Gyroscopic Investing

Yes, but you're forgetting about the benefits of getting to live in San Francisco where there's an assault weapon ban and concealed carry permits are virtually non-existent, so you know you're safe from Rambos. 

It's not just San Fran, it's the whole valley area. Then again, we've totally neutered the AWB with bullet buttons. There are hundreds of thousands of legal ARs and AKs in the state.

As for the CCW situation, this map is a few years old, but provides a good overview:

I would just think "why the f--- am I giving the state of California 10% of my income AND they won't let me carry a gun?" which is why I never moved there in spite of numerous job offers over the years.

Fortunately for me, the states with the most lenient CCW laws also have the lowest taxes. It's counter-intuitive to me, because I would be willing to pay more money to live in a free state where I can own whatever I want and carry whatever I want.

TripleB wrote: Fortunately for me, the states with the most lenient CCW laws also have the lowest taxes. It's counter-intuitive to me, because I would be willing to pay more money to live in a free state where I can own whatever I want and carry whatever I want.

And, the states with the most lenient CCW laws also have some of the lowest incomes.  I'd rather pay 10% on $150,000 than 0% on $75,000.

Great info graphic.  If you want to make valley salaries but don't want the extremely crazy rents and housing costs, try the NY area.  You can make the same salary, but live in CT or NJ and pay a much lower cost of living.  Even living in NY proper is less expensive, according to the graphic.

Storm wrote: And, the states with the most lenient CCW laws also have some of the lowest incomes.  I'd rather pay 10% on $150,000 than 0% on $75,000.

Great info graphic.  If you want to make valley salaries but don't want the extremely crazy rents and housing costs, try the NY area.  You can make the same salary, but live in CT or NJ and pay a much lower cost of living.  Even living in NY proper is less expensive, according to the graphic.

Even in NJ and CT you'll be paying around $1500/month in rent compared to $600 for a lenient-CCW state.

So let's say you can make an extra $75k in an anti-gun state. You're paying 38% taxes on that marginal $75k (federal 28%, state 10%) plus 7.5% of $75k to $110k = about $42k in extra take home salary.

Your cost of living will be around $2k/month to $3k/month greater considering higher housing costs, higher car insurance, higher sales tax, higher food costs, etc. That's $24k to $36k gone.

So you have an extra $10k or so on your $75k greater salary or to make it sound more real - if you double your salary from $75k to $150k by moving to a higher cost of living area, you get an extra $10k.

And you give up the right to self-defense and are more than likely going to commute an extra 1 to 2 hours each day. You might actually wind up spending $5k to $10k per year in gasoline and tolls commuting 50 miles to work each day from NJ to NY. Each time across that bridge into NY is like $10 or $15 and it keeps going up because someone has to pay the garbage men a $70k lifetime pension when they retire after 25 years.

TripleB wrote:

Storm wrote: And, the states with the most lenient CCW laws also have some of the lowest incomes.  I'd rather pay 10% on $150,000 than 0% on $75,000.

Great info graphic.  If you want to make valley salaries but don't want the extremely crazy rents and housing costs, try the NY area.  You can make the same salary, but live in CT or NJ and pay a much lower cost of living.  Even living in NY proper is less expensive, according to the graphic.

Even in NJ and CT you'll be paying around $1500/month in rent compared to $600 for a lenient-CCW state.

So let's say you can make an extra $75k in an anti-gun state. You're paying 38% taxes on that marginal $75k (federal 28%, state 10%) plus 7.5% of $75k to $110k = about $42k in extra take home salary.

Your cost of living will be around $2k/month to $3k/month greater considering higher housing costs, higher car insurance, higher sales tax, higher food costs, etc. That's $24k to $36k gone.

So you have an extra $10k or so on your $75k greater salary or to make it sound more real - if you double your salary from $75k to $150k by moving to a higher cost of living area, you get an extra $10k.

And you give up the right to self-defense and are more than likely going to commute an extra 1 to 2 hours each day. You might actually wind up spending $5k to $10k per year in gasoline and tolls commuting 50 miles to work each day from NJ to NY. Each time across that bridge into NY is like $10 or $15 and it keeps going up because someone has to pay the garbage men a $70k lifetime pension when they retire after 25 years.

That's nice, but for a lot of people getting even a $75K job is impossible in a flyover state.  Not to mention, that for a lot of us the lack of culture and entertainment options outside of big cities makes living in these areas pretty far down on our list of desires.

