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

Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#281

Post by throwaway713 »

rcpt wrote: post #274
adjkant wrote: post #192

These HN comments don't seem to grasp that there are two distinct groups of people here, and these trends can/will counteract eachother: the ones that are in the city for work, and the ones that are in the city because they love cities. COVID creates an exodus of one, but people in the latter category are also moving into cities as well as prices drop and they are no longer priced out. HN folks love to complain about…

> as someone in NYC NYC is a legit megacity - New York has been described as the cultural, financial, and media capital of the world. SF is small by comparison. Only a small portion of SF is walkable and even then the blocks are long. Transit is sparse and dirty and most people end up owning cars. Despite this housing is more expensive than NYC. Unless you think it's reasonable to pay $4k a month for a one bedroom in…

Except San Francisco has nature (and even more nature close by) which makes all the difference to me. The few times I’ve been in NYC, I found the sheer amount of gray concrete and steel to be unnerving and dystopian; I’m legitimately amazed that humans can live in such an environment for so long without becoming depressed. That’s not to disparage the city or people who like it; there’s just many of us who need at least some amount of natural beauty (and I don’t mean Central Park).

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#282

Post by smallnamespace »

kbenson wrote: post #144
kbos87 wrote: post #24

It seems very tough to draw any conclusions on this just yet. The media has clearly latched onto a storyline of a mass exodus from American cities, but the reality is probably much more complex. It seems plausible that SF already had such low inventory numbers that any change would look huge on a chart like this, though that doesn’t appear to be the case in the other highly competitive markets seen here. I’d love to…

The article actually notes this: > It should be noted that San Francisco had an unusually low inventory relative to other large cities prior to the pandemic. Historically, the ratio of homes for sale relative to total housing has been a quarter of New York's. But then they go on to assert that this is important regardless, but don't actually provide any information to back it up. > Regardless, the 96% year on year ch…

If you're a renter and you when lease renewal time comes up and you see twice as many open units in your apartment, wouldn't you also bargain more aggressively with your landlord?

Conversely, if you're a building manager and you an X% occupancy rate target, you're going to need to cut prices in order to maintain that rate if a bunch of tenants don't renew.

This is pretty much textbook microeconomics 101.

Going a bit further, occupancy rate is a signal that both sides of the market can (noisily) observe, so if the prior non-occupancy rate was very low, you'd expect a shock that doubles the rate (say, 5% -> 10%) to lead to perhaps a larger price change than in a less tight market (such as 10% -> 15%)

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#283

Post by novok »

danhak wrote: post #21
bluedevil2k wrote: post #18

It’s odd they don’t mention the sky high taxes in California as a driving force for the exodus and the fact the Gavin Newsom wants to raise them even more to cover Covid shortages. There’s only so much you can squeeze out of people before they’ll pack up an go.

Property taxes in California are among the lowest in the nation.

Only if you've owned a house for decades. If you bought recently, then your property taxes can effectively be %1.5 with all the extras they add to bills.

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#284

Post by rsynnott »

neltnerb wrote: post #131
kbos87 wrote: post #24

It seems very tough to draw any conclusions on this just yet. The media has clearly latched onto a storyline of a mass exodus from American cities, but the reality is probably much more complex. It seems plausible that SF already had such low inventory numbers that any change would look huge on a chart like this, though that doesn’t appear to be the case in the other highly competitive markets seen here. I’d love to…

I was surprised that in SF of all places the impact of COVID on AirBNB rentals wasn't even mentioned. I'd expect some people doing that have decided to just rent it like normal housing and actually increase the housing stock. But way too early to tell, I'm still never expecting to move back there.

I was wondering about that too. In Dublin, which has vaguely similar dynamics (inadequate housing supply, very large presence of tech and other industries which have gone all in on remote-for-now if not remote-forever) rental inventory is up by 60%. Which sounds like a lot, until you look at how tiny it is normally, and how much of what’s showing up to rent is very clearly hastily decommissioned Airbnb stock.

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#285

Post by reducesuffering »

jeffdn wrote: post #182
paul_f wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Semantics, we all know what the poster meant. Whatever the cause, the homeless make large swaths of San Francisco unappealing, especially for people with young families. BTW, quite the irony that the most liberal city in the country has the biggest homeless problem. Whatever they're doing isn't working, maybe they should try something different?

San Francisco may be the most liberal city in the country (or at least one of them -- Washington, D.C. is pretty liberal, too), but it absolutely does not have the worst homeless problem: https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/cities-with-th...

Only if you’re using the literal definition of “absolute.” I think most people would find per-capita a much better metric for the “worst homeless problem.”

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#286

Post by adjkant »

rcpt wrote: post #274
adjkant wrote: post #192

These HN comments don't seem to grasp that there are two distinct groups of people here, and these trends can/will counteract eachother: the ones that are in the city for work, and the ones that are in the city because they love cities. COVID creates an exodus of one, but people in the latter category are also moving into cities as well as prices drop and they are no longer priced out. HN folks love to complain about…

> as someone in NYC NYC is a legit megacity - New York has been described as the cultural, financial, and media capital of the world. SF is small by comparison. Only a small portion of SF is walkable and even then the blocks are long. Transit is sparse and dirty and most people end up owning cars. Despite this housing is more expensive than NYC. Unless you think it's reasonable to pay $4k a month for a one bedroom in…

SF doesn't have the size of NYC, you're very right there, but it is still quite large and has a good deal to offer. City sizing is not all or nothing, and Indianapolis is nothing like SF in terms of offerings. SF transit is less than ideal, but we can't entirely discount it. I'd of course love to see more, as would many, but SF has plenty of other problems to solve of course.

> "Only a small portion of SF is walkable"

This depends on the person :) I've found that on the peninsula, anything from the inner sunset to the water, bounded by the bottom of the mission, can be walked if someone wants and takes their time. Of course that's going to be mainly young able bodied people given the hills, but it does work for a subset of people. Let's also not discount downtown Oakland and the 45 minute walk zone around that either.

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#288

Post by yellow_postit »

willio58 wrote: post #149
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your friends are how representative of SF people? 1. Going on a road trip right now is a very bad idea 2. Most normal people don't have the ability (I guess if you're a high performer in tech?) to move to another high income English speaking country. 3. Moving to Santa Cruz is a joke if you're worried about cost of living. 4. Same with Austin.

Why is going on a road trip a bad idea? I mean bring a mask, only shop weekly and keep food refrigerated, and keep social distance.

I can imagine the argument is that unless you're periodically getting tested to you have a likelihood of spreading if asymptomatic over a broader geographic area while traveling.

That said, I personally think now is a great time to get out into nature and travel more locally pending the regulations in your area(s).

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#289

Post by john_moscow »

captaincole wrote: post #102

I am living in SF now and this confirms a very clear pattern that I have seen emerging, particularly of tech workers. I would say that >50% of the people I know who were living in the city have left, or are in the process of leaving. Some examples (there are countless): 1) All three of the roommates that I had are choosing to leave either permanently or temporarily. 2) A friend who works for google who is going on a…

Interestingly this seems to only cover people who don't have kids. Do you think people with kids are stuck in SF, or have they moved out much earlier?

Re: Remote work is reshaping San Francisco, as tech workers flee and rents fall

#290

Post by ghaff »

throwaway713 wrote: post #281
rcpt wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as someone in NYC NYC is a legit megacity - New York has been described as the cultural, financial, and media capital of the world. SF is small by comparison. Only a small portion of SF is walkable and even then the blocks are long. Transit is sparse and dirty and most people end up owning cars. Despite this housing is more expensive than NYC. Unless you think it's reasonable to pay $4k a month for a one bedroom in…

Except San Francisco has nature (and even more nature close by) which makes all the difference to me. The few times I’ve been in NYC, I found the sheer amount of gray concrete and steel to be unnerving and dystopian; I’m legitimately amazed that humans can live in such an environment for so long without becoming depressed. That’s not to disparage the city or people who like it; there’s just many of us who need at lea…

Yes. It's really the combination of climate (usually) and relatively easy access to water, mountains, etc. that set San Francisco apart. IMO, anyone who lives in SF and basically never leaves the city except maybe to work is passing up the main compensation for its high housing prices and many problems. Take away its setting and it's pretty unremarkable.

[ADDED: OK. Not really fair but what make SF unique is very tied into its geography.]

Post reply on HN