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

Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 424 posts

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#191

Post by 7thaccount »

aripickar wrote: post #8

I'm pretty bearish on the pandemic actually leading to massive change in the number of people permanently working from home. My boss put out a survey a week or two ago among my org (30 or so people), and 70% said that they want to work from the office, full time, 20% said some time or most of the time, and 10% said fully remote. And this is a group of people that would be largely well suited to working from home duri…

My company has ~600 employees with good diversity in age. Our recent survey showed strong support for work from home. The executives have always been against it, but admitted they could no longer say that it wouldn't work. One executive also said he's grown to like it. They've even started talking about allowing work from home on Fridays once we go back. A lot of folks commute from nearby suburbs, so this would be a game changer for many.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#192

Post by soneca »

_jal wrote: post #13
aripickar wrote: post #8

I'm pretty bearish on the pandemic actually leading to massive change in the number of people permanently working from home. My boss put out a survey a week or two ago among my org (30 or so people), and 70% said that they want to work from the office, full time, 20% said some time or most of the time, and 10% said fully remote. And this is a group of people that would be largely well suited to working from home duri…

> young, no kids, etc There is your major reason for that survey result. Companies with median-older workforces will see more enthusiasm for remote work.

I think you are right. I worked on a startup that had a few hundreds employees. Most of them in the early twenties. Every week day, a rotating subgroup of 5 to 10 of them would go to the bar after work. On Thursdays and Fridays there would be more like 30 to 80 people. I was already married, in my late thirties, so I would go home. You could tell everyone was eager to the end of the day. They were personal friends, not just coworkers.

I miss that environment, even though I was not part of the bar tradition (I don’t even drink). I can only imagine how they are feeling about working from home these days.

Remote is not a no-brainer forced by shortsighted employers like the general impression I get from HN. It is an option with serious trade-offs on both sides.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#193

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

shuckles wrote: post #149
TulliusCicero wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most techies in SF could afford to live relatively close to work, or without roommates, or both. The reason why they don't is still due to the high rent though. When living with a roommate or two, or living a bit further away means you get an extra $1000+ a month to spend on other things, that can be very enticing.

This suggests that it's not only just that rents are high, but also that the current housing stock is not configured for the type of demand (small homes for few people, instead of large homes for lots of people).

Yeah, I tend to agree. A lot of young people happily live in group houses; I suspect a lot more would if it didn't mean compromising on floor space or bathroom availability.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#194

Post by epistasis »

shuckles wrote: post #165
shuckles wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land values in urban areas always increase in response to upzoning and loosening of development restrictions.

I'm a little confused. Land values in Tokyo are high and have climbed consistently above inflation (post-bubble, of course).

Edit: I should preface this by saying that I'm not an economist, and would welcome nothing more than being able to learn through this discussion, and am quite likely to be wrong on this! I appreciate the engagement.

But housing prices are affordable in comparison to places that have restricted use in less efficient ways.

"Higher" is a relative term, and the question of what the baseline should be is quite complicated. They are also quite variable depending on what you can do with the land; if use is extremely restricted it can keep a plot of land down in price, even while it inflated the cost of land overall in the market.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#195

Post by [deleted] »

geddy wrote: post #85
jandrese wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My commute is also my morning and evening cardio routine as a bike 5 miles each way. I've been really missing the every day bike rides this year.

See, now this sounds awesome. Everyone's getting offended for sport but what I'm referring to is the fact that we have a huge portion of the US who sits in a car all day and night, clogging up highways and polluting the air. You bike to and from work? That's fantastic, if I could do that I'd be in the office a few days a week too, as I also road bike. But so many people don't do that.

[deleted]

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#196

Post by take_a_breath »

acituan wrote: post #163
take_a_breath wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

==reduces office space needs== While increasing their employees home-space needs. People will need bigger houses and apartments if everyone is going to work from home long-term.

People need bigger houses for other reasons too, including a growing family, having space for gathering with their friends and community, for their hobbies etc. And I’m not talking about a luxurious McMansion, just something bigger than a $3500 1 bedroom apartment where you can’t have a friendsgiving with more than 4 guests. Being able to work from home long term means not being tied to ultra-premium land for your pr…

You are talking about personal reasons that people need more space, which is absolutely true. I am talking about a fundamental shift in how we perform work as a society.

If everyone, all at once, starts working from home and avoiding offices, it is reasonable to assume that some of that office space will need to be re-created in houses, which will increase the necessary size for houses. Things like the average size of a new house and the average amenities people include (an extra office, an extra bathroom, a separated "play area", mesh wi-fi friendly, etc.).

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#197

Post by take_a_breath »

neutronicus wrote: post #159
take_a_breath wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

==reduces office space needs== While increasing their employees home-space needs. People will need bigger houses and apartments if everyone is going to work from home long-term.

Which they will find, for the same price, out in the sticks when they don't need to drive in.

Which suggests we will need to build new houses to satisfy all the demand. Which is exactly the question I was asking. How will those housing needs differ from today's? Will homes need more space for offices? play areas? gardens? bathrooms? Will multi-generational housing come back in-style to support elderly?

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#198

Post by jameslevy »

starpilot wrote: post #110

People are going to be moving Mountain House or Reno at farthest, not Cleveland. Though the thought of buying a literal mansion near Boise with your techbux is amusing.

Mountain House near Tracy? I don't think I've ever heard of Mountain House before.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#199

Post by edm0nd »

acituan wrote: post #163
take_a_breath wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

==reduces office space needs== While increasing their employees home-space needs. People will need bigger houses and apartments if everyone is going to work from home long-term.

People need bigger houses for other reasons too, including a growing family, having space for gathering with their friends and community, for their hobbies etc. And I’m not talking about a luxurious McMansion, just something bigger than a $3500 1 bedroom apartment where you can’t have a friendsgiving with more than 4 guests. Being able to work from home long term means not being tied to ultra-premium land for your pr…

God damn. $3,500 for a 1br apt. You must for sure live in SF lol.

That's enough to purchase a full on mansion here in Louisiana.

Re: Tech workers consider escaping Silicon Valley’s sky-high rents

#200

Post by jlbnjmn »

zaidf wrote: post #14

People won't continue making their current SF salary by working out of Farmville, Ohio. I think this point is missed by many I fully expect Twitter, for example, to come out with salary adjustment policies for people who want to work from home from an entirely different city and state

On the flip side, if VCs decide their money is better spent in Provo or Austin than SV, there might be a move toward wage equilibrium.

20 years ago, tech was still a toy to the average person and lawyers were the ones in high demand.

The thing about markets is that they communicate relative scarcity, which tends to bring new people into the market.

It will be interesting to see what happens next.

Post reply on HN