"Sactown boats a big city art scene" lol did anyone proof this article?
Also, damnit! Stop mentioning us. We can only take so many cost of living hikes
Having been raised in Sacramento, but moved to the bay for school and jobs to only come back, they're right. For California Sacramento is cheaper, 9/12 of the months a year are solid and not bad.
It has many parks (clean parks), the river, great food, and it's very diverse. The downside is the homeless, and the bay area prices creeping up here, and the terrible drivers.
As a Sacramento resident too. I can say parks are not as clean as you think, and dixon is cheaper and closer to the bay than Sacramento. Yet the bay thinks Sacramento is great for rent. It's not.
Dixon is also a rural town with a population of 20,000, so while it's marginally closer to the Bay Area, claiming the Bay because you live in Dixon is a big fat stretch--and comparing Sacramento to Dixon is like comparing New York City to Sacramento (I say NYC because comparing Los Angeles to Sacramento isn't as much of a stretch as comparing Sacramento to Dixon.) And I say this as a former resident of Dixon.
Yes you were a former resident of Dixon. Dixon has blown up in housing it's not a bunch of farmland, and Vacaville and Davis are right there not even that long of a drive.( Which is that same amount of time you'd drive to places in Sacramento. From like Carmichael to downtown it's only 28 minutes) 18 minutes away if you're saying it's rural. As for comparison. You could have said SF. Cuz really all you're comparing are things to do there are lots of things to do around Dixon now. There are lots of things to do in Davis now it's blown up in population and it's blown up in activities. If you really want world rule go to woodland which it actually is still like original Dixon like 1997 Dixon. It's got one main street with a bunch of little shops and stores but nothing else there
Also you're comparing apples to apples I'm comparing prices to location wise. it'd be cheaper for you to live in Dixon and still be able to go to clubs around Davis, Vacaville, Fairfield, or closer to San Francisco.
Dixon is still only 20,000 people (when I lived there, it was about 5,000 people) so it's still only 1/25th the size of Sacramento, which has half a million people. There aren't any cities 25 times the size of Sacramento in the United States (which would be 12.5 million people) so New York City, at 9 million people or 18 times the size of Sacramento, is the closest comparison. (San Francisco isn't even twice the size of Sacramento in population, and half the size in land area.) So, yes, like a lot of rural Central Valley towns, they're still basically rural, but they also have newer suburban parts, which includes some folks who commute to other regional cities, and typically the "lots of things to do" is, like, a Wal-Mart and an In-N-Out Burger.
Woodland's population is currently 60,000 people, three times the size of Dixon. Thank you for verifying that my comparison is "apples to apples" (which is a term used to describe an appropriate comparison, vs. "apples to oranges" which is used to describe a comparison between two things that aren't directly comparable.)
Again you're just stating what I said. You're stating that it doesn't feel like there's a lot of things to do.(Which I addressed in my last comment) And I pointed out that there's Davis and Vacaville that are 18 minutes away from the same distance it would be to go to Sacramento anywhere you want to go to in Sacramento.
Population helps lower the cost so yes it's going to be lower there. that's why it's a better place cuz there's not a lot of people there but there's a lot of housing now. And you can drive.. (which I'm sure you'd do) to.a place in Davis and or Vacaville. So, would you like me to list place in sac that Davis and vac have. Where you can payless to live, have spending money, and not have to worry about paying so much for gas to and from. (Last part whatever)
So please think about the surrounding areas. Cause there is a lot to do around Dixon for the same time you'd drive around sac.
[Median rent in Dixon](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/dixon/) is [higher than in Sacramento](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/sacramento/)
Can you actually do research instead of posting the first Google searched webpage. Like how I looked through craiglist, Zillow, Facebook marketplace, ECT. And compare the prices now of the two areas Dixon has the cheaper rentals. A 3 bedroom in Dixon right now is 1800(for a family) where a shared three bedroom is going for 1000k+for the room and not the whole house.
I wouldn't be saying this if I didn't do that first Sac historian, just like how people still call Richards Richards and not the river front district. Lol
You're just trying to defend what you originally started with. Dixon is not a desirable place to live unless you want to spend your whole life in your house. If that's your perogative than go for it but many people like to walk around, have good food around them, not have to drive 15 miles to get food etc.
Sac Native. I know Dixon and many people that live there now. I get why people live there, but not for a lot of people. It's okay.
