Hacker News Reader

Comment by zelon88 | Hacker News Reader

Ding ding ding!

San Fransisco has a housing crisis BECAUSE of all the $150k jobs. How are the $65k people supposed to find an affordable place to live? You've got thousands of wealthy people, tens of thousands of high-end places to live, and hundreds of thousands of middle class people that can't afford rent. Meanwhile you've got renters who can't make a buck off poor people, and can't find any wealthy people to move in!

The presence of wealth doesn't CAUSE poverty. It exacerbates poverty. It's just incompatible in the same ecosystem.

You don't see any problems with the nations capital for homelessness handing $3,000,000,000 to a company that's already worth $1,000,000,000,000? Keep in mind that NONE of those homeless people will be getting job offers to work at Amazon. Amazon will truck and fly (already wealthy) talent into NYC to hire. You're not "improving" NYC poverty, you're just diluting it with existing wealth from elsewhere.

View on HN

Nope. It has a housing crisis because policymakers and NIMBYs (whether wealthy SFH owners who bought into the inflation, or poor 'only approve if 100% affordable' housing types) block development.

What baffles my mind is people who think shutting down business is the way out. Which is what's happening in SF. Look at all the empty storefronts (now they want to tax landlords for keeping empty storefronts).

Whether you're being extorted based on your race, or trying to navigate all the permitting, it costs too much to do business here. That's why the storefronts are empty. Both on at the local level and even on the level of Tesla and Juul (who is leaving SF for many reasons including passing of more taxes for big local business, and attempts to ban corporate cafeterias in the city.).

The policymakers, many of whom have never done anything in the private sector are arrogant and corrupt to believe they can socially engineer people's behavior on all levels. I'm more inclined to believe shutting down the government would get more done (theoretically, notwithstanding existing gov employees).

You don't hear the stories of latino families who bought a house in the Mission for 50k in 1975 who then sold it for $1.5M in 2015. Or the people happy their neighborhood no longer has the violence it once did. You only hear the people who complain. Who are unable to adapt and take advantage of the incredible opportunity to grow themselves and their family. Maybe they should move to Flint, Michigan?

But then again, yea, keep hoods yours. Stave off the all evil racist (white) 'gentrifiers'...

And lastly, let me guess, you are not in poverty? But you know what's best for people who are? (Just checking)

> San Fransisco has a housing crisis BECAUSE of all the $150k jobs

No, it's because there's a shortage of housing. There are plenty of places that have high incomes and low rents, because the supply of housing keeps up with demand. I doubt directional drillers in North Dakota are paying San Francisco rents.

> The presence of wealth doesn't CAUSE poverty. It exacerbates poverty. It's just incompatible in the same ecosystem.

I find this statement to be very dubious. Where would the homeless living in tents be if all the wealthy people had their salaries cut in half? They'd be in the exact same spot, except the government would have a lot less tax revenue to spend on social services.

Do you genuinely think that it's better to be poor in a poor country than it is to be poor in a wealthy country? What kind if life does someone in the bottom 10th percentile live in a place like the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Venezuela lead? What kind of life does someone in the same finacial position lead in Switzerland or Singapore?

I doubt directional drillers in North Dakota are paying San Francisco rents.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/North-Dak...

This is a town with less than 30k people: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williston,_North_Dakota

> The 2010 census[6] gave its population as 14,716, and the Census Bureau gave the 2017 estimated population as 25,586, making Williston the sixth-largest city in North Dakota

Of course a tiny town that nearly doubles in population in less than a decade is going to experience a sharp rise in rents. This is a classic example of cherry picking outliers.

In contrast, the median home price in all of North Dakota is just over $200k.

This still demonstrates my point: it's supply and demand that dictates the price of housing. If demand rises and supply stays the same rents go up. If supply keeps up with demand, they do not.

> San Fransisco has a housing crisis BECAUSE of all the $150k jobs

More accurately because it has lots of $150k+ jobs (and growing numbers of them) and lots of jobs at or barely above local minimum wage.

Absent compulsion, there's no reason for any marginal increase in housing stock available on the market to serve the latter market when it can be directed to the former, even if that involves a delay (e.g., for remodeling.)

> The presence of wealth doesn't CAUSE poverty.

Yes, it does; the presence of concentrated wealth drives up costs, increasing CoL, producing poverty. Outside of the situation where the production possibilities curve doesn't actually suffice to provide reliable survival-sufficient food, clothing, and shelter for the population such that with equitable distribution people would not be dying of starvation or exposure except by choice not to avail themselves of what what accessible, essentially all poverty is a result of the presence of concentrated wealth, because resources are directed to serve the interests of those with wealth, which is, after all, fundamentally just he power to command the direction of resources.

The solution to the housing crisis is:

- Improved public transportation (bring more homes in commuting distance and you increase supply, which decreases cost)

- Better building codes so we can build up. The NIMBY landlords who insist on height caps are artificially decreasing housing supply so they make more money.

Let's not strawman tech jobs in place of poor public policy. Creative destruction built the modern economy and cities need to plan for growth.

Thank you!

I'd also like to add to NIMBY designation (beyond landlords):

- Those who bought a SFH/condo for exorbitant prices who don't want more supply to keep their investment afloat

- Those who block all housing that does not meet their demands for affordable-ness. Oftentimes, anything not 100% affordable is unacceptable to them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com