[la_mode]

(09-18-2013 04:39 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(09-18-2013 02:52 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

Why don't you get a short term lease in Vegas and live there for 6 months or so and figure out if you like it. Take little trips to L.A. and explore.

L.A. doesn't know what a short term apartment is. You'd be locked into paying 1300 a month for a year just for rent in some lousy place.

If you come to vegas first your moving expenses to LA would be something like 300 bucks.

Disagree about there being nothing to do but party in Vegas. Mount Charleston (mountain top forests), Red Rock (gorgeous rock climbing/hiking), and Lake Mead (skiing swimming) are in the backyard.

You think LA isn't a desert? Tell me how many trees you see that aren't planted.

Trust me, you aren't going to feel like driving 30 minutes to go three miles to the grocery store just to run into 4 bums, people with shitty attitudes, and overpriced food.

There were times when I really loved LA but I'd never want to live there again unless I was a millionaire.

Edit - Just read through the rest of the comments. Guys talking about "I can't stand the place after 3 days". Well no shit, you came and binged out and now you want to go home and sleep it off and not in a hotel you're probably sharing with some other dude.

Just read the comment about you liking the Valley.....not sure what to say about that.

You go out in L.A. and tell girls you live in the Valley and even the ones that live there won't want to talk to you.

Who cares if girls in Vegas are gold diggers (there's plenty that aren't), they still want to bang. Girls in LA are status diggers and gold diggers.

Good point, Fisto. The thing that sucks about LA right now is the rents are going up like crazy. Anywhere decent is going to set you back. Plus, like you said, everyone wants a one year lease.

(09-18-2013 03:34 PM)PartyonBro Wrote:  

LA isn't friendly at all. People are generally selfish assholes who will smile to your face and stab you in the back if it helps them to do so.

West LA people aren't trying to get into "the industry", most are already settled in professional careers (lawyers, docs, etc) or post college people partying it up a bit longer.

I would not live in the Valley under any circumstances personally. If you're a DJ, you need to live in mid-city area or even Koreatown.

On his budget, he will only be able to afford a tiny studio those places (if that), unless he chooses a sketchy apartment complex.

The valley along Ventura is high-end though. I'd like to be around there.

[Christian McQueen]

There's some real stupidity being tossed around on this thread.

You do NOT have to live in Ktown to be a dj. Fucking absurd.

Secondly, if you want to live cheap and cannot afford LA, then try Vegas first. If you can afford LA even with a side hustle then choose LA.

There is no comparison between the two. Vegas is cheap but limited in activities and lets not talk about going hiking when it's 118 degrees out. LA has mountains, ocean, and every kind of pussy you can imagine even trannies for El Mech when he visits.

[Drazen]

I was mainly speaking those areas because they are reasonable cab distance from all the smaller clubs/lounges around Hollywood/SM Blvd/Melrose/LaBrea. You're also reasonable cab distance to downtown and chinatown which have quite a few house/trance parties/pop-ups.

Sure, there are probably metro rail stations around the Valley, but if you're in a gig they probably don't run that late.

[speakeasy]

(09-18-2013 04:50 PM)la_mode Wrote:  

The valley along Ventura is high-end though. I'd like to be around there.

Yes, if you live in the valley, along Ventura blvd is a must. Noho district is the only exception. I think Sherman Oaks is best because it's got the 405 and 101 right there. Studio City is decent too. Don't go west of Encino though.

[samsamsam]

(09-18-2013 04:39 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

On his budget, he will only be able to afford a tiny studio those places (if that), unless he chooses a sketchy apartment complex.

That isn't necessarily true. I lived near LACMA in a bachelor all utilities paid for less than 800. I moved to a nice 1 bedroom in a much better area with hardwood floors, with parking for 1K, similar units on my street cost 500 more. Fuck for that price near LACMA would still be a steal.

All I am saying is yes it can be expensive in LA, but you shouldn't be totally discouraged. Some of the guys seem to be talking about renting an awesome house which might work for your budget.

I have always had good luck renting, because I present well and have good credit, etc. My current place the landlord told me over 100 people called about it (no doubt considering the rent is so low). But I got it because I came off as reliable, thoughtful and not a pain in the ass tenant that so many people can be.

