Living Space in New Homes has Doubled Since 1973

Jason C.
0 comments
Moving News

“The world is getting smaller” has become popular phrase due to globalization. But here’s the truth: the square footage of the world isn’t changing; however, new homes are getting bigger, at least in America.

The American Enterprise Institute recently shared some surprising information about changes in home size, square footage costs, and living space per person.

Average New Home Size

Mark J. Perry—economics professor and author of the article—writes “the median-size house has increased in size by almost 1,000 square feet, from 1,525 square feet in 1973 to 2,467 last year. In percentage terms, both the average and median size of new US houses have increased by 62% since 1973.”

Here’s what that means: if the trend were to continue, the square footage of new homes will have more than doubled within a 100-year time period! What happened to the “people today are making less than their parents did” debate? While there’s truth to that side, that fact that new homes are increasing so much in size makes it seem people today have more money.

The chart below shows the climb in square footage of new homes in 1973. Notice the dip from around 2008 until 2011. The short decline in total square footage for new homes during those years is likely to what’s now known as the Great Recession of 2008.

Cost per Square Foot

With the square footage in homes doubling since 1973, one would presume the cost per square footage is now less expensive. But that’s not the case. As a matter of fact, the price per square feet has relatively stayed the same, even considering inflation. At least the price hasn’t gone up!

Mr. Perry writes that the prices “range between about $107 and $128 per square foot at an average of about $116. The price of just more than $120 per square foot for new houses sold in 2015 was 8.5% below the peak of $131.29 (in 2015 dollars) per square foot for a new house in 2005.”

The graph below visualizes the price per square footage since 1973.

Living Space per Person

Is the average new home getting larger because more people are living under the same roof? The answer is no. As a matter of fact, people today have more square footage than they did in 1973.

Mr. Perry breaks down exactly how much more square footage each person has now, on average. He writes the “square footage of living space per person in a new US house has increased from 507 to 971 square feet using the median size house, and from 551 to 1,058 square feet using the average size house. In percentage terms, that’s a 92% increase for both the median or average house size per person.”

Final Thoughts on Living Space

Mr. Perry finishes his article on a lighter note. He explains that focusing on stagnating wages and decreasing household incomes do not paint the entire picture of our economy. Instead, he points to our overall quality of life improving since the 1970s, which is made apparent in the additional square footage we have and the price remaining about the same.

Featured photo by Sarah Jane on Pexels

American Enterprise Institute graph photos are screenshots by RPS Relocation

Excess Food Opportunities Map by the EPA

Jason C.
0 comments
Maps

What does a nation do if it has too much food? The phrase “too much food” is a bit of a misnomer. After all, too much food is actually a good thing. World hunger is alive and well. In addition, people go hungry right here in the United States due to reasons associated with poverty. This shouldn’t happen because there is an excess of food on a daily basis.

Think about restaurants that don’t sell all of their food by the end of the day. Where does that food go? Often times, it’s simply thrown out with the garbage. Other times, it’s donated. The Environmental Protection Agency has mapped out where opportunities exist to save excess food.

About the Food Opportunities Map

“The U.S. EPA Excess Food Opportunities Map supports nationwide diversion of excess food from landfills. The interactive map identifies and displays facility-specific information about potential generators and recipients of excess food in the industrial, commercial and institutional sectors and also provides estimates of excess food by generator type.”

Food banks, correctional facilities, educational institutions, composting facilities—these are some of the establishments you’ll find by exploring the interactive map. A quick glance of it shows a “heat map” of where these establishments are. There are ample establishments up and down the West Coast. On the other side of the country, Florida seems to have a good amount. Elsewhere, the Upper Midwest and stretching to the Upper East Coast show numerous establishments.

Food Opportunities in Dallas

According to the EPA’s map, there are currently nine excess food opportunities in Dallas. The photo below shows the institutions are sorted by anaerobic digestion facilities, composting facilities, and food banks. Dallas has 4 anaerobic digestion facilities, 3 composting facilities, and 2 food banks. You’ll see a similar list any time you click another area on the map.

