Houston cost of living more than NYC?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

It's bullshit to say Houston doesn't have a few areas where you can have a Manhattan-lite experience. Take a look at all the high-rises and retail all along Post Oak Blvd. Can live in a high-rise apartment on top of a very nice Whole Foods. The area is walkable and a real BRT line which will in essence be no different than high capacity light rail running down the middle. How about on Montrose. Very walkable - can grocery shop at the Disco Kroger and shop and dine to your heart's content. Look at the density of single family stock off W. Gray between Shepherd and Montrose and the new high rise being built next to Brasserie 19.

This is an article from the Kinder Institute at Rice. The highest density neighborhoods in Houston are the ghetto shitholes I mentioned in previous posts. Those aren't applicable for people like us. The ones that apply to our situation have the following:

When we look at the next tier of dense communities—Mid-West, Pecan Park, and Montrose—the realities of what density looks like begins to change. All three communities have around 10,000 people per square mile, comparable to the overall density of Newark, New Jersey. What Taking Stock makes clear, though, is that each of these communities achieves this density in a unique way.

https://kinder.rice.edu/2017/04/17/sure-houston-has-sprawl-but-some-areas-have-east-coast-levels-of-density

I like how you discount Houston's "ghetto shitholes" but then compare those 3 neighborhoods to Newark, NJ.  Ignoring the fact that many would call Newark the same thing, it also isn't particularly dense.  It is the same geographic size that it was in 1930, but has almost half the population it had then.  It has pockets of density, pockets of abandoned areas, and seaport/airport included as well.  Jersey City is a better comparison since it is still alive and growing.  It has a population density of about 16,500 per square mile.  Of course it also has a lot of seaport and industry so the places where people live actually have density roughly equal to Union City at 50,000 per square mile.

In the end, the next tier you mention is more similar to downtown Rutherford, NJ.  Single family neighborhood with a completely walkable main street (no front parking lots unlike Montrose) and anchored by a train station (also unlike Montrose).

Houston also has two high rise tower models.  Tower on a parking pedestal and tower with a parking wart on the side of it.  Both of those aren't necessarily good for walkability, but it depends on the people who live in them.

 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19171]

Those 2 German cars give you $1000 more per month to spend in NYC when you get rid of them.  For that extra grand, you can find that 2-2 you want in a good neighborhood.
Also, the only real comparison to Manhattan is River Oaks or wherever someone like James Harden lives.  Penelope lives not far from Arod and J-Lo.  I do get that young people don't want to live in River Oaks because there isn't shit to do, but none of the other places in Houston are really comparable.
Penelope and Iconoclast not wanting to live somewhere doesn't equal undesirable.  There are plenty of people in Forest Hills that make a lot more than Penelope does.  Its a family geared environment, has affordable housing as well as "luxury" housing, has express subway service, and has maybe the best overall set of open enrollment public schools in the whole city.  And while it also attracts wealthy single people from LI and the rest of Queens, it doesn't attract wealthy single people from elsewhere who moved to NYC specifically for Manhattan and Manhattan alone unless they have kids. 
Most of the neighborhoods I've been listing were always good and middle class even when the city was going through the shitter in the 80s.  They aren't "cool" though so they've actually had pretty decent price stability over the years.  Which brings up another difference between NYC and Houston.  Pretty much all the pricing increases lately are driven by single people and the schools in newly expensive areas are pretty terrible. In other cities, Houston and NYC suburbs included, good schools are a primary driver of housing value.

Sounds like you live in Forest Hills.

I looked at both Forest Hills and Rego Park and other areas. With my dogs, I would have had to keep my car. Car payment + garage + insurance would be roughly 1k. Rent was still going to run me 3-4k at a minimum. If the subway goes down, other than toughing it out, no option other than driving which is a fucking beating. The premise that Houston is more expensive than NYC is fucking dumb. The premise of the Texas Monthly article and the study are incredibly flawed.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

11 minutes ago, next2naus said:

cabs, car service, montly metrocard, LIRR, MetroNorth, NJT, all that shit cost money to get around. I paid for all that living in the city and I owned cars, which can cost several hundred a month to park and Auto Insurance in NYC ain't cheap.