Don't forget to look into guest houses and timing is the key. Search Craigslist and westsiderentals. Some people also use https://www.padmapper.com/

I do like some people's opinion of trying Vegas first because you can get one month leases (I can't confirm just relying on what they said) and see if you like it. Better to find out you don't like it and have to eat only a few weeks of rent than trying to eat 6 months or more of a lease in LA. If you don't care much about traffic, high costs (unless you know where to go etc) or fake people, LA is a pretty good place.

I date a girl from Vegas and she said there is the touristy vegas and the vegas people actually live in. She told me a lot of people living in vegas work in the casinos (duh, right?) and seems sort of transient, so you could hook up with a lot of people who are just working for a few months passing through.

Good luck on your decision!

[MikeCF]

I've lived in both places and am pro-Vegas.

Live in Summerlin or Green Valley. You can have a huge apartment with a hot tub and views of the stars at night.

St. George Utah is 2 hour drive.

If you want to be in the "scene," go the Strip. You'll make lots of contacts if you're a social person. The same people you see at LVAC or Gold's are going to be the VIP hosts and other hook-ups.

L.A. is hardly a cultural epicenter. There's the Getty, MOMA, and opera/symphony, but you'll spend god knows how much time on the road getting there. Vegas has Cirque/other shows, liberal gun laws (you can own most any gun), and some of the best food in the country.

No state income tax.

Vegas is hot but guess what, the Valley is hot as fuck too. (If you have bad allergies, Vegas can be rough. The pollen gets high enough in the summer that even people who don't have allergies often need an antihistamine.)

The West Side has great beaches, but I'll tell you this: A pool part at Encore beats Venice Beach 99/100 times.

[MikeCF]

(09-17-2013 11:09 PM)Courage Reborn Wrote:  

Scottsdale Arizona. it's cheap and hot like vegas, but the culture and work opportunities are both closer to LA.

This.

I've been in "forum wars" with idiots who shit talked the Tempe/Phoenix/Scottsdale area.

It's simply amazing.

More hot chicks than L.A. Period.

Rent is like $800 and that gets you a lot of real estate.

Everything is cheap.

My friend lives a nice lifestyle in Phoenix for $2,220. That's "all in." Food, housing, night life, gym, etc.

[Duke Castile]

It's not 115 year round, It's pleasant 8 or 9 months out of the year.

McQueen stick to what you know.

Scottsdale has been on my radar for a LOOOONG time.

If I were planning to stay in the US I'd be on that for sure.

[Tenerife]

What's the best place to live in vegas near the strip?

[Christian McQueen]

"McQueen stick to what you know."

I am. I have lived in vegas and La and am in vegas at least 8-10x a year.

I'm presenting the fact that a lot of people jump to vegas from La thinking its the promise land and then find out it's not.

There's a reason why it's a transient city.

MikeCF is right about the pool parties (Encore and Wet) though; beats Venice beach by a mile.

Ultimately it's your decision OP, just saying that if the difference between you living in Vegas or La is because of a $200-300 rent difference then get creative and make the money to live in La. It's worth it.

[Duke Castile]

If you lived here then you know it's not always 115.

I feel confident in saying, based on your job, you didn't really seek out too many outdoor activities.

[Christian McQueen]

^^^It's not always 115 but when I went to Red Rock to hike I about died from the heat haha.

And that was at sunset.

[MikeCF]

You need a camelbak bro.

[GameTheory]

^^^ fill it with BEER !!!

[Christian McQueen]

I did have a CamelBack, but it was filled with vodka.

Must be why ; )

[Easy E]

This has been a pretty good thread. The "Las Vegas vs LA" debate is interesting. Since you are a DJ, you can work in either place, so I say try Vegas first and see if you like it. It will be easier on your budget and on the off chance you don't like it, you won't be stuck with a long lease, so you can jump ship and head to LA pretty quickly.

