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

Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 185 posts

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#11

Post by jmaha »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #3

Why don't these people just move to more affordable places?

It's not exactly that straight forward...

As mentioned in the article, many who work full time in SF can't afford to live in the city. "Affordable places" generally means far east or south of their workplace, meaning that they have to spend an enormous amount of money and time commuting to their jobs. With time and money being a finite resource [for most], the commute time comes at the cost of family time and the cost of transportation comes out of their meager earnings (a fact that, if you live in SF or work at a company that provides a private bus, take for granted). Living outside of the city is still unaffordable for many people because of these costs.

The real problem is the scarcity of overall housing resources. With the boom in tech drawing more and more people into SF, it's only going to become more of an issue unless building picks up significantly. This is also true of salaries, which will have to increase in order for companies to hire people who can afford to live here, further driving a wedge between those who can and those who cannot live here.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#14

Post by clarkm »

DanBC wrote: post #5
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #3

Why don't these people just move to more affordable places?

How does a homeless person afford the travel to a "more affordable" place? (What does more affordable mean when they have no money?) Where do the nurses, teachers, security guards, waiters, shop assistants etc etc live?

Well, the first guy profiled could've used his "his savings and his investments" and his "daughter's college fund" to move instead of spending it all on rent. Downsizing is a pretty common occurrence in most parts of the country, but in SF there's really not much to downsize to.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#16

Post by bequanna »

remarkEon wrote: post #4
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #3

Why don't these people just move to more affordable places?

Ok. Where?

If you're looking for affordable housing, it would probably be wise to look anywhere other than SF:

http://www.businessinsider.com/san-francisco-is-more-expensi...

The East Bay is only a 45 min BART ride away from downtown, and considerably cheaper.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#17

Post by pessimizer »

GauntletWizard wrote: post #6
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #3

Why don't these people just move to more affordable places?

Because they have roots and history in SF and the valley. They've got friends, family, and memories there. It's hard to give up your home. It's those tech upstarts that're causing all the trouble; Moving there en-masse, with their strange ways and disrespect for the local culture. Always trying to "disrupt"; they're obviously troublemakers! Really, it's no different from casual racism, but you've got to understand th…

>with their strange ways and disrespect for the local culture. Always trying to "disrupt"; they're obviously troublemakers!

This is a straw man. It's the "tech upstarts" money and their willingness to spend it like water that's disruptive, and not because it makes them "troublemakers" but because it makes local rents rise to multiples of what they were before. It's very much different than casual racism.

edit: it's very silly and reality TV drama to think of this as a personality conflict. It's a rent going from $2K to $5K in 5 years conflict.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#18

Post by beering »

delluminatus wrote: post #2

Loading extremely slowly for me. Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6m1opf... After reading the article, this quote really jumped out at me: "I was going along, being a good citizen," Todd, now 52 years old, says. "I was a volunteer firefighter, I coached football and baseball, I was saving my money, doing everything you're supposed to do, being a single father, raising my daughter by…

These people still remember when you could graduate high school, go to work for GM for a few decades, and have the company pension to depend on in retirement. A suburban house with a white picket fence is somewhere in there too.

Nowadays we're much more used to the at-will relationship. The employment only lasts until either the employee or the employer decides that things would be better off if the relationship ended. I don't think either is "weird" - just mindsets from different places/times.

Actually, that kind of sounds like dating too.......

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#19

Post by mmagin »

delluminatus wrote: post #2

Loading extremely slowly for me. Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6m1opf... After reading the article, this quote really jumped out at me: "I was going along, being a good citizen," Todd, now 52 years old, says. "I was a volunteer firefighter, I coached football and baseball, I was saving my money, doing everything you're supposed to do, being a single father, raising my daughter by…

My impression is that most of the mandatory phase of education in the US teaches this lesson. It was well into my 20s that I really realized that I was taught wrong.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#20

Post by sp332 »

delluminatus wrote: post #2

Loading extremely slowly for me. Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6m1opf... After reading the article, this quote really jumped out at me: "I was going along, being a good citizen," Todd, now 52 years old, says. "I was a volunteer firefighter, I coached football and baseball, I was saving my money, doing everything you're supposed to do, being a single father, raising my daughter by…

Of course there's a social contract. We also have laws against burglary even if you leave your front door unlocked. There's a limit to how much people are allowed to screw you. If someone takes an action that results in you losing your house, that person is an asshole even if they're not technically a criminal.
Post reply on HN