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

141–150 of 465 posts

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

#141

Post by jeffbee »

ttymck wrote: post #135
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?

Both the decennial census and the census ACS are estimates. All population counts are estimates.

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

#143

Post by xedrac »

carapace wrote: post #53
jyounker wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it's the opposite. The city has a few bad spots, but overall it's quite nice. The big problem is the lack of housing, which is arguably driven by the way that Prop 13 warps economic incentives.

I've been here almost half a century now. The city has turned to shit. Prop 13 is part of the problem, but there are lots of confounding factors. FWIW, the lack of housing is largely artificial: there are lots of empty units, they are just priced out of reach of the folks who really need them. I live in Park Merced, on my block there are at least a dozen empty homes, yet a few blocks away there are families living in…

I've been to SF proper only twice (but many times to San Jose). In my opinion, the only things going for it are the weather, coastal locality, sycamores, and interesting terrain. Otherwise it just felt really trashy to me. I wouldn't move there even if I was offered an extra $100k/yr.

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

#144

Post by ProfessorLayton »

etempleton wrote: post #92
librish wrote: post #60

SF is probably hit the hardest by WFH. If you lived and worked in the city you probably had a pretty good commute, so you're not getting the biggest benefit. And while I know it's a less common preference on HN, a lot of people enjoy going in to a lively office and occasionally grabbing drinks with your coworkers after work. It's a great way to make new friends. But with WFH there's a prisoners dilemma where no-one g…

I have visited almost every major US cities including a lot of experience living in and near some of the “worst crime” cities. Cities where there really are streets you do not dare go. In San Francisco I never felt unsafe anywhere, even in the “worst” parts of town. That said, the concentration of homeless people when I last visited was unlike anything I had ever seen in a US city.

I'm a city native living in SF, but grew up all over the SFBAY including much, much rougher neighborhoods than anything I've experienced in SF.

Several of my family members and myself have been assaulted/robbed in broad daylight, had cars stolen, and some have been shot by stray bullets due to a local gang fight. When I was in grade school someone brought a gun to class and showed it off by pointing it at me (!!) — all outside of SF.

SF feels incredibly safe compared to my lived experience in the rest of the Bay. I'm not saying there aren't any issues here, but SF is nowhere near as bad as some of the roughest parts of the Bay. Not by a longshot.

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

#145

Post by cheriot »

cheeseblubber wrote: post #115

If you compare rent trends of SF vs NYC or LA https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/san-francisco-ca https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/new-york-ny https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/los-angeles-ca You'll notice a huge difference between in SF and the other cities. Rent prices still hasn't gone back to pre pandemic level.

Yes, SF has problems that are not related to the macro environment.

nitpick: Rent prices in many neighborhoods are back up. It's specific areas in and near downtown that draw down the average.

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

#146

Post by sushid »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #73
librish wrote: post #60

SF is probably hit the hardest by WFH. If you lived and worked in the city you probably had a pretty good commute, so you're not getting the biggest benefit. And while I know it's a less common preference on HN, a lot of people enjoy going in to a lively office and occasionally grabbing drinks with your coworkers after work. It's a great way to make new friends. But with WFH there's a prisoners dilemma where no-one g…

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

C'mon. Rent was/is expensive but never $3000 for a bunk bed. If you were really splitting a room I'm pretty sure you could have had one for <$800 pre pandemic (assuming you're splitting 1 bedroom in a 3 bedroom setup).

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

#147

Post by mancerayder »

peanut_worm wrote: post #138

San Francisco is the dirtiest city I have ever seen. It doesn’t seem like a great place to spend 1 million dollars on a house unless you work there.

I thought NYC was the dirtiest place I've ever seen, sounds like there's competition!

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

#148

Post by lemonlime »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #25
_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,…

If SF was attractive, then people would want to remotely work from SF. But it isn't. So, they're leaving. On the other hand San Diego seems to be blowing up.

If SF was unattractive, it wouldn't cost $2,500-$3,000 to live in mediocre housing with 6 housemates.

Even people that don't have high paying tech jobs are lining up to pay these kinds of insane prices. They don't want to pay the prices, but it's worth it to live in an area like SF.

One of the only places on the planet in human history that people put this much energy and money into just living somewhere.

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

#149

Post by 88913527 »

somethoughts wrote: post #10

I think in the two scenarios you can focus on either the positives or the negatives. When population goes up: positive - the area is vibrant economically; negative - rent is spiraling upwards out of control When population goes down: positive - rent is finally affordable; negative - the area is falling apart existentially I think the media in general has found the negative spin sells better.

A nuanced view of any sort of economic change will include analysis would objectively consider all the pro's-and-con's, and the media knows that con's sell better because of heightened emotional response.

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

#150

Post by neartheplain »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #48
jeromegv wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the conservative solution to this issue?

Who said homelessnesses and mental illness have solutions?

Centrist candidate for Governor of California Michael Shellenberger, who has interviewed many addicts on the streets of SF and has a credible plan to address homelessness and open drug abuse:

https://www.shellenbergerforgovernor.com/issues/homelessness...

Post reply on HN