Clicking through the facility type will show you the actual facility or food bank. For example, the North Texas Food Bank is one of them. It shows the address and phone number of each facility. The amount of food received per year is even listed. The North Texas Food Bank received 26,453.44 tons of food. That can feed a lot of people!

Goals of the Food Opportunities Map

The EPA created the map in part to let establishments know where to find these facilities. The EPA wants less food to be wasted and more excess food to be donated. They say that the “map will help you learn about potential sources of excess food in your region and potential non-landfill recipients, such as composting and anaerobic digestion facilities.”

The EPA also wants to highlight the “potential infrastructure gaps for managing excess food”. Managing excess food requires logistics to get the food to a facility where it can be donated. At a larger level, the EPA perhaps wants to highlight where a facility isn’t. If there is an area with a high amount of excess food, there should be a facility such as a food bank. That way, we can put more excess food to better use.

Featured photo by Daria Shevtsova on Pexels

EPA food opportunities map photos are screenshots by RPS Relocation

How Much Time Residents Of Major USA Cities Waste Commuting In Their Lifetime

Jason C.
0 comments
Dallas, Data Visualization, Maps, Seattle

How much time do you spend driving? If you live in or near a major city, the answer is probably “a lot”. EducatedDriver.org has put together a data visualization map which details the average round trip commute time that may affect you.

Alex Lauderdale, the author of the article, writes “We did the math for nearly 1,000 US cities. The average American loses 408 days of their life commuting, and in many areas, the toll is even higher.” Let’s dig a little deeper and look at some individual cities listed.

Here’s How Much Time You’ll Waste Commuting in Your Lifetime (by City)

The Cities We Serve

Here at RPS Relocation, we focus on offering a great relocation experience in Dallas, Seattle, Las Vegas, and Boulder; so we’ll use them as examples. What is the average commute time like in each of these cities? We’ve sorted them from worst to best, starting with Seattle which is the worst on this map.

Seattle, WASeattle has one of the worst average round trip commute times in the country. If you look closely at the visualization, the city is marked by a red circle which stands for the longest commutes. Indeed, a commuter in Seattle will spend 463 days of their life on the road. The average round trip commute time is 59.2 minutes.

Dallas, TXDallas is orange on the map, which is one step better. A commuter in the city will lose 436 days of their life by driving in or around it. The average round trip commute time in Dallas is 55.8 minutes. Dallas must have just missed being in the red due to its close proximity to the commuting times Seattle drivers have to deal with.

Las Vegas, NVLas Vegas, like Dallas, is also in the “orange zone”. A commuter in Sin City will spend 381 days of their life on the road. The average round trip commute time in Las Vegas is 48.8 minutes.

Boulder, CO — Out of the four cities, drivers in Boulder have it the best. The city is right in the middle when it comes to average commute times. The area is marked by a yellow circle. A driver in Boulder will lose 350 days of their life to commuting. That’s just under one year! The average round trip commute time in Boulder, CO is 44.8 minutes.

Other Major or Growing Cities

Major cities in red on the visualization map seem to be the largest in the country. Many of the ones in yellow seem to be growing or up-and-coming cities. Austin, Charlotte, and Denver come to mind. For the remainder, take a glance at where these cities stand with regards to the average round trip commute time. The number after each city is the round trip time in minutes.

Red Circle
New York 71.8
Washington D.C. 68.8
Chicago 64.4
San Francisco 64.2
Boston 64
Philadelphia 63
Miami 61.2
Los Angeles 60.8
Houston 59

Orange Circle
San Jose 54.6
Denver 54.6
Nashville 54
Detroit 53.4
Austin 52.8
Jacksonville 52.6
Charlotte 52.6
Portland 52.4
Phoenix 52
San Antonio 51.4
San Diego 50.6

Yellow Circle
Kansas City 45.8
Oklahoma City 44.8

Featured photo by Pixabay on Pexels

EducatedDriver.org data visualization map photo is a screenshot by RPS Relocation

Groups Are Planting More Trees In Dallas To Battle The Heat

Jason C.
0 comments
Dallas

Parts of Dallas are getting hotter over time and it’s largely due to human actions. I’m not talking about climate change or other atmospheric alterations. Instead, trees are being cut down as a result of continuous urban development.

