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

San Francisco Bubble

blog.larrold.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 393 posts

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#311

Post by restalis »

pc86 wrote: post #204
mbesto wrote: post #62

This is why the free market is so great. 1. Everything too expensive? Good, don't live here, eventually enough people will leave to drive all of the costs back to other market norms. 2. Dumb startups? Good, they will fail, people won't be able to afford to live here and they'll leave. 3. People are spoiled? Uber is cheaper and more convenient in some cases than taking the local transportation. When people stop taking…

Disclaimer: I don't live in SF and never would > When people stop taking public transportation because it's fundamentally broken (ps - it's awful in SF) then it will force government organizations to re-think their planning. I think what is much more likely is that the government will simply raise taxes to cover the shortfall and let the public transit die.

"I think what is much more likely is that the government will simply [...] let the public transit die."

That kind of happened in other parts of the world (in the former socialist block). You know what happened afterwards? The significant demand for mass transportation encouraged private parties to step in. They weren't as good or as convenient compared to the former government-subsidized public one, but they solved the problem for a while.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#312

Post by stvswn »

bpchaps wrote: post #272
stvswn wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what are the problems? "Everyone rides an Uber" is great for the Uber drivers. "People spend too much on organic produce" is great for the farmers. "Even bad engineers are in high demand" is great for the mediocre engineers. Housing is a problem, but this post didn't mention it. So before we start making changes, what are the problems in your opinion? And, then, what changes are you proposing?

Rose tinted glasses much? Have you ever been to a poor area in your life? Even mentioning Uber, organics, bad engineers and mediocre engineers ignores places like the south side of Chicago and any gradient between. It's not as pretty outside as you think it is.

I forgot to answer your question. Yes I've been to a poor area before.

I also forgot to apologize for mentioning Uber, organics, and engineering. You're right, but acknowledging the existence of those concepts I'm totally ignoring the South Side of Chicago.

But by bringing up Chicago, you're completely ignoring sub-Saharan Africa and Bangladesh. It's not so pretty there, either. Are you going to apologize for that?

Let's just remember that we should always mention regions of extreme poverty whenever we discuss something.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#313

Post by longlivedeath »

thecopy wrote: post #145
rorykoehler wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$7 beer? Frugal? In Berlin a beer costs $1 from the shop and maybe $2-3 from a bar.

Im thinkning of moving to München, this might be another reason too. A Heiniken 33cl beer in Stockholm costs around 12 USD if you are at a nightclub, otherwise around 10 USD.

> otherwise around 10 USD

wat? it's 1.5$ actually

http://www.systembolaget.se/dryck/ol/heineken-153603

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#314

Post by vectorjohn »

rorykoehler wrote: post #261
MAGZine wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll pay $7 for a 20oz point of something nice at a bar. You can buy 6 packs of good craft beer for $7/$8 at any grocery store.

Grocery store prices are not adjusted to local rental rates?

I don't see why not, they have to pay rent too.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#315

Post by niuzeta »

whybroke wrote: post #280

Please be aware that moving to the bay area for any reason other than fun will be a serious life mistake. If you move to the bay area in your 20s, by the time you're in your 40s you will have a specific knowledge of a fad language that is 20 years old. But even if you somehow keep up with new tech in your spare time, you will look 40 something and thus be nearly unemployable solely on those grounds. And you simply wi…

I'm in Canada and every time I consider prospects of getting into United States, comments like this frighten me. More specifically the Valley area for its renowned reputation of tech-oriented culture, and make good earnings. Compared to what I see in, say, Toronto area with bad housing and a bunch of old .NET 2.0 I feel that it must be better there.

What I find lacking in such comments, though, is some explanation on why and the suggested alternatives. Would you mind sharing why? Java/C# were the hot things of 10-15 years ago and people still make a living out of it. It sounds like an argument for classic Red Queen problem where the only winning move is not to play.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#316

Post by tizzdogg »

restalis wrote: post #301
bduerst wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the people who have already lived there, who aren't on engineering salaries and work service positions? I think it's fun to be flippant, but there still certain demographics that are being displaced and negatively impacted by the bubble.

"What about the people who have already lived there, who aren't on engineering salaries and work service positions?" I'm trying to look at it in more brighter light, so I'll say that they can sell high their place (which is wonderful thing from a market player's prospective), then offer themselves as a gift to enrich some other lucky place (which is good for many under multiple reasons). It's a win-win!

"they can sell high their place" It must be nice to live in a world where even the service workers own property.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#317

Post by wambotron »

hindsightbias wrote: post #264
wambotron wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does any of that have to do with 'dotcom stuff' or bubbles? People apply to jobs they're unqualified for in every field all the time.

> apply Because they got the job.

Again, this is not startup/bubble-specific. There are unqualified people all over the place.

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#318

Post by vectorjohn »

Apocryphon wrote: post #135
vectorjohn wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to Portland, $7 a beer is actually pretty expensive. Not as crazy as the mythical $15, but for a local craft beer it should be more like $5-6. But that could all just be taxes. (and we do have $7-12 beers, they're just known to be extra fancy or aged)

I've heard that Portland COL prices are climbing sharply due to people moving in. Is that true?

What do people normally count in cost of living? Utilities and services are fine, and groceries are easy to find reasonably priced. Transportation is fine.

So I think as others have mentioned, rent and house prices are the things climbing sharply. I know someone paying $900 for a room in a 3 person house, in a really great part of town (Division, for locals). I've heard studios go for well over $1000, and fill up fast. But really, you don't have to look very hard to find something cheap(er). Surrounding areas (with new access to light rail that goes down town) are reasonable.

I don't think it's really as bad as some people make it out to be, but it definitely is getting more expensive in town. I mean, that's the nature of the housing market recovery :)

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#319

Post by debaserab2 »

vonmoltke wrote: post #187
debaserab2 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never written anything that lives in a real production environment You've never maintained a production app and you're getting offers as director of engineering?

I have written code full-time for the past 7 years and been an engineer for the past 13, but have never maintained a "production app". There are large numbers of software engineers operating in fields where there is no such concept.

What is that exactly? I'm really curious. Presumably the code you write gets used by someone, right?

Re: San Francisco Bubble

#320

Post by sholanozie »

stvswn wrote: post #308
acchow wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can whoever downvoted this explain why they did so?

Thanks, it's interesting that I simply asked "what are the problems?" and that offended people so much that they downvoted -- but then I got three different answers. One person says "collective values, worship of the free market." Another person says "there are poor people in Chicago." Finally there's a third person who says "people can't afford to live in their neighborhoods because cost of living got too expensive.…

"They"? The people who responded to you aren't part of some larger conspiracy to oppose you, or even advocating on behalf of the same people or ideas. The fact that I'm commenting here doesn't even mean that I agree with the article.

Could it be possible that there are several problems at play here, at once? You can't look at situations as if they are black or white, or "us vs. them".

Post reply on HN