You also forgot to include a link to your hiring page in your website, too bad you're not hiring remotely https://angel.co/gearlaunch/jobs
I know plenty of grown adults that have roomates, because they prefer the quality of accommodations they can afford that way to what they would be able to afford without them. (And not even in places with Bay Area-level high cost of housing.)
If it is unacceptable to you, that's fine, but don't pretend it has something to do with being "a grown adult".
It's a real stretch to say 50k is a livable salary in most of the bay area.
A reasonable approximation is to target no more than 25% of your take home for housing, but you can probably survive closer to 50% for a while if you must. So for 50k, you're looking at something like $800 - $1600 being manageable. You'd be much better off near the other end of the range.
Also the job in question is "Customer Success", and consists in interacting with customers "through phone, email, and live chat" (from the job description). Those can very well be done remotely.
If you're going to force people to move to the Bay Area to work for you, you need to pay them enough to afford it. Good luck hiring though.
There are people out there paying 50% or more of their take home on their rent/mortgage I imagine - it's just not really considered to be wise move in most cases. 1200/mo for a 1 bed doesn't even sound that bad for what's supposed to be the most expensive city to live in America. I know people in DC who spend 1800/mo on a studio and that's pretty average. You could easily share a room and cut your rent in half if you were smart/willing.
Yeah, that's the same question every scumbag landlord in America started asking themselves a few years ago when demand for rental units started going up.
You don't "need" to spend less than 30% of takehome on rent. If you assume you're going to be running in a treadmill your whole life, and you're satisfied working for subsistence only, then sure, go for it, blow half (or more) of your paycheck on rent. Lots of people in San Francisco and other expensive cities do this.
If you have life goals that don't involve being stapled to a desk forever, it's probably not such a good idea.
That seems to be one of the common and very popular requirements to even have your lease application put aside for consideration, that being income must be 3x the ask for rent. At least this was the case in Austin proper (i.e. inside the city limits, and inside the I-35, Mopac, 183 and Hwy 71 box), I saw similar requirements when helping a friend scout for a place in SFO.
When I was looking for a place I found a landlord willing to negotiate and haggle on the deposit since my income wasn't 3x the rent ask. They took a larger deposit, I signed a lease, wasn't late once.
As with everything, YMMV.
While on one side the 3x rent rule might be just "good sense", most places won't consider you if your salary (or the salary of all tenants) isn't 3x your rent.
I managed to spend 3 years at university living on less than that. I've just spent the last 3 months interning for NZ$20 an hour (~$40k a year), much of that was spent paying about $260 a week for rent (paying rent for 2 places due to contracts). I managed to get along just fine.
Cost of living-wise, where I am isn't radically different from SF.
And many more people live on $50,000 or less everyday working in San Francisco, but commuting from somewhere else in the Bay Area with lower costs.
If it's truly prohibitive for a single person to live in SF for $50K per year then we should be really concerned about the families that earn $50K from two minimum wage jobs, and need to support 1 to 2 children on top of it.