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

111–120 of 185 posts

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#111

Post by eqdw »

beering wrote: post #21
kiba wrote: post #15

So, we got political deadlock in a way that constrains new housing addition. Why is the law not being changed?

Because they don't want it changed. Is it that hard to imagine that there's a subset of SF residents that don't want new housing built?

It's trivially easy. Just think of all the debates we've had over gentrification in Nob Hill or Pac Heights.

Oh wait. We haven't had any.

Because these are the enclaves of people with so much wealth that even the techies can't afford to move in.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#112

Post by scott_karana »

anigbrowl wrote: post #90
astrocat wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many may interpret this as victim blaming but I think it's a valid question: why have we as a country/culture become so much more resistant to moving? I know I've read more comprehensive literature on this before a but a quick google brought up these starting points: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/11/declining_ame... http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/generati... I understand that we dev…

places where greater opportunity exists like where? You might as well ask why tech companies don't set up elsewhere and start their own little versions of Silicon Valley instead of spending $$$ to headquarter in SF.

Most people don't require the startup connections and capital of SV; they just want to survive and do their job, not start a speculative business venture.

Working as a firefighter/waiter/mechanic/nurse is roughly the same in the Bay as it is in (say) Oklahoma, but prices of living are proportionally much more favourable.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#113

Post by brandonmenc »

jonnathanson wrote: post #60
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…

"I don't think you would ever hear those words coming from a millennial." Probably because Millennials grew up knowing there were wolves just outside the gates, and that your employer might throw you to them at any time. We're the first generation of Americans, in quite some time, to have experienced one significant crash or stagnation after the next. There is no "normal" in the job market, the stock market, the hous…

> Probably because Millennials grew up knowing there were wolves just outside the gates, and that your employer might throw you to them at any time [...] We don't know normal, so accordingly, we're not clinging to it.

Millennials need to learn some history.

A 52-year-old graduated high school in 1980. They grew up, then worked their first decade, during the economically scariest 20 year period between the Depression and the Recession.

Millennials don't even know what a pension is, let alone having to worry about losing one, or fear the Japanese taking over the world, including both the high-end and low-end manufacturing jobs along with Rockefeller Center.

It was pretty terrifying back then for your rank-and-file blue collar worker, and it didn't let up until the mid 90s. Anyone born around and after 1970 doesn't know "normal."

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#114

Post by tptacek »

ktothemc wrote: post #85

I was the person who wrote that super-long take on the San Francisco housing crisis in spring on TechCrunch. http://www.techcrunch.com/2014/04/14/sf-housing/ I'll just say this. It's four issues compounded. 1) Growth controls enacted in the 1960s and 1970s: Beginning in the late 1960s, the California Supreme Court started making a series of anti-development rulings: for example, one decision ruled that cities didn't…

Here's a question for you: REITs dehumanize and perhaps volatilize real estate markets. Do their benefits outweigh their costs? And if so, what are those benefits? Is it legitimate public policy in a system that ostensible has free markets as a principle to suppress or otherwise regulate REITs?

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#115

Post by refurb »

brandonmenc wrote: post #113
jonnathanson wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't think you would ever hear those words coming from a millennial." Probably because Millennials grew up knowing there were wolves just outside the gates, and that your employer might throw you to them at any time. We're the first generation of Americans, in quite some time, to have experienced one significant crash or stagnation after the next. There is no "normal" in the job market, the stock market, the hous…

> Probably because Millennials grew up knowing there were wolves just outside the gates, and that your employer might throw you to them at any time [...] We don't know normal, so accordingly, we're not clinging to it. Millennials need to learn some history. A 52-year-old graduated high school in 1980. They grew up, then worked their first decade, during the economically scariest 20 year period between the Depression…

Thank you for providing some perspective.

When I heard people say how hard Millennials have it I think to myself "harder than the 17 and 18 year olds who went off to fight in WW2?" or "harder than my grandfather who jumped on a freight train at the age of 16 to find work during the depression?"

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#116

Post by x0x0 »

Kalium wrote: post #109
x0x0 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet this thread will be filled with tech employees shitting on those less fortunate than themselves. And what tech ceo is showing up at city council meetings up and down the peninsula demanding more housing, or in any fucking way using the platform their job gives them to help even their own employees, let alone other people in their communities? Ladies and gentlemen, DanBlake: If you are a 90 year old grandmothe…

> And what tech ceo is showing up at city council meetings up and down the peninsula demanding more housing, or in any fucking way using the platform their job gives them to help even their own employees, let alone other people in their communities? http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/18/technology/google_zoning/ Care to guess how that went? Tech CEOs are doing the jobs you proclaim them to not be. > Yup. Fuck grannie -- wh…

One letter from google -- um, golf clap? Contrast that with what a company does when they actually want something. eg Twitter and their tax break [1]. They threaten to leave sf, testimony at the council, meetings with councilpeople, lobbying, etc.

But no no -- one letter means google is actively working for more housing.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#117

Post by Kalium »

x0x0 wrote: post #116
Kalium wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And what tech ceo is showing up at city council meetings up and down the peninsula demanding more housing, or in any fucking way using the platform their job gives them to help even their own employees, let alone other people in their communities? http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/18/technology/google_zoning/ Care to guess how that went? Tech CEOs are doing the jobs you proclaim them to not be. > Yup. Fuck grannie -- wh…

One letter from google -- um, golf clap? Contrast that with what a company does when they actually want something. eg Twitter and their tax break [1]. They threaten to leave sf, testimony at the council, meetings with councilpeople, lobbying, etc. But no no -- one letter means google is actively working for more housing.

My point is that they do try. It just doesn't get results. What would you have them do? Pick up, move, and crash the regional economy?

EDIT: If you look, you'll find that it comes up quite often. It's far from just one letter.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#118

Post by Iftheshoefits »

nthj wrote: post #63
sp332 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What am I supposed to do, live in fear every day of my life that my job might disappear tomorrow?

I'm a grown adult who is perfectly capable of maintaining a savings account and investing in a network of peers who I could ask for help with acquiring another job. Why should that be my employer's responsibility?

Lots of "perfectly capable of adults" maintain a savings account and cultivate a network they think can fall back on in hard times. Far fewer than you think are able to save enough or have that network come through. In fact, assuming one's savings account is large enough, or one's network is strong enough, is an assumption born of privilege few, even in America, ever know.

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#119

Post by x0x0 »

Kalium wrote: post #117
x0x0 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One letter from google -- um, golf clap? Contrast that with what a company does when they actually want something. eg Twitter and their tax break [1]. They threaten to leave sf, testimony at the council, meetings with councilpeople, lobbying, etc. But no no -- one letter means google is actively working for more housing.

My point is that they do try. It just doesn't get results. What would you have them do? Pick up, move, and crash the regional economy? EDIT: If you look, you'll find that it comes up quite often. It's far from just one letter.

um, they don't actually try, and nothing you've found disproves that. But one letter was sent!

Re: Inside San Francisco's housing crisis

#120

Post by eqdw »

Kalium wrote: post #45

To those people who believe this is the fault of tech - I have a question. What is the ethical way to move to San Francisco? Or anywhere in the Bay? What do you think is a good solution to this, beyond some variant on tech people owing undefined amounts of money to everyone else?

I'm beginning to think the honest answer is "DON'T", but people are still scared of being so brazenly xenophobic.
Post reply on HN