And while those are choices, not necessities, those choices were actually included in the research.  Hell of a commute you had taking all 3 commuter railroads, the subway, and car services every day.

I keep my yacht parked by Battery Park.  Its just SOOOO expensive here.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 minute ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Sounds like you live in Forest Hills.

I looked at both Forest Hills and Rego Park and other areas. With my dogs, I would have had to keep my car. Car payment + garage + insurance would be roughly 1k. Rent was still going to run me 3-4k at a minimum. If the subway goes down, other than toughing it out, no option other than driving which is a fucking beating. The premise that Houston is more expensive than NYC is fucking dumb. The premise of the Texas Monthly article and the study are incredibly flawed.

Nope, though I did live there around 15 years ago.  Although I don't recall a time ever when the entire Queens Blvd line went down (it has 4 tracks and services on it), there are other options like the Q60 which can take you to Manhattan.  A car is a complete pain in the ass over there.  I still had mine from Texas at the time.  I ASP'd it for about 3 months while never driving it a single time for any other reason.  Had enough and sold it. 

There are plenty of places with dog runs, but wait and pretty much every park will have a dog run in it.  My Community Board area has 5 in the works right now.  I imagine Forest Hills' CB is similar.  

And to be frank, exactly zero people in Queens and Brooklyn get a car because the subway may go down.  People get a car if they have to work in LI or if they just want one for weekend getaways.  If the MTA or a taxi can't get them to Manhattan, then they just don't go to Manhattan.  But again, people do complain a lot, but it really comes down to a 5 minute delay once or twice a week and a 30 minute delay maybe twice a month.  It isn't as bad as perceived.  Homeless sleeping on the train at rush hour is a bigger problem than delays.

The study isn't flawed.  Your particular expenses and desires are quite expensive, but you're applying them to everyone across the board.  The study is based on actual average expenses.  You may well get a car with an expensive note, pay to park it in a garage, and put only premium gas in it while also taking the subway to work every day and a taxi home.  Undoubtedly, there are people that do exactly that.  But the averages simply don't work out to that being a common thing and it certainly isn't a necessary thing.  The feeling of "needing" a car is a rest of America thing.  Many people that grow up in NYC barely even know how to drive, much less own a car.  Driving isn't a rite of passage here either.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I found a house in the Bronx for 600k.  It was a complete gut.  To get it to standard, it would cost me about 200-300k as it needed complete plumbing AND electrical work.  So, I found a house within an hour commute for 900k.  That is one of the only ones I found that did not have an astronomical coop or condo maintenance fee.  

Again, if I wanted to have a long ass commute, which I do not as my time is incredibly valuable, I would go live in NJ or Long Island, or somewhere else, but I would have an hour plus commute which would not just be the cost of my MTA pass AND would most likely need a car.  Net net, Houston is cheaper.   

FYI, I am not poor and I am not going to fucking live like it.  

I've never suggested that you live poor.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  And not knowing whether you're upper class or upper middle class, I've suggested that you understand that there are poor, lower middle class, and middle class people here that make housing and transportation decisions too.  Your decisions are not indicative of the mean or median.

I have no idea why you'd be looking at a 600k teardown in the Bronx unless it was in Fieldston in which case that would be a huge bargain, and you should buy it, gut it and resell it for 3 million. 

Co-op/Condo fees are only really high if they are mismanaged.  And co-op fees include property taxes, and usually heat, water, and utilities as well.  All these things are separate items with a single family home, and heating an old home can be astronomical if it is still using oil.  

[CHIEF 5095]

This is very simple, all housing being equal, same square footage, age, build quality, and proximity to downtown area, which is cheaper? Two family cars, gas, insurance, car payment, and parking which is cheaper? If everything that the average family has in Houston is applied to New York pricing, which one is cheaper?

CHIEF

[FondrenRoad 4378]

17 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

This is very simple, all housing being equal, same square footage, age, build quality, and proximity to downtown area, which is cheaper? Two family cars, gas, insurance, car payment, and parking which is cheaper? If everything that the average family has in Houston is applied to New York pricing, which one is cheaper?

CHIEF

Okay, find a Houston home built in 1920 with a basement. We will start there. 

[CHIEF 5095]

9 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Okay, find a Houston home built in 1920 with a basement. We will start there. 