[zwyjibo]

Weird thread. There's some information about living in Las Vegas, including some details I added, in this post: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-26481.html

To make it about LA vs LV - I struggle with this myself. A lot of the people I met in Las Vegas moved to LA and I miss having them around (no homo). I have not lived in LA, but I'm there about once a year and for about a month after every visit I get an itch to move there. What's skewing my perspective is that I'm only there for something interesting - a case, etc. - and don't get a full perspective on what living there actually would be like.

To avoid repetition, I'll limit my comments to things I don't think I've addressed before.

State Income Tax
Not having a state income tax, and having extremely lax business taxes (no corporate taxes per se, but a "use tax" of 1-2% of activity within the state), definitely has its perks. But it also comes at a cost. I'd actually go so far as to say the average person makes out worse without the state income tax. If you have a trust, a business, or are just a high networth individual realizing passive income from investments or actively earning money, then Nevada is awesome. But if you're middle-income dude who has to rely on public services in any meaningful way, you're getting a raw deal. Public education in the state is the country's anchorman, or close to it, by virtually every metric. While you're not paying state income taxes, you're paying more to register your vehicle, 8%+ sales taxes in Clark County, and receiving crumbling services at the local level. Nevada state government has been awesome in my experience. But how often is the average dude going to interact with the attorney general's office or secretary of state compared to, say, the local police? That's where the strain has been. Since there's no state income tax, a lot of taxation comes from gaming - and that's still off since the last downturn. Time Magazine recently had a detailed look at how Casino revenues have recovered somewhat, but room rates and average amounts gambled are still down significantly. (The revenue has been made up through nightclubs and shows.)

When you compare Nevada's lack of a tax with California's draconian taxes, it's not much of a challenge at all. But if you were comparing different states, I don't think it would be as decisive a victory in Nevada's favor. Unless you're doing significantly better than average, I'm not convinced that Nevada's lack of a state income tax is a good thing.

The "Can't Make It In LA" Issue
It's funny, I was actually talking with a co-worker yesterday about how there was (is?) a banking acronym for people who wash out to Hong Kong, FILTH (Failed in London, Try Hong [Kong]), and that it's surprising there's not a Las Vegas equivalent. I never tried LA, so I don't know if I failed there. A lot of migrants to Las Vegas came here (or back here) right after college, or to change careers. So, I don't think this is entirely accurate, but it may depend on your industry.

In all honesty, I have been wrestling to find the time to take the California bar for a while. I wonder how things would go in LA. I see where the idea that people in Vegas couldn't hack it in LA or NY originates. I don't think it's entirely accurate, but the best retort to it is "it depends."

Conclusion
If you're just starting out, Vegas definitely will be cheaper. While not the size of LA, the transience will make it easy to meet new people - whether they'll be valuable contacts is another question.

I'm planning to keep Vegas as a base of operations and foray outward and set down logistics elsewhere. I don't see how that's a bad plan, unless you're trying to do that with the opposite coast (NY / MIA), which can be difficult logistically. Realistically, if you had the desired connections and money weren't an issue, you'd be in LA and this conversation wouldn't be necessary.

P.S.
Yes, you need a camelback. If you do anything outdoors (or even if you don't) it's a great purchase.

[Tenerife]

Most people who come to LA to make it, don't make it. And most of them don't go to las vegas afterwards. They stay in LA or go somewhere else in the country, maybe back to their home town.

If you have your shit together, then LA is great, because that's where people go who have their shit together. If you don't have your shit together then it's going to be tough, BUT you never know if you don't go. Just make sure you hustle and take advantage of every opportunity, network, and be very sociable/extroverted. If you aren't willing to work hard, then it's probably not worth the price tag, or the lease term.

[speakeasy]

(09-19-2013 07:41 PM)Tenerife Wrote:  

If you have your shit together, then LA is great, because that's where people go who have their shit together.

I don't know. Considering that 10% of L.A. is populated by illegal immigrants, I'd say there are tons and tons of economically marginal people that find a way to survive here.

But yeah, if you want to live in Santa Monica or West Hollywood, then you clearly must have it together.

[Tenerife]

(09-19-2013 10:38 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(09-19-2013 07:41 PM)Tenerife Wrote:  

If you have your shit together, then LA is great, because that's where people go who have their shit together.

