Current Events > why is it so cheap to live in the south?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Never lived there. Is it that bad? there has to be something to it economics wise if prices are that low where people don't have jobs? Just looking at cost of living in say Boston the average place is twice the price. I don't live in boston for that reason. If i want to live in a city in mass that's halfway decent it's so expensive though. Or i live in Worcester or Providence which are less expensive. Or a crap hole like Springfield. Yet a place like Charlotte NC gets rated as a much better place to live yet the cost is the same. Looking at crime rates though charlotte has just as high if not higher crime rates. similar amenities. a place like worcester might not have the glamor or high end stuff but it does as well Is the South still that segregated that way?

One guess as to where this thread's going...
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AltjBNZOjek
---

I'm just curious why a place like Charlotte is similarly priced as a place like Worcester MA. Boston is twice the price or most surrounding areas that are nice. Worcester is better than Springfield for example. It's sort of an in between. It has it's issues but crime rates aren't terrible. It's more just a diverse place. Not glamorous by any means.

Fuck off back to the Andromeda board

Are the people that red neck like in the south? lol. Even Massachusetts has areas that are full of rednecks too though. Go to Lee sometime.

Or you have places like Lowell that are post industrial messes. Worcester has some of that too but still has the schools and hospitals that keep it going. Worcester is just a big mix of everything. Great depression and nice stuff too.

Charlotte seems like a mix of transplants and red necks I guess. Am I wrong?

Upstate NY is full of red necks too. Massachusetts has similar areas but not as bad. Transplants in the south.

There's rednecks everywhere but get ready for people telling you it's 100% only white racist people.

Charlotte's pretty nice, looks like they are trying to fancy it up. The surrounding areas are real nice and real cheap. As for why it's so cheap, no idea but I'd say it's the lifestlye down here. There's more important things than money and they've really embraced that.
---

Charlotte reminds me of a nicer newer worcester in ways. Worcester has been called the paris of the 80's. It was at one point. It's not that any more. Charlotte has been called that too. Worcester is a much older city that fell apart during the post industrial mess and never fully recovered but has remained stable due to it being a central hub in massachusetts. I"m guessing both cities are very different than that though. Providence might be more in line with Charlotte more upscale but serious issues as far as having an actual economy. Worcester actually has one.

Charlotte has the banking industry I was reading but it seems similar to providence where it doesn't have an actual economy. Maybe it does. But why is it so cheap to live there then? It has both sides of the spectrum?

Jobs are not an issue in Worcester. It's a smart place to live because of that because it's inexpensive and there actually are jobs. The unemployment rate is very low though. Providence on the other hand can look very nice but there are no jobs in Rhode Island lol. It's the same. Has the financial sector and that's it.

Worcester is what I'd describe as a working class city. Nothing glamorous where people don't care about those things. Plenty of diners though. Oldschool that way. If I want something nicer I'm probably going to have to look elsewhere and the prices in massachusetts are ridiculous. I don't think I can move down south though unless someone gives me a better reason.

Everyone's situation is different, but a lot of it does have to do with simple supply and demand/population size. There are some areas up north as well that are just as cheap, though not the "iconic" up north places such as New York City.

California isn't really considered the North, but it is also very expensive in part due to population. California's area size is about 35-40% smaller than Texas' area size, yet California has 12 million more people.

Think of the size of New York City. It is half the size of Houston, TX, yet contains more than double the amount of people.
---

It also has to do with the health of the city and the economy. Detroit for example, is obviously up North, and there are areas where you can buy a $50,000 house. In some cases, a house for several thousand dollars or less (with obvious renovation costs needing to be made) --- but are you going to want to live in that neighborhood? Probably not.
---

I hear you. My father was saying worcester is a very fair way of living. I agree. I moved here for that reason to work and hopefully for something better eventually. Unfortunately stuff happens in life and my plan got screwed with though. There are much worse places in this world than Worcester. There's better too though. I grew up in a nice town but no shot at ever getting back there it seems. my plan was good too but unfortunately life happens, people can be jerks, and doesn't always go as planned either.

