Quality of life tip: Living within walking distance of your job is priceless. I've been in LA for over nine years and never been more than fifteen minutes from the office. I'd sooner move to another city than spend some significant fraction of my life in traffic.
That requires that you work somewhere that you'd want to live, though. A few hundred thousand people work in midtown manhattan, but it would be a miserable place to live. The subway isn't great, but commuter rail is pretty pleasant.
Commuting 10 miles each way in LA traffic is definitely the worst commute I've ever had!
I live in midtown Manhattan. It's not at all a miserable place to live. We can catch most of the subways within a block or two. We are a couple of blocks from Central Park. There are more and more families that have been moving into the area. There's an increasing number of restaurants, cafes etc. There are a lot of tourists coming thru, but we don't mind. It's been fun living here.
Just out of curiosity, how much rent do you pay? I live in Frankfurt Germany and find rent pretty expensive here, but i can't imagine how expensive midtown Manhattan must be.
Market rate for something like dr_ described (only a few blocks to subways and Central Park) is probably ~$2400 for a studio, ~$2900 for a junior one bedroom, ~$3200 for a one bedroom, assuming not poor shape (at least dishwasher) but not luxury. Probably an elevator (there aren't many walkups that close to the park). More for a doorman.
You can get cheaper if you go significantly towards the rivers (for example west of 10th ave) at the cost of a more industrial feel and longer walk to transit and the park. Those buildings would also be more walkups.
Perhaps you can find a deal as a roommate if you know people as one of the other posters said, but if you're looking for a whole apartment and don't have connections that's the ballpark.
Also, it's very hard to get a sense of how cheap the market goes from looking online because chances are there's a catch or the listing isn't real. NY listings tend to lie outright (1BD is actually a convertible studio, etc).
Source: lived a few blocks from Columbus Circle last year.
> * assuming not poor shape (at least dishwasher) *
Everyone's definition of "poor shape" is different. I do not mind washing dishes at all; I'd rather save a hundred bucks a month in rent than have a dishwasher.
Not OP, but you can expect to start at about $1500 a month for a studio apartment (maybe cheaper if you find a damn good deal). If you want a one bedroom, $2000/month is probably closer.
I don't know what kind of situation you're in, but people cannot generally go and rent real, not-falling apart 1BRs in the the 20s for anywhere near $1500.
I'm not a New Yorker but I'm having a very hard time believing this. Poking around online I get the strong sense any non-roommate living space at all in Manhattan is going to be very well over $2000.
If your only avenue to finding an apartment is Craigslist, then most likely. But once you've lived in NYC for a while and have a group of friends who've lived there a while, it's not difficult to find good deals (especially if you're patient and don't need to move in a hurry). It's just like searching for a job, sometimes the best job openings are never advertised outside a small subset of people.
I've lived in NYC since 2003, including in the UES, EV, Harlem, Lefferts Gardens, and now Woodside.
I have absolutely no idea how I'd go about finding a $1500 studio anywhere in Manhattan south of 96th street, much less in the 20s. Maybe you can find an illegal apartment in a basement with a hot plate instead of a stove or something, but that's about it.
There are people are grandfathered in to all kinds of sweetheart rent stabilized / mitchell lama / etc. deals but that takes more than having a group of friends and keeping your ears to the ground. That's the equivalent to winning the lotto.
I've been here since 2004 and have lived in a one bedroom in the West Village for $1700, a one bedroom in the East Village for 1750, a one bedroom in Cobble Hill for 1500, a huge 3 bedroom share in Harlem which my share was 900, a one bedroom with a dining room and a backyard as big as the apartment for 1900 in Carroll Gardens, a luxury building in mid-town for 3500 and a two bedroom share in Greenpoint in which my share was 1200.
East Village, Downtown, and Harlem were sublets I was renting while bouncing back and forth between NYC and Oklahoma while my father and mother were going through illnesses and traveling alot for work, the others I left because I wanted more space, to be closer to certain neighborhoods or because the new apt was better than the last.