There are a host of problems that develop as a result of removing a large number of trees. One is that healthy oxygen levels would decrease since trees emit the compound. Trees also absorb unhealthy compounds such as carbon dioxide which is commonplace in urban areas. Still, another issue with removing trees is the lack of shade, especially in areas around Dallas.

Citilab detailed how Dallas-area residents have gotten tired of the growing “heat islands” and have begun fighting back.

The Planter Organizations

The residents have banded together under the banner of three different organizations: Texas Trees Foundation, The Nature Conservancy, and Trust for Public Land. Each of these groups plays a part in restoring trees in various neighborhoods. And there’s one neighborhood in particular that needs an added level of attention: Oak Cliff.

Oak Cliff, as seen in the map below, is a high-risk neighborhood for heat-related problems. Asthma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease—these are common health consequences of living in a poor environment.

“The goal is to eventually plant 1,000 trees; so far, some 500 saplings are in the ground as part of a project called Cool and Connected Oak Cliff. Planting trees is a common low-tech solution to battle the heat island, but high temperatures are just one target of this ambitious project.”

Planning the Habitat

The Texas Trees Foundation originally used aerial imagery to map where the trees were around Dallas. They studied different neighborhoods and found temperature differences in areas with trees versus those without. This was noted in their “report on urban heat management in the city, which suggested that trees could help curb temperatures by as much as 15 degrees on hot days”.

The Trust for Public Land did their part with the data as well. They ran it through a “visual mapping program, overlaying the numbers with additional data on the socioeconomic and health status of Dallas’s neighborhoods.”

Side Benefits of More Trees

Cleaner oxygen is only one benefit of living around many trees. Others include shade for playgrounds and places with high foot traffic. Trees foster an increase in the safety of pedestrians who walk near roads. Robert Kent at the Trust for Public Land says “not only provides a physical barrier of separation, but the tree will also be a signal to drivers to slow down”.

Future Goals

Cool and Connected Oak Cliff has already surpassed half of their goal; however, planting 1,000 trees is only a drop in the ocean. “The Texas Trees Foundation’s report suggests that the city will need to increase its tree canopy by about 5 percent to make a dent in curbing the heat island effect. That can mean roughly 300,000 trees.” That being said, the positive results from the new, growing trees may prompt more calls to grow even more trees.

 

Featured photo by Anton Atanasov on Pexels

Oak Cliff map and tree planters photo are screenshots by RPS Relocation

Cities in the USA With The Most Homeless People

Jason C.
0 comments
Data Visualization

Homelessness is an ongoing problem for many people and communities. Mental illness, poverty, domestic abuse, laziness—these are some common reasons people become homeless. Statista recently created the chart below which details the cities that have the highest number of homeless people.

Infographic: The U.S. Cities With The Most Homeless People | Statista You will find more infographics at Statista

Interpreting the Numbers

A quick glance at the chart shows a shocking number of homeless people. Half a million people would fill ten major sports arenas! Digging a little deeper, however, shows that the number is comparatively small compared to how many people there are in the United States. The United States Census Bureau states that the population is just over 328 million. That means only 0.17% of people here are homeless. While the percentage is small, it’s still about 0.17% too much.

The Census Bureau also lists the most populous states. Four of them, in order, are California, Texas, Florida, and New York. How does this match up with our chart? Four of the ten are cities in California. New York, while only having one city in the chart (New York City), is by far the winner (or loser) when it comes to the highest number of homeless people that live in any particular state.

Percentages Against Total Number of Homeless

Statista lists the ten cities with the highest number of homeless. Adding those numbers will net 192,535 homeless people, which is nearly 35% of the total homeless in the United States. This makes sense since we learned earlier that California and New York, a couple of the most populous states, have cities with a high number of homeless people.

