3 ms·

The difference in demand for SF vs Houston as well as salaries and equity buyouts cannot be ignored. SF/Bay/North Cal is a very aspirational place, Houston is

• jimthrow 7y ago
  Poop town SF is becoming less aspirational by the year. And can you really say SF is aspirational if Houston is growing 4 times faster?
  • jariel 7y ago
    Neither of these items are true. As globalization increases, there is ever more increasing demand for SF/Bay real estate, it's becoming ever more elite due to the fixed nature of housing. 'All things being equal' in terms of cost, SF would be the choice 8 times out of 10 for people as a destination. SF boundaries are fixed, housing is limited, Houston is large and has room for new housing; Houston's growth is due to affordability, not because it's aspirational. 'Tourism' isn't a perfect estimation of livable aspiration, I mean, Orlando gets massive numbers of visitors each year, but SF gets a huge number of visitors as well without 'Disneyland/Epcot' to draw them in, even with a relatively small population, it's a top tourist destination in the US. [1]. Houston doesn't get a lot of tourists. Also, Houston's population growth has slowed dramatically, with new births accounting for more than the ingress population this year. [1] https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-most-visited-cities-in-the-us.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-most-visited-cities-... With worker mobility ever increasing in this world, the demand for the 'nice spots' skyrockets.
• xyzzyz 7y ago
  Salaries in SFBA are higher, but not 5 times higher than in Houston, while houses are in fact over five times more expensive.
  • jariel 7y ago
    Salaries do not need to be 5x in order to have 5x housing, that's not how supply and demand works.