None were illegal shares, none were rent controlled, one was rent stabilized, and all were very nice.
I don't doubt that you could find an apartment for $1500 in Chelsea in 2006. Back then Chelsea was a significantly different place. The high line hadn't opened yet, google wasn't there, the stroller crowd hadn't moved in yet.
By the same token, I also don't doubt you could find a decent share where your half would be $1500 south of 96th street today, maybe even in the 20s somewhere.
Neither of those are a studio in the 20s for $1500 in 2015. If that exists, I wish I knew the secret handshake.
Nope, it's an inefficient real estate market with an affinity for bait and switch plus hidden points of entry.
I don't like the NYC real estate market, personally it's the reason I'm most likely to leave. But I've found great places and friends of mine have found great places; places many of the other commenters say don't exist, and I found these through friends and friends of friends. The longer I've been here, the easier it has come to find places I like that I can afford because I'm not relying on points of entry most likely to be scams or misleading.
Every small town around the world spreads this weird rumor among themselves that cities are so terrible. Apparently caused by the small percentage of people who moved to a city and then later moved back. Great sample to draw on.
What if -- dense cities are extremely packed with millions of people because that's exactly what some people love? Not some convoluted tradeoff that millions of people are being forced to make by living there. What if the answer to why cities are that way is simply because people love it that way?
That's what I thought before moving to NYC. After being here a few years, I've found New Yorkers are rather more provincial than I had expected and many don't have any idea what "not New York" (or at least the tri-state area) is like. At this point I think a majority of people who live in NYC do so because they already live here.
My theory on that is because Manhattan is so great, and the immediate surroundings are relatively so much worse in many ways (opinions vary but it's generally accepted). So, they get the idea that this trend just continues indefinitely, the further away you get the worse it gets.
I live in midtown manhattan (46th & 2nd) and while I don't enjoy it quite as much as I did living downtown it's still pretty great. I've no idea why you think it would be miserable.
I lived on 37th and 10th for a while (working about 10 blocks south). You don't have to live a block from your office to make it enjoyable. A 15-20 min walk is more enjoyable than a 20min (more likely 40min) subway trip.
While it obviously wouldn't work for everyone, it worked for me and was more pleasurable than living in even nice parts of Brooklyn and dealing with crowded trains in the morning.
Difference is, in LA I have a small house and a back yard. There are olive trees with a hammock strung between them and my rent is 1850 a month. I'm pretty sure that would get me a small closet in Manhattan.
Really? I always thought that was not possible in LA. I like living without a car and having a semi-urban house with a backyard. Is that possible in LA? I seriously would love to live somewhere like that.
I do iOS dev work, so I considered SF, but maybe 20 years ago...
I've found that LA is surprisingly tough to get a handle on as a newcomer or outsider. It helps to think of it as a conglomeration of many small towns which have grown together over time, resulting in a situation where there is a "downtown" practically every few miles in most areas of the city. Of course, depending on what part of LA you're in, these former downtown areas may not be in the greatest shape, but they're there. Additionally, there are always the "name brand" areas where lots of people live, but one of the best things about living in LA is exploring everything else, because there is a really mind-boggling amount of everything else out there in LA.
...there is a really mind-boggling amount of everything else out there in LA...
So true. I live in a pretty ordinary SFR (that's what I wanted), but it's a trip to go to friends' houses and see what other people have been able to do.
Horse properties where you stable your horse in your back yard and go riding into the mountains that rim the city. Totally unique view houses clinging to hillsides in Hollywood. Converted warehouses with 10K SF in Frogtown by the LA River (perfect for a sculptor or a tinkerer). Properties on National Forest Service land in the forested valleys in the San Gabriels. Freaky old cabins built in the 1920s right on the edge of Elysian Park or the Arroyo Seco.
It's not the luxury or the money (I did not mention any beach houses). It's the uniqueness. If you have your nose to the ground and care about such things, you can still score one of these places on a middle-class income.
