Is Texas being Californicated? No, not really. This Frisco development likely mainly has other Texas move-ins. |
In addition to calling out that general bullshit, I said that to the degree housing costs WERE going up there, it was primarily due to their fellow Texans.
But, Derek Thompson at The Atlantic didn't get the memo. Or more to the point, he read the wrong memo from places like the Snooze.
So, time to set him straight.
First, to the degree Texas, especially its suburbs, ARE being Californicated as Derek Thompson claims? That said, the idea that this might be a political tipping point? Tosh or at least semi-tosh. The majority of California migration here is from places like the OC, the Inland Empire, San Diego exurbs to the south of that, and portions of the Central Valley. Red, or at least red-dish. Now, these folks may not be as conservative as the likes of Former Fetus Forever Fuckwad Jonathan Stickland or Gohmert Pyle, but they're conservative enough.
That said, many Californicators aren't moving to Tex-ass. Per the Wall Street Journal, high property taxes (and they are, for Texans who still think they may not be, but refuse to look at an income tax). a $10K cap on state and local tax deductions, while not hitting Texas as hard as California or New York, is hitting it hard enough.
As for the Snooze saying more Californians move to North Texas than people from any other state?
No duh, dum fux. California is still far and away the most populous state in the Union. And, many conservative Californians do see some things they like. In suburban areas, the Former Fetus types of the world, like Stickland himself, may find themselves more and more deciding to leave the Lege. But as the recent special election for HD 28 points out, that day ain't here yet. Stickland has a good chance of being replaced by a Rethug, just one not quite so winger as him.
Let's look more at the Nerdwallet piece that said Snooze guy Dom DiFurio blogged about. (That's really what it was.)
- Phoenix, as well as the Metromess, had California's Southland as the No. 1 move-in source.
- Chicago, Denver, Portland, San Antonio, Seattle all had the Southland as the No. 2 source.
- Houston had it as third.
- Other Texas metro areas, in aggregate, were the largest Metromess move-in source. In fact, by itself, Helltown was almost twice as popular a DFW move-in source as the Southland. Ditto on other Texas metros, on the target move-out destination.
- Vegas was the No. 1 destination for LA and the Inland Empire. Other Cal metros were No. 1 for San Diego and San Francisco. (In a fail, Nerdwallet didn't mention in-state moves for the first two.
Beyond the high taxes, the Observer for the Metromess, and Texas Monthly for Helltown, have already refudiated the idea that Texas' main urban areas are low-income paradises, at least when compared to New York. The Snooze apparently didn't get that memo either.
As posted by me in a Texas Progressives roundup a couple of weeks ago:
When transportation sprawl, and housing and other costs relative to pay are all factored in, both Dallas and Houston are LESS affordable than New York City. For whatever reason, even though the Metromess and Houston are almost dead even on these costs, Texas Monthly writes its story on the issue only about Houston. (Unless it does the rewrite I suggested.) Related? Contra former Houston mayor Annise Parker's past bragging about how Helltown would eventually pass Chicago? The Windy City is cheaper, per the first link. And that ignores the humidity, skeeters and flooding of Houston, along with the climate change that will exacerbate all. Do we file this under "Rick Perry's Texas Miracle" or "Greg Abbott's Texas Miracle"?
The Dallas Observer DID pick up on the Dallas angle.
Per the bullet points above, Nevada also has no state income tax, is a much shorter move from California than Texas, and since Fredericksburg is NOT the new Aspen, like California, Nevada has skiing.
No comments:
Post a Comment