<-=*PdX*=->
RCTID
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 1,057
- Likes
- 158
- Points
- 63
Portland, Seattle, Phoenix Area, and SF. Those are the only places I could live.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I guess it depends on what one values. Personally, I couldn't live in Central Oregon . . . for me, Central Oregon is a great place for a second home but not primary residence.
I'm big on diversity and entertainment. I want to be able to interact with many different cultures, have many choices of good ethnic resturants and have ample access to performing arts and sporting events. Bay area is top on my list when it comes to my personal criteria (couldn't do the NY thing, although love to visit).
Not putting down central Oregon. I get why many want to live there (even people in poverty have a great view). But the Bay area offers a lot that central Oregon does not . . . it is just a matter of what one enjoys for entertainment . . . besides, Tahoe is only 6 hours away.
I lived in the Bay Area for 15 years. Terrific scenery and nature, but really crowded. A lot of people driving around in BMWs up to their eyeballs in debt, yet millionaires. I was there during the Loma Prieta earthquake, which pretty much triggered a mass exodus to Oregon. People sold their dumps and bought mansions, but have to suffer with lesser weather.
Last time I was in the Bay area I was reading the paper and how local law enforcement couldn't even afford a home in their area because of housing prices. Some officers had to commute 1.5 hour each way to Palo Alto to work. I was staying with family Redwood City and couldn't believe the prices of homes or private schools. Clubs, golf courses . . .heck the overall cost of living can be so unbearable to some it takes all the pleasure out of living in the Bay Area.
For a family of four on a national average income, I don't think the bay area is a fantasitc place to live. . . there are lots of good things, but it can be struggle.
Interesting. I dislike the weather in the Bay Area, and would trade for Central Oregon weather anytime. I get tired of not having seasons, not cooling off at night, and humidity (compared to Central Oregon).
Lived in Vegas for 6 years. I really liked it; for the most part it was like LA or the Bay Area without all the traffic on the freeways. Suburban sprawl with convenient shopping and eateries. Didn't gamble much, but the shows were oustanding. The culture is really weird tho. Where most cities have opera or symphony or museums, Vegas has strip clubs and other vice. I think I saw license plates on cars from all 50 states there (plus mexico and canada) - a real mix of people from all over. The Southwest is downright beautiful.
I live in San Diego now and like it a lot. I have been here numerous times on business. I leave work and it's 78 degrees outside, then drive 5 miles to the beach and the temperature drops to 68. When it's 75 here, it's really hot.
I lived in the Bay Area for 15 years. Terrific scenery and nature, but really crowded. A lot of people driving around in BMWs up to their eyeballs in debt, yet millionaires. I was there during the Loma Prieta earthquake, which pretty much triggered a mass exodus to Oregon. People sold their dumps and bought mansions, but have to suffer with lesser weather.
Raised in Chicago. It's a GREAT city, but it really needs to be picked up and dropped where Miami is.
Speaking of which, I hear homes in Miami are really cheap these days.
Did my undergrad at UCSD. Lived in Del Mar for a year (I miss the track, where the surf meets the turf) and Mission beach for 2 (best 2 years of my life). I think San Diego has the best weather of any of the cities mentioned so far.
But like the Bay Area, I find the cost of living to be too high compared to the going salaries.
I guess it depends on what one values. Personally, I couldn't live in Central Oregon . . . for me, Central Oregon is a great place for a second home but not primary residence.
I'm big on diversity and entertainment. I want to be able to interact with many different cultures, have many choices of good ethnic resturants and have ample access to performing arts and sporting events. Bay area is top on my list when it comes to my personal criteria (couldn't do the NY thing, although love to visit).
Not putting down central Oregon. I get why many want to live there (even people in poverty have a great view). But the Bay area offers a lot that central Oregon does not . . . it is just a matter of what one enjoys for entertainment . . . besides, Tahoe is only 6 hours away.
I'm living in Mission Beach, 4 houses in from the boardwalk.
Near the north end, close to Pacific Beach.

Wow. I was in the same situation, about 2 houses from the boardwalk (on the beach side of the street). Is parking still bad?
I would carry a skateboard in my car and skateboard along the boardwalk to get to my house . . . or I could leave my car parked, blow out class and toss the frisbee on the beach.![]()
Central OR has far more restaurants per capita than the Bay Area, a massively lower crime rate, a thriving arts/entertainment community, actual clean air you can safely inhale, zero gangs, zero fleas, and the only asses you meet here are visiting from California.
The Bend Elks are the biggest sports team 'cuz most entral Oregonians are too busy living the dream to sit and watch others play.
And if you like Tahoe, it's only 7 hours away.