I live in LA county (Long Beach) and yes, there are a lot of great little historic tree lined neighborhoods spread all over LA... For example, I work downtown Long Beach, and live in beautiful Cal Heights, a short 3 mile bike ride, drive, or blue line subway ride to my office.
I came here to say the same - Los Angeles is a big region, and there are many lovely places to live within. Like New York, if you can find a way to live near where you work it can be fantastic, and Long Beach is a perfect example.
Long Beach is both a great city to live in and, increasingly, a great place to work - not only if you work remotely, but if you want to work local. We have a great and growing tech scene, increasingly awesome food and drink, and a long history of arts, music and community.
PS, hi Dan! Great to run into you again (and again).
Splice is in Santa Monica (West LA, by the ocean), most of the team walks or bikes... and we are looking for an iOS dev, feel free to drop me an email if interested (matt at splice.com)
> Really? I always thought that was not possible in LA. I like living without a car and having a semi-urban house with a backyard. Is that possible in LA?
It's a rumor we spread to keep people from moving here. :-)
In LA, if you're going to live on side of the city & work on the other, you definitely need a car.
However, if you live near were you work, you definitely can get away without one. I've lived in Santa Monica, West Hollywood, & Pasadena (each for different jobs). I still had a car, but I tend to use it 1-2 a month, to do things like pick up friends from the airport, roadtrips to Vegas & what not.
The important thing to note is that unlike New York/Manhattan, LA hasn't really had a downtown that is exclusively commercial property. Businesses are scattered throughout the regions' major cities (LA, Pasadena, Long Beach, Santa Monica, Irvine, etc.) That means that those commercial areas are intermixed with housing, etc. This works great if you can land a near-permanent job, then buy housing nearby. It's not so good if you can't afford housing in the area your employer is located (the westside), or if your employer relocates their HQ across town after you're bought your home.
* The bus system and rail is better than many people seem to be aware -- if you live/work near a good line you can commute as quickly as an auto commuter (and sometimes quicker). Once you have to make multiple transfers or otherwise bridge a gap, speed of transportation goes down fast.
* Bicycling is possible, but the quality of bike accommodations varies widely and so does the consideration afforded cyclists.
* Real estate costs here are lower than San Francisco and New York but still far from sane for the median wage... even modest homes are often much more expensive to rent (let alone buy) than you'd think.
LA is a patchwork of small "neighborhoods" -- each typically only a few square miles. Adjacent to any particularly pricey area will probably be several more affordable ones. Can't afford pricey Beverly Hills? There may be parts of Century City or Culver City or Mid-Wilshire more in your price range.
I lived in LA for 7 years, in a variety of locations. Living within walking distance to your job isn't possible unless a) you make a lot of money or b) you don't mind living far from everything else.
This article really tempts me. About a year and a half ago, I moved to the SF Bay Area. And since moving here I've been just, totally disappointed. There's a tyranny of the useful here. Silicion valley loves boring B2B software -- your Slacks -- and boring social media products -- your Twitters -- and useful but banal consumer products -- your Ubers, and it's just depressing.
We don't value fun here. Or art. Or games. Or films. We're like robots, looking for useful things that make money, rather than something risky and expressive and thoughtful. We've fallen in love with money.
Reading this article, it's refreshing. A city of artists. I wonder if I might enjoy it to this city of gross utilitarians.
The really depressing thing is that even just 6 or 8 years ago, San Francisco was about all those things. It had artists, it made films, it valued culture and fun and creativity. I moved here 6 years ago for exactly those things, but even then I noticed it was changing. Now the artists and filmmakers and musicians have mostly left - moved to Oakland or LA or elsewhere. In a way, our moving here destroyed the things we moved here for.
We all have our own perspectives and bias. I moved out to SF 8 years ago and left 1 year ago. During that time, I was nothing but disappointed with SF and its so called "creative culture." Everybody I spoke to said it was so much better 7-8 years before that (just before the dot com bust). And yet, I have difficulty finding notable art that was made in San Francisco that doesn't date back to the 70s.
