That's probably the wrong calculation: What were the terms of your father's financing compared to the terms of what you could afford today? I don't know what LA was like, but my parents bought an $18,500 house in 1973 and their monthly payment was about $230. My housing payments are about 1/4 to 1/3 of this ratio today (if I had some time to mess with the paperwork, I'm sure I could get to 1/5) for a much better house with a much better view and on a much bigger lot in a far more desireable part of the country. Percentage-wise, my taxes are much lower (I have friends "back home" whose houses cost 1/3 of mine whose taxes are dollar-wise higher). James makes some other excellent points about this disparity; I would add: the supply/demand equation has been working against CA real estate prices ever since then (and perhaps before). And this will continue, the demographers tell us.
This is unrelated (or only minorly so) to the current frothiness of the real estate market.
Also: was this his "first" house? Would this be yours? What are you paying in rent at this point and how different is that place from said $500k house (I don't want actual answers here, but answering it yourself might help you understand this false paradox a little better)? The cost of housing in the Bay Area is high whether you're an owner or renter, so try not to confuse those two things. How important is it to you to be able to make a random hole in one of your walls and not be in trouble? :)
Catching up from being a long-time renter isn't easy either. But it's far easier today than it was 30 years ago.
/jordan