We have attics, basements are for Incels.

CHIEF

[Stunns38 3560]

Yes you are supposed to remove car cost because cars are an unneeded luxury item in NYC, but an absolute necessity in Houston. None of the other costs are being ignored by the article. Read it. 
My day care was 175 a week until universal pre K age (free).  What does day care cost down there? Or pre-K?  After school care is free too though not quite universal yet. None of this is even income tested anymore. 
And you did show yourself to be a condescending moron for 2 days. And a fuckstick to boot. Remember, youre the asshole who is in disagreement with the OP, not me. 

$175 per week full time? That’s bullshit, even in a non hip outer borough neighborhood.

[Stunns38 3560]

I honestly don't know how you do Costco without a car.  Maybe split shit up in the parking lot and put it in backpacks or little buggies.

Zip car

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, Stunns38 said:

 

$175 per week full time? That’s bullshit, even in a non hip outer borough neighborhood.

 

Nope, it's true. And that was the going rate at every in home provider in the area at the time that was listed on OCFS.  Might be up to 200 now. Been a couple years. 

Go to the website. Pick a few random Queens neighborhoods that aren't LIC. Call a few numbers and you can verify yourself. 

If all you are calling is Bright Horizons and places like that, sure you'll pay a fortune. 

[Stunns38 3560]

Nope, it's true. And that was the going rate at every in home provider in the area at the time that was listed on OCFS.  Might be up to 200 now. Been a couple years. 
Go to the website. Pick a few random Queens neighborhoods that aren't LIC. Call a few numbers and you can verify yourself. 
If all you are calling is Bright Horizons and places like that, sure you'll pay a fortune. 

That’s still hard to believe even for licensed home providers.

I’m guessing you live in Rego Park or Elmhurst...or over by Spa Castle by the Whitestone bridge, lol.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 minute ago, Stunns38 said:

 

That’s still hard to believe even for licensed home providers.

I’m guessing you live in Rego Park or Elmhurst...or over by Spa Castle by the Whitestone bridge, lol.

 

None of the 3.  And don't get me wrong, I was surprised by the price too when I had started calling places. The only difficult thing about it are the spots are extremely limited. You have to get lucky and call at pretty much exactly the same time some other kid is stopping day care while 100 other parents are trying to do the same thing. 

All the ones in my neighborhood are Latino run, fwiw.  The one my daughter went to was great.  Nicer people than the corporate ones we checked which were much more expensive. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8823]

Okay, find a Houston home built in 1920 with a basement. We will start there. 

Hard pass. Who the hell wants a 100 year old house, with likely tiny bedrooms, a single detached garage and no yard? I couldn't imagine having a family of 4 in one of those shacks.

Ive actually never been to either city. My formulated opinion is in proper Houston I'll get more house, yard, garage, newer than proper NYC.

Good lord just did some Google satellite zooming on nyc, Brooklyn e.t.c....i fucking got claustrophobic by looking at that. I couldn't fit a piece of paper in between some of those houses

[52-80 19271]

is the shouting over yet?

[Bevo 13606]

My brother leased a 1 bedroom in Manhattan for close to $6000 per month, so this hits close to home.

[DaysOff 7978]

I once shared a crashpad in Elizabeth, NJ with like 50 other dudes. Gigantic house in a pleasant neighborhood with families which seemed safe right next to Newark. I sure most people had cars. It's laughable that Fondren thinks anywhere within the tri state area is "cheaper" than Houston once taxes and prices for goods and services are included.

[Iceman 2726]

7 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

I once shared a crashpad in Elizabeth, NJ with like 50 other dudes. 

Most folks just say, “ I was in County...”

[huge 3795]

14 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Okay, find a Houston home built in 1920 with a basement. We will start there. 

My house was built in 1920.  No basement.

[Js1 85636]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

is the shouting over yet?

This whole thread is in the top 10 reasons the internet is failing society 

Everyone believes everyone else should conform to their lifestyle. And Texans are guaranteed by God a 4 bedroom, 4.5 bath house with 2 SUVs and a truck in the garage.  They couldn’t live without it. 

[TwiceHorn 31624]

Can someone figure out how I can live in Vancouver on the cheap?  While more or less duplicating my inner-Dallas-burb life?

