter the ‘everybody will come crawling back to SD meme'[/quote]
Point taken. People leave for a lot of reasons. I left and it had nothing to do with taxes. I’m quite content but still expect I’ll be back some day.[/quote]
Probably when you retire and have amassed a nicer nest egg than is possible in California.
As someone else said, California’s real problem is the out migration of the $75K-$200K crowd. The people that make lots of bank but in Coastal California are just getting by.[/quote]
What about all the Asian and East Indian immigrants who came to CA to go to school, graduated and then got jobs here in tech, medicine and law? They make “bank” and aren’t hankering to move to St Louis … that is, unless a random headhunter taps them with a more lucrative job offer elsewhere in the country.
They’re paying massive payroll taxes and not leaving by choice or because they have a “housing disconnect.”
The “housing disconnect” occurs primarily in American citizens who can’t accept that the calibur of the house they grew up in will never be theirs, likely because their parents sacrificed far more than they are willing to in order to keep it while they were growing up. It also occurs in the transferred-in employee who is “used” to more space and a newer, larger home out of state. It is very, very hard for these incoming transferees from the flyover states (ESP for their spouses) to “envision” themselves living in a circa 1961 remodeled 2150 sf 4/2/2 in Clairemont (92111) on a 6500 sf lot in order to be close to their new job in LJ.
These are the ones who tend to defect to lizardland and the IE to even get a semblance of the housing that they and their families were “used-to” in less-populous, less-desirable states, turning the transferee into a “road warrior.” The whole family tires of his/her “road-warrior” lifestyle and transfers out within five years instead of finding a place closer in.
January 16, 2013 at 9:48 AM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757813Participant[quote=no_such_reality]…Friend #2, moved to Austin 6 years ago. No longer stressed, feeling broke and living in a nice house on an acre instead of scraping by in a one bedroom apartment in beach town.
Friends #3, went St Louis 6 years ago. Happy, job is good, lots of opportunity. Has a 15 minute commute instead of an hour plus from the IE to the coast…[/quote]
NSR, based upon the info you gave us, I’m going to take “umbrage” with the “not-so-hidden” but nonetheless “real” reasons your “friends #2 and #3” defected from SoCal.
Reread my previous post on this thread about the “disconnect in the mind” about what particular properties “should sell for” in CA coastal counties and what they actually sell for. Those transplants that can’t get a grip on this phenomenon more often than not leave 1-5 years after arrival.
I’ve posted this several times on this forum and even stated a few times that the “housing expectations” of most transplants (even if assisted with their move by an employer) have to be carefully “managed” by their agent/broker assisting them in their search or hundreds of hours will be wasted by all with no sale.
Friend’s #2 and #3’s REAL issue was that they couldn’t obtain the “lifestyle” (read: size and/or location of housing) in So Cal that they saw others own and fantasized about owning themselves. Perhaps it was because they entered SoCal at a time when they watched a lot of “pretend” homeowners who used “funny money” to purchase their properties and home “equity” to live off of live the life they wanted.
The truth is, Friend #2 didn’t want to leave his/her “beach area” OR was renting a luxury apt/condo elsewhere in SD. They didn’t want to pay LESS rent and save MORE for a downpayment for a house because they couldn’t stomach leaving their beach locale or luxury unit for lesser local digs while they saved. Why am I saying this? Because they managed to purchase a house on an acre in Austin ($275K – $375K). So that person moved to Austin in 2006 and then purchased a property which may or may not (more likely not) be worth any more today or even tomorrow.
Friend #3’s housing disconnect is even MORE pronounced. They bought/rented in the IE all the while knowing they were working “on the coast.” Therefore, they never really assimilated into the coastal area where they were working (SD County?). All during their residence in the IE until the time they left in 2006, they likely coveted a home closer to work but refused to pay the price (they could have rented). Their self-imposed road warrior lifestyle was entirely their choice. They didn’t like what was on offer to rent or buy in the area of or an adjacent area to their employment so moved out of county and commuted daily.
Had either Friend #2 or #3 just “hung on” in SoCal three more years (to 2009), they would have very likely been able to buy better (and closer) digs then what they were living in. Instead, they sought employment elsewhere and left when a job was offered to them.
I don’t buy that your “friends” were taxed out of CA. All five of them don’t sound like they were in a “category” to pay very much in taxes.
They just suffered from good old “CA housing disconnect” which is incurable. In CA coastal counties, RE buyers must accept what is on offer, rent or leave.
It’s ALWAYS been this way and will never change.
January 15, 2013 at 10:39 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757785Participant[quote=paramount][quote=NeetaT]I say “good for you” if you leave CA to move to a business friendly state. I will eventually do the same thing. The Sacramento “Gravy Train” will inevitably fall just like the Roman Empire. CA is such a nice place to live with the exception of the welfare government. What a shame it is to be subject to Sacramento’s extortion.[/quote]
Very well said, my plan – rather than move – is severely reduce my expenditures. No discretionary spending at all – no eating out, no new cars or BMW’s.
