5 ms·

I hear this sort of thing a lot and I have trouble reconciling it with my experiences. I live in SF and my total expenses (rent, food, entertainment, etc.) were

by coltalk 10y ago

I hear this sort of thing a lot and I have trouble reconciling it with my experiences. I live in SF and my total expenses (rent, food, entertainment, etc.) were ~$15,000 in 2016. I don't feel like I live a life of great deprivation. I get that the article is talking about a family of four, but even if we assume there are no economies of scale, my costs would work out to $60,000 for a family of four. I also get that I have some privileges: healthy enough to bike rather than drive/take transit, minimal medical expenses, no student loans. But I am surely not the only person in this position. What's happening here? What are the other major expenses that people have? (I understand this comment probably comes off as obnoxious, but I'm genuinely trying to understand. This incongruity makes it harder for me to understand/sympathize with others on this issue and I'd like to regain that ability.)

kevinburke 10y ago
Among other things, childcare is wildly expensive. Throw in life insurance, and you want your kids to live in a good school district, right?
- coltalk 10y ago
  Hm, early childhood care is more expensive than I thought. I think the schools for my address do happen to be good.
- mac01021 10y ago
  If you make $100k, you probably net at least $70k after income taxes. The GP could double his rent and still have over $40k per year to spend on childcare. So something is still not adding up.
closeparen 10y ago
You're indicating that you rent for less than $1250/mo. A studio is out of the question at that rate; even a room in a shared apartment would be unlikely. People I know paying that little money for housing are an entire BART line away from the city (Richmond, Pittsburg, etc), have several roommates or a working spouse, and need cars. What do you pay for housing, what kind of housing is it, and is a lease like yours available to newcomers who don't have your grandfathered status or connections?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- coltalk 10y ago
  $915/month for SRO. No special connections or status.
  - closeparen 10y ago
    Ah. SROs seem to have a reputation for extremely poor physical condition, predatory management, a high concentration of unstable and dangerous people with untreated mental illnesses as neighbors, and locations in rough neighborhoods like the Tenderloin. There seems to be a consensus that enduring long commutes, or just moving away, are preferable to living in those kinds of conditions. I've never heard of someone considering an SRO unless they had been previously homeless or institutionalized. Even the starving artists seem to prefer sharing apartments (or using former warehouse/factory space as apartments) in the less glamorous parts of the East Bay. I'd love to to live in a clean, safe, quiet, well-maintained SRO close to work at that price.

by coltalk 10y ago

kevinburke 10y ago

Among other things, childcare is wildly expensive. Throw in life insurance, and you want your kids to live in a good school district, right?

coltalk 10y ago
Hm, early childhood care is more expensive than I thought. I think the schools for my address do happen to be good.
mac01021 10y ago
If you make $100k, you probably net at least $70k after income taxes. The GP could double his rent and still have over $40k per year to spend on childcare. So something is still not adding up.

closeparen 10y ago

You're indicating that you rent for less than $1250/mo. A studio is out of the question at that rate; even a room in a shared apartment would be unlikely. People I know paying that little money for housing are an entire BART line away from the city (Richmond, Pittsburg, etc), have several roommates or a working spouse, and need cars. What do you pay for housing, what kind of housing is it, and is a lease like yours available to newcomers who don't have your grandfathered status or connections?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
coltalk 10y ago
$915/month for SRO. No special connections or status.
- closeparen 10y ago
  Ah. SROs seem to have a reputation for extremely poor physical condition, predatory management, a high concentration of unstable and dangerous people with untreated mental illnesses as neighbors, and locations in rough neighborhoods like the Tenderloin. There seems to be a consensus that enduring long commutes, or just moving away, are preferable to living in those kinds of conditions. I've never heard of someone considering an SRO unless they had been previously homeless or institutionalized. Even the starving artists seem to prefer sharing apartments (or using former warehouse/factory space as apartments) in the less glamorous parts of the East Bay. I'd love to to live in a clean, safe, quiet, well-maintained SRO close to work at that price.