Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 328 posts

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#241

Post by wahsd »

mywittyname wrote: post #222
wahsd wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me guess; you are one of those new people and are resentful that people you are freeloading and mooching off of are resentful that you are destroying the community and society they built over time. Its the same thing in Austin, even though Austin has really be fully deconstructed at this point and it is nothing like the nice place it once was. It's become ever more exclusive, ever more restricted, ever more douch…

Freeloaders & moochers are making everything more exclusive, expensive and pretentious? How does that work? More importantly, if they have it so nice, why don't get what you're due and start freeloading?

Freeloaders are driving up costs, due to the oversupply of people and unmet demand for housing and finite goods and services. The pretentiousness it simply a cultural function of the types of people that are being attracted to Austin; a mixture of internet douchbags that have ever increasingly proliferated adn infested SXSW, which are largely made up of the west coast and big city self-righteously self-absorbed.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, one of two things is true, either you're naive about this matter, or you are precisely the type I just referred to and, as expected, fully lack self-awareness. I realize that hearing something like that will not necessarily be well received here, but it's really a pestilent type of cultural phenomenon which is a pernicious type of cancer that is constantly eating away at any progress that can be made.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#242

Post by shenanigoat »

rubicon33 wrote: post #59
windlep wrote: post #5

I'm sure the fact that there's an increasing trend of empty Chinese investment properties isn't helping. I grew up in Cupertino, and when I visit my parents there, I'm rather shocked at how downhill the neighborhood has gone in parts. It's crazy that these old 70's tract homes go for 1.5 million. Even more insane is that they're bought and then left empty to go downhill. Literally broken windows and paint falling off…

> "I'm sure the fact that there's an increasing trend of empty Chinese investment properties isn't helping." This. This. This. A couple of years ago, I found myself utterly shocked by the price of homes in San Francisco. In a fit of frustration, I fired off a few emails a few random real estate firms in SF, asking one simple question: "Who the BLEEP can afford these homes?" You see, I was frustrated. I have a great j…

Absolutely. The same thing is happening here in Vancouver and it is eventually going to suck the life out of the city. Beautiful homes in formerly vibrant neighbourhoods are left empty...indefinitely...held as an investment by offshore owners. The governments (provincial, civil, and federal) have no intention of limiting foreign ownership so it will continue apace until nobody wants (or can afford) to live here. I rent a house that was bought in 2014 (when I moved in) for $800k and it's now worth $1.5M. Foreign investment is driving this.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#243

Post by yolesaber »

falsestprophet wrote: post #234
yolesaber wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chicago has all three. It just has a really shitty climate and is surrounded by...corn fields

And Lake Michigan.

Ah Lake Michigan. How I hated you in the winter when your freezing winds suck the life out of me, but how I loved your cold cold waters come summer

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#244

Post by dpark »

davidw wrote: post #232
dpark wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the map, we probably didn't cover as much as I thought. Regardless, if Rome is "spread out", it's not dense. If Rome, being among the densest of Italian cities, not dense, then neither is Italy.

Rome is not very dense compared to places like Milan or Naples. Italy has a lot of cities that are fairly dense, but not Hong Kong or Singapore dense. That's why, despite being somewhat smaller than California, it has about 20 million more people.

I've completely lost sight of your point. You said Italy has good transit and affordable housing because it's dense. Now Italy only has "fairly dense" cities. Of those, the densest are on par with Seattle.

I'm going to re-assert that Italy has affordable housing because they are in an economic slump. I was frankly not that impressed with their public transit, either, but I didn't spend a lot of time on it.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#245

Post by telotortium »

windlep wrote: post #43
yock wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I grew up in Cupertino, and when I visit my parents there, I'm rather shocked at how downhill the neighborhood has gone in parts. It's crazy that these old 70's tract homes go for 1.5 million. Even more insane is that they're bought and then left empty to go downhill. Literally broken windows and paint falling off. I never used to see that. Do you have any idea what's behind this?

I'm inclined to believe many are empty investment properties. A documentary about the housing costs showed a Chinese investment tour of Cupertino for such purpose: https://youtu.be/SBjXUBMkkE8?t=2m35s The other issue is that the high school I went to there, Monta Vista High School, is extremely well-ranked. As such some investors buy houses, then rent them to a single custodian who boards as many students as possible…

Actually, I stumbled upon a Deleon (a major realtor in the South Bay) brochure yesterday, and due to the prices, they're willing to pay for a lot of complementary services to get your house sold (not surprising, since a $2 million sale will give the selling agent $60k, by the customary 3% fee, and they can make even more money if the buying agent is also employed by them). One of the services they advertise is ads on Chinese radio and newspapers.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#246

Post by vonmoltke »

throwaway6497 wrote: post #221
shimon wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zoom out - you're missing the huge demographic risk. The next generation of people who will become top engineers, founders, etc. are facing tougher tradeoffs between standard of living and access to SV's social and business networks. It's not only the risk that the current drivers will leave but that the new drivers will just go elsewhere.