It's still a very nice place to live but it's not a funky creative mecca. If you just accept sf as a really nice place to program from, you can appreciate it more.
The places utilitarian careerists create are miserable alienating cultural wastelands. As a result, they are repelled from the places they create and drawn to "artsy" cities and neighborhoods. When they arrive they bid up the price of real estate and drive out the natives. Rinse and repeat. If only the humanities had any economic value.
Yeah, we see it in LA. My girlfriend and I ate at a trendy gastropub (top pick from an LA Times critic) and were unfortunately seated next to a pair of Googlers (long communal tables). They were just namedropping all the cool cities they've lived in (London for this, NYC for that) while talking about their jobs and college (which looked like it was at least five years ago for them). It was nauseating.
There's a lot of advantages to working in tech in Los Angeles.
- If you do need to meet with people in the bay area, it's a short flight. You can even do a day trip, flying up in the morning & flying back in the evening. (It's a long day, but worth it if you have a family.) I do that probably 1-2 times a month.
- Being in the same time zone as the bay area is big boon as well.
- There's a fairly solid tech community in LA. We've hosted various meetups at the Google LA office and always gotten fairly solid attendance, from a pretty wide range audience.
- In a similar vein, we've also done things like hosting art walks on the campus & so on.
- The weather is pretty great year-round.
- It's easy to escape the tech bubble. In fact, most people you meet are not in tech. I actually find that pretty helpful to understand better how various technical issues are perceived by the non-technical public.
- There's a growing "maker" culture, with make spaces popping up. There are also events like Glow (http://glowsantamonica.org/) which fuse the tech & arts.
- The people here are actually pretty great & down to earth, yes, even the "Hollywood" types. I'm friends with the screenwriter of an ongoing movie franchise and the creator of fairly popular TV series. I knew both before there work became popular. Yes, they're very rich. No, they have not had major personality changes. No, they're not assholes. In fact, until you visit their houses, you'd think they were just regular guys.
That said, no place is perfect. We share some of the same housing pains at the bay area (esp. on the westside). Likewise, homelessness is a significant problem in parts of the city, including places like Venice.
ObRecuriting:
We're also looking to add great people to our office.
The great thing about Los Angeles is that you can find whatever you want here. There's certainly a tremendous amount of truly world class culture in the city. Film, of course. But also music (not just pop, but classical, jazz, etc). Games. Writers. Painters. Sculptors. People doing things there are no names for.
It's a giant city, with what is likely the largest concentration of creative people on the planet. Don't let your stereotypes and preconceptions mislead you. Some of that is here, but it's just a thin surface, and there's a great deal of depth underneath it.
You will. It's great down here. There's a balance - different professions, different perspectives. SV can be a big echo chamber. It's great to geek out, but you also can fall victim to serious group-think.
I hate to be this way but I assume SF is like the show Silicon Valley. I've lived in LA and loved all the street performers. In fact, seeing so many of them has inspired me to take that leap into making my creativity public. Some people laugh at the performers but I envy them for having the guts to do what they do.
This is a common sentiment towards Los Angeles, and one which I find a little closed minded and surprising. LA is a vast sprawling megalopolis, a collection of dozens of small cities, all with their own culture and approach towards life. From the nature and seclusion of Topanga Canyon to the Art Meets Crime Vibe of Venice, from the privilege of Marina del Rey, to the culture of Plaza Garibaldi, Los Angeles offers something for everyone.
The weird little snapshot you portray, of celebrity and smut, is a tiny self-contained microcosm of the greater whole that is LA.
I have a theory... it goes a little like this:
Someone is the beautiful person in their home town, or they're the funny one, or the artistic one. They have a mild level of success at home, and they feel ready to conquer the world. So they do, what thousands do every week, they board a bus, or drive, or fly to "make it" in the big city, LA.
When they get here, they find out that it's a different distribution to sample from than the one they left behind. They are not the only beautiful person here, they are not the only one with an angelic voice, the only one who can move gracefully, inspired by music. They find that the things that made them so unique and special at home, are in no short supply.