I don't know. Considering that 10% of L.A. is populated by illegal immigrants, I'd say there are tons and tons of economically marginal people that find a way to survive here.

But yeah, if you want to live in Santa Monica or West Hollywood, then you clearly must have it together.

I'm talking about people who move to LA with a dream of "making it" as part of the creative class. Aspiring musicians, actors, producers, writers, even people in the make-up and modeling world.

For example, starting a band in LA when you just move there is going to be harder than getting something together in another town, then bringing the whole group out to LA after you've done an EP and gotten your act together.

It might be different for acting. It really all depends on how hard you're willing to work. When I was in LA I had no idea of what I was doing basically.

Ultimately moving to a town is what you make of it. You can try and make generalizations, but especially when it comes to succeeding at a creative pursuit, it's all about sweat and willingness to put yourself out there.

[la_mode]

I've heard of people getting small roles in shows after only a few months, then others spend years trying and never get past a community improv night at a bar. I think luck really comes into play regarding acting.

[Akula]

Quote:

State Income Tax
Not having a state income tax, and having extremely lax business taxes (no corporate taxes per se, but a "use tax" of 1-2% of activity within the state), definitely has its perks. But it also comes at a cost. I'd actually go so far as to say the average person makes out worse without the state income tax. If you have a trust, a business, or are just a high networth individual realizing passive income from investments or actively earning money, then Nevada is awesome. But if you're middle-income dude who has to rely on public services in any meaningful way, you're getting a raw deal. Public education in the state is the country's anchorman, or close to it, by virtually every metric. While you're not paying state income taxes, you're paying more to register your vehicle, 8%+ sales taxes in Clark County, and receiving crumbling services at the local level. Nevada state government has been awesome in my experience. But how often is the average dude going to interact with the attorney general's office or secretary of state compared to, say, the local police? That's where the strain has been. Since there's no state income tax, a lot of taxation comes from gaming - and that's still off since the last downturn. Time Magazine recently had a detailed look at how Casino revenues have recovered somewhat, but room rates and average amounts gambled are still down significantly. (The revenue has been made up through nightclubs and shows.)

When you compare Nevada's lack of a tax with California's draconian taxes, it's not much of a challenge at all. But if you were comparing different states, I don't think it would be as decisive a victory in Nevada's favor. Unless you're doing significantly better than average, I'm not convinced that Nevada's lack of a state income tax is a good thing.

Sorry but I have to call a little BS on implying the services in Cali are so much better than in Nevada esp for middle-income guys/families (I think that's what you are implying right?).

California is simply a MESS financially. Municipalities are either going broke or dramatically reducing public services across the board. Aall over the state I've heard of cutbacks in schools, the police force, libraries and social services - you name it. The public unions are out of control and vote themselves more and more benefits that are basically unaffordable long-term. Illegals drain the system of any leftover funds and place a huge burden on schools and quality of life. [/quote]And taxes have gone up to unreasonable levels everywhere in Cali so much so that people continue to leave the state to get a tax brake.

Look at the highways - the minute you leave Nevada the CA roads typically suck, while in Nevada they are newly paved and nice to drive on.

I'm sure in the really rich districts like Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Westwood etc. public services are nice and all but they are propped up by private funding and/or a huge tax base from all the high earners and expensive property owners.

Maybe someone from Cali can chime in here re the school systems and declining services. But clearly in CA you don't 'get what you pay for' anymore.

[Easy E]

Good point, Akula.

Yeah, LA is probably a only really worth living in long-term if you are one of the following:

1. You work in the entertainment industry or a related creative industry.

2. You moved there to try an break into the entertainment industry or related creative industry.

3. You plan a short-term stay (a few years max) and are just there to party your ass off before you move on.

4. You are rich and you don't mind paying crazy taxes because you can afford it and you live in a high-end place (Hollywood Hills).

Otherwise, it ain't really worth it. In fact, for a regular guy working a normal 9-5 job, I would say it is definitely not worth it unless all you plan is #3 above.

[CaP7]

Or if you like 70 degrees and sunny in February and July...

[Drazen]

....or like the feeling of not being stuck in a bubble.