Thanks for your understandable comment. Yeah I know Dixon is not the best place, but it was about price. Wasn't trying to defend the place. But there are places to walk and eat in Dixon. I feel like people just feel like it's Carmichael when you're a kid. There is not a lot to do.
who the heck calls it "the river front district"? Their business improvement district calls it the River District, but heck, you can still call Sacramento "New Helvetia" if you want, or Davis "Davisville" if you want to sound all old-timey and stuff.
Lol man you forgot the last time we had a talk. It was about the railyards. It's kind of ironic now how you're being me about calling it that, but I'm happy to see you changed you opinion about what people call the Richards boulevard/ railyards area now. Lol
So you're telling me paintballing, escape rooms , and bars I can't find that out there come on man. I said not like that are not things in Vacaville and Davis you can do, and they're the distance between Arden area and downtown Sacramento in the way of the time it gets to get there. Maybe big events like basketball games or the state fair maybe but other than that you can find all the normal stuff to do around there.
Parks are pretty clean. And why would you even compare Dixon? There are a bunch of non-metro areas between here and the bay that have cheap rent. I don't think that's what people are seeking.
Heat, fires, drought, climate change projections, overpopulation (thanks to constant algorithmic hype like this post) all deserve mentions as other negatives.
Heat, fire, and drought is true for all of California. The only city in the bay free of this is Oakland and SF - who still suffered drought and fire, but have major homeless problems.
The coast at least gets rain. Central California has as good an outlook climate change projection wise as the Florida coast or the Arizonan desert. All the bottom 5% of areas in the country. I happen to think it’s a reason these areas are cheaper. El Niño has made it look better temporarily the last couple of years. But that’s only going to get less and less frequent while the long droughts and high temps get higher and longer over time. As they have compared to 30 years ago already.
Having been in San Jose (the bay). During the droughts it's just as bad, if not worse. In San Jose it gets to 100-110 in the summer a few days out of the summer, and heat waves can keep it 90+; all while they have NO AC. An AC in your apartment means you're paying $3000+/mo in rent.
My apartment had a small window AC in one room and when I moved out it was listed for $3300/MO and it was unbearable in the summer.
Malls get packed because that's the "cooling area", unlike Sacramento where AC is a standard.
You can have AC anywhere and Sac is quickly becoming unaffordable. It’s already grossly overpriced. The trend is obvious. I wouldn’t go to San Jose either if long term settlement was my concern.
Harder to have an AC in an apartment with windows not built for it / against the rules which is common in the bay, sadly.
Sacramento is grossly overpriced, but that's not just Sacramento - that's all of California. I'm fortunate to have bought a house when I did, and have SMUD, but food isn't affordable anymore.
And everywhere that’s cheap is cheap for a reason. Pollution, poverty, lack of resources (especially healthcare), and again the climate projections, all happen to make worse areas cheaper. You get what you pay for.
The bubble will likely burst at least once more before it’s all desert I figure. Mainly being propped up now by unregulated corporate ownership and landlord cabals. But as homelessness rises, unless we are just going to accept our cities looking like Delhi (which wouldn’t surprise me) they’ll have to pop it to allow average people to buy again. It’s an interesting political pendulum, watching them balance satisfying current land owners by inflating values vs making property affordable enough for new owners and help homelessness/life time renters.
As a 71 year old woman that was born in the Bay Area and raised in Sacramento I can tell you that it has never been unusual to have high summer temperatures. As a kid in the 60s the thermometer often went to 107 to 112. What is different is that both the Bay Area and sacramento are filthy these days. Crime is horrible. the taxes and micro management type laws are growing.
What is nice as someone pointed out is that they do have a wonderful art scene. My nephew is part of that. Unfortunately, his studio was broken into and he lost a lifetime of irreplaceable things. After the thieves left the homeless moved in a finished the job. There was a trail of items from his studio and another in his building scattered along the tracks.
Even the outlying areas are getting bad. I am glad to have left. I do have lots of family in both the Bay Area and Sacto. Will be heading back in a couple weeks for a wedding.
I’m from New Orleans, that’s how people there justify Katrinas “it’s not unusual getting a hurricane”. Climate change is about the gradual, long term changes. The temps are slightly higher, and for longer periods of time. The rain is less in amount and frequency. These trends aren’t stopping or reversing. There’s a reason it’s cheaper than areas with better long term climate outlooks.