Storm wrote: Not to mention, that for a lot of us the lack of culture and entertainment options outside of big cities makes living in these areas pretty far down on our list of desires.

I mean this with all earnestness and no snark at all, but what sort of "culture and entertainment options" are you referring to? I ask because I hear this a lot from people who prefer cities, and as one who typically tries to avoid cities, I've always had a hard time understanding what this meant. Are you talking about, like, theater? Concerts? Museums? Restaurants? Nightlife? The coffee shop scene?

Pointedstick wrote: I mean this with all earnestness and no snark at all, but what sort of "culture and entertainment options" are you referring to? I ask because I hear this a lot from people who prefer cities, and as one who typically tries to avoid cities, I've always had a hard time understanding what this meant. Are you talking about, like, theater? Concerts? Museums? Restaurants? Nightlife? The coffee shop scene?

+1 add me to the curious list. Most people I know who live in NYC have never been to a museum or theatre performance outside of a high school field trip.

I've always imagined by culture and entertainment, what most city folks mean is they can go to big shopping malls and not have to see "red necks" in line at the local supermarket.

Also, let me say something about the 75k-to-150k comparison. It's true that most people living in "flyover states" don't make 75k, but most people living in New York, California, New Jersey and Connecticut don't earn 150k. We're talking about the cream of the crop here, not the average.

Also keep in mind that the progressivity of the tax code penalizes people living in high COLA states because their accordingly higher income is taxed a lot more. You may get paid more to live in a high COLA state, but a huge chunk of that extra money disappears to taxes. At an income level of 75k, it's very easy to navigate the tax code to pay very few taxes and put yourself in the 15% bracket where you're paying nothing on long-term capital gains. Double that income and you're probably quadrupling or quintupling the taxes paid.

I would agree with Pointedstick and say the "cream of the crop" of upper middle class workers probably get $60k to $100k in flyover states and $125k to $175k in NJ/NYC/Bay Area.

However, they are basically equivalent in spending power and take home wages because after higher COLA and taxes, their spending power is about the same. At the end of the day it comes down to quality of life.

Some people like living in NJ, driving 30 minutes to a train station, then taking a 45 minute train to NYC (probably waiting 15 to 30 minutes for the train to arrive in the first place) then walking 15 minutes through NYC for work.

Versus others who like living in bum-f--- nowhere where they can drive 10 to 20 minutes to work. They might have to drive 10 minutes to get to the local Wal Mart and maybe drive 45 minutes to 60 minutes to get to a big shopping mall that still won't be as big as the smallest shopping mall in NYC/NJ.

And others might be staying in the east coast/bay area in spite of hating high COL and traffic but because they were born there and all their family/friends are there.

Pointedstick wrote: I mean this with all earnestness and no snark at all, but what sort of "culture and entertainment options" are you referring to? I ask because I hear this a lot from people who prefer cities, and as one who typically tries to avoid cities, I've always had a hard time understanding what this meant. Are you talking about, like, theater? Concerts? Museums? Restaurants? Nightlife? The coffee shop scene?

Personally I assign a lot of value to having access to a wide range of restaurants covering a diversity of authentic cuisines. I used to be in a band and go to music clubs frequently (not so much now), and for a music scene to be satisfying you need a certain critical mass of like-minded people and venues.

There are other group activities that only really work when you have enough population density to support a critical mass of participants --- theater, less popular sports, maker spaces, and so forth.

But, I concede that almost all of my passive entertainment comes through the Internet which works the same from everywhere. The "culture and entertainment" of just about everyone I know, including ones who scoff at less urban places, is almost exclusively limited to TV, mainstream movies, major professional sports, video games, and chain restaurants. That stuff is the same everywhere in the US.

Storm wrote: That's nice, but for a lot of people getting even a $75K job is impossible in a flyover state.  Not to mention, that for a lot of us the lack of culture and entertainment options outside of big cities makes living in these areas pretty far down on our list of desires.

It just seems impossible to have a quality life without living in suburban or uban hell next to other people that you have very minimal in common with.

But I do find it rather amusing we'd be worrying about that factor considering we're all Introverts more or less on here.  Introverts aren't supposed to be worrying about the social scene and all that jazz of New York, etc..  People into that have a completely different (superficial) mentality than just about anything we talk about on here.

Pointedstick wrote:

Storm wrote: Not to mention, that for a lot of us the lack of culture and entertainment options outside of big cities makes living in these areas pretty far down on our list of desires.

