64 Worst: Cost of Rent vs. No NFL Team

64 Worst Things About LA - click here for more!

Which is more ridiculous, the cost of rent in L.A., or the absence of pro football?

The economy is in shambles. Or, as President Bush calls it, in a “slowdown.” The housing crisis has littered the SoCal landscape with signs of foreclosure. Yet, with home prices falling, rents are going up. nfl.gifAnd half the time, you still have to bring your own refrigerator.

There have been arguments that professional sports teams can be a boon to a city’s economy. They can also be a source of civic pride, if they’re not a joke on the playing field. Los Angeles has been home 3 different NFL teams: the Raiders, the Rams, and the Chargers. Now, two years after Governor Schwarzenegger told the league he wanted 2 teams, L.A. is still home to none.

[poll=12]

Related posts:

  1. Is LA closer to an NFL Team than we think?
  2. Will Sam Zell be increasing the cost of newspaper home delivery?
  3. Arnold Schwarzenegger breakin’ the law, breakin’ the law!
  4. Hey Dodgers…LA vlogger Pete says give Manny Ramirez a job
  5. ‘Camera Assassins’ Scavenger Hunt Saturday!


8 Comments so far

  1. David Markland (markland) on March 27th, 2008 @ 11:34 am

    I’d say rent, hands down, but having an NFL stadium to go to might help justify the high cost of living… not that I’d be able to afford a ticket.

    Still, while I’m not a sports fan, I feel LA has a big gaping hole without a football team. We have bigger problems, of course, but having a pro football team to rally around gives everyone common ground, which this city can never have too much of.


  2. Jason Burns (jasonburns) on March 27th, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

    There is an interesting story in the Times about the Coliseum and its failed attempts to lure a team here:


  3. Jason Burns (jasonburns) on March 27th, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
  4. marshall on March 27th, 2008 @ 1:55 pm

    I like to think that we still have the Raiders, we just now keep them at a safe distance.


  5. Oren (oren) on March 27th, 2008 @ 2:03 pm

    Rent is so low in L.A. compared to other major world cities that it’s kind of a joke.


  6. 64 Worst: Cost of Buying A House vs. 110 Freeway | Los Angeles Metblogs (pingback) on March 27th, 2008 @ 7:44 pm

    [...] up on this morning’s topic of crazy rent pricing, is the outrageous cost of buying a house.  IrvineHousingBlog [...]


  7. browne on March 28th, 2008 @ 8:12 am

    While I think rent should be cheaper, compared to most urban cosmopolitan cities the rent here is pretty cheap.

    It’s cheap for a place you’d want to live.

    I can’t think of anywhere that I’d want to live that would be cheaper.

    San Francisco costs more, New York is more, London is insane…London is outrageous, but you know, I’ve heard that Berlin is very reasonable and that they like American artsy types. I’ve heard this from several people who actually picked up and moved there.

    Everyone just stop moving, stay in the apartment, parent’s guest house, cardboard box, or leaky roof single family dwelling you are currently in and the prices will go down…

    Browne


  8. 64 Worst: Lightning Round, Day 1 of 4 | Los Angeles Metblogs (pingback) on April 14th, 2008 @ 11:49 am

    [...] Cost of rent: The economy is in shambles. Or, as President Bush calls it, in a “slowdown.” The housing crisis has littered the SoCal landscape with signs of foreclosure. Yet, with home prices falling, rents are going up. And half the time, you still have to bring your own refrigerator. -Jason Burns [...]



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.