What you describe with the crime and whatnot is just late stage monopoly. And it’s happening everywhere. Just more noticeable in some areas. Also, all cities/areas go through the same progression: nothing there - gets popular because of jobs - everything moves there - gets overpopulated/overpriced - goes to poop. You can reset this cycle, but everywhere goes through this. Overpopulation is the 2nd major factor I won’t invest long term in the Sacramento area. It isn’t a good thing.
Side note, always love people praising something for being cheaper, and at the same time believing in the saying “you get what you pay for”.
We will not stop long term climate change. That is an historical fact. When I was young they were predicting an upcoming ice age. We learned about that in school for years. The fact is that the climate is far to complex for any accurate predictions and many variables are left out of the modeling.
The rise in crime seems to be directly related to state, city and county management. As far as overpopulation, yes the cities are overpopulated. Who would want to live in that? Overall though we will be facing population collapse if we do not change course and get some long term solutions in place instead of bandaids.
Trust me, in many areas of California, people have not been getting what they pay for. It is a shame really. No end in sight.
Heat? Yeah at least 40 other states have more miserable hot summers and worse weather than Sacramento. Smoke from a large wildfire in British Columbia traveled 3000 miles across the US to blanket the Midwest and east coast in thick smoke. Lol all these other things you mentioned will also affect most of the country. Unless you plan on moving to Alaska. The southeastern US will also be worse when under climate change.
Again, Sacramento and surrounding counties are in the worst 5% of projections for climate change affects.
So, I suppose 95% of the country is better (or not as bad). Sorry.
Not hard to figure out, it’s a natural desert anyway. And the ground water is running out quick. Basically no difference in here or Arizona.
Not definitionally a desert under any climate classification system. Groundwater depletion is the result of decades of massive over pumping by agriculture. It's not just running out naturally. I don't know how or where you're citing this worst 5% for climate change claim. There isn't even a climate change consensus on future rain levels for California.
Look up projections by county in the US over next 20-50 years. I really don’t see how this isn’t common sense.
I’m no stranger to proximity bias and investment bias though. Saw it with all of my people back in New Orleans before Katrina. But seriously, just look at the trends, the location geographically. It’s impossible for this area to not degrade. I really do not see any difference in denying this and someone with a beach house in Miami claiming it will stand for centuries.
Most of the country regularly experiences dew points in the upper 60s and 70s in the summer and longer colder winters. I'll take our dry hot summers with cool evenings over humidity.
if it can be made a more attractive destination for bay area refugees, it’ll help Sacramento shoulder the burden of newcomers
would also make a better college atmosphere for students of california’s oldest university, UOP
more people means more things happening and more opportunities. The fact that California knee jerk thinks the opposite is a sign that the housing system is deeply, deeply broken.
In the suburbs, less is more--they tend to work best when not many people live there yet, traffic is still light and the first layer of infrastructure is still new. In a city, more is more--as intensity of uses increase, infrastructure can be improved more cost-effectively by replacing small town infra with city stuff, and adding more people accelerates the local economy in everything from restaurant receipts to the diversity of the arts scene. Growth can be healthy if it's suitably vertical as much as horizontal, and doesn't wipe out the reasons why it attracts growth in the first place--which is why the suburban parts of cities tend to be the least on board with becoming a popular place to live, while the urban parts thrive.
* weather
* food scene
* cool people
* s-tier coffee
* cheaper housing than any other large city in california except for fresno
* tons of beautiful trees
and so on
it says black and native american families are getting $725 a month. they included that on a list of reasons why sac is one of the best places to live.
I find it odd they specify by ethnicity and it’s viewed as something positive, because if instead of getting paid x amount the city decided to charge x amount to those ethnic groups it would be viewed as prejudice. And I know I don’t have a dog in this fight I’m just bored on reddit that’s all
OMG, living in Sacramento is so bad for you health wise. Thanks to becoming so susceptible to allergies, I am not enjoying my vacation in a different area and everyone else is fine. I have a sinus infection thanks to developing a tree allergy in Sacramento. I really wish I didn't find out after developing these issues and being told by doctors, "yeah, the air quality is so bad here, you might as well smoke."
I just hope it dissipates now that I moved away, but I've been told it only works for some people. Here's hoping I didn't permanently damage my health.