Let’s take a look at how the ten cities compare again the total number of homeless.

Total Number of Homeless: 553,742.

  • Philadelphia: 1%
  • Boston: 1.1%
  • Las Vegas/Clark County: 1.2%
  • San Francisco: 1.2%
  • San Jose/Santa Clara City & County: 1.3%
  • District of Columbia: 1.3%
  • San Diego City and County: 1.7%
  • Seattle/King County: 2.1%
  • Los Angeles City & County: 10%
  • New York City: 13.8%

What’s striking here is that most of the cities seem to have similar percentages. Statistically, Los Angeles and New York City see large jumps and can be considered the outliers of the sample. However, we need to take into consideration that those two cities are massively larger than the others in terms of size and population.

Percentages Against Total Number of Homeless Within Top Ten

Another way of looking at the data is to compare the numbers within each other. For this we won’t take into consideration the total number of homeless; however, we’ll use 192,535. As we learned earlier, that is the sum of the number of homeless from each of these ten cities. Here’s what we get:

  • Philadelphia: 3%
  • Boston: 3.2%
  • Las Vegas/Clark County: 3.4%
  • San Francisco: 3.6%
  • San Jose/Santa Clara City & County: 3.8%
  • District of Columbia: 3.9%
  • San Diego City and County: 4.8%
  • Seattle/King County: 6%
  • Los Angeles City & County: 28.7%
  • New York City: 39.7%

While Los Angles and New York City are still the outliers, this gives us a somewhat clearer picture of the data. The two large cities command roughly 68.4% of the total homeless within the top ten cities.

Featured photo by Pixabay and sleeping homeless man photo by Alvin Decena on Pexels

Google Maps is Renaming Well Known Neighborhoods

Jason C.
0 comments
Maps

How does a neighborhood get its name? Often times, the political establishment will christen it. Other times, the residents of the area will name it. More recently, new names for neighborhoods have popped up on Google Maps. The New York Times recently dug a little deeper to find out why.

The East Cut

Imagine this: you live in the same neighborhood your whole life. Let’s say it’s called Old Town. Then, an acquaintance tells you to meet them down the street at an establishment in the “East Cut” neighborhood. You’ll have to ask for clarification because surely there’s no such place. The acquaintance pulls up Google Maps on their smartphone and proves it to you.

It may seem like the Twilight Zone to some; however, that’s exactly what happened earlier this spring. The New York Times writes “For decades, the district south of downtown and alongside San Francisco Bay here was known as either Rincon Hill, South Beach or South of Market. This spring, it was suddenly rebranded on Google Maps to a name few had heard: the East Cut.”

Typos and Mistakes

One would assume a platform like Google Maps would have precise spelling; however, that isn’t the case if the name submitted was misspelled in the first place. Arthur Mullen, a former city planner in Detroit, created a map as a side project back in 2002. His map, which was eventually posted online by locals, contained typos.

Timothy Boscarino, another city planner in Detroit, advised that Google Maps has incorporated Arthur Mullen’s map. “Google almost identically copied that map’s neighborhoods and boundaries, he said — down to its typos. One result was that Google transposed the k and h for the district known as Fiskhorn, making it Fishkorn.”

Here’s the problem with typos and mistakes: they spread from Google Maps to other online platforms. With regards to the East Cut, the “peculiar moniker immediately spread digitally, from hotel sites to dating apps to Uber, which all use Google’s map data. The name soon spilled over into the physical world, too. Real-estate listings beckoned prospective tenants to the East Cut. And news organizations referred to the vicinity by that term.”

How the Naming is Established

Google isn’t always clear with how they name or rename neighborhoods; however, we can presume that they do so with information already found online. This seemed to be the case after Arthur Mullen’s map appeared online.

The New York Times writes “The company declined to detail how some place names came about, though some appear to have resulted from mistakes by researchers, rebrandings by real estate agents — or just outright fiction.” The story of Jeffrey Schneider all but confirms this.

