2 ms·

NYC's median household income is $51k. Half get by on less.

by raldi 7y ago

jelliclesfarm 7y ago
Bay Area isn’t NYC. We are earthquake country with dismal public transport. We are more people and more sprawl. And definitely more jobs. Not comparable. Do you think NYC is affordable for those earning 51k? Really?
- raldi 7y ago
  The dismal public transport is what the proposal on the table will be taking aim at. What makes you think NYC is unaffordable to households making under $51k, and how do you explain the fact that half the populace is doing exactly that? What do earthquakes have to do with it? Half the megacities of Asia are in earthquake country.
  - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
    On NYC: NYC is affordable to them only with rent control. Most people don’t have cars due to its public transport network that we lack in the Bay Area. The city has entertainment, easy access so people don’t have to leave their boroughs..never mind the city. We have land in California and can provide housing IF we improve public transport. Sacramento takes money earmarked for public transport and channels it for affordable housing. It is a pattern of deception. On Asian mega cities with high density, I am going to assume that you have lived there as you brought it up. Is that the kind of standard of living you think affordable high density housing advocates want in California? I see that you are housing advocate and I assume high density as you are dedicated to building more housing stock in San Francisco. I have lived in high density Asian cities and have commuted at 20 km/hour. Which is what is happening in the Bay Area too. How many parts of Asia do you think are earthquake prone? Please name them and their population density. I would like to compare quality of life between them and the bay area.
    - pertymcpert 7y ago
      Bay Area quality of life isn't great. Endless strip malls, hardly any culture vs Europe. It's pretty shit.
      - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
        It is better than many other parts of the world tho’...I do agree that Europe wins in some respects. American comfort and quality of life does come from over consumption. We consume(and are wasteful too) at 350 million people more than the 1.3 billion Indians. So yea..there is that..but surely we can have a middle ground between wasteful sprawl and high density, bumper to bumper trafficker life style. Our local art gallery and indie coffee shops have closed down due to no foot traffic as home-office-home commute begins at 6.30 to 9,00 and then 2.00-7.30 pm. They use side streets and clog arterial infra city roads due to various traffic apps suggesting short cuts. The local mission that used to press olives every year from the olive trees in their property won’t do it anymore because they sold the land to build more condos. The community college wants to sell its land to build apartments and they aren’t even student housing. Everyone is in the speculative high density market rate housing game. Cities have no identity and they are nothing but bedroom communities where people come back to eat and sleep before getting up to go back to work again battling traffic. Are high density cities worth this zombie existence? That’s what Bay Area is becoming.. I hope it isn’t so!
        pertymcpert 7y ago
        You have things 100% backwards. High density should mean improved public transport because the economic incentives will shift to favor it strongly. Low density sprawl is a huge factor in traffic because it pulls people apart. You can't walk anywhere because you have to live more than half an hour walk from the local shop, the local butcher, florist, cafe, gallery. Zombie existence? The low density shit hole that is the Bay Area is a zombie existence. European lifestyle with its much higher density and much better road traffic is the antithesis of zombie existence.
        7y ago
- twblalock 7y ago
  > Do you think NYC is affordable for those earning 51k? Really? It must be, otherwise the people making $51k or less would have been forced to move away, thereby causing the median income to increase. The fact that they have not done this is proof that they can afford to live there.
  - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
    That’s a weak assumption. Are you telling me that it’s a ‘fact’ that those who make less than 51k do not move away from NYC?
    - kelnos 7y ago
      I mean, the numbers speak for themselves. If the median income is $51k, then yes, that is indeed a fact. Unless half of the population plus one person makes exactly $51k (with everyone else above), since... well... that's how medians work.
      - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
        NYC has the highest Gini co-efficient in the United States..close to 0.5%.

NYC's median household income is $51k. Half get by on less.

by raldi 7y ago

NYC's median household income is $51k. Half get by on less.

Bay Area isn’t NYC. We are earthquake country with dismal public transport. We are more people and more sprawl. And definitely more jobs. Not comparable. Do you think NYC is affordable for those earning 51k? Really?

raldi 7y ago
The dismal public transport is what the proposal on the table will be taking aim at. What makes you think NYC is unaffordable to households making under $51k, and how do you explain the fact that half the populace is doing exactly that? What do earthquakes have to do with it? Half the megacities of Asia are in earthquake country.
- jelliclesfarm 7y ago
  On NYC: NYC is affordable to them only with rent control. Most people don’t have cars due to its public transport network that we lack in the Bay Area. The city has entertainment, easy access so people don’t have to leave their boroughs..never mind the city. We have land in California and can provide housing IF we improve public transport. Sacramento takes money earmarked for public transport and channels it for affordable housing. It is a pattern of deception. On Asian mega cities with high density, I am going to assume that you have lived there as you brought it up. Is that the kind of standard of living you think affordable high density housing advocates want in California? I see that you are housing advocate and I assume high density as you are dedicated to building more housing stock in San Francisco. I have lived in high density Asian cities and have commuted at 20 km/hour. Which is what is happening in the Bay Area too. How many parts of Asia do you think are earthquake prone? Please name them and their population density. I would like to compare quality of life between them and the bay area.
  - pertymcpert 7y ago
    Bay Area quality of life isn't great. Endless strip malls, hardly any culture vs Europe. It's pretty shit.
    - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
      It is better than many other parts of the world tho’...I do agree that Europe wins in some respects. American comfort and quality of life does come from over consumption. We consume(and are wasteful too) at 350 million people more than the 1.3 billion Indians. So yea..there is that..but surely we can have a middle ground between wasteful sprawl and high density, bumper to bumper trafficker life style. Our local art gallery and indie coffee shops have closed down due to no foot traffic as home-office-home commute begins at 6.30 to 9,00 and then 2.00-7.30 pm. They use side streets and clog arterial infra city roads due to various traffic apps suggesting short cuts. The local mission that used to press olives every year from the olive trees in their property won’t do it anymore because they sold the land to build more condos. The community college wants to sell its land to build apartments and they aren’t even student housing. Everyone is in the speculative high density market rate housing game. Cities have no identity and they are nothing but bedroom communities where people come back to eat and sleep before getting up to go back to work again battling traffic. Are high density cities worth this zombie existence? That’s what Bay Area is becoming.. I hope it isn’t so!
      - pertymcpert 7y ago
        You have things 100% backwards. High density should mean improved public transport because the economic incentives will shift to favor it strongly. Low density sprawl is a huge factor in traffic because it pulls people apart. You can't walk anywhere because you have to live more than half an hour walk from the local shop, the local butcher, florist, cafe, gallery. Zombie existence? The low density shit hole that is the Bay Area is a zombie existence. European lifestyle with its much higher density and much better road traffic is the antithesis of zombie existence.
        7y ago
twblalock 7y ago
> Do you think NYC is affordable for those earning 51k? Really? It must be, otherwise the people making $51k or less would have been forced to move away, thereby causing the median income to increase. The fact that they have not done this is proof that they can afford to live there.
- jelliclesfarm 7y ago
  That’s a weak assumption. Are you telling me that it’s a ‘fact’ that those who make less than 51k do not move away from NYC?
  - kelnos 7y ago
    I mean, the numbers speak for themselves. If the median income is $51k, then yes, that is indeed a fact. Unless half of the population plus one person makes exactly $51k (with everyone else above), since... well... that's how medians work.
    - jelliclesfarm 7y ago
      NYC has the highest Gini co-efficient in the United States..close to 0.5%.