Retirement location

OurManInTangier said:
I'm not too fussed about moving permanently from or to anywhere in all honesty. In many ways a base either here or there makes little real difference to me as the world is a big place much of which I can still discover. Having said that, the idea of a little bolt-hole to disappear in to, somewhere I have an affinity with and that ticks some of the ( not completely jokey) criteria mentioned earlier, would be a dream.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, my first reaction to that was that Wales, with its long sandy beaches, mountains, lakes, low house prices, non-Tory NHS, etc would suit you down to the ground. Then I thought that I'd better not mention towns as it would ruin the place...

Regards, David
 
How much change are you up for? After retirement my wife and I used to do a sweep of the 48 USA lower states to move to and we each could veto. There are so many influences, you can talk yourself out of any of them. The internet is a big help in this, but there's a lot of goofy information out there too. So we wound up changing everything. Very interesting.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Several people have complained at how places change, become overcrowded, gentrified, overpriced, etc. The truth, though, is that "The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there" (L.P. Hartley). Very few places are immune from change, and not all change is bad: I quite like paved roads. Some change is bad, though: we lost our railway years ago, before I moved here, and the butcher's has disappeared since I've been here. Then again, I'm partly to blame for the latter: poor choice and high prices are why many people stopped supporting small local shops. If you want to live in the past you need either somewhere rural, or possibly a reasonably central location in a well-established (over 500 years) city.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,

This thread is about retirement locations. My complaints are not about change, but sustainability. Understand that I live in NYC because it is so dynamic and full of change. That is why it is so full of culture.

One cannot live without water, we know that water is a diminishing supply, so please do not evoke this into a complaint when I'm just considering the long term problem that is not sustainable.

I would say that things in NYC are not sustainable for me and that eventually I will be forced to move.

With a fixed income it is wise to think about the long term and consider a stable plan in an evolving changing world. I intend to avoid vulnerability and natural disasters if possible. A city like Miami will likely be doomed before I'm dead (allowing for 30 years from today). I do not want to live in a tornado belt. These are important decisions and to be short sighted is a huge mistake.

Cal
 
FrankS said:
There is the west coast San Andreas fault thing.

Earlier, someone mentioned Slab City. Just for kicks, I googled it.

http://www.slab-city.com/
Click to expand...

Frank,

Then there is Mount Saint Helens. I am willing to tolerate the possibility of volcanic eruption/disruption because I can put myself a safe distance away. Kinda like avoiding living in flood zones.

BTW they say if you don't plan for retirement, you have no retirement. Also know that one should plan out a retirement starting a decade in advance. You and I are wise to be planning now, rather than be overwelmed later and making mistakes.

Cal
 
Calzone said:
Roger,

This thread is about retirement locations. My complaints are not about change, but sustainability. Understand that I live in NYC because it is so dynamic and full of change. That is why it is so full of culture.

One cannot live without water, we know that water is a diminishing supply, so please do not evoke this into a complaint when I'm just considering the long term problem that is not sustainable.

I would say that things in NYC are not sustainable for me and that eventually I will be forced to move.

With a fixed income it is wise to think about the long term and consider a stable plan in an evolving changing world. I intend to avoid vulnerability and natural disasters if possible. A city like Miami will likely be doomed before I'm dead (allowing for 30 years from today). I do not want to live in a tornado belt. These are important decisions and to be short sighted is a huge mistake.

Cal
Click to expand...
Dear Cal,

Sure. No question. You are making exactly my point: you need to look forwards, not backwards. But part of "forwards" is "backwards". A city that has survived more than 500 years can probably survive another few hundred. Miami, on the other hand...

Google "Fatehpur Sikri".

Cheers,

R.
 
Unfortunately..there is no substitute for NYC....none...and if you groove there..well...
Best to not retire at all...just keep on workin...die with your boots on...its the best way to go..
Earn enough $$ while you can...cut your workload down as needed..
That said..I think the best place to retire or just slow down a bit....is a small forward thinking town...many towns in MA have lots of culture so thats what we are thinking about...in the Northampton area..still can get good food..and there is arts culture there...and none of the crime of the big city..
I grew up in NYC...and my mom told me way back when...she said...you don't want to grow old here...unless you have reams of cash...then she pointed to the line of depressed and lonely old women on a nearby park bench...she said..don't end up like them...move out at the right time..you don't want to be stuck here..and deteriorate...
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Cal,

Sure. No question. You are making exactly my point: you need to look forwards, not backwards. But part of "forwards" is "backwards". A city that has survived more than 500 years can probably survive another few hundred. Miami, on the other hand...

Google "Fatehpur Sikri".

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,

New York is not an ancient medevil city like many in Europe. I would not consider NYC an old city by European standards.