Jeffrey Schneider, an architect based in Los Angeles, owned a rental apartment. He wanted a new tenant so he ran some ads to make the available unit known. He decided, partly as a joke, to name his neighborhood “Silver Lake Heights”. In reality, the area he lived in was called only Silver Lake. Google Maps got a hold of the name ” Silver Lake Heights” and it began appearing on the platform.

Featured photo by Pixabay on Pexels

The East Cut map and photo are screenshots by RPS Relocation

The States People Don’t Want to Move To in 2018

Jason C.
0 comments
Moving News

Immigration to the U.S.—legal and illegal—is currently a hot topic in our political sphere. Both types of immigration happen on a daily basis. Another type of movement, domestic migration, also happens on a daily basis. As we’ll find out, the movement isn’t equal. Some states are gaining domestic migrants and other states are losing domestic migrants. We’re going to focus on the states that are losing migrants.

These are the states people don’t want to move to in 2018. In the chart below you’ll see some states shaded red which means the have a negative net migration, and some states shaded blue which means they have a positive net migration from current U.S. residents or citizens.

The Washington Post has detailed which states these are. They pulled the data from the best source: the U.S. Census Bureau. The data does not consider international immigration; however, the information is interesting nevertheless. Currently it would appear that U.S. residents are moving away from California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut.

Let’s take a closer look at the top three states people seem to be fleeing from: California, New York, and Illinois.

California

California is surrounded by Oregon, Nevada, and Arizona. As you see in the picture, California is red and the other states are blue. It seems as if migrants from California are jumping the state line in support of one of the neighboring states or moving elsewhere across the country. In an earlier post we showed how Californians were moving to places nearby like Nevada and and to states further away like Texas, New York, and Georgia.

New York

New York, a state in the northwest, is surrounded by other states people are migrating from. If we only take into consideration domestic data, it would seem like the population as a whole is getting smaller in New York. Taking international immigration into account gives a better picture, however. “For states like New York, domestic migration losses are offset by new immigration from abroad.”

Illinois

Like New York, Illinois is also surrounded by states U.S. residents are migrating away from; however, neighboring states have less of an outflow than that of the state of Illinois. “Illinois, meanwhile, had a net loss of about 105,000 residents, its largest one-year population leak in the 21st century.”

Similarities of California, New York, and Illinois

Why are people leaving these states? Or, perhaps the better question is this: why aren’t people moving to these states? The answer could be in the cost of living.

According to USA Today, California and New York both make an appearance on the list of seven most expensive states to live in. They write the “median home value in the sunny state is $429,000, and homes generally list for a median price of $425,000 ($256 per square foot).” New York is even more expensive. They continue “New York is known for its higher cost of living, with median home prices sitting at around $525,000 ($507 per square foot). The real estate market in the Big Apple is hot, as statewide housing values have risen 8.5% over the past year, according to Zillow.”

Illinois didn’t make that list; however, which could be because most of the state is farmland. Most of the population in Illinois lives in urban and surrounding suburban areas. Chicago is the largest city in the state. According to Inc., Chicago is listed as one of the ten least affordable cities in America. They write “The cost to live comfortably here is $68,670 [per year] more than $15,000 a year less than New York or LA”. This should come as no surprise as to why people are leaving the city of Chicago of lower cost living in other parts of the country, therefore giving the State of Illinois a negative net migration.

Both Los Angeles and Chicago, the biggest cities in California and Illinois, also share a dubious distinction in that the Washington Post recently added both to a different list, a list of cities were murders are most likely to go unsolved. Los Angeles has been improving but the report said there are still large pockets were murders go unsolved like Pico-Union. Chicago was named as one of the top 2 cities where murders would go unsolved according to the report. There’s no way of knowing how much this impacts net domestic migration figures for two of the largest cities in America or how much unsolved murders in these big cities impacts an entire state’s net domestic migration.

Featured photo and Chicago photo by Pixabay on Pexels

The Best Cities in America

Jason C.
0 comments
Moving News

There are thousands of towns, counties, and cities in America; but not all of them will be considered the best. “Best”, as a term, is quite subjective. Different people will have unique opinions as to what they consider the best cities. Often times, their answers will be related to their own past experiences.

