I guess I'm surprised you don't know if there are mountains near Dallas, just because I'd assume you would've visited your husband's family there at some point. Since it doesn't sound like you've ever been there, I'd say the first thing to do is go there and check it out. You'll get every possible viewpoint on moving from people here, and while they might raise points you might not have thought of, the only way to tell if you'd like it is to go there in person.

What does your husband think? Does he prefer SF to Dallas? Is there any way to move to a cheaper part of SF, rather than leave town altogether? Or any other way to lower expenses? I'm just asking because it sounds like the high cost of living (housing) is your primary motive for leaving, and I don't know that you'd be happy leaving for that reason alone.

Mah1980, exactly what statement about political Texans do you agree with? I don't think that particular subject was brought up.

Or do you mean local politics in Dallas city? It's predominantly Democrat. Perhaps you believe it's Republican? I know an easy way to find out for sure... they call it vote statistics.

There are two kinds of people who use the word "materialistic" to insult and denigrate others.

The first kind are the ultra rich who inherited wealth, and just don't have to think about earning their living. They live an a gilded cloud.

The second kind are the ones who came up short on the way to a normal standard of living. It helps to make a virtue of necessity.

The other kind

TheWeasel, you make some good points. The original poster should do some hands-on research before she makes a commitment, in view of the sharp cultural and ideological differences between the two areas.

xbt2316:

While most "cities" are heavily Democrat, I was merely trying to clarify your statement about the lack of political nature of those in Dallas.

Many in Dallas live in the suburbs. More live in the suburbs than live in the city. Therefore, just citing the city statistics is not really an accurate representation of the Dallas metro area, wouldn't you agree.

And I assure you that my comments on the noted materialism and pretense of the nouveau riche of Dallas is well known here in New Orleans. It has nothing to do with either 1) me being a Rockefeller or 2) me being a pauper as you allege. It is widely known within Texas, and also, outside of Texas.

Every time anyone I know talks about Dallas, the materialism of its residents come up. I'm sure this is not a peculiar happening.

I had a job interview with a firm in Houston. I told him that one of my best friends lived in Dallas (one of the sources for my information, among others), and he said "how can she stand to live there...it is so pretensious?" This coming from a man who has 2 vacation homes and has many luxury cars.

When my friend, who does very well for a Fortune 500 company in Dallas, first moved there she was struck by how much people in Dallas talked about "brands." She was in a sorority with me and we were around brand savvy people. She was just commenting that the people in Dallas that she had experienced (young professionals) were more materialistic than any people she had ever experienced prior.

This cannot be the first time you've heard these things?

Since the OP is debating a move from the vastly different SF, I think it's important that she understands that there are major differences in the two.

Funny, I don't see that most people in the Dallas area give a darn about brands. That's why we have so many Wal-Mart's and Target's.
I go to NYC and find THEY are total clothing and shoe snobs. I love going but I always stick out like a sore thumb in my pastels.
Anyway, maybe you are 'running' in snooty circles. SMU students may possibly fall into this category. Maybe you should head to the UTD campus or Deep Ellum.

>> In fact, SF has the most radical politics in the nation. You won't find it in the rest of Amrica.<<

That's not true. SF isn't even the most radical (we actually use the word "progressive") in the Bay Area - that distinction belongs to Berkeley. Just 1 1/2 hrs south, Santa Cruz is probably more progressive than SF.

Stu Dudley

Just another perspective...As an adult, I'd pick SF over Dallas in a heartbeat - if I could afford it! However your kids - they probably won't care that much (if at all) as long as they have a loving home, family nearby, good schools and plenty of opportunities to expand their horizons while growing up. (Yes, more culture in SF). So if Dallas is looking better for now, you can always raise your kids there then retire to SF when your kids move on...

And I think someone may have pointed this out - but as far as beauty goes, Dallas doesn't even come close to SF. Have you ever been to Dallas?

StuDudley, when I say SF, I don't care about minor administrative divisions between Berkeley, Oakland, The City, etc. I mean the Bay Area. The place is atypical to the rest of America.

Austin, I lived in the SF Bay Area for years, in The City actually... and this is the difference. San Francisco has scenic vistas and ugly treeless streets and dirty buildings. Dallas has just a few scenic vistas, clean buildings and gorgeous tree-lined streets, like Turtle Creek Boulevard, McKinney Avenue, North Central, etc. As far as culture, Dallas has plenty, and better cultural opportunities for its people than SF does. As well as more and better restaurants. That's because people in Dallas don't have to struggle just to pay for their housing.

Mah1980, you're making a fool of yourself, trying to apply a class stereotype to 6 million people. There are enough social classes in the Dallas area to contain 10,000 examples of every kind of human being. And I'm not impressed to hear that the people in your social circle share your hostile views... that's what you selected them for.

So people in Dallas are all bad, while you and your friends...are good... I'd disagree... I'd say that people anywhere, in any city, are about the same... a mixture of the moral, the amoral, the bright and dumb, the foolish and wise.

Notsure,
I think the housing market question answers the question. There must be a reason why it is so costly to live in SF as to why it is so cheap to live in Dallas. I think race has no place in making a decision.

Yes, there are several reasons why the Dallas area is much less costly than the San Francisco Bay area.

For one thing, SF is not building enough housing to meet the normal demands of its people, whereas the DFW area has more of a free market in its building industry. SF has many social and ideological beliefs and customs that choke the local building industry. People endure 1-2 hour commutes in order to afford a house.

But how do wages and salaries hold up? The answer is... pretty well.

The net result is that people in Dallas have a much higher standard of living than people in the Bay Area.

You will be wildly and pleasantly surprised at how much house you can get for your money in Dallas vs. SF.

Yes, it is flat and brown. And very hot in the summer.

