Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring • Hacker News Board

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#391

Post by taysic » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:53 PM UTC

deepsun wrote: post #311

lisper wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> California's housing crisis has repercussions all up and down the west coast. You're looking at it the wrong way. It's not that the situation in California has wider repercussions, it's that there is a wider problem whose symptoms happen to manifest themselves earliest in California because it's one of the nicer places to live: there are simply too many people and not enough space for them all to live in the nice p…

If you drive 30 minutes any direction from San Francisco, you will see plenty of vast empty fields covered with wild grasses. I don't argue that we should cover all the land available with houses, I like wild grass, but I just point out that if we really hadn't enough space -- we would have settled it already. I've never heard the now popular "Earth is overpopulated" rant from anyone who lives outside major metro. Go…

A big reason for that is those communities are ultra nimby. If you want to buy land, it needs to be a large plot. This makes it inaccessible cost wise to most people even if they want to be pioneering.

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#392

Post by ubernostrum » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:54 PM UTC

nerfhammer wrote: post #381

AndrewBissell wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The runup in real estate prices is fundamentally driven by the huge amounts of money printing by the Fed earlier this decade. The Bay Area has just been the canary in the coal mine on this because the strong job growth and self-injurious housing policies caused the price pressures to show up earlier than elsewhere, but it will become an undeniably nationwide phenomenon soon enough. High real estate prices & rents are…

Why do you need this indirect theory when much simpler numbers like the disparity between increase of population and lack of increase in housing units are available?

Because that theory allows the person promoting it to cling to an assertion that markets are perfect and never produce a bad result, and anything bad that does happen must be the fault of a government which got in the way of the perfection of the market.

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#393

Post by micro_cam » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:54 PM UTC

damnyou wrote: post #91

client4 wrote: post #14

Montana, a land of National parks, natural beauty, fast internet, and a low cost of living has a number of high tech jobs open. Full disclosure, I own an internet company here and want more tech savvy people in the area ;) Social Finanace (SoFi) | Helena, MT Oracle | Bozeman, MT OnXMaps | Missoula, MT Zaneray Group | Whitefish, MT Submittable | Missoula, MT Applied Materials | Kalispell, MT

How friendly to trans people is Montana?

I'm outside of Missoula. There are a few trans people on the reddit and I've heard adds for clinics offering care on the radio.

Generally Montanas seem to have a "you mind my business and I'll mind mine" attitude. So while there is a large right wing component they seem to be mobilized more by gun rights and logging/mining jobs then being anti gay/trans.

Our rural county did stop taking federal money for the women's health clinic as a tea party grand stand which is unfortunate.

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#394

Post by micro_cam » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:56 PM UTC

client4 wrote: post #14

Montana, a land of National parks, natural beauty, fast internet, and a low cost of living has a number of high tech jobs open. Full disclosure, I own an internet company here and want more tech savvy people in the area ;) Social Finanace (SoFi) | Helena, MT Oracle | Bozeman, MT OnXMaps | Missoula, MT Zaneray Group | Whitefish, MT Submittable | Missoula, MT Applied Materials | Kalispell, MT

Theorem LP (YC 14) | Hamilton, MT

Hillmap.com | Hamilton, MT

(I work for the first remotely and founded the second so the presence isn't big but we're here!).

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#395

Post by alistairSH » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:56 PM UTC

zcdziura wrote: post #179

cobookman wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly early in my career at a company ( 80-10-10 mortgage on a 1mil home is only 100k down. And the monthly payments split by 2 people (aka a couple) is ~2k / person / month. That's 4k/month all in once you include the tax rebates.

How much land and house does that $1M buy you? In New Hampshire where I live, $1M buys you quite a bit: several thousand square feet of house, several acres of land, an excellent local public school system, great views... Heck, I even imagine that in the greater Boston metro area you'll get a similar bang for your buck. Your normal family property (approx 1500 - 2000 ft/sq, ~1 acre land) goes for $200k - $250k. Still…

I'm in suburban DC (Reston/Dulles area). $200k gets you a 1-bedroom condo in an older building. $400-$500 buys a nice older town-home. It'll be smaller (1500sqft with small bedrooms). For a small single-family, $500+. For a modern single-family home, you'll need $700k or more.

If you want to live inside the Beltway, add 20%-50% to those figures, depending on neighborhood.

All those will be in livable, reasonably safe neighborhoods with decent public schools. I'm sure there are options that cost less if you look hard enough.

