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

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

#361

Post by tootie » Sat, May 28, 2022, 1:52 AM UTC

joemazerino wrote: post #356

Rampant and near-encouraged crime forced the hands of my SF friends to move. Some pass it off as a standard of living situation but they all moved to low crime Red states..

SF and NYC both saw precipitous drops in crime over the past 30 years that lead to a major influx of new residents. The pandemic has seen a moderate backslide and all the transplants are flipping out. It's amazing how expectations can change. I've lived in NYC for 25 years. The homicide rate is about a quarter of what it was when I moved here, yet everyone seems to be declaring this the apocalypse that will end the city.

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

#362

Post by sumedh » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

cbozeman wrote: post #218

themitigating wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know the excitement that surrounds stories like this on foxnews? They want liberal Democrat cities to fail so they can blame leadership as an example

That's because leadership is failing. The correct response of leaders is to ignore wealthy citizens attempting to prop up their multi-million dollar 3bed4bath properties and let them know, "We're going to zone more areas for residential development, sorry. 2500 square foot homes shouldn't be $3 million in any area in America." And all these rich liberals - and they are liberals - use the same bullshit line over and o…

> What they're really afraid of is that some politician who really does give a shit about the city will come along and upend their apple cart

The opposition party in Australia in 2019 wanted to take some policies which makes investing in houses more profitable which might have lowered house prices but majority of people in Australia are homeowners so they didnt vote for opposition party.

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

#363

Post by thatfrenchguy » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:11 AM UTC

lmeyerov wrote: post #84

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've lived in the same spot in the mission for 10+ years (and been around longer), and other folks in the building for 20+: the mission hasn't regressed to the gang wars era (we have stories there...), but between the break-ins, homeless tents, poop & drugs, crazy people shouting at 4am, and occasional shootings, the neighborhood has slid back 10-15 years. Luckily I've only witnessed 1 murder, so the crime is merely…

Surprisingly though, mission south of 24th has gotten better in the past decade.

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

#364

Post by thatfrenchguy » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:13 AM UTC

diogenescynic wrote: post #249

San Francisco has become a really hostile place to live even if you make $300,000+. My wife and I lived in Glen Park and it was still a shit hole. We had a meth head constantly breaking in and living in the parking garage of our building. Cops and landlord didn't care. I regularly saw people shooting heroin and smoking meth/crack on BART during rush hour. I was sick of seeing needles on the street and smelling urine.…

I'm really curious where you live in Glen Park for this to happen. I've never seen crime there. There's no needles anywhere, and kids everywhere.

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

#365

Post by northerdome » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

For SF specific data on housing and zoning I highly highly recommend http://socketsite.com. Such a thorough and great resource! I only wish more cities had something like it!

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

#366

Post by bogomipz » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

jimmont wrote: post #357

webwielder2 wrote: post #227

Serious question: what's another place in the US with mild year-round weather, walkable neighborhoods (haven't driven a car in 12 years), and easy access to an international airport? That's what SF offers me. The "SF is an unlivable hellhole" drumbeat is so loud that I almost feel compelled to move (my own experience be damned), but I'm not sure where to.

There is no such place in the US. And SF is not it either. San Jose appears to be steadily improving, though this is not a recommendation at all. This is my perspective traveling and living around the northern hemisphere awhile, including substantive time in SF. Manchester NH is within an easy Uber ride of BOS and may be of interest. Winters aren't so great but you can easily fly as far south as Puerto Rico, which ha…

>"Manchester NH is within an easy Uber ride of BOS and may be of interest."

I had not heard of this before. Is it walkable? It looks like pretty country outside there. I would be curious how you found it.

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

#367

Post by iancmceachern » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:20 AM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #226

sheepybloke wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where have you been seeing the rent drop in SF? I'm in the south bay and have been interested in moving to SF now that I'm going remote, since I want a bit more active nightlife. Now that I'm remote, I don't have to stay in south bay.

I haven’t seen these supposed rent drops in SF or the Bay Area either. My lease in the peninsula is up next month and the rent is increasing about 8%, and that’s aligned with the prices I’m seeing elsewhere for comparable apartments.

We've known multiple people whom their building was expecting they'd continue their lease at the higher rent while offering the lower rents to the general public for new tenants. I'd encourage you to find out what they're advertising rents at for new tenants and then hold them to that advertised rent.

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

#368

Post by iancmceachern » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:21 AM UTC

sheepybloke wrote: post #213

iancmceachern wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in this boat. We moved apartments in SF during the pandemic and we now live in an amazing neighborhood, amazing building, for 40% less then we were paying for a below average apartment before. It's not one or the other (moving in or out), it's about getting what you (the individual) wants, and being smart about timing and using world events to your advantage, not disadvantage. Some people wanted to move away from…

Where have you been seeing the rent drop in SF? I'm in the south bay and have been interested in moving to SF now that I'm going remote, since I want a bit more active nightlife. Now that I'm remote, I don't have to stay in south bay.

Check out SOMA, dogpatch, Potrero, south beach, etc.

Rents are still significantly less around here than before the pandemic.

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

#369

Post by hiyer » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:23 AM UTC

I know a few folks who moved to States like Colorado, Delaware, etc from Bay Area once their employers officially went fully remote. They all said Bay Area was unaffordable for them. These are mid-to-senior level tech guys, though not in FAANG companies.

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

#370

Post by iancmceachern » Sat, May 28, 2022, 2:24 AM UTC

acchow wrote: post #313

sheepybloke wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where have you been seeing the rent drop in SF? I'm in the south bay and have been interested in moving to SF now that I'm going remote, since I want a bit more active nightlife. Now that I'm remote, I don't have to stay in south bay.

Largely SOMA and parts of the Mission and the Van Ness corridor. It's mainly areas which generally feel less like a neighborhood and more like a bustling city - mainly areas where renters are more OK with living in than homeowners would be willing to purchase in. A great example is the new Chorus building which opened in 2021 on Van Ness and Mission. It remained mostly empty throughout 2021 despite offering 10 weeks…

I would revise this statement: "mainly areas where renters are more OK with living in than homeowners would be willing to purchase in"

To say: Areas that appear less like traditional neighborhoods with single family homes and more large modern condo buildings.

Our building, and many around ours are largely condos, not rentals. They don't look like traditional houses, but even in this more modern area with multi story buildings and retail all over the 1st floor it's not that it's a place that people don't want to buy homes, it's that there are no "homes" to buy, just condos.