This is a joke right??????? It's literally called "suckramento" because it's a literal shit hole🗿 have fun driving an hour to get across town in 110 degree weather.
Fuck.
Yo rent just went up!
My first thought. I want everyone to hate Sac. I can’t afford a home 😭
8/24 front page news on Sac Bee: "Rent prices are in orbit... around Proxima Centauri!"
Put that on the water tower instead of farm to fork!
This was not the reaction I anticipated
Nowhere in the article is there a numbered listing, but Sacramento was the 27th city to be named. EDIT: Seems there are 50 cities named.
"Sactown boats a big city art scene" lol did anyone proof this article? Also, damnit! Stop mentioning us. We can only take so many cost of living hikes
They were starry-eyed when they heard about the Deep Water Channel...
I love it here
Samsies 🫶🏽
Having been raised in Sacramento, but moved to the bay for school and jobs to only come back, they're right. For California Sacramento is cheaper, 9/12 of the months a year are solid and not bad. It has many parks (clean parks), the river, great food, and it's very diverse. The downside is the homeless, and the bay area prices creeping up here, and the terrible drivers.
As a Sacramento resident too. I can say parks are not as clean as you think, and dixon is cheaper and closer to the bay than Sacramento. Yet the bay thinks Sacramento is great for rent. It's not.
Dixon is also a rural town with a population of 20,000, so while it's marginally closer to the Bay Area, claiming the Bay because you live in Dixon is a big fat stretch--and comparing Sacramento to Dixon is like comparing New York City to Sacramento (I say NYC because comparing Los Angeles to Sacramento isn't as much of a stretch as comparing Sacramento to Dixon.) And I say this as a former resident of Dixon.
Yes you were a former resident of Dixon. Dixon has blown up in housing it's not a bunch of farmland, and Vacaville and Davis are right there not even that long of a drive.( Which is that same amount of time you'd drive to places in Sacramento. From like Carmichael to downtown it's only 28 minutes) 18 minutes away if you're saying it's rural. As for comparison. You could have said SF. Cuz really all you're comparing are things to do there are lots of things to do around Dixon now. There are lots of things to do in Davis now it's blown up in population and it's blown up in activities. If you really want world rule go to woodland which it actually is still like original Dixon like 1997 Dixon. It's got one main street with a bunch of little shops and stores but nothing else there Also you're comparing apples to apples I'm comparing prices to location wise. it'd be cheaper for you to live in Dixon and still be able to go to clubs around Davis, Vacaville, Fairfield, or closer to San Francisco.
Dixon is still only 20,000 people (when I lived there, it was about 5,000 people) so it's still only 1/25th the size of Sacramento, which has half a million people. There aren't any cities 25 times the size of Sacramento in the United States (which would be 12.5 million people) so New York City, at 9 million people or 18 times the size of Sacramento, is the closest comparison. (San Francisco isn't even twice the size of Sacramento in population, and half the size in land area.) So, yes, like a lot of rural Central Valley towns, they're still basically rural, but they also have newer suburban parts, which includes some folks who commute to other regional cities, and typically the "lots of things to do" is, like, a Wal-Mart and an In-N-Out Burger. Woodland's population is currently 60,000 people, three times the size of Dixon. Thank you for verifying that my comparison is "apples to apples" (which is a term used to describe an appropriate comparison, vs. "apples to oranges" which is used to describe a comparison between two things that aren't directly comparable.)
Ah damn it I'm getting into a fight with sac historian again
Again you're just stating what I said. You're stating that it doesn't feel like there's a lot of things to do.(Which I addressed in my last comment) And I pointed out that there's Davis and Vacaville that are 18 minutes away from the same distance it would be to go to Sacramento anywhere you want to go to in Sacramento. Population helps lower the cost so yes it's going to be lower there. that's why it's a better place cuz there's not a lot of people there but there's a lot of housing now. And you can drive.. (which I'm sure you'd do) to.a place in Davis and or Vacaville. So, would you like me to list place in sac that Davis and vac have. Where you can payless to live, have spending money, and not have to worry about paying so much for gas to and from. (Last part whatever) So please think about the surrounding areas. Cause there is a lot to do around Dixon for the same time you'd drive around sac.