FWIW, I chose "nice, older town-home" for a bit under $500k. That's on two mid-career, white-collar salaries. We have enough left over to max our 401ks, take vacations, etc. The loss of one income wouldn't drive us to homelessness, but it would hurt. I walk to work, bike to grocery store, and my spouse has a 7 mile commute (it's also bike-able, which she does occasionally).

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#396

Post by cobookman » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:57 PM UTC

swendoog wrote: post #230

cobookman wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly early in my career at a company ( 80-10-10 mortgage on a 1mil home is only 100k down. And the monthly payments split by 2 people (aka a couple) is ~2k / person / month. That's 4k/month all in once you include the tax rebates.

I'm really, really curious how you got your numbers. I just 'did the math' in Redfin's mortgage calculator on a $990,000 home. The total monthly cost came out to $6,495 or $3,247 per person (in a couple). That's almost exactly 1/2 of the take-home (after tax) pay of someone making $120,000 a year in California. -- Monthly expenses on a $990k house in SF -- Principal and Interest: $4,185 Property Taxes: $1,015 HOA Due…

You are forgetting interest deduction & property tax deduction.

so 900k mortgage at 4.1% interest is ~3k of interest and 1.2k of principal for first month.

Now you have 1k/month of property tax, 0 HOA (i was not talking about a condo), and 180$/month of insurance. I've been quoted 80-10-10 which have 0 PMI fees.

Let's be safe and assume that you're taxed at 30% at your highest level. Its likely you're being taxed at 40% though.

Now doing some math....

3k*0.7 + 1.2k + 1k+0.7+.180k = 4180$/month. Obviously there's maintenance and other costs but that's how much its actually costing you.

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#397

Post by taysic » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #363

Gargoyle wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what people tell themselves in order to make their suffering tolerable. But the best places to live even just in California are amazingly underpopulated.

The best places to live are the best in no small measure because they are underpopulated. The SF peninsula is one of the most desirable (and expensive) areas in the greater bay area in no small measure because very few people live there, so we have less traffic, hiking trails, horse properties, peace and quiet.

I don’t disagree with you. I wonder at which point is it unethical to build more office space if the Bay Area has determined it prefers peace and quiet. Jobs can then relocate to places that want growth.

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#398

Post by malchow » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

StreamBright wrote: post #223

top256 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what were the multiple reasons?

- lack of affordable housing with a garden where my kid can play - traffic - airport traffic is flying above residential areas, so even when you find something affordable you have to check - affordable creche for my kid - SFO is one of the worst airports to arrive from abroad

"SFO is one of the worst airports to arrive from abroad"

Explain?

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#399

Post by lisper » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

mixmastamyk wrote: post #208

lisper wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> California's housing crisis has repercussions all up and down the west coast. You're looking at it the wrong way. It's not that the situation in California has wider repercussions, it's that there is a wider problem whose symptoms happen to manifest themselves earliest in California because it's one of the nicer places to live: there are simply too many people and not enough space for them all to live in the nice p…

Plenty of space, too many NIMBYs. Just heard a lady in my neighborhood in L.A. complaining about the development of a parking lot and crackhouse into a modern apartment building. Didn’t even bother to argue, sometimes the divide is too great.

And what exactly is wrong with NIMBY-ism? Not everyone likes living in dense cities. I don't see anything wrong with groups of people who prefer to live in less dense development working together to create less dense places to live.

The problem is that there are (as I said) more people who prefer to live in less dense development than there is space to accommodate them all. At that point, the market takes over and decides who gets to have a back yard and who has to settle for the fifth floor walkup. Given the problem statement, isn't that the best possible outcome?

Re: Bay Area hammered by loss of jobs: Lack of affordable housing strangles hiring

#400

Post by pc86 » Mon, Oct 23, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

noonespecial wrote: post #255

TuringNYC wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> A fourth category: people who have lived here for a long time, and were able to buy property back before it became unaffordable. Very well said. So often, some (usually older) person will tell me, "well I know this [choose your civil servant profession] and they get by fine in SF on a 60k salary, so stop your whining." Yep, I'd get by fine with 60k and a TIME MACHINE.

Yes, they don't understand that the house they bought for 80k in '86 Is now acting as a defacto million dollar savings account. It is quite easy to get along on 60k when you've already banked a megabuck.

To be fair whether your house is worth $100k or $10MM doesn't mean much unless you sell it, especially in SF where your taxes don't change with the increased value. Yes, you can spend more of your earned income if you plan on leaving as soon as you retire. But it doesn't mean $60k is easy to live on.