So they try to make it. They go to audition after audition. They "put in their hours". As savings finishes dwindling, they take a job somewhere, to make ends meet, and they become part of the great fabric that is Los Angeles.
You will meet them, if you come to LA. Folks that came here to make it, and just stayed... for 5, 10, 20, 50 years. They've made LA their home, and almost universally, they love it here. If they didn't, they wouldn't pay the high price of rent, or deal with the damned 405.
But not all of them stay... for some, the toll is too great. So they pack their bags, and they return home. The home they left with great fanfare, the home that they may have sworn never to return to. But they return none the less.
What story are they going to tell folks when they get back? "LA was a lovely place. It was sunny and the sky was actually quite blue. Unfortunately it's full of people more beautiful and more talented than I am, shucks."
No. They retell the tale that people returning home from LA, with hurt and bruised feelings have retold.
"LA is a soul-less, smoggy, terrible city full of superficial shallow people. It's not that I failed, the city is corrupt. If anything, my failure to succeed is due to my high moral fiber and unwillingness to play by it's rules."
It's sad, and I wish those folks well, but I believe that is a large part of why people have this skewed, warped view of LA.
Los Angeles has so much to offer, and so many ways to live. If you want a tech industry, it exists and it is growing. It is a sector which has sampled from the engineering and media roots of the greater industry. You can create stuff here. You can contribute to great causes. You can come in contact with a seemingly infinite stream of people from all over the world. You can ski in the morning, and see the sunset over the pacific that night.
I'm a husband, a father, a dog owner, and a technologist, and I love LA. Perhaps it is because I am in tune with it.
I think the other thing you didn't mention is that all of those terrible things (like the Kardashians) weren't created by LA, they were created by America. The rest of America encourages such terrible behavior that the Kardashians actually make money when they act poorly. Just because the entertainment industry (which is filled with crap as well as art) is based in LA, is not LA's fault.
I also think Wall Street is filled with soul-less monsters, but it's not on TV as much so I just don't think about it.
Lived in LA for a decade. Fantastic city if you don't need to commute during business hours, which are essentially any times between 7am and 8:30pm these days.
slightly off topic but I'm always baffled by photo captions like the one in this article
"Hamish Robertson, an artist, with his wife, the writer Andi Teran, at their home in Los Feliz"
Why is Hamish just 'an artist' while the other person is 'the writer' Andi Teran? seems like some kind of bourgeois class system. Makes me suspect Andi is a well heeled trustafarian and other isn't ...but then I'm a terrible cynic
They both seem to be doing fine, but "from the deserts of West Texas" (Teran) doesn't seem like the tagline of a trust funder.
The thing I have observed about LA artists and "creatives" who are featured in the NYT is that they are well-connected, but not necessarily wealthy.
There tend to be repeats; i.e. one person's art will be reviewed one month, and then five months later there will be a spread with their garden, or an opinion piece on work/life balance that quotes them. I assume it's just laziness, or (to be generous) keeping it simple by looking into a NYT pooled rolodex for [LA] [artist] while under deadline.
Probably all it takes is a lucky encounter, or a well-timed press release, and you're "in the system". It seems like Teran has linked to a couple of articles about moving NYC->LA, and has a book coming out with Penguin in June, so there's your peg.
I live in NYC and the startup I had found before had an office in L.A. In fact the first time I had ever been to L.A was to get that office / team running.
Here are my 2cents:
1. At about 50% of NYC's economy, LA is the second largest GDP contributor. So, one can expect all the pluses and minuses of a large economy. As a side, economy of LA county alone will make it 21st largest "country" in the world by economy.
2. It helps to think of LA as a string of different "Cities", each unique in one way or another. This is different than how NYC behaves. Yes, you can argue that each neighborhood in NYC is unique, but by and large, NYC behaves like a single organism.
