impartialobserver

I have a 26-year-old coworker who still lives at home. His reasoning is that he is saving money so that if and when he gets a home, he can put down a very sizeable down payment and therefore be less impacted on a month to month basis. Who knows if this will pan out. If he intends to stay in Reno/sparks, he faces steep odds.

First, the population in the US is becoming more urban so not sure what you are talking about when you say they are always leaving. Second, it is a general thing. Every time I talk to someone in Boise, Reno, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Las Vegas etc.. when you mention a town of less than 20k... you get the usual roll of the eyes. Yes, xyzville with population of 1,400 is charming but it is a s**hole full of 40-pt IQ rednecks who barely are house broke. Or that is the general perception of my conversations with them.

I agree with folks who do not like being in the urban core of certain CA cities or the ultra-affluent suburbs (Davis, Carlsbad, Novato, etc) but there is plenty of CA that is quite scenic and not a "s**hole". However, most city folks think that any place that is not a major city is a "s**hole"

It is one teacher...

Except that the supply of lithium that demands no processing is far, far lower than that of oil. That is why they have fought so hard to get this mine up and going. Exceedingly dry climate, very sparsely populated, and would demand no secondary processing.

The northern 1/3 of CA is very similar to what you would see in Idaho, montana, Wyoming, or Eastern oregon. I visit this area 8 to 10 times per year.

Somewhat connected to this... largest lithium mine in America is a go. It is in the very remote northwest portion of Nevada. The natives and ranchers attempting to block it has been put aside for now.

Am indifferent mostly. During his time as President, I was too busy trying to get through college (grad and undergrad) to follow his every move and critique it.

I knew there was yet another reason that I have zero interest in ever visiting Florida let alone living there.

In this case, it is not subsidies. For example, lets say that you have a property in Vacaville, CA (between Sacramento and San Francisco). Garden variety suburb. As the landlord, you have certain state mandated screening processes that have to be done a certain way. If you skirt this, you open yourself up to someone overstaying (staying 45 days and paying for 30 as a simple example). Second, the license. Yes, you can do it "under the table" but then again, you expose yourself to litigation and such. Finally, if you undercharge given the market... you get tenants that get you complaints. Hence, why they try to keep up with the Jones. Another aspect to CA that impacts them and the neighboring states is the 1031 exchange. To avoid capital gains and other similar constructs.. they invest in real estate and therefore expect high rates of return. This distorts the true cost of providing housing.

Would working on this farm be a matter of choice or not? If not, you are going down a legal route that is exceedingly hard to justify. If it is voluntary, do you expect high turnout? My guess is not.

Shoup has a current permanent population of 35. Salmon, ID (the closest town of size) comes in at around 3,200.

What is your solution for those that are either mentally ill or voluntarily homeless due to undiagnosed issues such as depression, bipolar, and such? Having been homeless, I agree that it is mostly self inflicted. Reno (until 2 years ago) had a republican mayor and yet the homeless population stayed the same mostly. What is your explanation for that? There has to be something at play other than the R or D next to the name of the mayor.

If I was in charge (I know that I will never be), I would put an immediate end to the public sector pension system. It is the one reason that they will have unfunded liabilities starting in 2025. Second, I would remove the well-intentioned but quite costly fees/regulations that make renting out a property a nightmare. They were trying to weed out the "slum lord" but instead they have jacked up the cost of housing to a point where you no longer simply compensate. Finally, i would undo the law/statute (AB - 5 if I recall) that affects trucking.

The overly generous CA public sector pension system predates what you speak of. It came about in 1972. The Clinton Administration brought about student loans being easier to get. When I taught at University of Nevada.. I asked why we had such a hard time getting quality staff (no matter the dept or task). The answer was that we could not compete with the overly generous benefits and pensions in CA. Candidates would choose Cal St. Fullerton over us for that exact reason.

Most colleges/universities in CA are public. Most, not all. They did it to themselves. They made the cost of labor too expensive and are now passing the cost on to the consumer thinking that they will pay the cost no matter how high it gets.

I care not in the least if someone is religious.. simply leave me alone. I will not push my lack of beliefs on you and in return, I expect you will not push your beliefs on me.

They are PUBLIC sector employees. The Public sector pensions in CA are disproportionately generous. With that coming out of your budget.. you have to make it up somewhere else. Now combine that with student loans which are easy to get and the environment is set for having prices increase. However, the pension system is what drives up the cost of labor especially for those staff that are tenured or have been there a long time. On the converse side of that.. in Nevada (where I live and work), the pension system is not nearly as generous and getting tenure is not nearly as easy as it in CA.

Smarter? Not necessarily. Just different priorities from my vantage point.

I would say yes. Have a phd in economics and am self taught in my current profession.. programming and database management.

If one was to move to shoup, idaho right now and did not have retirement income or some other independent source then you would face certain harsh realities 1. Forest service dirt road that is only maintained once per year. 2. 30 to 50 mile one way drive on that dirt road to the nearest retail outlet that sells anything 3. 55 -ish mile commute (mostly on dirt road) to the nearest grocery store or hardware store 4. No public utilities. You have to supply your own power via generator. There is no internet and phone service is limited. As for sanitation, you have to have a septic tank. Water.. fend for yourselves. If and when any of this fails, you have to take care of it yourself. Getting someone to come from the nearest town, Salmon, is quite expensive and they will not arrive for a few days at the least 5. If you are a wage-earner, you face steep odds. Lack of foot traffic makes a consumption based business such as restaurant difficult. Yes, you can break even but expecting a comfortable life is for fools. Therefore, if you insist on living here, you will need to commute to the nearest town and earn a meager existence. 6. With no socialization to be found, one has to travel to see or do anything other than fish or sit in nature. For most people, this is not enough. How do I know these things? I spent six of seven summers from 1990 to 1997 here. Now compare this with Boise where the commute to a grocery store/restaurant/hardware store is as little as a few blocks. One's employment prospects go from a dozen prospects to thousands and most which do not demand a 55 mile commute one way.

I was comparing where my grandparents lived (shoup, Idaho) to that of Boise. Clear enough?

I love my mother but she leads a far simpler life and always has. Only topic that I would learn more about is home improvement. My mother has the incessant need to re-arrange, re-decorate, and re-model her house. Its always a matter of aesthetics (how it looks) and not functionality. I have learned more about the world through my much more varied experiences than if I had stayed home.

I would rather be homeless than live with my mother. However, I can see why most younger folks stay home longer than those in past generations did. When I left the parent's domain in 1996, I could rent a 1 bedroom apt in Boise, Idaho for $400 a month and that was doable. The same exact apartments today are renting for $1850. Wages have went up but not by that much.

This is not encouraging. This is thinking that the problem is inevitable and so why not do something to alleviate it. We do the same thing in Reno. Do nothing or do something.. the homeless population has stayed steady between 1300 and 1425 for the 13.5 years. Police are limited and can only do so much. There are only so many of them and tying them all day with policing the homelessness is both wasteful but very unpopular.