Nothing. Staples only.[/quote]
paramount, you are not alone. What you describe here is actually what most homeowners in SD County do to stay afloat and still raise a family and save for college/retirement simultaneously.
The beauty of this plan is, SD is NOT Kansas City. You can feel like you’re on “vacation” in your off-hours without leaving home :=]
It is only when their house is paid off that their discretionary income level goes up, whether they are still working … or not.
January 15, 2013 at 10:05 PM in reply to: Prop 30 money sold as funds for schools – watchdog reveals something else #757783Participant[quote=mike92104][quote=SK in CV][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I don’t know the statistics, but at least one person I know is moving to Nevada.
He doesn’t need to work for a company. Has no family ties to this state. I can understand why moving to Nevada becomes attractive to him. Most people affected by prop 30 won’t move because they have a job, family, friends and roots that will keep them here.[/quote]
In the past, both in CA and in other states, the statistics have been that there has been no material change in the number of high income taxpayers when rates go up. Not zero. But no material change.
I think the real worry should be on the middle income taxpayers. I know of 7 individual or couple that have moved out of the state in the last 2 years. All went to lower tax burden states. Washington, Arizona, and Texas.[/quote]
Uhhh, Mike? Hello?? Your “friends” haven’t been gone long enough to crawl back to SD broke and desperate to “start over” after asking to “rent a room” from you “for just six months.”
If they bought homes in their new locale, did they (or you) actually think they could get out with their heads above water in ~3 years?
Think again.
They are going to end up telling you that they will do anything to get outta there and back to SD.
Give it another year-plus.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Thanks for the suggestions, BG. Yes, those ankle boots are what I prefer to wear when having to wear “proper” shoes. Unfortunately, it’s not easy to find professional clothing to go with them. We need women’s pumps that are extremely comfortable and don’t squeeze the toes like most pumps do. Like you and scaredy, being barefoot was always my thing and, as you’ve said, it can cause your feet to not quite fit into most women’s shoes. 🙂
Never did understand how women could wear stilettos for more than two seconds, and wearing them while pregnant must have been tons of fun! ;)[/quote]
CAR, here’s a big collection of VERY comfortable pumps. Some styles come in wide widths, as well.
http://www.sofftshoe.com/fall2012-pumps
I have some very similar dress sandals to these, which I got at Nordstrom’s Rack for just $38 🙂
http://www.sofftshoe.com/Sofft-Ibiza-in-Black-Patent-color
Of course, we didn’t know about these brands back in the day … and only one or two of them likely existed back then. We know so much more today about what working all day in stilettos will do to your feet (and your gait, as scaredy mentioned). I had to work on pilates reformer machines to correct my gait and posture and STILL have to do daily exercises for this.
I DID have some more practical “Easy Spirit” pumps in my collection of stilettos back then but they were annoying to wear because they activated the metal detector in the Federal Courthouse every time I had to go thru, frequently carrying a load of stuff :=0 (This was before 9/11.)
A lot of the paper and file shuffling we did manually on our feet carrying stuff and rolling baskets up and down elevators and back and forth across the street is just done electronically from cubicles and judge’s benches by pants-wearing clerks now, thanks to e-filing and pdf documents :=]
We weren’t allowed to dress that way. Skirts and hose were mandatory on days we only popped in and out of courtrooms as well as stayed in there for hgs.
Participant[quote=CA renter]They need those for women, too. Can’t figure out why nobody has managed to make a woman’s shoe that is stylish, yet comfortable. Doesn’t matter how much you’re willing to spend, women’s shoes are torture devices.[/quote]
I understand, CAR. I went barefoot most of my youth and when I wasn’t wearing Dr. Scholl’s wood sandals, I wore moccasins in the snow which caused my feet to “spread out.” I now can’t fit into the most “stylish” shoes, ESP the heeled sandals. I prefer:
http://www.olukai.com/ProductPurchase.aspx
(most of them work well in water, also)
http://us.shop.ecco.com/women/women,default,sc.html
(the sandals are the most comfortable)
http://www.clarksusa.com/eng/categories/womens/clogs
Their clogs feel great and are nice-looking and have the look of boots when wearing flared or boot-cut jeans/pants with them.
http://www.naturalizer.com/en-US/Womens/_/_/Boots~Ankle/_/Products.aspx
Their ankle boots (abt 3″ heel) are VERY comfortable. (I don’t like to wear tall boots in SD because they are too hot.)
I wore pointed stiletto pumps for years back in the day (even while pregnant, lol) when working in dtn SD.
Bad, bad mistake which I am now paying for :=0
January 14, 2013 at 4:17 PM in reply to: Hottest Up-Coming Neighborhoods in 2013 : Mira Mesa #757707ParticipantI was just perusing Wiki and noticed that Livermore now has two stops for the ACE, a commuter train from Stockton to SJ. A LIV to SJ one-way trip takes one hour, seven minutes.
http://www.acerail.com/ridingace/trainschedules.aspx
It also stated a petition drive had been undertaken by a fmr mayor of Dublin to bring the BART all the way out to Livermore but I do not know if the idea ever made it on the ballot as it would be VERY expensive to do so.
-
AuthorPosts
