4 ms·

This is basically what should happen. I'm also unsure what relation tech has to it. Either restaraunts/etc pay enough to make it possible for people to live t

This is basically what should happen. I'm also unsure what relation tech has to it. Either restaraunts/etc pay enough to make it possible for people to live there (and in turn, people living there pay for those things), or they close, eventually causing people to stop deciding to live in those parts (eventually helping to bring prices back down) It happens right now that tech is a major industry in the area can afford to pay those people enough to live there. But it's also probably true that people would not like PA as much if every restaurant closes. So, ..... This is the same as the cities having trouble attracting police/firemen/etc because they can't pay enough. Either the people living there will pay more, or they'll be okay with no police/firemen, or they'll decide they don't want to live in a place with no police/firemen, which will help bring prices back down.

twblalock 10y ago
That's not what happens. What happens is that the policemen, firemen, and restaurant workers commute from areas where it is cheaper to live. It's been that way in Palo Alto for a while, and it certainly has not caused any downward pressure on prices.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- DannyBee 10y ago
  Sure it is. "But in recent years, many police agencies across the Bay Area have seen a decrease in applicants. Some say the area's high cost of living is partly to blame as job seekers move to other parts of the state to start their careers." They only commute if the cost of doing so is worth it. When they can find reasonable jobs that provide the life they want elsewhere, they stop :) The expensive area police hiring has dropped dramatically (SF, etc) when the less expensive areas have seen increases in ability to recruit (San Mateo, etc). It's only when the less expensive areas don't need police that you see increases in hiring elsewhere. Even then, they are still having more and more trouble hiring over time.
  - twblalock 10y ago
    This is beside the point. This is what you wrote: > Either the people living there will pay more, or they'll be okay with no police/firemen, or they'll decide they don't want to live in a place with no police/firemen, which will help bring prices back down. That has not happened. Every place in the Bay Area has sufficient numbers of police and firemen. There is no place that has run out of them. Trouble hiring is not the same as no hiring. Furthermore, there is no evidence that trouble hiring policemen and firefighters causes downward pressure on housing prices, which is what you said should happen.
    - marmot777 10y ago
      Yeah but does their life suck because they have to commute this insane distance every day to get to work? Yes, they are willing to do it because they need to eat but that does not sound like an ideal situation where all the low and mid income jobs have to be filled by people who commute from outside.
      - twblalock 10y ago
        What's your point?
        marmot777 10y ago
        My point is that nobody addresses the costs that the decisions the market very well. It's glossed over. It used to be a fire fighter or, say, teacher could live pretty near work. Now in certain places they have to drive ungodly distances each day. Those are costs to many individuals and there are substantial costs to society too. It's not just a matter of saying it's a solved problem, we can put out fires pretty quickly when they happen. It'd be a worthwhile exercise to be more open to the real pain that the market's decisions inflict on people at times. I'm not saying I have a solution to that or that I know what's best for anyone. But making some people life worse as part of the process of making other people's life far better, isn't something that should be dismissed out of hand. It is an act of courage to face something at least a little bit, pain caused to other human beings.
- marmot777 10y ago
  That sucks for those people. It must be acknowledged that it sucks. There are costs and there are benefits to everything. It'd be good to note and acknowledge the costs. I get the feeling that a lot of people talk about the market like it's a religion or spiritual force and that all that happens with its guidance we must embrace.
marmot777 10y ago
But the article says and, we've heard this from other sources many times, that restaurants have very slim margins even in pretty good conditions. It's not so simple to say pay enough and so on. Or maybe you really saying if an industry has to pay below a living wage by so much then it's not even worth it? And if all the half decent restaurant closes does the area start to slide toward entropy with boarded up shops and decay?

twblalock 10y ago

That's not what happens. What happens is that the policemen, firemen, and restaurant workers commute from areas where it is cheaper to live. It's been that way in Palo Alto for a while, and it certainly has not caused any downward pressure on prices.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
DannyBee 10y ago
Sure it is. "But in recent years, many police agencies across the Bay Area have seen a decrease in applicants. Some say the area's high cost of living is partly to blame as job seekers move to other parts of the state to start their careers." They only commute if the cost of doing so is worth it. When they can find reasonable jobs that provide the life they want elsewhere, they stop :) The expensive area police hiring has dropped dramatically (SF, etc) when the less expensive areas have seen increases in ability to recruit (San Mateo, etc). It's only when the less expensive areas don't need police that you see increases in hiring elsewhere. Even then, they are still having more and more trouble hiring over time.
- twblalock 10y ago
  This is beside the point. This is what you wrote: > Either the people living there will pay more, or they'll be okay with no police/firemen, or they'll decide they don't want to live in a place with no police/firemen, which will help bring prices back down. That has not happened. Every place in the Bay Area has sufficient numbers of police and firemen. There is no place that has run out of them. Trouble hiring is not the same as no hiring. Furthermore, there is no evidence that trouble hiring policemen and firefighters causes downward pressure on housing prices, which is what you said should happen.
  - marmot777 10y ago
    Yeah but does their life suck because they have to commute this insane distance every day to get to work? Yes, they are willing to do it because they need to eat but that does not sound like an ideal situation where all the low and mid income jobs have to be filled by people who commute from outside.
    - twblalock 10y ago
      What's your point?
      - marmot777 10y ago
        My point is that nobody addresses the costs that the decisions the market very well. It's glossed over. It used to be a fire fighter or, say, teacher could live pretty near work. Now in certain places they have to drive ungodly distances each day. Those are costs to many individuals and there are substantial costs to society too. It's not just a matter of saying it's a solved problem, we can put out fires pretty quickly when they happen. It'd be a worthwhile exercise to be more open to the real pain that the market's decisions inflict on people at times. I'm not saying I have a solution to that or that I know what's best for anyone. But making some people life worse as part of the process of making other people's life far better, isn't something that should be dismissed out of hand. It is an act of courage to face something at least a little bit, pain caused to other human beings.
marmot777 10y ago
That sucks for those people. It must be acknowledged that it sucks. There are costs and there are benefits to everything. It'd be good to note and acknowledge the costs. I get the feeling that a lot of people talk about the market like it's a religion or spiritual force and that all that happens with its guidance we must embrace.

marmot777 10y ago

But the article says and, we've heard this from other sources many times, that restaurants have very slim margins even in pretty good conditions. It's not so simple to say pay enough and so on. Or maybe you really saying if an industry has to pay below a living wage by so much then it's not even worth it? And if all the half decent restaurant closes does the area start to slide toward entropy with boarded up shops and decay?