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

A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 323 posts

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#301

Post by ucaetano »

lisper wrote: post #183
thephyber wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Bay Area housing situation is a tragedy of the commons. For those who don't appear to know what "Tragedy of the commons" is, it's an economic concept[1] that doesn't necessarily involve a "tragedy" and "the commons" can include private property. A recent example of "tragedy of the commons" was during the recent California extended drought, Wall Street firms were buying up struggling pistachio farms in Californi…

Completely agree. Nonetheless, I stand by my position that the SFBA housing situation is NOT an example. In the case of the pistachio farmers there was a common resource (the aquifer) that was available on a first-come-first-served basis, so deep drillers were rewarded. I don't see any analogous mechanism at work here.

The commons in this case isn't the land, it's the government and laws.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#302

Post by quesera »

dionidium wrote: post #287
soft_serve wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if your source if income isn't there, or if needed amenities aren't nearby.

I'm sorry, but no. If you have a million-dollar gold statue of a pig that you're unwilling to sell, your unwillingness doesn't even enter into it. You still have the million-dollar statue and it's still worth a million dollars. It doesn't matter what rationale you provide for not selling it. It just doesn't matter. Those reasons seem important to you . But they aren't important in assessing the value of the statue.

You can't live in a statue of a pig.

Value of primary residence isn't even considered part of your net worth. It exists, but it's not fungible like other assets.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#303

Post by kamaal »

Just playing the devils advocate by posting some themes discussed on the article's comment section.

- She apparently can't relocate as she makes $81K as a federal employee. Most commenters seem to point out they make far less for equally brutal commute, and don't even complain.

- She also works from home every now and then. Something which most other people like Chefs, Janitors, Barbers who are paid way less, don't even have an option to do by very occupational design.

- She qualifies for pension after some time. There fore it's not too much to expect somebody to make a little sacrifice for a few decades worth of getting paid without doing anything at all.

- Most other commenters seem to point out that they would love to have a job which pays $81K, with benefits and a pension even at that commute time. Therefore this is not a problem, this is actually an opportunity.

Most comments seem to have a 'Cry me a river' kind of a sentiment.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#304

Post by jacinda »

pc86 wrote: post #245
jacinda wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a choice. The San Francisco Bay Area is already denser than the entire country of Switzerland and has a similar GDP. However, the Swiss have incomparably better public transit. And their taxes are lower than the US. There's no need to become Manhattan or Hong Kong. Just invest in infrastructure.

How does the density of SFBA (or even SF proper) compare to the density of the Swiss cities that actually have the transit you're talking about?

Basically every Swiss city has the transit I'm talking about. I lived in Switzerland for 9 months last year. Zurich is less dense than SF. Geneva is more dense but the density of the country as a whole is less than the SF Bay area.

I had some Swiss friends and we were on a train once that was delayed by 15-20 minutes. They were all complaining because this happens once in a blue moon. They mentioned that if the train is delayed by more than 3 minutes it has to be posted on signage and if it's delayed more than 6 minutes or would cause someone to miss a connection it results in fines to the operator. I haven't been able to find a written source to back this up but personally I almost never experienced delays on Swiss transit.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#305

Post by jacinda »

ucaetano wrote: post #234
jacinda wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a choice. The San Francisco Bay Area is already denser than the entire country of Switzerland and has a similar GDP. However, the Swiss have incomparably better public transit. And their taxes are lower than the US. There's no need to become Manhattan or Hong Kong. Just invest in infrastructure.

> There's no need to become Manhattan or Hong Kong. Just invest in infrastructure. You're not getting the basic point with transit infrastructure: it requires density. Transit systems are only viable with enough people living and working at walking distance from the stations. Increasing density decreases traffic, increases transit effectiveness, and reduces environmental impact. It's simple geometry.

If that's the point, why does Switzerland have a lower density than the SF Bay Area but a transit system that is orders of magnitude better?

I lived in Switzerland for 9 months last year. They have arguably the best transit infrastructure in the world, with a passenger rail system that is 100% electric.

According to Wikipedia, the density of Zurich is ~4600 people/km^2. The density of San Francisco is ~7170 people/km^2. So what excuse does SF have for being so very, very much worse?