Also know the level of creative destruction going on is on a scale that is kinda hard to imagine with many unintended consequences. The tax abatements for luxury housing in NYC is subsidized by hard working people like me who enjoy no benefit. I can predict that when these tax abatements run out and full assesments are made of these current properties that another man made disaster will implode. As usual the usual will pay. There is a bomb ticking here that at sometime will explode. Also know that many of these abatements run out at the same time to make tis a combined big explosion.

The reality of housing in NYC is a tale of two cities: the luxury market is where the huge gains are and this offsets the mean price increases that my goverment records, but the modest homes of regular people are not getting bid up because all housing has become kinda unaffordable through this intervention/manipulation. The government numbers on housing prices are skewed in certain cities like New York, San Francisco..., but these are not tales of cities, but a tale of two cities within each city.

One thing I know is that it is a compelling time to be a photographer to document all this creative destruction. Much of the old New York is gone. The Bowelry is now a luxury community. A new highrise in Long Island City now blocks the view of the Empire State Building that was an iconic shot I took only 4 years ago. The scale of change is kinda unimaginable.

Cal
 
Roger is correct that change happens everywhere. However, it definitely happens at different rates and in different directions at different locations.

I lived in southern California for a while (much too long). There's either 33 or 35 million people there now. An unstoppable force that makes me wonder about impending water shortages. During the time I lived there, I watched entire landscapes destroyed before my eyes. Yes, entire landscapes, including small mountains and rivers. And yes, destroyed is the correct term, even though most of us do enjoy a paved road. Its difficult to describe, but easy to feel in my gut. Its simply not a good thing. The corruption and disregard for all but the mighty dollar is so evident when I look at southern California. I'm sure to be accused of hyperbole, but let me assure you, not much.

In the early 80s I lived in a small town (pop. 4000) east of Los Angeles/Orange County area. I left several years later after the town swelled to pop. 250,000 (yes, a quarter million people) and quality of life plummeted like a falling rock. There is a mentality associated with this kind of "growth" that I've heard repeated in other western US communities -- Quite simply, many smallish communities throughout the western US (and elsewhere?), where this is a high quality of life, are being duped by terms such as "smart growth", usually pushed by out-of-town (southern Californian?) real estate developers. Its happening in the town I live in now....and the day is approaching when I will have to leave. Where will I go? I do intend to keep that as secret as possible. But even though I won't tell anyone, word will get out and the day will come when the destructive forces "discover" my new home and start the process that leads nowhere good. My intent is to die before it gets unbearable.

Quality of life, population growth, physical community size, and steady-state economics are an interest of mine (likely due to my experiences in s. CA). I've learned a lot and I've had to work hard to stay positive. Enter photography...
 
It seems to me that those living in NY think this city is above the rest. But the times they are a changing and the future is in South East Asia....in Jakarta, KL, Seoul, Saigon and Bangkok to name a few mega cities on the rise.
 
Most Californians are pretty blaze' about earthquakes. If its less than a 6.2 I usually can't be bothered to get out of bed.

I was once at the epicenter of a "large quake". The Landers earthquake 7.5 richter. Now *that* was an experience, believe me!

I also remember the World Series quake that hit the Bay area (1990?). I was working for the state Office of Emergency Services Mobile Command and got deployed to manage communications. A fair number of people were affected by that event.🙁
 
Emile de Leon said:
Unfortunately..there is no substitute for NYC....none...and if you groove there..well...
Best to not retire at all...just keep on workin...die with your boots on...its the best way to go..
Earn enough $$ while you can...cut your workload down as needed..
That said..I think the best place to retire or just slow down a bit....is a small forward thinking town...many towns in MA have lots of culture so thats what we are thinking about...in the Northampton area..still can get good food..and there is arts culture there...and none of the crime of the big city..
I grew up in NYC...and my mom told me way back when...she said...you don't want to grow old here...unless you have reams of cash...then she pointed to the line of depressed and lonely old women on a nearby park bench...she said..don't end up like them...move out at the right time..you don't want to be stuck here..and deteriorate...
Click to expand...

Good advice. NYC is a great-great place if you are rich, but it is likely a bad place to endure on a fixed income, especially if you don'y have mucho money.

Another problem for both New York and New Jersey are the legacies that have yet to be paid that are unsustainable like the pensions of all those state government workers. Just say no to higher taxes. Again the usual suspects will pay.

I'm going to tough it out for a while and keep on shooting the creative destruction. Printing can happen later.

Interesting to note that "Maggie" my partner is an academic who teaches in a grad school. My salary matches hers, and together our combined incomes puts us into the top 10% of houshold incomes nationally. All I can say it is a stretch to say we could buy a home in NYC, and theres a huge difference between the top ten percent and the top 1%. My only consolation is that I know that I'm better off than most, and my New York dollars are worth about double they are in NYC in many parts of the country.

