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

The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

stanfordpolitics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 208 posts

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#31

Post by fhrui »

I found these whining hypocritical and snobbish. I can't afford a house in Palo Alto even if I work there. I don't complain about it just like I don't complain about not being able to purchase a luxury car. I don't expect the people who CAN afford these things to just lower the price and give them to me.

Many cities near Palo Alto have houses at a reasonable price, East Palo Alto, East Menlo Park, Mountain View, Redwood City, just to name a few. Why doesn't the author want to raise her kids there? BECAUSE SHE DOESN"T WANT HER KIDS TO GO TO SCHOOL WITH THE AVERAGE JOE! She wants her kids to go to a school where Joe Millionaires send their kids, while only paying the price of an average Joe. How could that be possible?

Her mentality is the same as that of the people she's accusing of not making a change. She just makes less money and she's loud.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#32

Post by [deleted] »

jhulla wrote: post #30
StanislavPetrov wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems that we made a pact with the devil by positioning housing as an investment asset. That was certainly a mistake, but the much larger mistake was made (and continues to be made) by the FED (and other central banks at the FED's insistence). FED efforts to prop up the housing and equities markets through QEinfinity, Operation Twist, the FOMC, and countless other FED mechanisms designed to prop up markets (and o…

Get outta here with your free markets. In free markets, those that lose big get up off the table. In our TBTF markets, the bigger your loss, the greater the odds that your national Treasury will backstop you. Have you helped out your local banker today?

[deleted]

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#33

Post by sjg007 »

arkadiyt wrote: post #8
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

"Downing and her husband, an attorney and programmer, respectively, say they simply could not afford to pay almost $150,000 per year for housing alone while starting a family in Palo Alto." It's interesting the difference a couple of miles make. $150,000 per year is $12,500 a month. The most expensive house for rent in East Palo Alto (3 miles away) is $6,000 (half that) and there are many choices under $4,000 per mon…

"They can move elsewhere" is not a reason to not build more housing - it is reasonable (and desirable) for people to live in the city that they work in. If your argument is that they can pay 3,000 a month for the privilege of living 50 (!) miles away from work in Gilroy then that still doesn't do anything for the "teachers, police officers, and other working and middle class people" - you know, the people who actuall…

The teachers, police and fire fighters all moved out a long time ago.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#35

Post by ermterm »

As much as I appreciate all these articles expounding the plethora of issues stemming from housing in the Bay Area, I can't help but feel thoroughly discouraged.

It seems that despite an abundance of chatter, we'll never see any change. If things were going to be fundamentally different, any time soon, we'd see indications of that. Instead it's just articles. Articles, on articles, on articles.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#36

Post by dekhn »

mbreese wrote: post #7
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

"Downing and her husband, an attorney and programmer, respectively, say they simply could not afford to pay almost $150,000 per year for housing alone while starting a family in Palo Alto." It's interesting the difference a couple of miles make. $150,000 per year is $12,500 a month. The most expensive house for rent in East Palo Alto (3 miles away) is $6,000 (half that) and there are many choices under $4,000 per mon…

The $150,000 number is the cost of the mortgage needed to buy a home the size of the one they rented in Palo Alto [1]. The breakdown was that they rented the home with another couple for $6200/mo. If they wanted to buy a similar home, it would cost ~ $2.7M, thus the $12.5k/mo mortgage. They were already renting a place in Palo Alto at ~ $3100/mo. Their problem was that they wanted to start a family and needed more sp…

So, the argument is based on her insisting that she had to buy a house in Palo Alto. But renting a place large enough would have been much cheaper than that $150,000: $5k/month gets you a nice 4 bedroom.

I don't think her math adds up. She's just insisting that she has to buy, and it has to be in Palo Alto. Neither of those are truly requirements for her, so the $150K quote is specious.

EDIT: I acknowledge $5k is not realistic in PA. 6k is, however.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#37

Post by will_brown »

While it is fine to call out the City Council, I am surprised there wasn't an acknowledgment that the City Council is a reflection of the will of the people in the City. If it were really an issue to the community they would elect new Council persons.

Since the majority of the stakeholders on this issue likely can't vote to change the Council because they don't live in the City, I would recommend a boycott. One thing the transit workers could do is organize to the extent they don't buy anything within the city limits. No gas, no food/lunch, no shopping, no entertainment, etc... Once you get local business behind a political issue the rest typically fall in line or they may find themselves ostracized within their own community.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#38

Post by pfarnsworth »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #11
arkadiyt wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They can move elsewhere" is not a reason to not build more housing - it is reasonable (and desirable) for people to live in the city that they work in. If your argument is that they can pay 3,000 a month for the privilege of living 50 (!) miles away from work in Gilroy then that still doesn't do anything for the "teachers, police officers, and other working and middle class people" - you know, the people who actuall…

Or move the jobs out of ridiculously high COL areas? An area of land has a carrying capacity dictated by the will of the people who live there through their votes. Why fight it when you can simply move work elsewhere?

This is the real answer.

The problem is that the large global companies like Facebook and Google are extracting an unnatural amount of money and that's flowing into the Bay Area, and translating into high-paying engineer jobs. The problem is all of the great jobs are landing in the Bay Area, and in the age of the Internet that just doesn't make any sense anymore.

These large global companies need to spread that around the US and move jobs around to other areas, so that young people can get exciting jobs in lower cost areas. This will take off the burden off the Bay Area, and ease the pressure of housing prices.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#39

Post by youngButEager »

The east coast of the USA was settled first, recall. What did they do back east to 'solve' this problem of "we're running out of space"? They increased the density of occupants per unit of land -- they built UPWARD.

That will have to happen here too. It's already happened in LA.

There will always be crybabies like this attorney during the growing pains of a popular 'destination city.'

For now, think of turning the Peninsula into tall buildings, concrete and asphalt. Think how the picturesque drive up highway 280 to San Francisco from the South Bay will be affected.

Everyone wants the nature. Not the tall buildings, concrete and asphalt.

Crybabies need to do precisely what this gal chose -- LEAVE. There's the door. That's how markets work -- when the price of a good or service is too high, demand drops. Well, she's a living example of a smidgen of demand disappearing.

People who don't like markets should move to Venezuela or North Korea or Cuba.

Re: The Shame of Palo Alto: An Interview with Kate Downing on Affordable Housing

#40

Post by ScottBurson »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #26
hkmurakami wrote: post #3

It seems that we made a pact with the devil by positioning housing as an investment asset. By doing so, we've encouraged people to commit a very large fraction of their net worth into a rather illiquid asset, tying their financial fates to the future assessment of that asset. As a result, protecting the price and appreciation of this asset has come to overshadow the other crucial roles that housing plays in our socie…

>It seems that we made a pact with the devil by positioning housing as an investment asset. That was certainly a mistake, but the much larger mistake was made (and continues to be made) by the FED (and other central banks at the FED's insistence). FED efforts to prop up the housing and equities markets through QEinfinity, Operation Twist, the FOMC, and countless other FED mechanisms designed to prop up markets (and o…

> If not for FED chicanery, housing prices would fall precipitously to meet real demand.

Maybe in some places, but I don't think that would happen in Silicon Valley. As the article says, the population of Palo Alto doubles during work days. A lot of those people would rather live there than commute from wherever.

Silicon Valley is not a creation of the Fed.

Post reply on HN