5 ms·
I agree with you but there is still a problem to be solved: a LOT of essential public services are provided by people that have salaries far lower than required
by jarym 8y ago
I agree with you but there is still a problem to be solved: a LOT of essential public services are provided by people that have salaries far lower than required for rents in a particular area.
Teachers, nurses, police officers, etc.
- seibelj 8y agoSure, but wouldn’t a city have to increase salaries to allow someone to be a nurse or teacher in an expensive area? Similarly, one can be a nurse or teacher in a lower cost of living place. No one forces you to teach in SF.
- bradknowles 8y agoNo one forces you to have kids, either. No kids, no need for teachers or any kind of education system.
- seibelj 8y agoUnrelated to my comment? Are there a lack of teachers in SF?
- txsh 8y agoNo. They wouldn’t. They’d just allow the quality of government services to degrade. Example: every city the United States. It’s like saying “traffic is good because it forces to government to build more roads.” No, it does not.
- jstanley 8y agoIf those people start being forced to move out, you'll quickly find that salaries will rise to compensate. Supply and demand is very simple. Keeping rents artificially cheap is just a backdoor way of keeping salaries artificially low.