TIA!

[MaybeACoordinator 8350]

47 minutes ago, huge said:

My house was built in 1920.  No basement.

Grandparents house, where I lived half the time as a kid / teen, was built in 1923, and it is a rare Houston house with a basement. Not much of one, but there were stairs that went down and into a cave-like room.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Hard pass. Who the hell wants a 100 year old house, with likely tiny bedrooms, a single detached garage and no yard? I couldn't imagine having a family of 4 in one of those shacks.

Ive actually never been to either city. My formulated opinion is in proper Houston I'll get more house, yard, garage, newer than proper NYC.

Good lord just did some Google satellite zooming on nyc, Brooklyn e.t.c....i fucking got claustrophobic by looking at that. I couldn't fit a piece of paper in between some of those houses

The 100 year old houses in NYC don't have garages at all unless they were added later. Most are beautiful homes as well. The common outer borough wall to wall 1950/60s house built directly on top of a garage is probably the ugliest housing stock NYC has to offer.  

Even in Houston, detached garages always look better.  

Newer isn't necessarily better. All those early cookie cutter areas like Sharpstown are run down these days. Even the earlier Sugar Land cookie cutter neighborhoods are dated and in low demand. None of those things were built to still have value 50 years later. 

But really, if you desire those things, NYC isn't for you. The subway is the "car", and public parks and the city itself are the "yard."

Edited January 24, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[Native Horn 3516]

56 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Grandparents house, where I lived half the time as a kid / teen, was built in 1923, and it is a rare Houston house with a basement. Not much of one, but there were stairs that went down and into a cave-like room.

I'll kill your dog, mister!  

[Dahobbs 17704]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

This whole thread is in the top 10 reasons the internet is failing society 

Everyone believes everyone else should conform to their lifestyle. And Texans are guaranteed by God a 4 bedroom, 4.5 bath house with 2 SUVs and a truck in the garage.  They couldn’t live without it. 

I dont think that was the point. New York is more expensive. Whether that expense results in a better quality of life depends on the person's preferences. I like New York. I like what it has to offer and would be comfortable sacrificing space to live there (and was close to doing so). But, for what you get when spending your dollars, Houston is cheaper. Not better. Cheaper. A bigger house, higher quality, better appliances, larger yard, and a car/better car are available in Houston for people in the same relative income bracket. Those are things you sacrifice to live in or near NYC as a result of it being more expensive. For many people it is is worth it, I have no doubt. 

 

Edited January 24, 2020 by Dahobbs

[Bevo 13606]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Can someone figure out how I can live in Vancouver on the cheap?  While more or less duplicating my inner-Dallas-burb life?

TIA!

Good question. I was looking for houses around Squamish on the sunshine coast and prices seemed pretty high by Austin standards. Probably, they are around double. 

[Bevo 13606]

13 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

But really, if you desire those things, NYC isn't for you. The subway is the "car", and public parks and the city itself are the "yard."

And walking to school is the outdoor adventure.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

8 minutes ago, Bevo said:

And walking to school is the outdoor adventure.

What is the outdoor adventure in Houston?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

15 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I dont think that was the point. New York is more expensive. Whether that expense results in a better quality of life depends on the person's preferences. I like New York. I like what it has to offer and would be comfortable sacrificing space to live there (and was close to doing so). But, for what you get when spending your dollars, Houston is cheaper. Not better. Cheaper. A bigger house, higher quality, better appliances, larger yard, and a car/better car are available in Houston for people in the same relative income bracket. Those are things you sacrifice to live in or near NYC as a result of it being more expensive. For many people it is is worth it, I have no doubt. 

 

Well, income is a factor in the article too.  How many jobs do you think pay the exact same amount in NYC and Houston?

[Dahobbs 17704]

Part of the problem with the conclusions of the study (really just data mining) is that it is measuring affordability based on what people actually spend on transportation and housing. But, that is obviously limited by income and other needs. People will generally spend as much as they can afford, so we pretty much expect that the ratio of expenses to income to fall in a relatively narrow band regardless of what the person gets for their dollars. In the sense that people do successfully live in NYC on lower budgets, it is affordable. But, to me at least, the question of whether it is cheaper requires an entirely measurement and analysis. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by Dahobbs

[Dahobbs 17704]

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

Well, income is a factor in the article too.  How many jobs do you think pay the exact same amount in NYC and Houston?

Yes, income is a factor. I think the relative difference is 13% more for NYC. A good portion, if not all of that, is taken up by the increased tax burden. And, even if you adjusted based on the increased income, NYC is still not cheaper. And it isn't close. But, as I alluded to above, I honestly think you're trying to measure something different than "cheapness."

[ZB'Tejas 593]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

This whole thread is in the top 10 reasons the internet is failing society 

Everyone believes everyone else should conform to their lifestyle. And Texans are guaranteed by God a 4 bedroom, 4.5 bath house with 2 SUVs and a truck in the garage.  They couldn’t live without it. 

American by birth and Texan by the grace of God, amirite?

[Iceman 2726]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

This whole thread is in the top 10 reasons the internet is failing society 

Everyone believes everyone else should conform to their lifestyle. And Texans are guaranteed by God a 4 bedroom, 4.5 bath house with 2 SUVs and a truck in the garage.  They couldn’t live without it. 

I don’t expect them to change.  Just don’t piss down my leg and tell me it’s raining.

The comparison in the original post is not remotely apples to apples.  The headline is deliberately bullshit.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Iceman

[Js1 85636]

20 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

What is the outdoor adventure in Houston?

House to car or work to car with minimal sweating? 

[achooloco 1086]

On 1/23/2020 at 11:55 AM, FondrenRoad said:

None of those neighborhoods except Bayside are inconvenient for subway service.  Car ownership isn't common or needed in them either.  Sunnyside is 5 stops to GCT. 3 stops to 59 and Lex. Forest Hills is 4 stops to 53 and Lex.  Queens is less convenient to get downtown, but it's much faster to get to Midtown than it is from hipster Brooklyn.

Not sure if this has been addressed but this post is very uninformed. There is literally construction/maintenance every wknd on that forest hills line, and if you include sunny side and Astoria, there will always be one line that is rerouted or down. We don’t need cars but yes, Forrest hills is inconvenient. Midtown to Astoria can be 35-50 min and I have a better commute than most. Rego park or FH? Forget it, crazy long. And to get to dt from Astoria, always at least 45 min, if not closer to 55 Min most days. So yeah the subway might be there but it makes your life terrible.

Subway service is inconvenient when you have to add 2 hours or longer to your commute and you are at the mercy of sick passengers, assholes holding the door, idiots falling on the tracks, signal malfunctions, water main breaks, inclement weather, dead people, people fucking, and just plain crowded trains that don’t let you get in until the third one comes on not just your train but the whole goddamn system. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

Part of the problem with the conclusions of the study (really just data mining) is that it is measuring affordability based on what people actually spend on transportation and housing. But, that is obviously limited by income and other needs. People will generally spend as much as they can afford, so we pretty much expect that the ratio of expenses to income to fall in a relatively narrow band regardless of what the person gets for their dollars. In the sense that people do successfully live in NYC on lower budgets, it is affordable. But, to me at least, the question of whether it is cheaper requires an entirely measurement and analysis. 

I don't think it requires a much different analysis than what was already done except for adding tax and transfer payments.  And even though I know you think this will work out in Houston's favor, it might not. 635,000 NYers live in NYCHA housing or get rental subsidies. 

Amounts actually paid are a much better indicator than price per square foot or "what if I wanted" analyses.  People don't want the hypothetical McMansion in Manhattan.  And if they did, and everyone could have one, then there would be no Manhattan at all really. There would be Sugar Land on Manhattan island with a few strip malls thrown in. The other thing that many Texans can't grasp, is that a lot of NYers don't really want a car no matter how much money they make. I know many native NYers who don't even have a license. 

[Spankytoes 1743]

I don't know what in the tits the argument is about, but the suggestion that Houston even comes close to the realm of expense as NYC is utter bullshit. No, I don't have a car or fuel payment. It still costs me $425 to get to work each month between the LIRR and MTA. Even more when I need a cab, Uber/Lyft or Carmel to get from point A to B. You can get a decent house for $250,000 in Houston. It would cost you $10,000+/mth. to match 50% of that space in the boroughs. Hell a studio in Astoria. Queens, which is a good value area, will run you about $2,000/mth. I don't think you could find much in the less desirable Long Island neighborhoods for less than $350,000. 