I mean this with all earnestness and no snark at all, but what sort of "culture and entertainment options" are you referring to? I ask because I hear this a lot from people who prefer cities, and as one who typically tries to avoid cities, I've always had a hard time understanding what this meant. Are you talking about, like, theater? Concerts? Museums? Restaurants? Nightlife? The coffee shop scene?

Yes, to all of the above.  How about even places to take the kids like a children's museum (we have 2 near us), a water park, or an amusement park with rides?  Libraries that actually have a good selection of newly released bestselling books (digital and print), DVD and Bluray movies (so you don't even need to rent or buy them).  Decent restaurants to eat at occasionally.  The ability to see a broadway show if you want to.  If you're single and younger, perhaps nightlife like clubs where good live music can be found.

I've lived in flyover states before, and my idea of a good night out is not a dive bar followed by Waffle House at 2 am.  Or, a 20 year old movie theater with sticky floors, uncomfortable seats, and a small screen.

KevinW wrote:

Pointedstick wrote: I mean this with all earnestness and no snark at all, but what sort of "culture and entertainment options" are you referring to? I ask because I hear this a lot from people who prefer cities, and as one who typically tries to avoid cities, I've always had a hard time understanding what this meant. Are you talking about, like, theater? Concerts? Museums? Restaurants? Nightlife? The coffee shop scene?

Personally I assign a lot of value to having access to a wide range of restaurants covering a diversity of authentic cuisines. I used to be in a band and go to music clubs frequently (not so much now), and for a music scene to be satisfying you need a certain critical mass of like-minded people and venues.

There are other group activities that only really work when you have enough population density to support a critical mass of participants --- theater, less popular sports, maker spaces, and so forth.

But, I concede that almost all of my passive entertainment comes through the Internet which works the same from everywhere. The "culture and entertainment" of just about everyone I know, including ones who scoff at less urban places, is almost exclusively limited to TV, mainstream movies, major professional sports, video games, and chain restaurants. That stuff is the same everywhere in the US.

Some very good points.  90% of my entertainment can be filled by the Internet and cooking at home with family, which can be done anywhere.  But, on the weekends we like to leave the house and sometimes run out of activities to do, even in a heavily populated area.  It can be downright depressing to realize that the only place you can enjoy a decent meal out is a chain restaurant like Outback Steakhouse.  I mean, sure, Outback Steakhouse makes a decent steak, don't get me wrong, but I prefer diversity in my cuisine.  I like being able to gorge myself on all you can eat sushi and sashimi (that is actually freshly made and good quality) for only $15 a person... I like to be able to go to Korean BBQ, Dim Sum, or have Xiao Long Bao (if you don't know what that is, it's basically dumplings steamed in a wood basket that have a soup with pork and crab inside them and they are delicious - you can eat dozens of them!).

I know even in most flyover states you can drive a couple hours and get to these places, but the quality is still not as good, they are too far away, and it's just not the same to have it easily accessible.

I would also have to say that if you are into live music there are only a few cities, even in the US, where you have a really good selection.  Austin Texas comes to mind as a good example of what I am talking about.

MachineGhost wrote: But I do find it rather amusing we'd be worrying about that factor considering we're all Introverts more or less on here.  Introverts aren't supposed to be worrying about the social scene and all that jazz of New York, etc..  People into that have a completely different (superficial) mentality than just about anything we talk about on here.

I also find it interesting, but I am an ENTJ so I do prefer being extroverted.  I know many of you are INTJ.

MachineGhost wrote:
But I do find it rather amusing we'd be worrying about that factor considering we're all Introverts more or less on here.  Introverts aren't supposed to be worrying about the social scene and all that jazz of New York, etc..  People into that have a completely different (superficial) mentality than just about anything we talk about on here.

I am an introvert.  Like most introverts, I do like to socialize.  I just don't always feel like it, and like to have control over the circumstances (I don't want to get stuck chit chatting with random boring people at some party while I wait for my ride, but I'll be happy to discuss shared interests with other nerds at a Meetup). 

If I lived in the middle of nowhere, I would have to expend a lot of energy to get any social interaction (e.g., meeting neighbors, etc.).  This extra energy might be fine for an extrovert, but for me it means I'd probably stay a shut-in.

Living in a place like SF, I have a million opportunities for low-effort socialization.  I do like museums, concerts, etc., but that's not that important for me.  More important is being able to talk with people who share my interests -- high likelihood where there are many smart, nerdy people, college students, etc.