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

The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 363 posts

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#291

Post by closeparen »

wcummings wrote: post #249
closeparen wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We've grown accustomed to overporting our post-war suburban archetype of what a "middle class" family "deserves," i.e. lots of bedrooms, garages and lawn space, while diminishing previously (and still!) common practices like having roommates when young, not owning a car, et cetera. "People's lives are too good, we need to make them worse." What's your angle? What do you gain from advocating against mobility and pers…

Not worse, just different. Times change. Maybe the lifestyle people expect and idralize isn't sustainable.

Being unable to afford a room to yourself isn't "just different." The ability to be alone when needed is huge.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#292

Post by Waterluvian »

abalashov wrote: post #285
rukittenme wrote: post #284

The people who write these articles almost always live in California or New York City. I just have to laugh. Move to any major Texan city, any major Floridian city -- really any city in "The South" -- and the situation is much different. There are tons of great properties for unsubsidized, lower class purchasers. Seriously, zillow downtown Nashville TN. You can find great deals for the poorest amongst us. People in (…

That may be, but first-class cities concentrate a lot more of the most desirable economic opportunities. Living in the Silicon Valley and SF area would be completely irrational on all grounds, except for the fact that you're within driving distance of 900 of the world's top 1000 technology employers (figurative example, I wouldn't have an exact count). Similar arguments can be made for entertainment, music and film i…

I always say that Canada is just the U.S. put through a low-pass filter. In this case, it feels very true too. Toronto and Vancouver are like our NYC and SF, to a somewhat more toned down extent. But then there are countless other cities where living in them yields the same overall quality of life at a considerably lower price tag.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#293

Post by twblalock »

BWStearns wrote: post #247
twblalock wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What will it take Google, GE, or Microsoft to move a big chunk of their respective operations away from San Francisco, Boston, and Seattle? It's a chicken and egg problem: companies don't want to invest in cities where there aren't a lot of qualified workers, and workers don't want to move to cities where there aren't a lot of jobs. Furthermore, the most competitive workers tend to move to the cities you mentioned,…

I don't think it's illegal to collude to improve a second tier city's economic prospects. Large tech cos have proven their inclination and ability to cooperate to influence markets before, why not put that collaborative spirit to work for good and profit?

If tech companies would benefit from doing that, why haven't they done it already?

The simple answer is that they would not benefit by doing that. They can just sit tight in Silicon Valley, Seattle, and New York while the best talent comes to them.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#294

Post by freshyill »

sh_tinh_hair wrote: post #258

In order to afford a decent newer house in the suburban beltway (DC) you need to spend 500k+. That's $2200 a month. Personal property tax on a 3 year old SUV and a new sports car is $2700 yearly. Car insurance is > $300 monthly. Car payments >= $1900 month. (college + personal) Loan repayment = $400 monthly. Food and gas + energy >= $600 monthly. State and federal tax + ss take about 45% of gross. Upper middle class…

We live in Silver Spring, and between our two kids, we pay ~$2,000/month for private middle school and preschool. Our older one has one more year at his middle school (started there when we lived in an area with pretty crappy public schools), and the younger one finishes preschool this summer. We moved and now pay ~$1,000/month more for a roughly equal house, but better public schools and a better neighborhood. A shorter commute (40 minutes on a good day, but usually 50-60) is a minor side benefit.

I'm really looking forward to the end of paying for school because we can finally get a much-needed new car. Once they're both done, it'll be the equivalent of getting a pretty decent raise.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#295

Post by vidoc »

tobylane wrote: post #237
mhneu wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just housing policy that's gone wrong, it's transit policy. We haven't built good public transit in our cities, and now that cars are filling all available roads, even houses far away from cities are too expensive for how long commutes are. We wish we had a train system in many cities that allowed the middle class to live 40-60 minutes away from their jobs. Ultimately however the main problem is wealth inequ…

London, cities in Europe in general have good transport but not great housing options. London just overtook the pre war population (within a green belt set just after the war). Nearly everywhere is within a mile of a station, only one tiny spot is four miles away. It's all about affordable housing. We as a country are building half of what we need.

