Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not in SF, where the median rent is now $4,225/month, or $50,700/year. Realistically, you can't even expect to take home $50,700 on a gross income of $75k. http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2015/06/02/san-franciscos-...
I've been thinking about this lately. Why doesn't Google or Facebook just pack up one day and go to... say, Detroit? Buy a shitload of property there, and tell all their workers that in the course of the next 5 years they want to have presence in two places: this new place in Detroit, and the old place in the Valley. Whoever wants to stay in the valley can stay... and whoever wants to move to Detroit can come move to…
At the time, it was seen by the industrialists as a way to raise their workers into the middle class. "Paternalism was considered by many nineteenth-century businessmen as a moral responsibility, or often a religious obligation, which would advance society whilst furthering their own business interests. Accordingly, the company town offered a unique opportunity to achieve such ends."
"Although economically successful, company towns sometimes failed politically due to a lack of elected officials and municipally owned services. Accordingly, workers often had no say in local affairs and therefore, felt dictated. Ultimately, this political climate caused resentment amongst workers and resulted in many residents eventually losing long-term affection for their towns."
Perhaps it is time for a new company town concept being pushed by one of the big tech firms. Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, or Google might be able to pull it off. It could also be a test bed for their new technologies.
[*] Quoted paragraphs lifted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town