Dallas is a good place to make a living and raise kids. Look for good schools. Some areas, such as Richardson, have a very large Asian population. But don't rule out suburbs such as Grapevine and Colleyville. The population is quite diverse.

>>>The net result is that people in Dallas have a much higher standard of living than people in the Bay Area.<<

That's totally subjective!

The "things" that contribute to your high standard of living, are completly different from mine.

Stu Dudley

Notsure, I think you are asking this in the wrong place.

Your kids are still small. How do YOU want to raise them, and in what environments?

On these boards you are going to find many who are San Franciso-phile. My guess, and it is only a guess, would be at least 2 to 1.

Also having family support is very important. How much support? Do your kids see your family every week? Those kinds of questions are more important than house size, IMHO.

But you would need to be IN Dallas for some time to compare a real difference. Would your husband's family be close and supportive there. Or just live close. There is a difference.

I would see if you could rent for awhile to see if you liked it. Getting out of SF right now, might be great on timing the housing market, if you have a property to sell.

You are the only one who can answer the questions of what kind of surroundings you require or desire for your childrens' upbringing. For instance, when you see 12 or 14 year olds in your present area, what do you see? Do you like what you see?

Those questions are most important of all.

When I read the title of this post, I could hardly believe it was a serious question. But then I got into some detail and understood the question. SF vs. Dallas is really a question of "unique and exciting sense of place" vs. "everyday Americana with cheaper houses". I agree with several of the posters. Having spent time in both cities, SF is a much more intriguing, attractive, romantic, and spontaneous place. Dallas is probably the more practical, affordable type of place where you'll have a lawn and a 3-car garage.

So this is more a lifestyle question, because trying to compare Dallas to SF is impossible.

But would you consider other places, other than Dallas? I would think that places like Portland, Seattle, Denver, Charlotte, or Nashville could give you a cheaper housing price while still having a better "sense of place".

I'd comment on the Dallas materialism discussion, but I don't think it belongs on this board.

What about Austin?

When I spent time in Dallas, I definately noticed that the culture was to get very hung up on name brand stuff, and to always fret about portraying the right image. It was almost like there was an insecurity and they were "wanna-be" west coasters. Maybe it bothers them that people think Texas is simple, and they compensate by having that Kate Spade handbag or driving a BMW that they maybe shouldn't. Enough of my attempt at psychoanalyst.

I'm not a psychiatrist, but I am a Financial Planner. In our world, Dallas is notorious for being a place where lots of money is spent on image and show. "Big hat, no cattle" as some of the Texans like to say. The empirical data supports it.

A.G Edwards did a "Nest Egg Index", ranking the 200 largest American cities based on how much people saved relative to their income (and then relative to their cost of living). Dallas was #151, and Ft. Worth was even lower. I don't have a link to that study, but I'm sure you could find one on Google.

Experion, the credit bureau, ranked the 20 largest metros for average credit scores. Dallas ranked dead last. Minneapolis, Boston, and DC were 1, 2, and 3. That study can be found here: http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/in...showtopic=6203

So, in addition to the anecdotes on this posting, there is definately evidence that the Dallas folk get pretty hung up on spending their money and living on credit, in order to support some type of perceived lifestyle of sophistication.

The credit issue is well known, which fits in with my previous comment. These types of things are important for the OP to hear, rather than hearing only of xbt2316's rhetoric (which includes calling me a fool-that really is unnecessary and you should refrain from that type of language on these boards).

Dallas has a lot to offer in terms of restaurants and musuems. However, any evaluation of a city that one is considering moving to needs to be balanced.

Hazelmn, I lived in and around San Francisco for 20 years, and "intriguing, attractive, romantic, and spontaneous" is not how I would characterize it. As to its place in America, and its future, I'll defer to history, but I'm not interested in its future, and I'm finding Dallas plenty intriguing, attractive, romantic and spontaneous... thank you.

In terms of the nuts and bolts of everyday life, the SF Bay Area is sadly defective, compared to other American cities. Its relative poverty is just a symptom of its greater social malaise, and the Original Poster would be well advised to leave as soon as possible and discover the real America.

Dallas is wealthy, compared to other American cities, and its people enjoy a greater standard of living. Dallas panhandlers are better off, Dallas burger flippers are better off, Dallas millionaires are better off.

Why is this so? Perhaps Dallas people are more intelligent? I don't think so. More likely, the social atmosphere in Dallas and Texas encourages people to take a more realistic view of life and human behavior, and see through the self-delusion that many other places, such as the SF Bay Area, maintain about themselves.

Why do San Francisco people try to insult Dallas people as "materialistic"? Simple. Dallas has more money and better spending power.

Clearly one of the posters here has some major problems with San francisco. You are clearly in the minority as it is one of the most popular cities to visit in the world.

Based on the tone of your writing (e.g., your hostility and talk of the "social malaise" of San Francisco), I have a feeling that the Bay Area hasn't been crying since your departure from the city.

Dallas is not a wealthier city, many of its residents choose to flaunt their wealth more. There is a MAJOR difference between the two. Take a look at the credit rating link that Honest Abe supplied- if overextending yourself in terms of credit is "wealth," then I guess I'm poor because I don't have any credit card debt.

Mah1980, Dallas is wealthier, because its cost of living, in comparison to its income, is better than places like San Francisco.

And yes, the Bay Area has been suffering and wailing since my departure... not because of my absence, but because of its inherent shortcomings as a society and economy.

The people who live in the Dallas suburbs moved there from other states. Very few are native Texans. Dallas became the 4th largest US metro area because of its inherent desirability for the American people.

Even in my own near urban neighborhood, the people are migrants. In my building, of my 3 neighbors, one is Russian, one couple is from Rhode Island, one family is Columbian.

There has to be a good reason that Dallas is so popular... perhaps people want to settle here?