5 ms·

Let's set aside cost of living in the Bay for a second. Here's a completely taboo subject. At what point do we hold people accountable for their reproductive ch

Let's set aside cost of living in the Bay for a second. Here's a completely taboo subject. At what point do we hold people accountable for their reproductive choices? You want to have 2, 4, 6 children in the most expensive slice of land in the US? Great, but please bear in mind that choice comes with real financial consequences to your lifestyle and you should not expect the state to bail you out of it.

enknamel 10y ago
Of course people should be responsible for their choices. However that doesn't mean we can't be more accommodating to people making 100k or less. You think Starbucks will stick around if they have to pay their employees 100k or make them commute a couple hours? The bay needs more housing to meet the needs of all the companies that need employees here.
throwthisawayt 10y ago
The Bay Area is the most expensive place in the US for no real reason except for regulation. It's kinda like everyone cheering for Uber and Lyft because medallion rules in SF prevented ever having enough cabs. There's no real reason and that's the problem. Also maybe they had those kids in the 1990s when things were a bit more affordable ? The Bay Area wasn't always the most expensive place in the US
- duderific 10y ago
  > The Bay Area is the most expensive place in the US for no real reason except for regulation. Isn't it more about supply and demand? There are many people here making big salaries at the tech companies, so there is not a shortage of people who can pony up $1-1.5M for a 1200 sq. ft. house. If the demand wasn't there, the prices would come down to meet it.
  - BadassFractal 10y ago
    Exactly. Singles and DINKs moving in, chasing the gold rush, willing to pay whatever it takes to be part of the action. The market adjusts itself accordingly. Nothing new here.
wehadfun 10y ago
I have mixed feelings about this. People say that state shouldn't have to pay for your kids, but the state can send your kids to war. If the state sends your kids to war and they get killed who reimburses the parent for $100K they invested in the kid?
- stevenwoo 10y ago
  it looks like the default death benefit for the US Army serviceman or woman is $100K. http://myarmybenefits.us.army.mil/Home/Benefit_Library/Federal_Benefits_Page/Death_Gratuity_.html?serv=147 http://myarmybenefits.us.army.mil/Home/Benefit_Library/Feder... There were additional sums added for those who died in the Iraq War, with a range from 250K to 800K that varied depending upon the rank and dependent family members. http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/05/news/war-benefits5 http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/05/news/war-benefits5
  - nommm-nommm 10y ago
    There's much more than just the one-time death benefit. On top of that SGLI (servicemember group life insurance) has a maximum payout of $400,000 and surviving spouses get ongoing payments and other benefits as long as they remain unmarried.
- kevinmannix 10y ago
  Can the state currently send your kids to war? By this, I mean forcefully via a draft. I was under the impression that it's a no for now and for the foreseeable future.
  - ef4 10y ago
    Yes, they can. Every male between 18 and 25 is still required to register for the draft. The database is sitting there ready to go. The president just has to declare an emergency and convince congress to approve activation of the selective service system. In practice, will they? Probably not. But weirder things have happened.
Spooky23 10y ago
A professional worker should be able to support a reasonable sized family without living in a slum or being a millionaire. I'm not sure what "holding people accountable" means to you. What it means to the Valley is that these companies have basically colonized the region and created an environment where you need to be single or dink. They like that because it means it's easier to make you work more without a family. In my case, it means my services aren't available to those companies at any price. No big deal individually, but there are many people like me.
- BadassFractal 10y ago
  There are many places in the US where you can live, it doesn't have to be Silicon Valley. Nobody owes you a house and a comfortable lifestyle with a large family in the Bay Area without you providing enough value to the market to live in the most expensive place in the country. There are many other states in the US where you could live, and many other places even in CA that you could move to. If you want to live comfortably right in the eye of the storm, that's your personal choice and the market won't bend over backwards for you.
kidskidskids 10y ago
BUT IT IS MY RIGHT TO MAKE CHILDREN EVEN THOUGH I CANNOT AFFORD THEM. SV parents are the worst.
Danihan 10y ago
Yes, all the smartest, most capable people should stop having kids. Considering intelligence is something like 85% hereditary, that will work out excellently!
- BadassFractal 10y ago
  The smartest and most capable people will not be making 100k in the Bay area with a family of 4.
  - Danihan 10y ago
    In your mind, what would the smartest and most capable people be doing?
- nradov 10y ago
  There is no reliable evidence of people in the Bay Area being smarter or more capable on average than other major metropolitan areas. The average Bay Area resident may be slightly more educated but that doesn't necessarily prove anything about their level of heritable intelligence.
  - Danihan 10y ago
    What would you consider reliable evidence? I'd say the Bay Area GDP and tax base alone would point that way.
    - nradov 10y ago
      Reliable evidence would be a large scale, double blind clinical study establishing statistically significant correlations between particular genes and high scores on multiple standardized intelligence tests, followed by a finding that those genes are significantly more common in the Bay Area than in other regions. Without something like that you can't legitimately make any claims about heritable intelligence. There are many alternative hypotheses which could potentially explain the GDP per capita differential.