3. The people. It is just different, how people communicate, connect and further an Idea in LA. It seems much more peppy, group-hug (not being cheeky) kind of a collective progress, than the cut-and-dry of NYC. If you like that sort of diffused but more social way of progress, you will like LA.
4. Weather. All around it is nicer than NYC. But air quality is significantly worse in LA than in NYC. If you are Asthmatic, or just breathing-in vile air bothers you then LA may not be for you.
5. Traffic. I took the Bus or walked in LA. I realized only poor people took the Bus and no one walks (for commute. Not including the joggers).
6. Cars are status differentiators in a way that most New Yorkers do not even get. If a fancy $50K car is out of your reach, you need to get a Hybrid and lean in on your green credentials.
7. The Valets (they are everywhere) and Wait-staff are better looking in LA compare to NYC (most of them are aspiring actors).
lifelong southern californian and 10 year resident of santa monica/LA. i also lived in san francisco for 2 years and have travelled the world extensively... observations about the changing city/area:
* lots of new york license plates driving around in the last 5 years, indicating transplants. midwest/upper midwest states also.
* dining and entertainment has taken a major step forward in the past decade. it was never bad, but now it's really good in general. also, ethnic food has always been top notch but is now far more mainstream. food / culture enclaves exist but are frequented by the public at large, i.e. more integration. i see this in other large cities like new york and chicago also.
* public transit has improved in a major way. expo line (light rail from downtown to the beach) is opening next year and will have a major effect. uber also has amazing coverage everywhere, not surprising for a city full of cars.
* the bus system (and local subsystems) is probably the best in the country by a huge margin and is relied upon by probably millions of lower income people. it's very, very good and covers a massive area. it's probably the best bus system in the world, again not surprising for a driving city.
* commercial development was uncorked in the past few years and new construction is happening all over the city.
* the key is to live close to work, or to shift your hours. without traffic LA is extremely fast to get around whether in a car or public transit. it's the traffic that kills everything. lots of car enhtusiasts live in the city and drive around town or in the canyons early in the morning or late at night.
* traffic still sucks but there are many infrastructure projects to improve it. having said all that, people are still buying cars like mad. if you're into cars, it's like a car show every day. not just expensive, but rare, old, and unique custom-built cars too.
* anecdotally, when people leave LA, it's almost always for cheaper places i.e. portland, vegas, denver, etc. they only move to new york or other east coast cities when a lucrative or strategic job offer beckons.
* and last but not least.... downtown LA is now a legitimate downtown. it took 10 years of concerted effort by the powers-that-be, but it's a cultural destination and nice place to live now. a residential construction boom (you could buy a condo for < 100k at one point in the last decade!!!) has fueled a rise in shops, cafes, restaurants, bars, etc. in the downtown area. downtown is also the regional transit hub.
> and last but not least.... downtown LA is now a legitimate downtown. it took 10 years of concerted effort by the powers-that-be, but it's a cultural destination and nice place to live now. a residential construction boom (you could buy a condo for < 100k at one point in the last decade!!!) has fueled a rise in shops, cafes, restaurants, bars, etc. in the downtown area. downtown is also the regional transit hub.
The construction boom started about five years ago and is just peaking. Most of the work before then was commercial to residential conversions. Most of the "effort" went into zoning changes (almost everything downtown was zoned commercial leading to a major glut; occupancy rates were around 20% in some buildings).
The reason it's a cultural destination now is mostly due to the "concerted effort" to raise commercial rent prices elsewhere in Los Angeles. I run a small art gallery in South Park, something that wouldn't make sense if it wasn't for the cheap rent. I know a lot of other people running similar spaces or smaller bars, the story is the same. In a few years when we have to re-negotiate our leases a lot of these places will move or shut down. I really don't care about hipster cafes, but having the Fashion District (all the fabric suppliers, textile printers, and mom-and-pop clothing factories in one place) is great (my wife has a clothing business and I help out sometimes). It's cool if people want a "nice, clean" place to live and spend their money on hipster coffee and lame clothes, but I kind of wish these people would stay on the west side.