Here's an example within a few blocks of my house: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/525-W-Olive-St-Long-Beach-NY-11561/31401414_zpid/

For $600,000, you aren't getting 1,144 sq. ft. 2-bedroom in the Houston area and your house wouldn't have been built in 1950 either. (Granted, the location plays a role in pricing a bit, but I'm in the "cheap" area) Things like groceries and entertainment aren't even close. Property taxes are similar but NY has a State tax, which is worse if you happen to commute from NJ or CT. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

30 minutes ago, achooloco said:

Not sure if this has been addressed but this post is very uninformed. There is literally construction/maintenance every wknd on that forest hills line, and if you include sunny side and Astoria, there will always be one line that is rerouted or down. We don’t need cars but yes, Forrest hills is inconvenient. Midtown to Astoria can be 35-50 min and I have a better commute than most. Rego park or FH? Forget it, crazy long. And to get to dt from Astoria, always at least 45 min, if not closer to 55 Min most days. So yeah the subway might be there but it makes your life terrible.

Subway service is inconvenient when you have to add 2 hours or longer to your commute and you are at the mercy of sick passengers, assholes holding the door, idiots falling on the tracks, signal malfunctions, water main breaks, inclement weather, dead people, people fucking, and just plain crowded trains that don’t let you get in until the third one comes on not just your train but the whole goddamn system. 

If it takes you 35-50 minutes to get to midtown from Astoria then you live pretty far from the subway.  Downtown is further, yes, but that post was specifically about Midtown.

If there is maintenance going on and the subway is running local on the weekend, yes it takes longer to get to Forest Hills.  Otherwise, its fast during the daily commute.  Also, unlike Astoria, most of the dense housing (condos/co-ops) are almost right on top of the station.  The Queensboro Plaza 7/N transfer never takes longer than 5 minutes when one of them is not going to Manhattan on the weekend.  Usually, its like 1 minute.  You know who is really inconvenienced by that?  LIC because their 7 train stations are entirely shut down when that happens.  Yet LIC still makes into the "maybe" neighborhood list for every Manhattanite who makes your same complaint.  So do Williamsburg and Greenpoint whose subway service is terrible and worse than terrible.

I'm also not sure why y'all like to exaggerate.  There has not been a single time that 2 hours was added to your commute because of a subway delay unless you were stuck in one during the East Coast blackout.  And all that shit you mention happens to subway trains in Manhattan too.  The 6 is pretty much the worst train in the whole system, for example, and you can barely even get on it from the Upper East Side during rush hour.

[next2naus 439]

19 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

And while those are choices, not necessities, those choices were actually included in the research.  Hell of a commute you had taking all 3 commuter railroads, the subway, and car services every day.

I keep my yacht parked by Battery Park.  Its just SOOOO expensive here.

Commuting cost is somewhat fixed and predictable, what studies like this don't account for is for say, the costs of running about to see clients, this is a variable and its less predictable 

[next2naus 439]

parking for me was $600 a month in the FiDi. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

I don't know what in the tits the argument is about, but the suggestion that Houston even comes close to the realm of expense as NYC is utter bullshit. No, I don't have a car or fuel payment. It still costs me $425 to get to work each month between the LIRR and MTA. Even more when I need a cab, Uber/Lyft or Carmel to get from point A to B. You can get a decent house for $250,000 in Houston. It would cost you $10,000+/mth. to match 50% of that space in the boroughs. Hell a studio in Astoria. Queens, which is a good value area, will run you about $2,000/mth. I don't think you could find much in the less desirable Long Island neighborhoods for less than $350,000. 

Here's an example within a few blocks of my house: https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/525-W-Olive-St-Long-Beach-NY-11561/31401414_zpid/

For $600,000, you aren't getting 1,144 sq. ft. 2-bedroom in the Houston area and your house wouldn't have been built in 1950 either. (Granted, the location plays a role in pricing a bit, but I'm in the "cheap" area) Things like groceries and entertainment aren't even close. Property taxes are similar but NY has a State tax, which is worse if you happen to commute from NJ or CT. 