enknamel 10y ago

Of course people should be responsible for their choices. However that doesn't mean we can't be more accommodating to people making 100k or less. You think Starbucks will stick around if they have to pay their employees 100k or make them commute a couple hours? The bay needs more housing to meet the needs of all the companies that need employees here.

throwthisawayt 10y ago

The Bay Area is the most expensive place in the US for no real reason except for regulation. It's kinda like everyone cheering for Uber and Lyft because medallion rules in SF prevented ever having enough cabs. There's no real reason and that's the problem. Also maybe they had those kids in the 1990s when things were a bit more affordable ? The Bay Area wasn't always the most expensive place in the US

duderific 10y ago
> The Bay Area is the most expensive place in the US for no real reason except for regulation. Isn't it more about supply and demand? There are many people here making big salaries at the tech companies, so there is not a shortage of people who can pony up $1-1.5M for a 1200 sq. ft. house. If the demand wasn't there, the prices would come down to meet it.
- BadassFractal 10y ago
  Exactly. Singles and DINKs moving in, chasing the gold rush, willing to pay whatever it takes to be part of the action. The market adjusts itself accordingly. Nothing new here.

wehadfun 10y ago

I have mixed feelings about this. People say that state shouldn't have to pay for your kids, but the state can send your kids to war. If the state sends your kids to war and they get killed who reimburses the parent for $100K they invested in the kid?

stevenwoo 10y ago
it looks like the default death benefit for the US Army serviceman or woman is $100K. http://myarmybenefits.us.army.mil/Home/Benefit_Library/Federal_Benefits_Page/Death_Gratuity_.html?serv=147 http://myarmybenefits.us.army.mil/Home/Benefit_Library/Feder... There were additional sums added for those who died in the Iraq War, with a range from 250K to 800K that varied depending upon the rank and dependent family members. http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/05/news/war-benefits5 http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/05/news/war-benefits5
- nommm-nommm 10y ago
  There's much more than just the one-time death benefit. On top of that SGLI (servicemember group life insurance) has a maximum payout of $400,000 and surviving spouses get ongoing payments and other benefits as long as they remain unmarried.
kevinmannix 10y ago
Can the state currently send your kids to war? By this, I mean forcefully via a draft. I was under the impression that it's a no for now and for the foreseeable future.
- ef4 10y ago
  Yes, they can. Every male between 18 and 25 is still required to register for the draft. The database is sitting there ready to go. The president just has to declare an emergency and convince congress to approve activation of the selective service system. In practice, will they? Probably not. But weirder things have happened.

Spooky23 10y ago

A professional worker should be able to support a reasonable sized family without living in a slum or being a millionaire. I'm not sure what "holding people accountable" means to you. What it means to the Valley is that these companies have basically colonized the region and created an environment where you need to be single or dink. They like that because it means it's easier to make you work more without a family. In my case, it means my services aren't available to those companies at any price. No big deal individually, but there are many people like me.

BadassFractal 10y ago
There are many places in the US where you can live, it doesn't have to be Silicon Valley. Nobody owes you a house and a comfortable lifestyle with a large family in the Bay Area without you providing enough value to the market to live in the most expensive place in the country. There are many other states in the US where you could live, and many other places even in CA that you could move to. If you want to live comfortably right in the eye of the storm, that's your personal choice and the market won't bend over backwards for you.

kidskidskids 10y ago

BUT IT IS MY RIGHT TO MAKE CHILDREN EVEN THOUGH I CANNOT AFFORD THEM. SV parents are the worst.

Danihan 10y ago

Yes, all the smartest, most capable people should stop having kids. Considering intelligence is something like 85% hereditary, that will work out excellently!

BadassFractal 10y ago
The smartest and most capable people will not be making 100k in the Bay area with a family of 4.
- Danihan 10y ago
  In your mind, what would the smartest and most capable people be doing?
nradov 10y ago
There is no reliable evidence of people in the Bay Area being smarter or more capable on average than other major metropolitan areas. The average Bay Area resident may be slightly more educated but that doesn't necessarily prove anything about their level of heritable intelligence.
- Danihan 10y ago
  What would you consider reliable evidence? I'd say the Bay Area GDP and tax base alone would point that way.
  - nradov 10y ago
    Reliable evidence would be a large scale, double blind clinical study establishing statistically significant correlations between particular genes and high scores on multiple standardized intelligence tests, followed by a finding that those genes are significantly more common in the Bay Area than in other regions. Without something like that you can't legitimately make any claims about heritable intelligence. There are many alternative hypotheses which could potentially explain the GDP per capita differential.