London as more than decent public transportation indeed, plus it has this rather extreme car policy we all know about (which by the way I am sure the super rich actually love!). The thing is, I've always wondered why public transportation is so outrageously expensive there. Actually, even with the Oyster card, the rates strike me as rather extreme. I'd love to hear a Londonese on this.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#296

Post by vidoc »

1024core wrote: post #151

I live in SF, and am flabbergasted at the number of 1- or 2- floor single-family homes. A city the size of SF (46 sq mi) and population (850K+ and growing) simply can't afford so many SFHs. I was in Barcelona recently (yay NIPS!) and Barcelona is smaller than SF (36 sq mi) and has nearly twice the population! Everywhere you see are 6-floor buildings, with the bottom reserved for shops and people living above them. It…

> I live in SF, and am flabbergasted at the number of 1- or 2- floor single-family homes. A city the size of SF (46 sq mi) and population (850K+ and growing) simply can't afford so many SFHs.

I feel the same. I grew up in Europe and I'll add to that that generally speaking, apartment sizes are much bigger in SF (and, basically, western US) than anywhere I've lived before. I was recently in NY and apt sizes there remind me Hong Kong actually (well, I exaggerate a bit). Funny thing too is that when you cross the border into Vancouver from Seattle, you immediately revert back to Europe size apts!

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#298

Post by mturmon »

tptacek wrote: post #14
Clubber wrote: post #5

Strange, I'm middle class and I live in a city. There are other cities than NYC, SF, LA and Boston.

It's not even true of NYC; it's true of Manhattan and Brooklyn. Is it true of LA? That also sounds wrong to me.

LA homeowner here. Short answer is: not entirely true, as written.

The situation is that a vast expanse of the (very large) city of LA, and key enclaves like West Hollywood and Santa Monica (not formally part of LA, but surrounded by it) has had large and steady price increases for the past ~60 months straight. Renters have been priced out of one neighborhood after another.

It has caused a huge upheaval as people who had not noticed the pace of change have had to move to distant neighborhoods, or out of the area entirely. You see a lot more homeless, and there is a political struggle about people living in mobile homes parked at the edges of parks, etc. This upheaval is a hot issue.

But (coming to the point) it is still, barely, possible for middle class people to find homes in LA city. But you have to pay a lot more (say, 400k), and/or accept some living conditions that are marginal. When middle class Anglo families are seriously considering moving to Boyle Heights condos...it's a new thing.

I don't have time just now, but looking at real estate listings for Cypress Park might be informative. This is a tough neighborhood with significant long standing gang activity. Not South LA (aka "south central"), but close. Example: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Los-Angeles/3608-Arroyo-Seco-Ave-9... (sold for 360k last year).

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#299

Post by crdoconnor »

vidoc wrote: post #295
tobylane wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

London, cities in Europe in general have good transport but not great housing options. London just overtook the pre war population (within a green belt set just after the war). Nearly everywhere is within a mile of a station, only one tiny spot is four miles away. It's all about affordable housing. We as a country are building half of what we need.

London as more than decent public transportation indeed, plus it has this rather extreme car policy we all know about (which by the way I am sure the super rich actually love !). The thing is, I've always wondered why public transportation is so outrageously expensive there. Actually, even with the Oyster card, the rates strike me as rather extreme. I'd love to hear a Londonese on this.

It's partly because the underground is 154 years old, which carries with it its own set of maintenance headaches, partly because of the "public private partnership" programs from 2000s onwards that were set up as a means to extract money from the system and partly because they pay reasonably good wages.

Re: The Middle Class Can't Afford to Live in Cities Anymore

#300

Post by the_gastropod »

jamespitts wrote: post #96
the_gastropod wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in NYC. I live a reasonably fancy pants lifestyle—have an apartment in a nice neighborhood with a doorman, eat out a few times a week, go to bars a few times a month, etc. I spent under $34,000 in 2016. $24,000 of that was for my rent, which is admittedly ridiculous. But I think with a little financial awareness, NYC can be affordable to the middle class.

It is true that people can squeeze by in a place like NYC with the right moves (as you have), but a configuration like this one may not be sustainable for those who want to raise a family.

I don't think I'm "squeezing by". There's a lot of fat I'd need to trim for there to be any "squeezing".

A family is definitely more costly than a single person, and may be more difficult. But the article defines middle class as $50-$125k / year. With a $125k salary, you could afford 3 people living like me (including each having their own apartment). So I think the article is a bit extreme. On $50k, it'd be harder, but definitely do-able with some effort.

Post reply on HN