12 ms·

I'm not sure what you're getting at--people don't complain about stocks increasing at that rate because they aren't negatively affected by that. When housing in

I'm not sure what you're getting at--people don't complain about stocks increasing at that rate because they aren't negatively affected by that. When housing increased a rate that significantly exceeds that rate that wages increase, people will have to leave and the social structure of the city changed drastically when only a certain type of person (in the case of SF, typically wealthy, male, and childless) can live there.

asflkjdslka 10y ago
> only a certain type of person (in the case of SF, typically wealthy, male, and childless) can live there. You should note that young women in cities earn more than young men: http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274...
- throwanem 10y ago
  That article also has this to say, directly to the point at hand: > The holdout cities — those where the earnings of single, college-educated young women still lag men's — tended to be built around industries that are heavily male-dominated, such as software development or military-technology contracting. In other words, Silicon Valley could also be called Gender Gap Gully. So I'm not sure what you mean to prove by citing it. If you mislike and mistrust gendered rhetoric, you're welcome; so do I. But perceiving a lack of intellectual consistency on the part of one's interlocutor is no cause to hold oneself to a similarly weak standard.