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

Evicted in San Francisco

priceonomics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–257 of 257 posts

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#251

Post by null_ptr »

nilkn wrote: post #42
fishtoaster wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like she moved there when it was cheap. Is it reasonable to expect her to leave her friends, contacts, etc that she's built up over decades because the city is changing? Housing isn't widgets: it's not easy to move to a cheaper type if your current type gets expensive. There isn't an easy answer to this sort of problem, but to imply that she should simply "move somewhere else" is simplistic in the extreme.…

It's not that I don't feel sympathy for her, but yes, cities change and it's something you simply have to be aware of if you're living in one. If you're planning on being a life-long renter, you're really taking a risk that this will happen to you, too, if the prices ever experience a big boom as they have in San Francisco. If she had bought property back when it was cheap, she might be a millionaire today. If over t…

Comparing yourself leaving for college at 18 to a 75 year old woman being evicted is plain distasteful.

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#252

Post by null_ptr »

normloman wrote: post #7
TrainedMonkey wrote: post #2

"According to Inge, she pursued some of these options, but was turned off by the no-guarantee nature of the wait-lists, and felt she was entitled to stay where she was." So she voluntarily did not use resources designed to help her out. That lands credibility to landlords story. If I lived on fixed income, I would definitely move out of Bay Area somewhere cheaper.

It's not easy for people to just pack up and move. What if you've lived there your whole life? What if your friends and family lived there? What if your job was there? I guess you say "Sorry poor trash, but you gotta be this rich to live here. If you can't cut it, kindly leave the city you've known your whole life, abandon your friends, and get a new job." But that seems cold, doesn't it?

That's what the majority of people in this thread seem to say, and this lack of empathy is disheartening. There's some dick a few comments up that said people uproot themselves all the time, "he did it when he was 18 and left for college". Unbelievable. It's sad to slowly see where all the techie-hate comes from, the entitlement and lack of basic empathy demonstrated in this thread is eye-opening.

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#253

Post by lotu »

penguindev wrote: post #94
jseliger wrote: post #11

Nonetheless, it’s a good time to be a Bornstein in San Francisco: in the past year alone, Ellis Act evictions have risen 170%; since 1997, there have been 3,811, and that number is constantly rising. The obvious solution to rapidly rising prices is to increase supply, as described here ( http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0078XGJXO ) or here ( http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/10/san-francis... ). I've posted both…

>The obvious solution to rapidly rising prices is to decrease demand. FTFY. Seriously, there's two parts of a fraction. Why are we subsidizing immigration and children?

The better question why aren't we subsidizing murder?

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#254

Post by krschultz »

refurb wrote: post #138
krschultz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My parents bought their house in the 1980s. They paid it off 100%. When they retired they moved. Would it have been preferable to keep the house the whole family grew up in? Probably. But they couldn't afford the overhead of utilities, maintenance, etc. They moved to a smaller house in a state with lower property taxes. They too left their friends, contacts, etc. Built up over living there for 35 years. But it was th…

Slight quibble: seniors get Medicare, not Medicaid. Medicaid is for lower-income folks and the disabled, except some disabled who get Medicare. However, you can be eligible for both (so called-dual eligibles). ...I'll see myself out....

Upvoted for the correction, appreciated.

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#255

Post by krschultz »

cryoshon wrote: post #237
krschultz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My parents bought their house in the 1980s. They paid it off 100%. When they retired they moved. Would it have been preferable to keep the house the whole family grew up in? Probably. But they couldn't afford the overhead of utilities, maintenance, etc. They moved to a smaller house in a state with lower property taxes. They too left their friends, contacts, etc. Built up over living there for 35 years. But it was th…

Pfft, "responsible" my ass. They left the life they built behind because they couldn't afford to keep it. That's horrendously sad.

In theory yes, in their specific case they are a lot happier. Moved to a warmer climate, their neighborhood has a lot of people their age and they have many new friends and enjoy it. They still come back and see the old friends & family often enough. Overall a great decision, but definitely influenced by the fact that paying for the house they had owned the last 30 years did not make sense for 2 people - and there aren't really cheaper options in the area.

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#256

Post by maxlybbert »

normloman wrote: post #230
maxlybbert wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not easy for people to just pack up and move. What if you've lived there your whole life? What if your friends and family lived there? What if your job was there? I've done many things I didn't want to. It's part of being an adult. Then again, nobody makes me eat my vegetables.

You echo a lot of other comments. Boils down to "I've had to relocate, so nobody else gets to complain." That's not a valid argument. Being forced to move sucks, no matter who you are. More importantly, why should the poor in San Francisco move? They were there first. They could afford rent, until us tech people came. Why should we crowd them out? And if we did, is that the kind of city we want? A city where everyone…

> Boils down to "I've had to relocate, so nobody else gets to complain."

I'm sorry. That's not my argument in any way.

For one, I support free speech enough that I won't say people have no right to complain. Personally, I think anybody who constantly streams complaints is probably immature and not somebody I want to associate with, but they can complain all they want; I'll simply tune them out.

Looking at the particular case of this lady:

* she is currently homeless, and apparently does not like that;

* she used to antagonize her former landlord;

* her former landlord tried to help her find a new place, but she declined the help;

* she refuses to work with organizations that exist to help people like her, she apparently chafes at their rules and regulations;

* she has the option of moving to Germany free of charge, but refuses to do so.

But my statement that "doing things you don't like is part of being an adult" is true. Many college students are appalled when they discover that the life isn't as easy as they were led to believe. I'm sure I was one of them; it's been a while and my memory is foggy. But complaining that things aren't always hunky dory is silly. At some point you have to make the best with what you have. And saying "but I don't want to move away from my friends" or "but why do I have to pay market rates for a place to live?" simply comes off as immature.

Re: Evicted in San Francisco

#257

Post by Guvante »

aetherson wrote: post #80
Guvante wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not surprising the the housing market crash reduced the eviction rate. While I don't know if I disagree with the law, it is hard to see it being used outside of sale opportunities.

Sometimes people use it to buy a property with a tenant in it (at a reduced rate, usually), then evict the tenant and move into the property themselves (typically after a renovation). It's much less convenient/more time consuming than buying an empty unit and moving into it, but it can be less costly. Relatives of mine did something similar in Berkeley (I don't think that they actually used the Ellis act per se, but…

Same thing from a different angle, but still interesting.
Post reply on HN