2 ms·

>And NYC's absolute market rent levels appear to be lower than SF's.... That's NYC, not Manhattan. Manhattan is worse than SF, (and certainly worse than any o

>And NYC's absolute market rent levels appear to be lower than SF's.... That's NYC, not Manhattan. Manhattan is worse than SF, (and certainly worse than any other place in SV). And yet, it's not a monoculture. That's the point I'm making. It strongly suggests that the issue in SF is less about affordable housing, and more about the fact that SF/SV is simply popular with a certain type of person.

jseliger 8y ago
This data: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/915/28341255697_1dbd87422e_o.jpg https://farm1.staticflickr.com/915/28341255697_1dbd87422e_o.... claims median rent in SF is $450/mo more in SF than Manhattan. Zillow rent index: https://www.zillow.com/san-francisco-ca/home-values/ https://www.zillow.com/san-francisco-ca/home-values/ has SF at $4100/month. And it has Manhattan: https://www.zillow.com/manhattan-ny/home-values/ https://www.zillow.com/manhattan-ny/home-values/ at $3879. And, as noted in the original post, in Manhattan it is very easy and typical to live without a car; in SF, less so, further increasing the cost disparity. It is wise to cite your sources prior to posting.
fmajid 8y ago
Tech is not even in the top 4 employers in SF (tourism, government, medicine and finance are ahead). Granted, a large contingent of techies working at Google/Facebook/Apple in the Peninsula would rather live in SF than the mind-numbing tedium of Silicon Valley.