I guess it depends on what one values. Personally, I couldn't live in Central Oregon . . . for me, Central Oregon is a great place for a second home but not primary residence.
I'm big on diversity and entertainment. I want to be able to interact with many different cultures, have many choices of good ethnic resturants and have ample access to performing arts and sporting events. Bay area is top on my list when it comes to my personal criteria (couldn't do the NY thing, although love to visit).
Not putting down central Oregon. I get why many want to live there (even people in poverty have a great view). But the Bay area offers a lot that central Oregon does not . . . it is just a matter of what one enjoys for entertainment . . . besides, Tahoe is only 6 hours away.
Last time I was in the Bay area I was reading the paper and how local law enforcement couldn't even afford a home in their area because of housing prices. Some officers had to commute 1.5 hour each way to Palo Alto to work. I was staying with family Redwood City and couldn't believe the prices of homes or private schools. Clubs, golf courses . . .heck the overall cost of living can be so unbearable to some it takes all the pleasure out of living in the Bay Area.
For a family of four on a national average income, I don't think the bay areacan be a struggle.
Lived in Vegas for 6 years. I really liked it; for the most part it was like LA or the Bay Area without all the traffic on the freeways. Suburban sprawl with convenient shopping and eateries. Didn't gamble much, but the shows were oustanding. The culture is really weird tho. Where most cities have opera or symphony or museums, Vegas has strip clubs and other vice. I think I saw license plates on cars from all 50 states there (plus mexico and canada) - a real mix of people from all over. The Southwest is downright beautiful.
I live in San Diego now and like it a lot. I have been here numerous times on business. I leave work and it's 78 degrees outside, then drive 5 miles to the beach and the temperature drops to 68. When it's 75 here, it's really hot.
I lived in the Bay Area for 15 years. Terrific scenery and nature, but really crowded. A lot of people driving around in BMWs up to their eyeballs in debt, yet millionaires. I was there during the Loma Prieta earthquake, which pretty much triggered a mass exodus to Oregon. People sold their dumps and bought mansions, but have to suffer with lesser weather.
Raised in Chicago. It's a GREAT city, but it really needs to be picked up and dropped where Miami is.
Speaking of which, I hear homes in Miami are really cheap these days.
With states facing nearly $100 billion in combined budget deficits this year, we're seeing more governors than ever proposing the Barack Obama solution to balancing the budget: Soak the rich. Lawmakers in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Oregon want to raise income tax rates on the top 1% or 2% or 5% of their citizens. New Illinois Gov. Patrick Quinn wants a 50% increase in the income tax rate on the wealthy because this is the "fair" way to close his state's gaping deficit.
[Commentary] Chad Crowe
Mr. Quinn and other tax-raising governors have been emboldened by recent studies by left-wing groups like the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities that suggest that "tax increases, particularly tax increases on higher-income families, may be the best available option." A recent letter to New York Gov. David Paterson signed by 100 economists advises the Empire State to "raise tax rates for high income families right away."
Here's the problem for states that want to pry more money out of the wallets of rich people. It never works because people, investment capital and businesses are mobile: They can leave tax-unfriendly states and move to tax-friendly states.
Updating some research from Richard Vedder of Ohio University, we found that from 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts.
Where I lived (Mountain View), it got near 100 on the hottest days, but the Bay cooled things down to 70 or so at night. Typically it was 90s and high 60s... And the winters were rainy and plenty long enough. It got cold enough to kill some of the landscaping each year.

People who like outdoors activities typically drive to Tahoe or Reno for skiing or the lake, and there's all sorts of camp sites in the East Bay or it's a short trip to Yosemite, which is downright gorgeous.
Good lord, with all the out of state plates here (Calif., Oregon, Washington, Florida) I have been seeing here lately, it must be the Midwest. A ton of cool places are within driving distance when you're smack in the middle of the country.
I've lived a lot of places, and I think Oregon has ruined me. For example, I live part of the year in Denver--in the opinion of many, a place high on the livibility scale--and I can't wait to get back to the Willamette Valley. I went hiking this past weekend around Chicago Creek and the entire hike I was thinking, "This would be really beautiful if they got as much rain as we did in Portland". I mean the scenery is jaw-dropping, something right out of a John Denver song, and I was still pining for the Pacific Northwest.
And blazerboy hits the nail on the head. It's not that we don't have access to great nature here, it's just not as close or convenient as it is in Oregon. It's crazy to think that within a couple of hours you can be on the coast, whitewater rafting, on a mountain, in a rainforest or in a desert.
Funny to me to hear complaints about the crowds in the Bay Area and San Diego and how superior Oregon is. I left Oregon after living there for seven years because I just couldn't stomach how crowded it always felt. (Well, the rain really, really sucked too.) Every trail that's a reasonable drive away seems to have a parking lot jammed with cars. You can't piss in the woods without somebody coming around the corner.
I get really claustrophobic just visiting Portland every couple of months. Constantly sandwiched in by people, buildings--even a murky gray sky for 9 months of the year. The "freeways" are a river of headlights and a river of rain in the winter.
Living back in Boise, it really does feel like "big sky" country (although that's technically Montana--but hey, we're both mountain states nobody ever thinks about, so I doubt they'll mind me appropriating it.) There are too many redneck idiots here, but I know I can drive a half hour out of town and go duck hunting in the winter. And unlike Suavie's Island, I don't have to reserve a duck blind 8 months in advance (LOL!)
I've lived a lot of places, and I think Oregon has ruined me. For example, I live part of the year in Denver--in the opinion of many, a place high on the livibility scale--and I can't wait to get back to the Willamette Valley. I went hiking this past weekend around Chicago Creek and the entire hike I was thinking, "This would be really beautiful if they got as much rain as we did in Portland". I mean the scenery is jaw-dropping, something right out of a John Denver song, and I was still pining for the Pacific Northwest.
And blazerboy hits the nail on the head. It's not that we don't have access to great nature here, it's just not as close or convenient as it is in Oregon. It's crazy to think that within a couple of hours you can be on the coast, whitewater rafting, on a mountain, in a rainforest or in a desert.
Portland Oregon . . . one of the few places you can surf in the morning and go sking that same day/night.
I remember reading that Oregon, California and Hawaii are the three states where this is true.