Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
am pretty sure these averages do not match the rates 30 miles away for these cities (is the average 1 bedroom in Leesburg or Harpers Ferry this amount (or in Bridgewater NJ etc.)
All this is based on market prices. Most is driven by jobs, pay, etc.
I think its more simple in many ways and also more complex
If you are trying to put a metric to say more "elite" or something and associate that with DC have at it
I think the thread got off on the wrong track by specifying "gateway cities", since places like Chicago are gateway cities, but don't have some of the most expensive housing. The thread title causes confusion and I think most people are spending time pointing that out than hearing what you really meant apparently in regards to COL and housing. I work in the commercial real estate industry so that's why I was confused by the title. The big 6 gateway markets in the USA are: NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, San Fran, Los Angeles and Boston.
I think it would be better to say why is the COL of and housing prices higher in Boston, San Fran, NYC, LA, DC and Boston than they are in Chicago, Houston, Dallas and Atlanta.
Mostly just supply and demand for both office and housing. Many CBD's are fairly constricted like San Fran and Boston where they can't just throw up buildings left and right without much trouble. Chicago on the other hand had a few dozen office towers go up in the 2000's greatly increasing the amount of Class A space and it wasn't too difficult given the open nature of the city and the supply of land around downtown. This has left office rents in the mid $30's psf.
It seems most got on here mad that their city was not considered a gateway office market in the article and didn't even read the question. They have been shouting for three pages about office markets like this is somehow a thread made to come strut or brag about being in the big six gateway markets or whatever.
Notice how nobody has even answered the question. One poster even talked about QOL being inferior and when I asked why people still pay for this inferior QOL, they have not been back since because I guess they didn't have an answer for their claim. Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. My question would be is the proof in the pudding?
It seems most got on here mad that their city was not considered a gateway office market in the article and didn't even read the question. They have been shouting for three pages about office markets like this is somehow a thread made to come strut or brag about being in the big six gateway markets or whatever.
Notice how nobody has even answered the question. One poster even talked about QOL being inferior and when I asked why people still pay for this inferior QOL, they have not been back since because I guess they didn't have an answer for their claim. Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. My question would be is the proof in the pudding?
For NYC, SF and Boston probably in many ways the job market drives this based on organic industry or proof in the pudding
For DC, the gov't subsidy of good jobs drives a lot of this
DC can thank the american taxpayers (now and into the future we took a loan out on DC), you are welcome
Another issue with COL is you have to take into account the high prices for rent and living, but then the higher salaries. Rents might be really high in San Fran, and salaries are high as well. Pound for pound though the average person there working a 40 hours a week in an office might be quite similar to a person doing the same in some mid-tier region given they are making a lot less....but also have to spend a lot less.
Adjusted, the "most affordable" places in the USA from #1 onwards are Des Moines, Washington, DC, Houston, Dallas, Madison and Atlanta of cities people tend to know. Places like DC have a high cost of living, but due to the federal government people make a ton of money pound per pound. Places like Des Moines have high white collar wages in general, and a very cheap cost of living. The least affordable are McAllen, Texas, NYC, Fresno, El Paso, Honolulu, LA and Miami. A combination of places with high wages but killer COL, and places with a low COL, but a very very low average earnings.
am pretty sure these averages do not match the rates 30 miles away for these cities (is the average 1 bedroom in Leesburg or Harpers Ferry this amount (or in Bridgewater NJ etc.)
All this is based on market prices. Most is driven by jobs, pay, etc.
I think its more simple in many ways and also more complex
If you are trying to put a metric to say more "elite" or something and associate that with DC have at it
What the #$*& are you talking about? I was asking why do people pay so much to live in these cities? What drives the demand to live in these cities? Why pay so much for inferior product etc.? And who the %^#$ SAID ANYTHING ABOUT DC? There are 10 cities listed and here you go.
It seems most got on here mad that their city was not considered a gateway office market in the article and didn't even read the question. They have been shouting for three pages about office markets like this is somehow a thread made to come strut or brag about being in the big six gateway markets or whatever.
Notice how nobody has even answered the question. One poster even talked about QOL being inferior and when I asked why people still pay for this inferior QOL, they have not been back since because I guess they didn't have an answer for their claim. Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. My question would be is the proof in the pudding?
You listed off cities in bucket A and bucket B and then provided a link as backup. People are responding to your link since that's what it seems this was to be based off. Just go get rid of the link in the original post if you don't want an innocent person to assume it's in regards to the topic.
Not starting a fight or bashing or anything like that - but when a thread is 3 pages long and "nobody has even answered the question" I think it's safe to say the question is the problem and not everyone who's trying to figure out what it is.
Let the thread die and start a new one with the question you intended. You start off saying Boston, San Fran and DC are gateway market and Chicago, Philly and Houston aren't with no real methodology except a link to the largest office markets in the country that confuses everyone.
But the OP has almost pathologically let it be known that his city is included in this "gateway market" and it is has a high cost of living.
This is why it is almost impossible to have any kind of intelligent discussion on this board. People are so insecure about their own cities pecking order all they do is either try to defend their city when it's not even being attacked or get jealous of other cities when the thread has nothing to do with "My City is better than your city syndrome"
Do you have an answer to the question in this thread? I wonder what your post would have read if Philly had been included in the Gateway cities?
You listed off cities in bucket A and bucket B and then provided a link as backup. People are responding to your link since that's what it seems this was to be based off. Just go get rid of the link in the original post if you don't want an innocent person to assume it's in regards to the topic.
Not starting a fight or bashing or anything like that - but when a thread is 3 pages long and "nobody has even answered the question" I think it's safe to say the question is the problem and not everyone who's trying to figure out what it is.
Let the thread die and start a new one with the question you intended. You start off saying Boston, San Fran and DC are gateway market and Chicago, Philly and Houston aren't with no real methodology except a link to the largest office markets in the country that confuses everyone.
This is city-data.com and we are in the city vs. city forum to boot. Did you just get here? The reason this thread has gone on for three pages without anybody answering the question is for one of the few times every 200th thread, this question is actually asking about the psychology of people's action's in choosing to live in these cities even though they are expensive. If this thread had of been closer to the things people on here are used to like:
Which is better:
or
Who has better:
or
What are the best ____ which are better than:
or
What is the best place to do this:
or
Who has a bigger:
etc. etc. etc.
This board is the biggest brag fest in the history of the internet so I am sorry but you are wrong. People spend days talking about how they are the best at whatever is in season for that day on this board. They don't actually talk about things that matter or are happening that will affect people's lives. Examples or things that work that can help other places in the same situation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
