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

311–320 of 328 posts

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

#311

Post by eldavido »

DanielDent wrote: post #291
eldavido wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There are plenty of property management & other real estate firms in Vancouver which cater to foreign owners. But the math on renting isn't actually so straight forward. A 10-20 year old building in Vancouver will have many units with kitchens that have literally never been used. There's wear and tear and a lot of extra work and risk that comes from renting a place. And as odd as it may sound, the resale value can ta…

So, if I may summarize, you're saying that there's a lot of demand for safe-haven assets by investors whose priority is capital preservation?

I don't see the math on this working out. Have you been in a house that hasn't been occupied? Things depreciate: roofs leak, water pipes break, floors rot, bugs get in, etc.

Given a sane property rights regime (something notably absent from San Francisco), I would vastly prefer real estate I own for investment purposes to be occupied. Tenants make sure the place is at least habitable, pay rent, and you can feel good as an owner about giving someone a place to live. I get that the market may not view it that way, but I think the market is wrong, and maybe that's an opportunity in and of itself.

Honest question: do Chinese people understand capitalism? Even poor people in the US have some inkling of understanding about the stock market -- it's on TV, in the newspaper, the presidential primaries, etc. I get that the main motivation might be just getting capital out of China and into the US, but I really don't understand the investment thesis of holding empty real estate, at all.

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

#312

Post by sideband »

intrasight wrote: post #274
Touche wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of "up and coming" cities in the U.S., I'm guessing there must be a massive exodus from all of the traditoinal "big" cities like Chicago and Boston. Add to the list: * Nashville * Pittsburg * Charlotte * Orlando * San Jose (at least in terms of population, not sure about industry) It's an interesting phenomenon given how in the developing world there are more super large cities, are we going the opposit…

Nashville, Charlotte - too socially conservative Pittsburgh - great city! Orlando - too small and isolated to be a contender

I don't understand the comment about Orlando. The metro area is the same size as Pittsburgh's, and it's a 90 minute drive from an even larger metro, Tampa.

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

#313

Post by hnal943 »

jerf wrote: post #173
hkmurakami wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> homes do not depreciate very much as a result of people living in them. I get what you are saying, but this part above isn't a "natural order of things". For example, homes in Japan are expensive (perhaps representing an even larger fraction of lifetime earnings than in the Statse) yet they depreciate like they are cars.

Honest question: Why? My home is about 30 years old and honestly the only way you'd know that is by recognizing certain features and techniques that pin it to that general time period of construction and code requirements. It's not like everything shows "30 years of wear" on it. (Of course all the surfaces have been replaced at least once over time, but by mass of the house that's not that much; maintenance is mainte…

I don't really know, but I read an article that said earthquakes contribute significantly to depreciation in Japan. If the structures just don't hold up as long due to the harsh conditions, it would make sense that old structures would be worth less.

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

#314

Post by lexhaynes »

joshAg wrote: post #214
khushia wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "you can make unprotected left turns" mean? I'm from the UK so I guess this is the US equivalent of turning right at a set of traffic lights... but what significance does "unprotected" have?

You're right, it's the equivalent of a right handed turn in the UK. Consider an intersection between two perpendicular streets that is controlled by traffic signals. A protected turn is one in which the turn through the intersection and across the oncoming lane of traffic happens when the oncoming traffic (that is going straight) is stopped. An unprotected turn is one in which the turn through the intersection and ac…

I'm from LA and didn't realize the unprotected left turn was anything unusual...

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

#315

Post by hnal943 »

hkmurakami wrote: post #147
hnal943 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except no one decided that - it falls naturally out of the facts that homes are expensive (and therefore represent a large chunk of the wealth of most people) and that homes do not depreciate very much as a result of people living in them.

> homes do not depreciate very much as a result of people living in them. I get what you are saying, but this part above isn't a "natural order of things". For example, homes in Japan are expensive (perhaps representing an even larger fraction of lifetime earnings than in the Statse) yet they depreciate like they are cars.

It's true that there's no law of nature that dictates housing depreciation. However, I will say that all of America works this way, and has for at least as long as I have been alive - houses hold onto their value. That fact may be culturally bound, but the point still remains that no one decided that this should the case, nor is there some law or policy that keeps homes from depreciating.

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

#316

Post by lexhaynes »

dmode wrote: post #257
jonstokes wrote: post #4

Please don't come to Austin. I moved from SF to Austin a little over two years ago, and I want to make it clear that it's terrible. The food is bad, the people are lame, and all the musicians are out of tune. I hear Chicago is where it's at, so please go there. Or New York. Or anywhere else, really. Just don't come to Austin.

I know you were being sarcastic, but Austin is very overrated. Low VC funding, small city, surrounded by Texas. Ironically, in another related study, the #1 place people want to move to from Bay Area turned out to be NYC - an even more expensive place. I guess the thought there was might as well stay in a big city if we are paying that much money

There's a) affordable (even wildly affordable) housing in NYC, though the commute can be around an hour into the city but then there's b) decent public transport and c) a good deal of jobs if you're in tech.

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

#317

Post by lexhaynes »

1812Overture wrote: post #236
blackhaz wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking about moving to either Bay Area or Los Angeles with a family, from Prague. I have a 7 years old kid. I am not sure if that's the right thing. We're doing it for the climate. It's really difficult to find a warm English-speaking country where you won't be culturally isolated from the rest of the world. I can work pretty much from anywhere, however I am not a magnate. Things definitely to be missed: - Prag…

The schools in Los Angeles are terrible unless you live in an insanely expensive part of town or send your kids to an insanely expensive private school.

There are quite a few wonderful magnet schools for smart kids.

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

#318

Post by shimon »

vonmoltke wrote: post #246
throwaway6497 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Actually, maybe it can? If we can ignore the somewhat tasteless aspect of this, what if the Bay Area was just a playground for kids who get 6-figure salaries at graduation, and then stay at high-paying jobs there?

It becomes extremely elitist, with all the costs and benefits of that. The benefit is that everyone who can afford to live there is implicitly vetted by a rich employer or investor, so there could be extremely high serendipity. The costs are massive insularity, risk of the next big thing coming from elsewhere, and hugely inflated costs for basic service labor.

But, if the vetting is good enough, maybe those costs are worth it?

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

#320

Post by rubicon33 »

shenanigoat wrote: post #242
rubicon33 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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 re…

Ah! I was hoping someone from Vancouver might comment, as I have heard through the grapevine that there is HUGE foreign money (mainly from China) buying up land there, and driving prices sky high. Hadn't heard much else than rumor about it though. Hopefully Vancouver will figure something out, I hear it's a very nice place to live.
Post reply on HN