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

San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

tomdale.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 458 posts

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#231

Post by throwaway1979 »

foobarbazqux wrote: post #86
api wrote: post #30

I've got a possibly great job offer on the table from SF/SV, but may turn it down. I'd love the city I'm sure, but after glancing around I've come to the conclusion that home ownership is unthinkable to anyone who hasn't had a cash-out event. The real estate market is certifiably, utterly bat-dookie insane. NYC is often considered more expensive, and Manhattan is certainly... well... Manhattan. But taken collectively…

> real estate hyperinflation in general is a social ill that deserves to be tackled directly as such. How do you stop house prices from going up? You can't put a cap on property values without turning bidding into a lottery and screwing owners out of asset appreciation. You could make it easier to afford expensive houses by increasing the money supply, but our interest rates have been pegged at effectively zero for f…

You said it ... the fix isn't hard except the politics make it so. Make it easy to build more housing stock. Allocate more land for building high density homes.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#232

Post by taurath »

Kickmr wrote: post #107
GFischer wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to look up "stabby".. Is this what you were talking about? www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stabby‎ or http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/stabby ?

They mean to get stabbed by a knife, a common misconception about the east bay. Yes there's violence, but theres also beauty, you just need to know where to go and where not to go (san francisco is the same).

#3 crime rate in the US isn't a misconception. Anecdotally, of 6 people I know who have moved to (relatively nice) areas of Oakland, 6 have had their cars broken into or robbed at gunpoint. 4 are currently looking to move elsewhere.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#233

Post by methehack »

Well come on down, Tom Dale! Portland, on behalf of me, welcomes you.

With regard to the tech scene here, a few things. First, it's a little sleepy, sure -- but it's not groggy, more waking up. I'm sure it will appreciate whatever leadership you can contribute.

Second, as you'll soon be demonstrating, living in Portland and working for a company in SFO should be a pretty good combination. The flight down is frequent, quick, and cheap. I would think that given remote working capabilities now and being able to visit SFO for f2f right now! if needed should make things pretty smooth.

I've seen some warnings in some of the comments about the Portland job scene... I'm sure it's not the bay area, but nowhere is. My experience with finding tech jobs here has been excellent. And now that remote work is more and more viable, it's all the better. This is so personal and depends on so many factors that I don't think you can generalize except at the extremes, but I thought it was worth a word from someone who has had zero (knock on wood) trouble.

I know, some haters may hate on me for pointing out how great Portland is for fear that its preciousness will be peed on. But I'd like to think portland's welcoming arms are more generous than that. At least for the foreseeable future.

Two more things: portlandia (the show) is mostly true, and wait until you arrive to buy a bike :)

See you soon!

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#234

Post by pekk »

cynicalkane wrote: post #49
necubi wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty reductionist. San Francisco's housing policies are definitely responsible for some of the price difference between here and Tucson, but you can't ignore the geography. SF is a 7x7 mile square surrounded by water on three sides. Tucson is a sprawling mess that go on for dozens of miles. Dense, desirable, naturally bound cities are always going to be more expensive than endless exurbs. Look at housing pri…

Hong Kong is one of the wealthiest, most space-constrained places on the planet, and remains far cheaper than areas of similar population density and economic role. Compare Hong Kong to Manhattan, Tokyo, London.

Would this remain true if salaries inflated to SV levels?

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#235

Post by enraged_camel »

JonFish85 wrote: post #194
enraged_camel wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>I'd love the city I'm sure, but after glancing around I've come to the conclusion that home ownership is unthinkable to anyone who hasn't had a cash-out event. I've never understood this crazy, if not outright insane obsession with home ownership. Why does everyone want to tie significant amounts of their lifetime earnings into physical property that historically has had very low appreciation in value? It's like pe…

What, exactly, is "crazy" about it? As a renter, you don't control your own destiny. You're at the whim of your landlord. As a home-owner, or better yet, a property-owner, you have much more control over your living situation. Don't like the paint color? Change it. Don't like your stove? Get a new one. Want to plant some new flowers? Go for it. As a renter, you're going to be dealing with rents rising year over year.…

>>What, exactly, is "crazy" about it? As a renter, you don't control your own destiny. You're at the whim of your landlord. As a home-owner, or better yet, a property-owner, you have much more control over your living situation. Don't like the paint color? Change it. Don't like your stove? Get a new one. Want to plant some new flowers? Go for it.

