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

Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 280 posts

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#91

Post by Domenic_S »

dvirsky wrote: post #44

As someone from outside the US, how much do you need to earn in order to live well in this area? There was one slide stating a minimum of $100K for a family of four just to "escape poverty". Is that really the case? And if so, how do early stage founders who aren't already rich manage to get by?

Depends on what you mean by "living well". On the Peninsula in a good neighborhood with a 2k+ sqft house and 2 kids in private school, yearly vacations, newish cars? $400k household income minimum imo.

It's really a meaningless numbers game - no matter where you live, you have to trim your lifestyle to what your income supports.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#92

Post by onion2k »

Domenic_S wrote: post #70
coderzach wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My sentiment is not classist or elitist. You just think poor people should have to move out of their homes because rich people decided they want to live there. Got it. > The same argument applies to people of all socioeconomic background. Yeah, rich people get forced out of their homes because they can't afford them all the time. /s

> You just think poor people should have to move out of their homes because rich people decided they want to live there. That isn't how this works, at all. When the number of people who want to live in an area > the area's capacity, prices increase. See: every metro area in the world. > Yeah, rich people get forced out of their homes because they can't afford them all the time. /s Rich people move to optimize their f…

That isn't how this works, at all.

If rich people living around you only affected house prices then you'd be right, but they tend to push the cost of everything up. That's what drives poor people out.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#93

Post by nsnick »

whybroke wrote: post #89
mdjdk wrote: post #49

That's a hard problem to tackle at a national level without the dreaded Socialism.

Correct. There is a religious libertarian belief that somehow changing zoning laws will "fix" the problem. No numbers are ever given (maybe prices would stay level for a few years) And no one notices that the extremely dense housing of Manhattan did not make Manhattan cheap. If they want to fix the problem they'd need large tracts of very high grade housing rented non-profit, (never sold) on government land. The comp…

You have to ask yourself why Manhattan is now cheaper than San Francisco.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#94

Post by ForHackernews »

coderzach wrote: post #36
mgraczyk wrote: post #20

This may not be the most popular thing to say, but ... Just move? If you are the head of a large household living in an area where the cost of living is too high to support your dependents, you would do a whole lot of good for them and yourself by starting new in some other part of the country. At the very least it would be wise to relocate across the Bay. I realize that people have families, social networks, and sma…

> My sentiment is not classist or elitist. You just think poor people should have to move out of their homes because rich people decided they want to live there. Got it. > The same argument applies to people of all socioeconomic background. Yeah, rich people get forced out of their homes because they can't afford them all the time. /s

> Yeah, rich people get forced out of their homes because they can't afford them all the time. /s

Actually, in some places (certain NYC or London neighborhoods), the rich are getting pushed out by the ultrarich. What chance does a mere millionaire have against billionaires?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/19/h...

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#95

Post by selectodude »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #64
selectodude wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More people want to live there? Awesome, build even more. Demand is not infinite. Ever.

It may not be infinite, but it is often larger than supply.

It's only larger than supply when you make it illegal to build enough housing to satiate demand.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#96

Post by rfrank »

Domenic_S wrote: post #81
hypnos1 wrote: post #68

The lack of empathy on display here is astonishing. Is this quality a prerequisite to participating in the luckier side of the wealth-gap of silicon valley?

Consider the audience, who will overwhelmingly shift to problem-solving mode. Empathy feels nice but doesn't provide a roof or full bellies.

And most responses are something along the lines of, "just move." Top notch problem solving, that right there.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#98

Post by comatose_kid »

Domenic_S wrote: post #81
hypnos1 wrote: post #68

The lack of empathy on display here is astonishing. Is this quality a prerequisite to participating in the luckier side of the wealth-gap of silicon valley?

Consider the audience, who will overwhelmingly shift to problem-solving mode. Empathy feels nice but doesn't provide a roof or full bellies.

Empathy vs problem-solving is a false dichotomy. Having empathy helps to better understand the problem, and this understanding can lead to better solutions.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#99

Post by txru »

jkot wrote: post #35

I dont get it. One person on video lives in nice bedsit (garage) and talks about homeless.

That woman was talking about how she had been homeless after her child was born, and how that status had affected her perceptions of security since. She seemed to have a mostly self-deprecating, while also grateful, air about the garage.

Re: Poor Kids of Silicon Valley

#100

Post by Frondo »

Domenic_S wrote: post #55
benten10 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! I can see how one might feel 'just move' is a good argument, but really NO! In chinatowns all over the country, whenever low-income residents are being priced out, the argument is always 'you can just find another place to stay'. They've lived there for decades, if not more. That's where all the people they know are. They are poor but they do have a support system, that lives with them. When they move away…

> some people feel VERY STRONGLY emotionally about where they live Those feelings are a luxury. Taxpayers should not be forced to bear the cost of someone's emotional attachments. I would prefer tax dollars be spent on relocation assistance + job placement to help get people on a sustainable path.

Why not?

If enough of us decide that emotions are worth supporting, why shouldn't taxpayers make that a priority?

Post reply on HN