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

331–340 of 363 posts

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

#331

Post by tptacek »

closeparen wrote: post #220
rayiner wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in the US. We're facing a huge impending labor shortage. (And immigration just externalizes the problem of accommodating raising children from US policy to India or China policy.)

Doesn't that mean, huge impending rise in real wages? Because if so, sign me up!

Does it? Your real wage is your wage adjusted for purchasing power. A labor shortage drives up the cost of production and of services, which increases prices for everything, and also makes it uneconomical for people to hire others for services (like taking care of elderly parents), then the math teachers and so on in that fashion until everyone is eaten.

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

#332

Post by sh_tinh_hair »

snowwrestler wrote: post #308
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…

The car numbers jump out at me. The rest sounds familiar but you must have some nice cars to run up those car tax, loan, and insurance bills. For comparison, a couple of 5 year old Japanese cars run me less than $100/month insurance and around $600/year in property tax in NoVA. No payments because we saved up and paid cash, but if there were, they'd be well under $1,900/month. > State and federal tax + ss take about…

My situation is extraordinary regarding the mortgage since I can't deduct it: so tax rate is pretty accurate. The sports car is nicer than the average (approaching supercar) and the SUV is categorized as luxury. Not out of the ordinary in this area.

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

#334

Post by snowwrestler »

sh_tinh_hair wrote: post #332
snowwrestler wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car numbers jump out at me. The rest sounds familiar but you must have some nice cars to run up those car tax, loan, and insurance bills. For comparison, a couple of 5 year old Japanese cars run me less than $100/month insurance and around $600/year in property tax in NoVA. No payments because we saved up and paid cash, but if there were, they'd be well under $1,900/month. > State and federal tax + ss take about…

My situation is extraordinary regarding the mortgage since I can't deduct it: so tax rate is pretty accurate. The sports car is nicer than the average (approaching supercar) and the SUV is categorized as luxury. Not out of the ordinary in this area.

I'm curious why you can't deduct the mortgage payments. Just so far down the amortization curve that it's mostly principle now? Or you're talking about an investment property?

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

#335

Post by dragonwriter »

The article talks about "the middle class", but the people it talks about (teachers, etc.) are wage laborers with respectable pay, not independent business owners deriving income by applying labor to their own capital -- that is, they are middle income working class, not middle class.

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

#336

Post by melq »

sangnoir wrote: post #319
kafkaesq wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We kept thinking: why can't SF be more like BCN? Because you'd have to demolish acres and acres of 100+ year-old architecture (generally considered to be among the planet's most distinctive) to make it that way. And even if we did -- it wouldn't look anything like Barcelona (and its fabulously integrated 100 year-old architecture and street grid), either. Most likely, I betcha, it would end up looking like a pepped u…

> Which I'm sure would suit many of the "Who cares about historic architecture, as long as I can get a shot at a $2400 studio!" advocates here just fine. As opposed to the status quo, which suits many of the "Who cares about the middle class, as long as we can preserve all of the 100+ year old architecture" advocates just fine.

You can't touch such historic buildings, that house is 100 years old! We have to preserve the character of our city! I've lived here 3 years and really treasure it.

Let's just continue the wholesale replacement of the people and culture that gave rise to it in the first place.

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

#337

Post by Eridrus »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #271
ghaff wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because schooling and public transit and such will just happen automagically?

Public transportation is a 20th century solution. If cities do nothing autonomous vehicles will revolutionize transportation wants within 20 years. Which is as fast or faster than major public transportation projects would take. Additional housing will result in a larger tax base which will automatically cover additional schooling needs.

It's not a guarantee that self-drive for cars will not lead to more use and more congestion in cities which are not upgrading their transit.

I am hopeful for autonomous app hailed buses, but there's definitely a big chance it doesn't all work out that way, and even then there is clearly still a physical limit on how much existing road infrastructure can handle.

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

#338

Post by jblow »

developer2 wrote: post #231
laughfactory wrote: post #128

This article reflects my wife and my experience: just a month ago we left San Diego for a small town north of Salt Lake City. We make over six-figures and San Diego held only poor economic prospects for us. We'd have a very difficult time buying a decent home (2000 sq ft, good neighborhood, reasonable commute) for a price which wouldn't jeopardize other essentials like retirement savings, kids college savings, saving…

Just a minor nitpick. If you are buying a home, and are also fortunate enough to be able to manage "retirement savings, kids college savings, savings in general, and debt payoff and avoidance", you are likely not strictly middle class. Most people who are classified as middle class can't afford any one of those, let alone the entire set. You don't come across as negatively "privileged", but perhaps if you can afford…

Definitions of class boundaries vary slightly depending on who you're talking to, but in general, "upper class" means you do not have to work for a living, plus you are plugged into the social network of upper-class people.

This is true for a very small percentage of the population.

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

#339

Post by rak00n »

kafkaesq wrote: post #245
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…

We kept thinking: why can't SF be more like BCN? Because you'd have to demolish acres and acres of 100+ year-old architecture (generally considered to be among the planet's most distinctive) to make it that way. And even if we did -- it wouldn't look anything like Barcelona (and its fabulously integrated 100 year-old architecture and street grid), either. Most likely, I betcha, it would end up looking like a pepped u…

It doesn't have to be like that. There are places like SoMa where we have industrial buildings that city can easily get rid of.

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

#340

Post by user5994461 »

vidoc wrote: post #303
crdoconnor wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Do most londonese share this feeling of mine that it's kinda expensive or this is just me being a bit dumb? :)

The other places I've been were not qualified of "expensive" because they had dramatic discounts for the privileged ones. e.g. student 18-25 age 10€ - worker 25-65 age 50€ - no work 25-65 free pass if you send a paper to request it.
Post reply on HN