There are jobs here like i was saying and it's reasonably priced. That's why I moved here and that was my plan to work and eventually yeah but life isnt always that simple either.

Had fun when i was younger too. I was in the right place. Grew up around Northampton and Amherst and good times. Moved out here was going into Boston and having a blast. Working hard too. Then really bad shit happened and I feel stuck here.

Honestly, most places that are costly also offer better jobs and the ability to save money on things like transport, gas, etc. If it gets to the point where people can't afford rent and food, everyone leaves and the prices drop to equilibrium again. Sometimes it lasts for a bit, but it tends to meet a price equilibrium after awhile.

A place like Charlotte has to be inexpensive for a reason then. If it wasn't people wouldn't be there? I don't get it though because overall it looks on the surface like a much nicer city than Worcester, MA. Worcester MA is oldschool working class and mainly a college town now. When school is out the city empties as well and it's a different place. There are tech jobs in the area. That's why i came here. Where I grew up was much more limited that way. It's not Boston but as far as jobs it's fine. Otherwise what is in worcester are the small business owners and a lot of poverty, mentally ill etc... Hospitals and Tech and old working class jobs are what is left. It has arts and culture too. History etc.. Service jobs and humanities jobs as well.

Yeah, there is no accounting for tastes, honestly. Some people just prefer certain cities due to personal biases. Hell, a factory opening up one hundred years ago could result in higher population now if the original immigrant's children claimed it as their home. I'm just saying expensive cities, in general, tend to offer more opportunity to make/save money, but there are exceptions of course.

Boston is super expensive for that reason because it offers so much as far as that. It's a great city. I wouldn't choose to live there because of the price though. The surrounding areas that are nice are very expensive as well because they serve that area and have access to it.

I still get to watch the red sox from worcester and am 45 minutes a way if not less by train. So I'm fine with that. I grew up in western ma which was halfway between nyc and boston. You got a lot of both worlds out there. Very different. Springfield itself is a mess though. I don't like Hartford either. I used to work in both and jobs are much more limited and Hartford and Springfield are really pretty dangerous cities.

Between Hartford, Springfield, NY and Boston it's gangs are very prevalent out there too. Springfield is a major gang hub. It's people tryign to get out of those other places. The surrounding towns are very nice though. Some are very red neck though. some are very ghetto. where i grew up was very nice.

because the south sucks shit and everything sucks down here (especially the fat fucking worthless sacks of human flesh that coat everything in mayo/ranch dressing)

source: i live in eastern tennessee
---

Supply vs. demand

Also a lot of older cities in the NE are smaller and denser in terms of land area; if Jacksonville needs new housing, there's more place for it to go.
---

That's what concerns me about the south. The people there. I'm sure there are nice peopel everywhere. Even in Worcester it's hard to find people like me. I don't see a huge divide though. More because of age though and just how I grew up. Where I grew up was just nice "normal" people whatever that is. Some of the stuff I see in these clicky cities is just bizarre to me. there is some of that in worcester but mostly it's just poor people and college kids and then a mix of whatever. Providence is more upscale but has no economy and has more of a hipster scene. That's not me either. Some stuff down south is just weird to me. In california too. I've worked with people from different places but usually they are the more normal ones. intelligent and good people but normal whatever that means. Some of us also aren't though. A lot of the people I've known have done really good things in this world.

Massachusetts is where it all started. A lot of people in other parts of the country are farther out there lol. Am I wrong?

I grew up in a small town around Northampton and Amherst. Whatever stereotype that is I don't think there is one. Classic new england small town usa. best place in the world imo.