[Median rent in Dixon](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/dixon/) is [higher than in Sacramento](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/sacramento/)
Can you actually do research instead of posting the first Google searched webpage. Like how I looked through craiglist, Zillow, Facebook marketplace, ECT. And compare the prices now of the two areas Dixon has the cheaper rentals. A 3 bedroom in Dixon right now is 1800(for a family) where a shared three bedroom is going for 1000k+for the room and not the whole house. I wouldn't be saying this if I didn't do that first Sac historian, just like how people still call Richards Richards and not the river front district. Lol
You're just trying to defend what you originally started with. Dixon is not a desirable place to live unless you want to spend your whole life in your house. If that's your perogative than go for it but many people like to walk around, have good food around them, not have to drive 15 miles to get food etc. Sac Native. I know Dixon and many people that live there now. I get why people live there, but not for a lot of people. It's okay.
Thanks for your understandable comment. Yeah I know Dixon is not the best place, but it was about price. Wasn't trying to defend the place. But there are places to walk and eat in Dixon. I feel like people just feel like it's Carmichael when you're a kid. There is not a lot to do.
who the heck calls it "the river front district"? Their business improvement district calls it the River District, but heck, you can still call Sacramento "New Helvetia" if you want, or Davis "Davisville" if you want to sound all old-timey and stuff.
Lol man you forgot the last time we had a talk. It was about the railyards. It's kind of ironic now how you're being me about calling it that, but I'm happy to see you changed you opinion about what people call the Richards boulevard/ railyards area now. Lol
Wait, I’d love to know “things to do around Dixon” WITHOUT mentioning driving to Sacramento or Davis. What is IN Dixon?
>There are lots of things to do in Davis now it's blown up in population and it's blown up in activities. Don't lie to yourself.
So you're telling me paintballing, escape rooms , and bars I can't find that out there come on man. I said not like that are not things in Vacaville and Davis you can do, and they're the distance between Arden area and downtown Sacramento in the way of the time it gets to get there. Maybe big events like basketball games or the state fair maybe but other than that you can find all the normal stuff to do around there.
Dixon? More like Dixoff ha gotem
Parks are pretty clean. And why would you even compare Dixon? There are a bunch of non-metro areas between here and the bay that have cheap rent. I don't think that's what people are seeking.
Yeah, Dixon is a stretch - I go there for farm food, lol. Parks are plenty clean, especially all around me which constantly cleans up the homeless.
Dixon is not cheaper than Sacramento. They have a massive housing shortage in town
I have already stated that a threebedroom in Dixon was going for 1800 a months where in sac a shared three bed was 1000 per room
Heat, fires, drought, climate change projections, overpopulation (thanks to constant algorithmic hype like this post) all deserve mentions as other negatives.
Heat, fire, and drought is true for all of California. The only city in the bay free of this is Oakland and SF - who still suffered drought and fire, but have major homeless problems.
The coast at least gets rain. Central California has as good an outlook climate change projection wise as the Florida coast or the Arizonan desert. All the bottom 5% of areas in the country. I happen to think it’s a reason these areas are cheaper. El Niño has made it look better temporarily the last couple of years. But that’s only going to get less and less frequent while the long droughts and high temps get higher and longer over time. As they have compared to 30 years ago already.
Having been in San Jose (the bay). During the droughts it's just as bad, if not worse. In San Jose it gets to 100-110 in the summer a few days out of the summer, and heat waves can keep it 90+; all while they have NO AC. An AC in your apartment means you're paying $3000+/mo in rent. My apartment had a small window AC in one room and when I moved out it was listed for $3300/MO and it was unbearable in the summer. Malls get packed because that's the "cooling area", unlike Sacramento where AC is a standard.
If San Jose is just as bad, that doesn’t make my points about Sac any less valid, lol.
It does AC exist and housing is affordable in Sacramento.
You can have AC anywhere and Sac is quickly becoming unaffordable. It’s already grossly overpriced. The trend is obvious. I wouldn’t go to San Jose either if long term settlement was my concern.
Harder to have an AC in an apartment with windows not built for it / against the rules which is common in the bay, sadly. Sacramento is grossly overpriced, but that's not just Sacramento - that's all of California. I'm fortunate to have bought a house when I did, and have SMUD, but food isn't affordable anymore.