"relied upon by probably millions of lower income people."
That sounds odd, about the bus system. So if you can afford it, you pass on the bus system? Why, if it is so great? Where I live I prefer public transport over driving (cycling is best, though).
Most people middle-class or above in LA have cars - so they don't bother with the hassle and extra time of taking the bus. When there's no traffic, taking a car is usually a lot faster than buses + the metro.
And many people see it as a necessity for weekend beach trips, or getting groceries 5 minutes away.
> i'm so very sorry stating an obvious observable fact hurt your fragile moral sensibilities.
Why the patronizing? Asking why you don't prefer the bus when you deem it the best in the world was actually a great question. Using your personal car also makes you move at the same speed as traffic (duh) and obviously it costs you more than a dollar.
It's a stupid question. If you have a car you can go all the way to your exact destination (+/- some parking distance), put things in it, play the music of your choice as loud as you like, hold private conversations, and enjoy greater levels of comfort. If you have children, pets, or weighty items to carry, it's vastly easier than getting on a bus. Also, you don't need to wait for a vehicle to turn up on a particular schedule, you just get into your own. And you don't have to stop every block or two to take on or drop off passengers. And...
I like riding the bus/subway, more so than having a car. But the reasons many people prefer cars are glaringly obvious.
You have to look for parking, deal with traffic jams (maybe buses have extra lanes, they would in the greatest bus system of the world). You don't have to focus on driving but can read. You don't need to maintain a car.
And so on.
Granted in my city we also have subways. But the question really interests me, because having to rely on a car would be a complete no go for me. So if that is (still) the case for LA, it's not the city for me.
I know all that, because as I explained, I personally prefer using public transport. But other people have different use cases, and for many of them a car is a superior solution. I don't think you have to rely on a car to live in LA, but you're not going to enjoy it if you can't get to grips with the concept that many people do like cars, for both their utilitarian benefits and their very very obvious function as status indicators in a town built around the entertainment industry.
I can of course imagine reasons why people like cars. I was just surprised by the distinction of poor people using public transport and rich people using their cars.
Actually I consider it a privilege to not need a car. I pay for it with higher rent, I suppose - living closer to the city center, and in a city big enough to have public transport to begin with.
I have no idea what LA is like, does it have things like 8 lane streets? Seem to remember hearing that years ago. That to me would look very outlandish, I don't think I have ever seen an 8 lane road.
Maybe some LAians just can't imagine how different other cities are? Maybe in LA parking space is not scarce, and neither is space on the roads (with 8 lanes). But in other cities it might be different, and the incentives for cars change, not just because of ideology but because of circumstances.
As an LA resident currently in NYC for college your claim of best bus system is humorous to me because when I'm in LA I rely on the buses heavily but they do slow down commutes and can be somewhat flaky. LA has the terrible public transportation reputation because of the buses, even though they are fine to me, but not as good as a real subway system. "Best bus system" to me sounds like "best masters program" rankings; they can be not terrible, but probably not great.
I lived in the South Bay for 6 years, and they were the best years of my life. I definitely plan to own there in the future (and likely AirBnB it out and surf there as I please), but decided to move for the expense reasons you mention.
Anyway, my initial thought behind this article was, "If you're gonna be poor, you might as well do it in LA". Weather is great, and the ocean can do you wonders.
I left LA (Manhattan Beach/Torrance) for San Jose. Cost of living was about the same in both places. Northern Cali was where I grew up, so I did have some old friends here too.
LA was picturesque, and had really awesome things to do, but ultimately I left because of allergies to the local flora and the smog. And I never got into the focus on looks and connections. People were always talking about T&A (both on guys and girls) and name dropping.
Of course, All this is 15-20 years ago, maybe things have changed.
Re: DTLA. The Arts/Warehouse District (near Bestia, Stumptown Coffee etc.) is very Brooklynesque today. Tons of young people walking around these days. Hyperloop (yes, the tube train project) even has their offices around there.