Because except for a few large cities, you have next to no opportunities in the south compared to the North or the west coast.
---

why if you look online and the best cities to live are they mostly in the south though. It's usually cities like Raleigh, Charlotte, Austin Texas. You have the usual staples like san francisco and boston. Denver is the new hot spot. Makes me feel like i'm living in the wrong place if these cities down south are the same price and better. boulder colorado. Seattle etc.. Irvine california. Cambridge MA. the cost of living in some of those places is very high. Others not so much. sandy springs, georgia etc...

The reason I ask is a lot of the ones being rated high the cost of living reflects that. Charlotte on the other hand is priced about the same as Worcester but you'd never see Worcester on a best place to live ranking ever. That's why I was comparing Charlotte to Worcester in particular. Providence is more similar to Charlotte though where it's more low end and high end though I'm guessing. I could be totally wrong there because Providence has some pretty serious issues as well. I don't know what city I'd compare Worcester to.

If I want to live in Massachusetts at the cost that people are paying in some of these other places it pretty much is a place like Worcester or Providence is what I'm saying, where if you look at city rankings these other places are rated much better yet the cost of living is much less than a city like Boston or NYC etc..

I'm better off living in a place like Rochester Minnesota or Charlotte no?

The median home value in Worcester is 205k in charlotte it's 172k. So charlotte you can buy a much nicer house for less and it's supposedly a better place to live. Makes me feel like i'm being ripped off. Yeah I can also sell my house for more but in the bigger scheme of things if im looking to buy its also much more expensive and selling at a rate where the value may have dipped its all relative.

therin_lews_kin posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AltjBNZOjek

XD that's awesome. I miss the country.
---

kg88222 posted...

why if you look online and the best cities to live are they mostly in the south though. It's usually cities like Raleigh, Charlotte, Autin Texas. You have the usual staples like san francisco and boston. Denver is the new hot spot. Makes me feel like i'm living in the wrong place if these cities down south are the same price and better. boulder colorado. Seattle etc.. Irvine california. Cambridge MA. the cost of living in some of those places is very high. Others not so much. sandy springs georgia etc...

The reason I ask is a lot of the ones being rated high the cost of living reflects that. Charlotte on the other hand is priced about the same as Worcester but you'd never see Worcester on a best place to live ranking ever. That's why I was comparing Charlotte to Worcester in particular. Providence is more similar to Charlotte though where it's more low end and high end though I'm guessing. I could be totally wrong there because Providence has some pretty serious issues as well. I don't know what city I'd compare Worcester to.

The answer to your question is that a lot of the South is poor and archaic. :u Or at least that is what Faulkner taught me.
---

I went to college in Worcester and now live in Boston. Shits expensive now.
---

The median home value in Worcester is 205k in charlotte it's 172k. So charlotte you can buy a much nicer house for less and it's supposedly a better place to live. Makes me feel like i'm being ripped off. Yeah I can also sell my house for more but in the bigger scheme of things if im looking to buy its also much more expensive and selling at a rate where the value may have dipped its all relative....

the average income in charlotte is also higher than worcester. That makes no sense to me. Yet MA is rated as the best state to live.

yeah we have the red sox, and celtics and patriots etc if you are into that. crime rates are low in surrounding towns but are not exactly low in major cities. Tons of schools, supposedly good hospitals etc. The best and brightest are here etc is what they say...

South isn't too bad depending on some places, stay away from remote small cities. Why is it cheap? I dont know, i can't complain. I can guess its because our scenery isnt as great as the northern areas. it could be because its likely to be hit by hurricanes, who knows
---

there is no way i can afford to live in boston that's the thing. the scenary in worcester isn't t hat great. yeah you have some nice colonial architecture and wachusett mountain to the north. I don't think it looks better t han north carolina though. I do agree the people down there rub me the wrong way in some way. There are areas around here that are absolutely awful. Worcester isn't terrible but it's no prize for sure. It's considered a dump by a lot of people. I don't consider it that, but some parts of it are really bad. I consider it a pretty average city.