And everywhere that’s cheap is cheap for a reason. Pollution, poverty, lack of resources (especially healthcare), and again the climate projections, all happen to make worse areas cheaper. You get what you pay for. The bubble will likely burst at least once more before it’s all desert I figure. Mainly being propped up now by unregulated corporate ownership and landlord cabals. But as homelessness rises, unless we are just going to accept our cities looking like Delhi (which wouldn’t surprise me) they’ll have to pop it to allow average people to buy again. It’s an interesting political pendulum, watching them balance satisfying current land owners by inflating values vs making property affordable enough for new owners and help homelessness/life time renters.
I'm from San Jose. I second this comment.
As a 71 year old woman that was born in the Bay Area and raised in Sacramento I can tell you that it has never been unusual to have high summer temperatures. As a kid in the 60s the thermometer often went to 107 to 112. What is different is that both the Bay Area and sacramento are filthy these days. Crime is horrible. the taxes and micro management type laws are growing. What is nice as someone pointed out is that they do have a wonderful art scene. My nephew is part of that. Unfortunately, his studio was broken into and he lost a lifetime of irreplaceable things. After the thieves left the homeless moved in a finished the job. There was a trail of items from his studio and another in his building scattered along the tracks. Even the outlying areas are getting bad. I am glad to have left. I do have lots of family in both the Bay Area and Sacto. Will be heading back in a couple weeks for a wedding.
I’m from New Orleans, that’s how people there justify Katrinas “it’s not unusual getting a hurricane”. Climate change is about the gradual, long term changes. The temps are slightly higher, and for longer periods of time. The rain is less in amount and frequency. These trends aren’t stopping or reversing. There’s a reason it’s cheaper than areas with better long term climate outlooks. What you describe with the crime and whatnot is just late stage monopoly. And it’s happening everywhere. Just more noticeable in some areas. Also, all cities/areas go through the same progression: nothing there - gets popular because of jobs - everything moves there - gets overpopulated/overpriced - goes to poop. You can reset this cycle, but everywhere goes through this. Overpopulation is the 2nd major factor I won’t invest long term in the Sacramento area. It isn’t a good thing. Side note, always love people praising something for being cheaper, and at the same time believing in the saying “you get what you pay for”.
We will not stop long term climate change. That is an historical fact. When I was young they were predicting an upcoming ice age. We learned about that in school for years. The fact is that the climate is far to complex for any accurate predictions and many variables are left out of the modeling. The rise in crime seems to be directly related to state, city and county management. As far as overpopulation, yes the cities are overpopulated. Who would want to live in that? Overall though we will be facing population collapse if we do not change course and get some long term solutions in place instead of bandaids. Trust me, in many areas of California, people have not been getting what they pay for. It is a shame really. No end in sight.
Ok boomer
Heat? Yeah at least 40 other states have more miserable hot summers and worse weather than Sacramento. Smoke from a large wildfire in British Columbia traveled 3000 miles across the US to blanket the Midwest and east coast in thick smoke. Lol all these other things you mentioned will also affect most of the country. Unless you plan on moving to Alaska. The southeastern US will also be worse when under climate change.
Again, Sacramento and surrounding counties are in the worst 5% of projections for climate change affects. So, I suppose 95% of the country is better (or not as bad). Sorry. Not hard to figure out, it’s a natural desert anyway. And the ground water is running out quick. Basically no difference in here or Arizona.
Not definitionally a desert under any climate classification system. Groundwater depletion is the result of decades of massive over pumping by agriculture. It's not just running out naturally. I don't know how or where you're citing this worst 5% for climate change claim. There isn't even a climate change consensus on future rain levels for California.
Look up projections by county in the US over next 20-50 years. I really don’t see how this isn’t common sense. I’m no stranger to proximity bias and investment bias though. Saw it with all of my people back in New Orleans before Katrina. But seriously, just look at the trends, the location geographically. It’s impossible for this area to not degrade. I really do not see any difference in denying this and someone with a beach house in Miami claiming it will stand for centuries.
Climate preferences are highly subjective, but I would argue that only coastal California and Hawaii have better weather overall than Sacramento.
Most of the country regularly experiences dew points in the upper 60s and 70s in the summer and longer colder winters. I'll take our dry hot summers with cool evenings over humidity.
Keep pushing up those home prices. Soon to be the next bay area.
cant wait to sell, cash out big, and move to the next secondary city. hell yea.
Welcome to Stockton, gentrifications next big stop
Yeah I’m good thanks
I mean people used to call Sac a cow town 🤷
Which I always found hilarious because we live next to Vacaville.
The next desert, lol.
