5 ms·

For a luxury condo in downtown SF? Yes. That's not where the people who work for a living at charitable organizations live. HN is a weird bubble.

• tyingq 11y ago
  Heh. No, I looked up the average rent for Oakland, which I assumed would be less expensive than downtown SF. I saw $3k, which would likely be higher than the take home pay for a low-level employee.
  • potatolicious 11y ago
    Averages aren't really representative - even in SF there is a very, very wide variance between a crappy run-down studio in an undesirable neighborhood vs. a luxury condo in the hottest neighborhoods. The average is really just tossing those two in a blender and hitting the "puree" button. Likewise, there are still cheap places to live in Oakland, even if the average is high (and rising). Also, there are places further out of Oakland that are still relatively inexpensive. In any case, the "typical rent" on a SF/Oakland apartment already affords a lifestyle more luxurious than most people in this country ever experience, which is why IMO aetherson is right in calling it "Oh poor well-paid me". This meme that 6-figure incomes in the Bay Area is "break even" is a special kind of myopic: "Oh dearie me, I'm making 6-figures, enjoying quality of life way higher than is typical for my country, but I'm just breaking even!"
  • djcapelis 11y ago
    I live in the Bay Area and I don't know anyone who pays $3k for something in Oakland by themself. I think the averages you're looking at probably show a bunch of places multiple people live in together and split.