Rethinking Retirement: Why Expensive Cities Are Rising in Retirement Rankings

Onda

Full time employment: Posting here.
Joined
Dec 1, 2023
Messages
809
A new retirement ranking is turning old assumptions upside down: expensive places like New York City/San Francisco/Boston/Seatle now score high because healthcare, walkability, and daily convenience matter more with age than low taxes alone. Meanwhile, The Villages in Lady Lake, Fla, for example, ranks dead last. It’s the largest retirement community in the United States but scores near the floor on every metric that predicts long-term urban vitality.

The newest retirement rankings suggest retirees may value healthcare, walkability, daily convenience, and long-term independence more than low taxes and low cost. Is the real shift simply that retirees are starting to rank “aging well” above “paying less”?

Top:
1. New York City — 66.4
2. Durham, NC — 65.3
3. Ann Arbor, MI — 64.4
4. Boston, MA — 63.9
5. Seattle–Tacoma, WA — 63.8
6. Washington–Arlington, DC — 63.8
7. Frederick, MD — 61.8
8. Albany–Schenectady, NY — 61.4
9. Raleigh, NC — 61.4
10. San Francisco–Oakland, CA — 61.0

Bottom:
250. The Villages–Lady Lake, FL — 32.9
249. Spring Hill, FL — 34.1
248. Vero Beach–Sebastian, FL — 34.3
247. McAllen, TX — 35.1
246. Myrtle Beach–North Myrtle Beach, SC — 36.3
245. Brownsville, TX — 36.4
244. Indio–Palm Desert–Palm Springs, CA — 36.8
243. Port Charlotte–North Port, FL — 37.3
242. Ocala, FL — 37.4
241. Beaumont, TX — 37.8


 
Last edited:
"Researchers compiling the new index evaluated five characteristics: climate resilience, automation readiness, social cohesion, population renewal, and governance and foresight."

Just what I'm looking for in a retirement location...
Which two of those five would you call unimportant in retirement?
 
Interesting. I would want to retire to any of top sites quoted or the bottom sites quoted. To many people for me.
 
What does walkability mean? Does that mean a hospital is within walking distance when you get mugged?
In Seattle I recommend living in Hawthorne Hills, Laurelhurst or Magnolia :)
 
In Seattle I recommend living in Hawthorne Hills, Laurelhurst or Magnolia :)
It isn't my top choice for walking. Not now, maybe 30 years ago.

" Seattle: A 75 yr old lady loses her right eye eyesight after being hit by a guy with a wooden stick with a screw attached."
 
It isn't my top choice for walking. Not now, maybe 30 years ago.

" Seattle: A 75 yr old lady loses her right eye eyesight after being hit by a guy with a wooden stick with a screw attached."
MIAMI May 30, 2012— -- The grisly assault on a homeless man whose face was eaten by a deranged assailant lasted for 18 agonizing minutes and was captured on nearby surveillance cameras.

Neither your statement nor mine is relevant to this thread.
 
Yes, a 75 year old lady walking on the street in broad daylight getting randomly attacked in Seattle is exactly the same as a Florida homeless man getting attacked (probably in a encampment with drugs around).
 
Yes, a 75 year old lady walking on the street in broad daylight getting randomly attacked in Seattle is exactly the same as a Florida homeless man getting attacked (probably in a encampment with drugs around).
Did it happen in Hawthorne Hills, Laurelhurst or Magnolia?

Do you know how often things like this happen in inexpensive, drug-infested small towns?
 
Did it happen in Hawthorne Hills, Laurelhurst or Magnolia?

Do you know how often things like this happen in inexpensive, drug-infested small towns?
I wasn't saying the three places you mentioned were bad but what is the point in living in Seattle if you must confine yourself to safe zones?

Our smaller town in Washington has not had any murders, muggings or face eatings for the past 10 years we have lived here. I can walk to the library, Safeway, hospital at 1am if I wanted and not feel insecure. A bit chilly at night still though.
 
Which two of those five would you call unimportant in retirement?
Am I limited to only two out of the five?

How about a ranking of the five, from most important to least.

1. governance and foresight
2. social cohesion
3. automation readiness
4. population renewal
5. climate resilience

Given these selections, and the top 10 as proposed, thanks but no thanks. I wouldn't want to retire to any of them except perhaps, and only because I haven't really checked, Durham or Raleigh.

Top:
1. New York City — 66.4
2. Durham, NC — 65.3
3. Ann Arbor, MI — 64.4
4. Boston, MA — 63.9
5. Seattle–Tacoma, WA — 63.8
6. Washington–Arlington, DC — 63.8
7. Frederick, MD — 61.8
8. Albany–Schenectady, NY — 61.4
9. Raleigh, NC — 61.4
10. San Francisco–Oakland, CA — 61.0
 
I think the data source for that article was written by an advertising firm. Ignore it.
 
I imagine everyone who makes it to retirement has their own individual criteria for their desired place. I know we do. There are only a couple of things I’d like to change about our locale, the primary one being climate. But we remain here because it offers just about everything we want, starting with conveniences, but a close second is that it feels kinda secluded, even though we’re smack in the middle of almost 10m people.

Conveniences include nearby grocery options, world class healthcare, restaurants, entertainment venues, pro and college sports, activities - you name it and it’s here. Another important item for us is an international airport nearby and ours is only a 20 minute drive away, offering direct flights to every major city in the world. And domestic, North American, and Central American travel is easy because we’re positioned in the middle.

All of this in a heavily treed golf course community with very low crime and controlled growth. I recognize the appeal for those that want it, but I just couldn’t live rurally.

Now if we could only do something about the summer heat….
 
I wasn't saying the three places you mentioned were bad but what is the point in living in Seattle if you must confine yourself to safe zones?

Our smaller town in Washington has not had any murders, muggings or face eatings for the past 10 years we have lived here. I can walk to the library, Safeway, hospital at 1am if I wanted and not feel insecure. A bit chilly at night still though.
Our oldest son and his family are in Issaquah, which is lovely. It is much as you describe: active and safe. And absolutely gorgeous if you can handle the gray winter. And I think there are pockets like that in just about every city. We’re in one of those in the DFW area. So when I consider Seattle, I don’t think of downtown, but instead, I think of all of the options around it. I’d do the same for any large city in that list.
 
A Doc I used to work with actually did retire to NYC. He kept his suburban home in NJ, but bought a place overlooking Central Park on the upper east side. ( he did very well financially)
He told me it's fantastic, can walk everywhere including to Mt Sinai hospital , feels "safe" and everything is close by as well as having access to great shows and entertainment. Not for me, I lived there for 5 years and I would never move back.
 
I'd not rate NYC high on "climate resilience" with Hurricane Sandy coming to mind, but TEHO (To Each, His/Her Own). I think an increased interest in expensive places mostly reflects retiree finances.
 
Beacon Hill in Boston is lovely today and Lisbon , Madeira, Granada 6 - 8 hours away.
Airport and Beacon Hill Few minutes by Metro from green area of Cambridge.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom