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

S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 465 posts

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#131

Post by picture_view »

dominotw wrote: post #121
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually know several people who used this as an opportunity to move into the Bay Area. The sudden drop in rents made it more attractive and they jumped. They both work in industries where face to face communication is a competitive advantage. It’s easy to forget that not every job is naturally compatible with remote work like it is for those of us who type on computers all day.

> sudden drop in rents Curious, Why aren't properly prices droping to reflect the loss in population.

It’s possible most of the 6.3% did not own property and we’re not in the market to buy property, so there was no change in that market.

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#133

Post by jdhn »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #70
gamechangr wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second this My friends seem to be moving to Washington, Florida, and other parts of California (away from main cities)

I see far more California vehicle tags in Central Florida than I would've expected.

When you look in the cars, are they older people? Where I live (western Florida), it's generally older people and not the demographic that you'd expect to find on this site.

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#134

Post by nineplay »

deltaonefour wrote: post #98
scelerat wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny, I moved to SF and landed a tech job, in that order. I moved to the Bay Area for certain things above a job. I know there are others like me, perhaps not a majority of the HN crowd, but I quite like it here and it would take a lot for me to change my mind about the place.

Lots of reasons why people hate SF. The homeless problems, the petty crime. The smell, the dirtiness, the shitty weather, the actual danger of stepping on human feces, the drug use. To each their own, but I think it's important for people to get out of their headspace and see things from a more general perspective as well. There are very good reasons why people don't like SF and unless people who love the city acknow…

There are good reasons why people don't like SF but why should people who do like SF care or try to convince them otherwise? I don't like Dallas but I don't think people who do like Dallas need to get out of their headspace and change things for my benefit.

Obviously SF has problems and no one loves SF who doesn't want to improve the homeless issue. It doesn't make them wrong to love the city.

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#135

Post by ttymck »

birken wrote: post #37

One thing to note is that the 2021 population is an estimate , and if you are a Census buff as I am, and compare the Census' 2019 estimates to the 2020 actual populations (as calculated from the census), there are often very large differences. The article also says that CA's estimate of the population decline is much smaller, and arguably CA itself would have more accurate data for this particular metric (residency a…

I appreciate the point you are making, so I ask this genuinely: how confident are we in the census count? How confident are we usually, and how did that change given the hurdles the pandemic introduced?

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#136

Post by abofh »

blululu wrote: post #87
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the people paying $3000 for a bunk bed who bailed on the city.

Probably not. Rents dropped (supply meets demands - even in San Francisco). Most people I know who were unhappy with their apartment moved across town and got better deals (myself included). If you left you probably left because you had no strong connection with the city and you wanted to leave. Anyone in tech who wanted to stay could fill the vacancies.

Did rents really shift that much outside of the widest margins? I feel like 3k for a nice one bedroom has held more or less constant for the last few years (even pre-pandemic), a little up, a little down, but largely been around there. You could definitely pay more, and you could find cheaper, but for a ~1000 sqft single, the needle really hasn't trended far.

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#137

Post by adam_arthur »

RosanaAnaDana wrote: post #99

Could this be a potential source of a housing bubble collapse?

Given that work from office is the primary reason SF became so expensive in the first place, yes.

How can SF home prices be justified vs SD or LA in a remote work world?

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#139

Post by 8note »

99_00 wrote: post #122
_fat_santa wrote: post #5

I think remote work is often understated in reasons people move away. When you go into the office every day, it's pretty obvious that you have to live in whatever city you live in. But with remote work, the question becomes "if I don't have to live here, do I want to keep living here". For many (including myself), the answer was a definitive NO. Sure many headlines and news segments make it seem that it's the crime,…

Your reasoning contradicts its self. I agree that remote work allows more workers to live where they want. You claim that workers left SF not because of any attribute of the city, but because they wanted a change. You imply that SF is desirable place to live, however it's population declined only because of a desire for change. However, there are more remote workers outside of SF than in it. If SF was in-fact desirab…

The price of rent shows its desirability. Lots and lots of people want to live there, but that doesn't mean they can, or that it's the best fit for their other requirements.

Re: S.F. population fell 6.3%, most in nation, to lowest level since 2010

#140

Post by raylad »

j_walter wrote: post #6
gamblor956 wrote: post #3

In the first year of COVID. I can't comment about how SF is faring these days, but LA also cleared out that first year. But this year, people came roaring back. The average rent increase in my neighborhood was over 20%. The competition for rental units in some buildings is intense enough that potential tenants either sign a rental agreement on the spot or lose the unit to someone else willing to sign, and at least on…

I haven't seen any data to support "roaring back". 6-ish months ago they were still saying SF rents were down 20% from March 2020. Any idea how many rentals aren't rentals anymore because of the moratorium impact? I know up here in Portland there was a huge net reduction of rentals and prices spiked pretty hard. For example: https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/ca/sa... https://therealdeal.com/sanfr…

Here's rent data for SF:

https://www.rent.com/california/san-francisco-apartments/ren...

  Avg.    Rent    Annual Change
  Studio  $2,911  +17%
  1 Bed   $3,520  +12%
  2 Beds  $4,593  +6%
  3 Beds  $5,701  +8%
Post reply on HN