|
|
|
|
|
by mindways
3296 days ago
|
|
...even if we take this not-quite-equivalence at face value (note: 650 < 979 and 20% < 25%), most life expenses don't scale linearly with housing values - not even close. Groceries may be more expensive in the big city, but not 10x more expensive. You're not paying 10x more for a car, or a plane flight. And insurance premiums / deductibles sure aren't 10x cheaper in a less expensive part of the country. Plus, the "$300K in expensive place" household has the option of moving to the less expensive place. The reverse is hardly true. > it is arguable that 30k in MO would actually be better off 1. No.
2. Even if we were to accept that $30K in one place went just as far as $300K in another, "better off" ignores that higher property costs are likely to indicate a more desirable place to live. (For whatever reason: access to jobs, lower crime rates, pleasant to live in, what-have-you.) |
|