Live data from Hacker News

The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

economist.com

161–170 of 192 posts

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zoning existed in the 1970s also. > Outside major metros, minimum setback rules, minimum size rules, and myriad other policies conspired to make the average new house twice as large as they were before, while families on average shrunk. Outside major metros, the economy isn't as hot and demand is tapered back significantly. In cities that have poor economies, housing prices are also cheap. In places that are extremel…

In SF you can't build a house that casts a shadow over a park ever no matter how small. The entire western half of the city is zoned for 4-story housing. This is why housing is expensive in SF. SF added less than half as many houses over the last few decades as necessary to keep pace with job growth and there's simply no excuse for it. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:San_Francisco_aerial.jpg

SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm). And...it is not like you HAVE to live in SF, there are plenty of cities nearby.

Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF. If SF had 10 times as many housing, then there would simply be 10 times as much economic activity and prices wouldn't budge. If you want cheap housing for your city, make your economy unattractive like Gary Indiana, or, if you like your economy, take the Tokyo approach and make housing speculation unattractive and let units be small.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In SF you can't build a house that casts a shadow over a park ever no matter how small. The entire western half of the city is zoned for 4-story housing. This is why housing is expensive in SF. SF added less than half as many houses over the last few decades as necessary to keep pace with job growth and there's simply no excuse for it. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:San_Francisco_aerial.jpg

SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm). And...it is not like you HAVE to live in SF, there are plenty of cities nearby. Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF. If SF had 10 times as many housing, then there would simply be 10 times as much economic activity and prices wouldn't budge. If you want cheap housing for your city, make your economy unattractive like Gary…

> SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm).

This is irrelevant, it's obviously not sufficiently dense to meet demand. If you look at the photo you'll obviously see that it's simply not particularly dense by visual inspection.

> Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF.

They are expensive because they do not permit sufficient construction to meet the demand, what about that do you disagree with? It's not just that people want to live there - it's because people want to live there and city council would rather keep a derelict parking lot for Nordstrom than put up a 27-story 500 unit condo building in the middle of downtown. [1]

> If you want cheap housing for your city, make your economy unattractive like Gary Indiana, or, if you like your economy, take the Tokyo approach and make housing speculation unattractive and let units be small.

That has nothing to do with what Tokyo does. Tokyo permits construction via federal zoning rules.

[1] https://thefrisc.com/how-to-unpack-one-supervisors-rejection...

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm). And...it is not like you HAVE to live in SF, there are plenty of cities nearby. Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF. If SF had 10 times as many housing, then there would simply be 10 times as much economic activity and prices wouldn't budge. If you want cheap housing for your city, make your economy unattractive like Gary…

> SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm). This is irrelevant, it's obviously not sufficiently dense to meet demand. If you look at the photo you'll obviously see that it's simply not particularly dense by visual inspection. > Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF. They are expensive because they do not permit sufficient construction to meet the demand, what about…

> This is irrelevant, it's obviously not sufficiently dense to meet demand. If you look at the photo you'll obviously see that it's simply not particularly dense by visual inspection.

Why does demand always have to be met in one smallish (geographically speaking) city?

> They are expensive because they do not permit sufficient construction to meet the demand, what about that do you disagree with? It's not just that people want to live there - it's because people want to live there and city council would rather keep a derelict parking lot for Nordstrom than put up a 27-story 500 unit condo building in the middle of downtown. [1]

> That has nothing to do with what Tokyo does. Tokyo permits construction via federal zoning rules.

The former probably wouldn't have been approved in Tokyo either. But yes, I do prefer Tokyo's solution to zoning (residential can go anywhere, businesses can mix as well), and their solution to property speculation (housing depreciates rather than appreciates because it is so easy to rebuild)

Still, SF is more dense than Tokyo (6,658 ppl / sqkm vs 6,158 ppl /sqkm), but as mentioned before, SF is tiny while Tokyo is huge.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 20 states have their minimum wage at the federal minimum wage. So the federal minimum does have a major impact on the actual minimum. I agree about the other part though.

> About 20 states have their minimum wage at the federal minimum wage. Minimum wage in those states is increasingly meaningless as almost no one will work for that wage. The longer the minimum wage isn't updated, the more irrelevant it is. Seattle has a higher minimum wage now of $14.50, but it is also mostly meaningless at this point. Conservatives used to propose $20 minimum wages as slippery slope straw men, but t…

Minimum wage in my state is still nominally $7.25 but even fast food joints are advertising starting wages of $10-$12/hour with no experience.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#166

Thought it was going to be this one, which I enjoy using a lot and find useful for getting the big picture. https://inflationchart.com/cpi-in-bigmac https://inflationchart.com/spx-in-bigmac In the 70s you could work minimum wage for an hour and afford three Big Macs. Now you have to work almost an hour to afford one Big Mac.: https://inflationchart.com/minwage-in-bigmac

Not only are those charts Bad™, the website also hijacks the back button

Never understood why browsers allow that.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In SF you can't build a house that casts a shadow over a park ever no matter how small. The entire western half of the city is zoned for 4-story housing. This is why housing is expensive in SF. SF added less than half as many houses over the last few decades as necessary to keep pace with job growth and there's simply no excuse for it. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:San_Francisco_aerial.jpg

SF is one of the densest cities in the USA (17k/sqm vs. NYC's 27k/sqm). And...it is not like you HAVE to live in SF, there are plenty of cities nearby. Houses are expensive in SF because people want to live in SF. If SF had 10 times as many housing, then there would simply be 10 times as much economic activity and prices wouldn't budge. If you want cheap housing for your city, make your economy unattractive like Gary…

> And...it is not like you HAVE to live in SF, there are plenty of cities nearby

All of which have even more draconian zoning policies that permit only SFH (not even a 5+1). If SF had 10 times as much housing maybe we'd have 10 times as many people being productively employed in industries in the city instead of being forced to locate elsewhere. Maybe some of those people wouldn't HAVE to work in tech/finance to afford the city.

Your opposition to increased density benefits only yourself and existing landowners.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding that last chart, I changed it to "US Income" and got a different story. It looks like US Income has largely kept pace with the big mac.

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-... US income hasn’t increased equally though. The rich could already afford a Big Mac.

If you think about what 1970s "middle income" jobs looked like, they were mostly factory jobs that paid well. Nowadays those jobs don't exist due to deindustrialization. So you can't really blame that income inequality on domestic US social policy when a big portion was due to US foreign policy.

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#169
If you take the chart in the article at face value, where USD is the base currency and almost every other currency is undervalued in comparison... doesn't that mean that USD is overvalued in those terms? Or that USD derives its value from other currencies depending on it?

If you calculated an equilibrium of sorts then USD would be worth less. And you'd have to separate the currencies that are based on USD as the standard and not gold or some other resource... right?

Re: The Big Mac index: Our interactive currency comparison tool

#170

It says a Big Mac in the U.S. is $5.81 which sounded high. Popped open the McDonalds app and sure enough I can get one for $4.39 plus a free medium fry. Prices must not be uniform across the U.S., but I find it hard to believe the average is $5.81.

So I thought this was interesting and looked into it.

The website has a reference for where they get their big mac prices:

> Big Mac Index measures the average price of a Big Mac at McDonald's in the United States and is famously used in the Economist's Big Mac Index to measure inflation.

And a link to the Economist article (https://www.economist.com/big-mac-index) where they further link to their methodology: https://github.com/TheEconomist/big-mac-data

The USA average seemed high to me, and I found this resource: https://www.zippia.com/advice/how-much-big-mac-costs-states/ - Nov 2021 - which suggests $4.40. But the Economists data/csv file really does say $5.81 for the USA... so that's where I bow out!

Post reply on HN