Cal
 
Cal, I can understand your frustration regarding the mismatch between income and affordability. I can personally understand. I hope all pans out for you. BTW, How do NYC dollars get their double value?
 
rfaspen said:
Cal, I can understand your frustration regarding the mismatch between income and affordability. I can personally understand. I hope all pans out for you. BTW, How do NYC dollars get their double value?
Click to expand...

Many places in the USA literally have a cost of living that is half of the cost of living in NYC. Also know that our New York incomes are very high when compared to the median. Moving from New York to New Jersey makes no sense, but if I moved to Savannah GA. I could easily buy a nice home and live comforably. As you can tell I've been looking at smaller cities.

I'll give you an idea. I actually pay $2750.00 a month rent for a 650 square foot one bedroom apartment in Spanish Harlem (worst neighborhood and poorest neighborhood in Madhattan). It is a really good deal because it is a luxury apartment that is brand new and not like many old run down apartments that I've lived in that haven't been updated in decades. Originally this building of 40 units was built as a luxury condo, but the housing bubble popped while the building was under construction.

I consider my building a "ghetto buster" because literally a block away is East 100th Street where Bruce Davidson shot the poverty of this neighborhood in the late 60's, but I have a gym, bike storage, and a cyber doorman.

I got in as a fluke because the developer was forced to make it rent stabilized, but that got unwound when the building went into a condo conversion. During the conversion we were offered our apartment at an "insider price" of $550K about double the median cost of a house in the U.S.

Amazingly the units sold, including a penthouse (the larger of two) that recently sold for $1.8 million. Realize that this is in a neighborhood where 25% of the residents live in public housing, and 50% of the population gets some form of government check. Just down the block is a halfway house that use to be call the "Parole Transition Institute." LOL.

One of the reasons of why the units sold out is a 421 Tax abatement that lasts for a decade. Basically the real assesed value is not used and every two years the assesed value is increased until on the tenth year the subsidy runs out. Some wealthy foreiner bought 4 units in my building and became my new landlord. Much of the new development in NYC has these 421 Tax Abatements, and they are the time bombs I'm talking about.

I decided not to get gamed, and decided to keep my ammo dry. Eventually bad things will happen due to unintended consequences and many will be ruined.

BTW I have been actively a gentrifier in NYC. In the 70's I lived in Soho one summer when it was just artists camping out in warehouses. I helped gentrify Greenpoint, Williamsburg, and Long Island City before they were conquered by hipsters.

Never been afraid of danger, crime or living in abandoned places, but I don't want to do that when I'm retired, getting old, and vulnerable.

Cal
 
This has been a very interesting thread to read, so many different opinions. It makes me feel even more appreciative of my hometown. I was born and raised in Liverpool and wouldn't want to live anywhere else on earth. Yes, visited many countries and met many interesting people from different places... But Nowhere compares to the 'pool.
Couldn't stand a warm place all the time anyway 'cause like David I've got fair hair and dislike the heat.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Cal,

Again, that was my point. Cities rise and fall. Rome and New York are good examples. Some rise again. I'd back Arles....

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,

Point well taken, but I don't think I will see NYC rise from the ruins again. I was here back in the 1970's when NYC was almost like Detroit is now today, meaning bankrupt. NYC in the 70's was a broken city in ruins, but it took many decades to get to where we are today, and surprisingly we still haven't topped out yet.

I'm thinking I could be playing the violyn while NYC is burning, I think I will escape the ruins, but I don't think I'll be around for its second coming. That's my point.

IMHO NYC will destroy itself and is not on a sustainable path that includes me.

Cal
 
Armenia

My wife was born there, and even though it's friggin' cold in winter the summers are very nice.
The people are friendly, the food is simple but good, and the Armenians make nice brandy.
I don't speak any Armenian or Russian, so my conversations with whatever relatives would still be alive would be very limited (although I still have approx 20 years until my retirement to learn basic Armenian).
So I picture myself spending a lot of my time reading, taking pictures or trying to find cheap Russian mechanical watches or cameras.

Just need to figure out what to do with these cold winters... hibernate?
 
Calzone said:
. . . Point well taken, but I don't think I will see NYC rise from the ruins again. . .
Click to expand...
Dear Cal,

That's the tragedy. It's a bit like the old medical saying of ars longa, vita brevis: a long art to learn, a short life to learn it.

The trick is to catch a city on the way up; and the trick before that is to define (or even recognize) "on the way up".

This is the appeal of the (old, slow) rural life. It don't change so quick. Rich ancient Romans lived on their estates as children (up to puberty); moved to Rome and the service of Rome; and then at 40-60 went back to their estates...

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom