San Francisco, I Love You But You’re Bringing Me Down • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by cm2012 » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:26 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #76

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…

> NYC is often considered more expensive, and Manhattan is certainly... well... Manhattan. But taken collectively the NYC metro area is actually much more affordable. You can find places to live that are nice, friendly to someone older than 25-30, and at least sanely priced. It's crazy, isn't it? I was looking at housing prices recently, for places within a 30-35 minute train commute of work (I refuse to make a car p…

By the way, you can also get a spacious 2 bedroom co-op with a large outdoor courtyard in NYC with 1 hour mass transit (express bus from door to midtown/downtown)for $300,000, in a fantastic neighborhood.

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

#262

Post by base698 » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:27 PM UTC

hoov wrote: post #219

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…

> I've never understood this crazy, if not outright insane obsession with home ownership. And, I don't understand why so many people on HN seem to think it's insane. I'd like to be more in control of my environment. I don't want to be at the whims of a landlord, particularly in the future, when I have children. I want a place that is mine to customize as I see fit. I don't want to have to ask if I can paint, I want t…

Probably because we came of age when Fight Club, American Beauty, and AdBusters were popular and questioning the American dream. Home ownership usually implies suburbs and crushed dreams to people born in the 1980s.

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

#263

Post by pcwalton » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:29 PM UTC

31reasons wrote: post #156

zanny wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad you can't build more in SF because of the building height limits, which is the principle reason housing rates are absurd. If the city made sense they'd build some highrise condos downtown and house the entrepreneurs in studio apartments.

The earthquake in 1906 nearly ruined the entire San Francisco. It can happen again at anytime. Limiting the building heights and number of housing is a precautionary measure. The best thing the SV tech community should do is realize the limitations and move out to other cities. LA/San Diego could be the great replacement/extension for SV.

Los Angeles has earthquakes too.

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

#264

Post by muzz » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:30 PM UTC

zaroth wrote: post #239

muzz wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/file…

There were plenty of foreclosures and short sales in 2010-11, indicating overbuilding (be it because of over-buying / over-lending, regardlesss) in the previous few years (2006-2008).

The article is from 2012. There are 140 projects under construction RIGHT NOW.

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

#265

Post by hoov » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:33 PM UTC

base698 wrote: post #262

hoov wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never understood this crazy, if not outright insane obsession with home ownership. And, I don't understand why so many people on HN seem to think it's insane. I'd like to be more in control of my environment. I don't want to be at the whims of a landlord, particularly in the future, when I have children. I want a place that is mine to customize as I see fit. I don't want to have to ask if I can paint, I want t…

Probably because we came of age when Fight Club, American Beauty, and AdBusters were popular and questioning the American dream. Home ownership usually implies suburbs and crushed dreams to people born in the 1980s.

I'm not so sure that there's as strong a correlation to age as you think. I was born in 1983, so I don't think that I missed the window that you're talking about.

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

#266

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:33 PM UTC

RKoutnik wrote: post #66

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…

Have you looked into Alameda? It's hundreds cheaper than anywhere in SF proper, quieter/cleaner and my commute's only 20 min.

[deleted]

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

#267

Post by foobarbazqux » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:33 PM UTC

jlgreco wrote: post #211

31reasons wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked in Seismology related field for 8 years and visited Tokyo construction companies to see how they build and retrofit existing buildings to make them earthquake proof (to some extent). Let me tell you, they are way more prepared for the earthquakes than SF is.

So SF can't have nice things because they currently do not have nice things?

Yes, but at a less abstract level, SF can't have nice thing A (tall buildings) because they currently do not have nice thing B (the ability to build earthquake proof buildings).

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

#268

Post by princess3000 » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:36 PM UTC

hoov wrote: post #219

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…

> I've never understood this crazy, if not outright insane obsession with home ownership. And, I don't understand why so many people on HN seem to think it's insane. I'd like to be more in control of my environment. I don't want to be at the whims of a landlord, particularly in the future, when I have children. I want a place that is mine to customize as I see fit. I don't want to have to ask if I can paint, I want t…

It's a reaction against the "home ownership is doable and always a better idea than renting" sentiment that the previous generations knew to be true. The answer is probably a bit more nuanced in that sometimes ownership is great and sometimes it's a terrible idea, but I think it's just a case of the pendulum swinging the other way.

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

#269

Post by 727374 » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:36 PM UTC

31reasons wrote: post #156

zanny wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too bad you can't build more in SF because of the building height limits, which is the principle reason housing rates are absurd. If the city made sense they'd build some highrise condos downtown and house the entrepreneurs in studio apartments.

The earthquake in 1906 nearly ruined the entire San Francisco. It can happen again at anytime. Limiting the building heights and number of housing is a precautionary measure. The best thing the SV tech community should do is realize the limitations and move out to other cities. LA/San Diego could be the great replacement/extension for SV.

The nice parts of LA are just as expensive as SV (e.g. $1mm Santa Monica cottages) and transportation is equally bad.

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

#270

Post by base698 » Mon, Jul 08, 2013, 9:36 PM UTC

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.

Want to move to San Francisco to work at a new startup? Oops, you have a house, you're fucked. Breaking a lease is a lot easier than selling/renting your home. Being mobile is a lot better, for job prospects if you aren't in one of the hot spots already.