This is hilarious.

As a home-owner, you have control over your own home, but you have no control over your neighbors or your neighborhood in general. If things go badly, your house depreciates in value and there isn't much you can do to change it. Therefore, when you buy a home you are buying control of your immediate living situation while simultaneously surrendering yourself to the whims of those around you.

If you don't like your stove, you can get a new one. But what if you don't like your neighbors? That's a much bigger problem than not liking your stove, and there isn't a single thing you can do about it. They aren't going away anytime soon, and neither are you.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#236

Post by rhizome »

api wrote: post #30

I've got a possibly great job offer on the table from SF/SV, but may turn it down. I'd love the city I'm sure, but after glancing around I've come to the conclusion that home ownership is unthinkable to anyone who hasn't had a cash-out event. The real estate market is certifiably, utterly bat-dookie insane. NYC is often considered more expensive, and Manhattan is certainly... well... Manhattan. But taken collectively…

It's a city built on young entrepreneurs coming there and doing new stuff

Not true. There was a huge housing crash 20 years ago, and large swaths of the city were extremely affordable until about the mid/late-90s. It's only in the last 10 or so years that the city has acquired the perceptions you describe, and certainly post-9/11.

You may be talking about, what, gold miners and prostitutes? I don't think that relates to the current situation and at any rate there was open space within city limits within the lifetime of your grandparents.

You're right about sellers milking the peaks, though. Prices have been going nuts ever since the economy showed a hint of uptick, and it's certainly opportunism at work. Might as well get yours before the terrorists ruin everything, or something. I guess.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#237

Post by russelluresti »

jaysonelliot wrote: post #60

I don't understand why the author would move to Portland when we've got our own affordable, culturally rich, tech-friendly cities in the East Bay. Come to Oakland. It's beautiful here. The weather is better than San Francisco, you can ride your bicycle anywhere, public transit is good, and it's easy to get to SF as well as Silicon Valley (which I do regularly). There's no need to leave the entire Bay Area just becaus…

http://www.spotcrime.com/ca/oakland http://bit.ly/18J6BFi

Yeah, looks safe enough.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#238

Post by ltcoleman »

I have never understood the fascination with San Francisco for tech. I am a senior developer in Arkansas, and cannot imagine having to deal with any of that B.S. I have a mortgage of <$2000 for a 3,600sq ft house on an acre of land with an in-ground pool. My commute is 40 minutes of relaxing country-side when I go into the main office, and about 4 minutes when I work at the remote office. A tech salary of 90k in San Fran ~= 36k in Arkansas when looking at cost of living, plus you can buy a starter home (~1100sq ft) for about ~100k. Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi, and the list keeps going. Tech professionals should really look outside the normal huge tech city box. I personally believe that is where most will find happiness.

Re: San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down

#239

Post by zaroth »

muzz wrote: post #151
forrestthewoods wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

San Francisco real-estate is absurdly corrupt. From 2004 to 2007 only an average of 2,220 units were built. From 2008 to 2012 a mere 1,710 units were built [1]. New construction has been impossible. It looks like it's picking up slightly, but not nearly as much as it would in a fair market. [1] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-apartment-construc...

New construction ABOUNDS "22,000 residential units are in various stages of approval and construction." More units are under way now than have been built from 1993-2011.

What forrestthewoods, api, and zanny are saying is that too few units have been getting built for many years. What you are saying is 'wait, they are coming'.

The first is most certainly true. The second may be true, but we'll have to wait and see how it impacts pricing. For now, you can't live in a building permit.

BTW, here's a graph of permitting and completions in SF for the last 60 years: http://www.spur.org/files/u41/f1.png

Post reply on HN