In order to get more objective results, certain criteria should be offered. In addition, the criteria should be judged by an authoritative source. Best Cities has stepped up to the plate in this regard. Let’s take a look at their criteria and then see what cities they view as the best in the nation.

Criteria for the Best Cities

Best Cities has described the categories used in their methodology. “The ranking evaluates each qualifying city across the six pillars of place equity: Place, Product, Programming, People, Prosperity, and Promotion.” Having so many categories allows for better final results.

Place refers to the quality (crime, air quality, etc) of the city. Product refers to the city’s institutions, attractions. and infrastructure. Programming refers to the city’s arts, culture, entertainment. and culinary scene. People refers to the immigration rate and diversity of a city. Prosperity refers to the city’s employment and unemployment rate. And Promotion refers to the number of stories, references and recommendations shared online about a city.

Best Large Cities

Best Cities lists 50 of their favorite large cities based on their criteria. Large cities are those that have “metro populations of a million people or more.” For brevity, we’ll list the top 10. They are:

1. New York
2. Chicago
3. Los Angeles
4. San Francisco
5. Las Vegas
6. San Diego
7. Houston
8. Miami
9. Seattle
10. Boston

These cities are among the most recognizable in the country. New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami—these cities are icons of American metropolitan areas. Chicago scored a perfect score when it comes to New York has a perfect score in the Place, Programming, Prosperity, and Promotion categories. Furthermore, New York has a near perfect score in the Product category. It’s no surprise then why it came in at first place on the list. Although Washington, DC is the capital, New York City is revered as the “Empire State” due to its wealth and resources.

Best Small Cities

Best Cities also lists 50 of their favorite small cities. Small cities are those that have “metro populations under a million people.” Again, we’ll list the top 10 in this category. They are:

1. Honolulu
2. Omaha
3. Albuquerque
4. Charleston
5. El Paso
6. Reno
7. Tulsa
8. Madison
9. Myrtle Beach
10. Asheville

The cities that are on this list are much less recognizable. Asheville, El Paso, Madison—these cities are relatively unknown to many people in America. Some of them, like Asheville, score highest with the Product criteria. Asheville is known for its universities, festivals, and other year-round events. In another example, Honolulu has a perfect score in the Place, Programming, and Promotion categories. It’s no surprise that Honolulu has a perfect score with Place, seeing as how the city has some of the most beautiful beaches and landscapes in the world.

New York City Photo by Lukas Kloeppel and Honolulu Photo by Tyler Lastovich on Pexels

American Cities by Time Zone

Jason C.
0 comments
Data Visualization


American Cities by Time Zone [OC] from dataisbeautiful

What time zone do you live in? Depending on where you’re planning moving, you might end up in a different time zone. Moving to a neigboring time zone shouldn’t be too difficult; however, moving to a farther time zone may require some adjustment, especially when it comes to your sleep schedule.

A Reddit user, u/ptgorman, recently shared the time zone visualization shown above. It details the time zone of American cities with a popular of over 100,000 people. The data was pulled from Wikipedia’s List of United States cities by population. Reddit users have commented on the thread. Let’s take a look at what they wrote.

Common and Outlying Zones

Pacific, Central, and Eastern times are the most popular time zones. The number of cities in each is similar to each other. The cities in Mountain time are numbered less than half of the most common zones. Hawaii, Alaska, and Atlantic time zones can be considered the outliers of the data. Each of those three has five or fewer cities with a population of over 100,000 people.

Texas and Time Zones

As Reddit user, u/sertorius42 says, Texas has many cities with a population over 100,000 people. They counted 14 in the Dallas-Fort Worth area; however, another Reddit user, u/Bonesaw823, quickly corrected u/sertorius42, advising the Dallas-Fort Worth area actually has 15 cities with a population of over 100,00 people.

Texas has two time zones: Central and Mountain Time. Most of the state is in the Central Time Zone. Only two counties—Hudspeth and El Paso—are in the Mountain Time Zone. These two are the western Texas counties.