For 2015/16, new college grads at good companies total comp is in the range $120-180K, and they definitely have access to good social networks within the company and outside. Is there a large group of next generation people I am missing?

Considering how few 2015/2016 college grads will actually get one of those jobs at good companies, I think your large group is, well, any graduating class. If the Bay Area becomes unattractive for the kids who can't score $120k+, or for seniors like me who can't score the $200k+ jobs, it won't survive at the level it has been going on for.

In that sense, the distribution of salaries attached to the answers is telling. How do the startups and non-elite companies survive if nobody they can actually afford wants to come or stay? The area can't just be a playground for the elite megacompanies that can pay the salaries you state.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#247

Post by eldavido »

windlep wrote: post #5

I'm sure the fact that there's an increasing trend of empty Chinese investment properties isn't helping. I grew up in Cupertino, and when I visit my parents there, I'm rather shocked at how downhill the neighborhood has gone in parts. It's crazy that these old 70's tract homes go for 1.5 million. Even more insane is that they're bought and then left empty to go downhill. Literally broken windows and paint falling off…

What's needed is a property management firm that caters to these people.

There's no reason for houses to sit empty. They're much more economically productive (a nice way to say "profitable") with tenants in them.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#248

Post by kethinov »

dev1n wrote: post #134

Come check out troy, new york. Growing startup scene and lots of awesome shops and cafe's.

I visited recently and enjoyed it. I live west of you a few hours. Somewhat recently came back home to upstate NY after getting tired of the cost of living in Silicon Valley.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#249

Post by davidw »

dpark wrote: post #244
davidw wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rome is not very dense compared to places like Milan or Naples. Italy has a lot of cities that are fairly dense, but not Hong Kong or Singapore dense. That's why, despite being somewhat smaller than California, it has about 20 million more people.

I've completely lost sight of your point. You said Italy has good transit and affordable housing because it's dense. Now Italy only has "fairly dense" cities. Of those, the densest are on par with Seattle. I'm going to re-assert that Italy has affordable housing because they are in an economic slump. I was frankly not that impressed with their public transit, either, but I didn't spend a lot of time on it.

If Italy had the same kind of NIMBY laws that the US does in many places, half the country would have to get up and leave, or they would have to pave over everything between towns, leaving no agriculture, parks, forests or much of anything.

The public transportation in Italy varies a lot, from North (pretty good) to South (awful in many places). The thing they tend to do well is that it's fairly frequent, so you usually don't have to stress about missing one particular bus or tram.

"Fairly dense" is all you need to vastly improve things in many places. Look at vast swaths of the bay area that are single story detached houses. Mix in some 2/3 story buildings in there, and you'd add a lot of supply without going 'full Hong Kong'.

Also, Milan is about twice as dense as Seattle.

Re: One-third of SF Bay Area residents hope to leave soon, poll finds

#250

Post by joe_the_user »

potatolicious wrote: post #24
joe_the_user wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, The high cost of housing here is often presented as Bay Area specific phenomena whereas it's phenomena that's appeared many urban areas, especially the most desirable ones that Bay Area residents might consider moving to.

Increasing urban unaffordability is a theme throughout the US, yes, but let's not pretend that the Bay Area has experienced this to a degree not seen anywhere else - even in New York. While unaffordability and its many causes needs to be addressed everywhere, SF does seem like the odd one out of the bunch.

Well, the increase in cost of housing has been very patchy - each instance it is very mediated by local conditions but still not simply a local phenomena.

As a Bay Area resident, I'm eager to escape to places like the Bay but with a lower cost of living and scanning craigslist for such places, I have consistently found the differences less than I'd imagine.

A variety of things seem to have come together.

On the demand side, the job market today seems to favor certain of the young and the educated. The social consensus has become that no one, especially not the young and educated, wants to live in America's vast expanse of suburban developments - and investors are equally shy about investing her.

But also on the supply side, investment in any and all stores of value has gone up all along with the process of the Fed printing money aggressively with investment rental property going with that; the Blackstone group is now one of the nations' largest landlords. And of course a array of Home-value protectors in the form of Nimbyists, prevents construction and a lack of land central cities naturally restricts supply as well.

But still, I think it's reasonably to say you have a national phenomena which simply manifests locally in different ways.

Post reply on HN