Again with the space argument.  That is entirely irrelevant.  NYC is a city.  Houston is a bunch of suburbs put together.  Its about actual expenses.  Its all in the article.  Take that $425 and compare it to the vehicle costs of your 2 car household in Houston.

Also, you live on the damn beach.  How much do you expect to pay for a house you can rent out for $400 a night during the summer?  That's cheap all things considered.  So far, all I've been hearing are a bunch of anecdotes from people that choose expensive lifestyles compared to the average NYer.  Guess what?  You aren't average.  Neither is Penelope.

Astoria is also not a good value area if you want to live near the subway.  Its simply cheaper than Manhattan and close-in Brooklyn.  The 5 million or so people who live further away from Manhattan all get better value.  A good value area is Briarwood.  Keep this in mind.  There are 8.6 million NYers.  The posters here have shown willingness to live in an area where fewer than 2 million people live.  And even that's being generous because I'm sure that most of you aren't going to choose to live above 110 street either.  Then we get to see them make a comparison between the most expensive 20% of NYC with all of Houston.

All this convo would already be finished and you'd understand the article is accurate if you also understood that NYC is a much bigger place than you realize it is.  It isn't a comparison between the cost of living in Houston and NYC for Texas people working on Wall Street.  Its a comparison between everyone living in both cities.

[elfenix 34344]

On 1/23/2020 at 12:39 PM, gmr548 said:

All that said, on balance, Houston is obviously still cheaper for an individual/ family. You could argue that all the subsidy that goes into building the Houston area into the sprawl it's become, as well as the side effects on public health, environmental quality/pollution etc. is more expensive for society on a per person basis than New York. That gets pretty academic though.

massive flooding due to development isn't academic.

[DCA_HORN 725]

This is a weird hill to die on.

[Pig Bellmont 8742]

6 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Again with the space argument.  That is entirely irrelevant.  NYC is a city.  Houston is a bunch of suburbs put together.  Its about actual expenses.  Its all in the article.  Take that $425 and compare it to the vehicle costs of your 2 car household in Houston.

Also, you live on the damn beach.  How much do you expect to pay for a house you can rent out for $400 a night during the summer?  That's cheap all things considered.  So far, all I've been hearing are a bunch of anecdotes from people that choose expensive lifestyles compared to the average NYer.  Guess what?  You aren't average.  Neither is Penelope.

Astoria is also not a good value area if you want to live near the subway.  Its simply cheaper than Manhattan and close-in Brooklyn.  The 5 million or so people who live further away from Manhattan all get better value.  A good value area is Briarwood.  Keep this in mind.  There are 8.6 million NYers.  The posters here have shown willingness to live in an area where fewer than 2 million people live.  And even that's being generous because I'm sure that most of you aren't going to choose to live above 110 street either.  Then we get to see them make a comparison between the most expensive 20% of NYC with all of Houston.

All this convo would already be finished and you'd understand the article is accurate if you also understood that NYC is a much bigger place than you realize it is.  It isn't a comparison between the cost of living in Houston and NYC for Texas people working on Wall Street.  Its a comparison between everyone living in both cities.

Nobody knows what the fuck you are arguing. Cost of housing is higher in NY. Objectively and across the board- no need for your “luxury vs necessity” BS. Cost of owning a car is higher in NY. Cost of childcare is higher in NY. Cost of utilities and food is higher in NY. Costs of taxes is higher in NY.
 

The TM article quoted a non profit that only compared housing costs and transportation costs against income numbers using federally reported data from 2016. 
 

 

The Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) compared data of housing and transportation costs as a percentage of income collected by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for different types of households in 20 peer cities with the largest economies in 2016...

Your continued defense of the article and it’s sentiment is a head scratcher given its glaring flaws and divorce from reality. Everyone with a brain knows NY is more expensive- even for those without cars, compared to people in Houston with cars.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

13 minutes ago, next2naus said:

Commuting cost is somewhat fixed and predictable, what studies like this don't account for is for say, the costs of running about to see clients, this is a variable and its less predictable 

And they don't have to for a few reasons.  They are a billable or deductible expense for one.  I see clients in Manhattan and CT typically.  The first is already part of my unlimited Metrocard.  MNR and Lyft in CT is billed.  If anything, this will end up being more expensive in Houston because in Houston, driving everywhere is a certainty.  In Manhattan, the vast majority of client visits are done via the subway using an already purchased unlimited ride card.

I flew to Chicago 2 weeks ago and will go to NC next week.  Also billed to the clients, but even if it wasn't, it isn't nor should it be a considered transportation expense for this type of comparison.

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31624]

3 hours ago, Bevo said:

Good question. I was looking for houses around Squamish on the sunshine coast and prices seemed pretty high by Austin standards. Probably, they are around double. 

Most places have Vancouver as the most expensive city in the world.

[Spankytoes 1743]

33 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

I'm also not sure why y'all like to exaggerate.  There has not been a single time that 2 hours was added to your commute because of a subway delay unless you were stuck in one during the East Coast blackout.  And all that shit you mention happens to subway trains in Manhattan too.  The 6 is pretty much the worst train in the whole system, for example, and you can barely even get on it from the Upper East Side during rush hour.

Just last week: https://www.google.com/search?q=subway+flooding&rlz=1C1GCEJ_enUS800US800&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9nbDH-ZznAhWRnFkKHdnNC2QQ_AUoAXoECAwQAw&biw=1920&bih=969

We haven't hit the snow season yet, so I'll get back to you with LIRR/Metro North service interruptions and massive subway delays. Also assuming there's no terror threat.

[Dahobbs 17704]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

I don't think it requires a much different analysis than what was already done except for adding tax and transfer payments.  And even though I know you think this will work out in Houston's favor, it might not. 635,000 NYers live in NYCHA housing or get rental subsidies. 

Amounts actually paid are a much better indicator than price per square foot or "what if I wanted" analyses.  People don't want the hypothetical McMansion in Manhattan.  And if they did, and everyone could have one, then there would be no Manhattan at all really. There would be Sugar Land on Manhattan island with a few strip malls thrown in. The other thing that many Texans can't grasp, is that a lot of NYers don't really want a car no matter how much money they make. I know many native NYers who don't even have a license. 

Again, you are measuring something different. I agree, the market in NYC is different. But, that is BECAUSE IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE. People don't demand smaller housing in NYC because smaller housing is more desirable. The demand exists for smaller housing BECAUSE LARGER HOUSING IS MORE EXPENSIVE. If you gave a random average household in NYC an unlimited amount of money, do you think they'd stay in their 500 square foot home or move to a larger property?

None of that is to say that NYC is bad or that living in NYC is bad. I strongly believe the opposite. But, it is more expensive. It just is. Yes, you can live there for around the same price that you can live in Houston. But, your house will be smaller. It will have less luxury items in it. It will have less/no yard. In general, your home will be of a lesser quality. That isn't because you wanted a smaller place of lesser quality. It is because that is what is available in your price range. Again, for many that trade off, which exists BECAUSE NYC IS MORE EXPENSIVE, is worth it for other quality of life reasons. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by Dahobbs

[FondrenRoad 4378]

3 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Nobody knows what the fuck you are arguing. Cost of housing is higher in NY. Objectively and across the board- no need for your “luxury vs necessity” BS. Cost of owning a car is higher in NY. Cost of childcare is higher in NY. Cost of utilities and food is higher in NY. Costs of taxes is higher in NY.
 

The TM article quoted a non profit that only compared housing costs and transportation costs against income numbers using federally reported data from 2016. 
 

 

 

Your continued defense of the article and it’s sentiment is a head scratcher given its glaring flaws and divorce from reality. Everyone with a brain knows NY is more expensive- even for those without cars, compared to people in Houston with cars.  

The research speaks for itself.  The raw comparison of car ownership between a place where everyone actually owns a car and a place where fewer than half of people own a car is irrelevant.  Just like the cost differences between Ninfa's in Houston and the non-existant Ninfa's in NYC are irrelevant.  And just like you are irrelevant.  If you don't like the results, then go fund another research project. 

Until then, go fuck yourself, fuckstick.  Your existence really serves no purpose to anyone.

[Iceman 2726]

12 minutes ago, elfenix said:

massive flooding due to development isn't academic.

flooding comes from rain, moran.