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#306

Post by jacinda »

BeetleB wrote: post #206
jacinda wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a choice. The San Francisco Bay Area is already denser than the entire country of Switzerland and has a similar GDP. However, the Swiss have incomparably better public transit. And their taxes are lower than the US. There's no need to become Manhattan or Hong Kong. Just invest in infrastructure.

Minor nitpick, but I do not think you know what dense means. Most cities are denser than Switzerland. My undergrad town of 25K is over 20 times denser than Switzerland.

Your statement is exactly right and strengthens my argument. Switzerland has absolutely fabulous public transit while having low density. Therefore, the argument that you have to be incredibly dense to support good public transit is false.

Switzerland has excellent public transit. Therefore, if there is a density threshold to offering good public transit, an area would need to be at least less dense than Switzerland in order to argue that it isn't possible.

The SF Bay Area is denser than Switzerland. Therefore, the reasons for not having good transit are not to do with density, but with something else (politics, zoning, public support, etc.). But density is not the issue.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#307

Post by vecinu »

lisper wrote: post #211
thephyber wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You only benefit from this if you sell Home equity is a benefit. You can borrow against it or otherwise use it as an asset on paper. > if you sell two bad things happen if housing prices are up. First, you take a big hit on capital gains Wait, what? You're arguing that it's a "bad thing" if you have to pay a percentage of additional profits ? Most primary residences aren't subject to capital gains if you hold them…

I do not object to paying taxes. In fact, I'm very politically active in trying to get taxes raised on rich people like me. But if I want to sell my house and buy the house next door and those two houses cost the same, then the higher those prices are the higher my actual cost of moving is, notwithstanding that I am theoretically trading like for like. That's bad for everyone because it makes me less likely to move,…

Without Prop 13, if you were paying the taxes you actually "should" on the true market value of your house, you would most likely be forced to move out of your current house.

If that happened to enough people, prices would stabilize closer to reality.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#308

Post by soft_serve »

ucaetano wrote: post #296
soft_serve wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact, you're benefiting through increasing home values (for which you are not taxed due to Prop. 13) This is completely untrue. I have a house in 94087 where I live about 7 months/year (the other 5 months are in Tel Aviv, where it's also very expensive!) I own the house, bought in in 1989. I don't benefit at all from increased house prices. It just makes everything more expensive. And even under Prop 13, my prop…

Quick question: what do you do with your house when you're out of the country?

It stays empty. My business partner checks up to make sure the landscaper, cleaners, etc, are doing their job. I sometimes need to come back to US for a quick visit during my Tel Aviv time. (Our company has offices in both Sunnyvale and Israel.)

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#309

Post by overcast »

KekDemaga wrote: post #98
ghaff wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh. It's reasonable to point out that even a That said, selling and buying houses (or changing jobs) on an ongoing basis so you're right next to your job doesn't seem like a great strategy either. And likely not a plausible one, at least outside of a city, if you have a partner who also goes into an office.

When choosing between jobs I try to calculate the true hourly wage I'd receive. I include transportation costs, travel time, expected unpaid overtime etc and pick not the highest salary but the highest hourly rate all things considered.

Do you calculate life lost as well? I'm being serious. There is a MASSIVE difference between a five minute commute, and an hour commute when you add it up over a lifetime. That's a stupid amount of your life wasted doing nothing.

Re: A 2:15 Alarm, 2 Trains and a Bus Get Her to Work by 7 A.M

#310

Post by lisper »

vecinu wrote: post #307
lisper wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not object to paying taxes. In fact, I'm very politically active in trying to get taxes raised on rich people like me. But if I want to sell my house and buy the house next door and those two houses cost the same, then the higher those prices are the higher my actual cost of moving is, notwithstanding that I am theoretically trading like for like. That's bad for everyone because it makes me less likely to move,…

Without Prop 13, if you were paying the taxes you actually "should" on the true market value of your house, you would most likely be forced to move out of your current house. If that happened to enough people, prices would stabilize closer to reality.

Yes, I would totally support the repeal of prop 13. What most people don't realize is that it was a colossal scam by business interests. It was sold as "let granny stay in her house" but it also applies to commercial properties, which don't change hands nearly as often as residences. California has vast tracts of prime real estate that are still being taxed at 1970s assessments.

At the very least prop 13 should have been restricted to owner-occupied principal residences. But that ship sailed long before my time.

Post reply on HN