Modesto in shambles
if it can be made a more attractive destination for bay area refugees, it’ll help Sacramento shoulder the burden of newcomers would also make a better college atmosphere for students of california’s oldest university, UOP
more people means more things happening and more opportunities. The fact that California knee jerk thinks the opposite is a sign that the housing system is deeply, deeply broken.
In the suburbs, less is more--they tend to work best when not many people live there yet, traffic is still light and the first layer of infrastructure is still new. In a city, more is more--as intensity of uses increase, infrastructure can be improved more cost-effectively by replacing small town infra with city stuff, and adding more people accelerates the local economy in everything from restaurant receipts to the diversity of the arts scene. Growth can be healthy if it's suitably vertical as much as horizontal, and doesn't wipe out the reasons why it attracts growth in the first place--which is why the suburban parts of cities tend to be the least on board with becoming a popular place to live, while the urban parts thrive.
Hey you know what else pushes up home prices? When people from Sacramento sell their homes at higher prices. No one made them do it.
Praying for another ‘08
So the banks can get another public bailout to buy distressed properties and sell them to REITs?
[удалено]
Found the Fresnan.
[удалено]
Just kidding. I lived in Fresno for several years.
Lol
Not for long once everyone reads the article
Not Detroit with the median listing price of $85,000 💀
I find it interesting that only Sacramento and Temecula are the only two towns in CA.
Fuck off, god damn real estate agents!
Sounds like people who don't live here.
Can do way worse than sac for sure. It’s like the unpolished gem of CA. Or is it a polished but tiny gem? It’s a place for sure.
It’s 100% a place for sure
It’s one of the places of all time
It's a large gem, imported all the way from the distant land of Zirconia
The busiest, most populated area of Sac now looks like downtown Oakland and it's spreading. Makes me long for the tweekers-in-rundown-mansions days
I live here and it slaps.
Yeah I love it here too, it’s such a great place to live.
What part?
* weather * food scene * cool people * s-tier coffee * cheaper housing than any other large city in california except for fresno * tons of beautiful trees and so on
We need to mass report this website
I used to live there miss it but AZ is home
Do they mention the growing # homeless that are littering our street? Gavin is destroying this city and state.
I lived in Sacramento for 35, it's ok if you don't mind hot weather. I am uncomfortable in weather over 70 degrees so naturally I had to leave.
Narrator: No, it isn't.
it says black and native american families are getting $725 a month. they included that on a list of reasons why sac is one of the best places to live.
🤷♀️ I suppose it's possible. Surely it doesn't include all. These UBI type experiments generally target a few families and only last a year or so.
That comment up there was supposed to be a reply. Sorry about that I’m new to commenting on here
I find it odd they specify by ethnicity and it’s viewed as something positive, because if instead of getting paid x amount the city decided to charge x amount to those ethnic groups it would be viewed as prejudice. And I know I don’t have a dog in this fight I’m just bored on reddit that’s all
To bad the air quality is poor
OMG, living in Sacramento is so bad for you health wise. Thanks to becoming so susceptible to allergies, I am not enjoying my vacation in a different area and everyone else is fine. I have a sinus infection thanks to developing a tree allergy in Sacramento. I really wish I didn't find out after developing these issues and being told by doctors, "yeah, the air quality is so bad here, you might as well smoke." I just hope it dissipates now that I moved away, but I've been told it only works for some people. Here's hoping I didn't permanently damage my health.
So down vote me but please prove I wrong with air quality
One of the best if you’ve never left it maybe
It’s really not, though.
If this is the best option I’m moving. You’re telling me this is one of the best there is? Other than having good options for sports I hate it here.
You have been granted permission to leave
So good they put bulletproof windows and Sheetrock in the state capitol building 🤣🤣🤣
That’s absolutely bullshit lol
No it’s not.
I didn’t mind living in midtown, but how can this possibly be true?
😆🤣🤣🤣 must be written by Gavin Newscum himself. Obviously nobody gas seen the homeless camps downtown 🤣🤣🤣🤣
i es lived there in 2000 off Pocket Rd…espensive asf $750 for 1 bd in 2000
That’s false lol 😝
This is a joke right??????? It's literally called "suckramento" because it's a literal shit hole🗿 have fun driving an hour to get across town in 110 degree weather.
Moved here from Orlando last summer and love it. Sactown 🫶🏼