Total Population of Time Zones

If you look at each time zone’s total population, the visualization would look very different. For example, the number of cities in Pacific, Central, and Eastern Time Zones with a population of over 100,000 people are similar; however, most of the general population lives in the Eastern Time Zone. It will probably stay like that for a long time.

U/ptgorman also shared relevant information about where the total population lives. In terms of total population, the Eastern Time Zone has 47.6%, the Central Time Zone has 29.1%, the Mountain Time Zone has 6.7%, and the Pacific Time Zone has 16.6%. This data comes from the 2015 Census estimates (via MetricMaps). So, if the visualization showed time zones by percentage of the population, Eastern Time Zone would show more than the others.

Given this information, another Reddit user, u/TradinPieces, expressed surprise that more Eastern Time Zone cities weren’t on the list. This makes sense for a couple reasons. One is that the population was able to grow on the eastern part of the country over the past few hundred years. The eastern part is where most of the historical immigration originated. Another is that, if a great part of the population resides on the eastern side, one would imagine there would be a high number of cities where the population is over 100,000 people. This just goes to show that data visualizations can be surprising and are a great and fun way to learn.

Featured Image by Kaique Rocha on Pexels

Top Destinations for Californians Fleeing the High Cost of Living

Jason C.
0 comments
Moving News

Californians are leaving! Well, not all of them are; however, there are a few reasons native Californians are looking to live elsewhere. KERA News, an organization based in Texas, dug a little deeper as to why some Californians are relocating. Their article details why some are moving to parts of Texas and other places.

Home prices in many areas of California are expensive. “It’s clear from the median home prices why Californians are moving to North Texas. Homes on the market in the four coastal California cities averaged $720,000 in March 2017, compared to $313,000 in Dallas.” The average home prices in those four cities are double the average home price in Dallas! It’s no surprise, then, why some people in California are moving.

Top Ten Cities for Emigration

Where else are Californians moving to? KERA News listed additional cities, which they pulled from a Trulia article. The cities, as you’ll soon read, are literally scattered all over the United States. The top ten cities Californians are moving to, in order, are:

  1. Las Vegas, Nevada
  2. New York, New York
  3. Phoenix, Arizona
  4. Dallas, Texas
  5. Seattle, Washington
  6. Portland, Oregon
  7. Atlanta, Georgia
  8. Houston, Texas
  9. Chicago, Illinois
  10. Denver, Colorado

Do you see any cities on the list that are surprising? Three of them, New York, Seattle, and Chicago, stand out. This is because these three cities aren’t known for affordable housing as much as a city like Dallas. New York City has some of the most expensive homes in the country.

KERA News continues, “Dallas and Fort Worth had among the largest population gains last year. On the list of 15 cities nationwide with the most population growth, Dallas’ increase of 18,935 people put it at No. 3, and Fort Worth was No. 4, with an increase of 18,664.” Again, the focus is on cities in Texas due to their job opportunities and lower cost of living.

It’s important to highlight Seattle, Dallas, and Houston specifically. According to Curbed, more homes are coming to the market in what has been a slim housing market as of late. “In the Seattle city limits in June 2018, NWMLS saw 1,246 active listings, a 75.5 percent increase from the year before.” Dallas and Houston are also highlighted because their real estate market is getting hotter as well.

The New Tax Law

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 contained more than tax cuts. It also closed some tax loopholes and established some deduction ceilings. The tax law became effective January 1, 2018. Therefore, many people don’t really know how it will affect them yet. They’ll find out next April when they submit their taxes.

Here’s what I’m getting to: there is a maximum deduction for state and property taxes. The magic number is $10,000. Let’s say a homeowner in California paid $15,000 in property taxes each year. Now, with the new tax law, they will not be able to deduct that extra $5,000 from their taxes. It makes financial sense for people with expensive homes and high property taxes to move to an area with lower home prices and property taxes.

Featured Photo by Bella Co and Dallas Photo by Pixabay on Pexels

Congress Photo by Wikimedia Commons on Wikipedia