4 ms·
I’d be curious to know where that person got such cheap housing. $300k/yr translates to $15k/month take home. Houses are like $10k/month if you’re looking to ow
by bradlys 6y ago
I’d be curious to know where that person got such cheap housing. $300k/yr translates to $15k/month take home. Houses are like $10k/month if you’re looking to own. Even if you rent, it’s still close to $5-6k/month if you want a decent neighborhood.
I’m not even talking about nice houses btw.
Maybe they rent an apartment and share the rent. That’s the only way I see them coming up with those numbers.
$300k/year isn’t enough for single income families in the Bay Area.
EDIT: I'm curious if you live in the bay area and where you get your notions.
- tidepod12 6y agoIn less than 5 minutes of looking I found several very nice houses for $4-5k/month in multiple nice neighborhoods. Renting, there are actual luxury condos and apartments ready to rent for $3-4k, again in multiple nice neighborhoods. >$300k/year isn’t enough for single income families in the Bay Area. The median household income for SF families is less than $100k, and you're telling me three times that "isn't enough"? That's bullshit. Responding to your edit: I don't live in SF, but prior to covid I traveled there every week for work, so I am familiar with the city. For a local example, my best friend makes ~$140k/yr, lives in Nob Hill in a gorgeous high rise apartment, and still has thousands to spend every month on fun discretionary activities. Another close friend who makes ~$250k/yr owns a great house in Inner Sunset and they certainly seem like they are able to afford any other desires they want (a boat, all kinds of tech gadgets, trips all the time, etc).
- bradlys 6y agoYou're going to have to show listings. Last time, people were posting spam postings they found on Craigslist. If you want an apartment - you can find 1-bedroom "luxury" apartments (also known as normal apartments outside the bay area) for about $3300-4000/month. Even at $7000/month income that leaves "thousands" left over but that is a fucked ratio of expenses. You shouldn't be spending close to 50% of your take home on RENT. You will never be able to retire and live the same lifestyle. If you want a house, you're not finding a nice house (3+ bedrooms, central air, etc.) and in a nice neighborhood (San Carlos, Hillsborough, Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, etc.) for $4000-5000. I'd love to see the listings... I don't even bother with SF because the prices are even more outlandish for nice neighborhoods. Familiar with the city and actually paying rent here are different. I've had coworkers who lived with their parents who are wildly out of tune with how much it costs to rent a place. I don't know how your friend affords a high rise on $140k/yr - maybe you should ask what their rent is and if they're sharing it with someone. You can't buy a house now with $250k/yr in inner sunset. Go to Zillow and find me a nice house you can afford on $250k/yr and won't be house poor in the end with. Do it - prove me wrong.
- tidepod12 6y ago>Even at $7000/month income that leaves "thousands" left over but that is a fucked ratio of expenses. You shouldn't be spending close to 50% of your take home on RENT. You will never be able to retire and live the same lifestyle. The general guidance is that 30% of your gross income should be spent on rent. After taxes, that equates to ~40-50% of your take home goes to rent. That's normal for everyone, not just in SF. It is not a "fucked ratio of expenses" at all, and in any case, "thousands" left over after rent is still an extravagant amount of discretionary income. >I don't know how your friend affords a high rise on $140k/yr - maybe you should ask what their rent is and if they're sharing it with someone. I'm not going to dox my friend but I just looked up their building and there are 1br apartments for $3-3.3k/mo, and it is a very nice building/apartment. 3k/mo is easily doable on $140k/yr. >You can't buy a house now with $250k/yr in inner sunset. Go to Zillow and find me a nice house you can afford on $250k/yr and won't be house poor in the end with. Do it - prove me wrong. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1345-16th-Ave-APT-7-San-Francisco-CA-94122/2079109757_zpid/ https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1345-16th-Ave-APT-7-San-F... Literally the first result. Gorgeous 2 bedroom, and at 250k you'd have ~7-8k each month left over after mortgage. 7-8k per month is more money than most people in SF make period, even before paying for their homes. You're not even close to being "poor in the end with it". Also well below the "thirty percent rule" with this condo. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1485-11th-Ave-San-Francisco-CA-94122/15105873_zpid/ https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1485-11th-Ave-San-Francis... Second result. 3 bedrooms, central air, all the amenities. At 250k/yr. At the list price (assuming you can't negotiate lower) with a house note of 5-6k/mo, you are still within the "thirty percent rule" without even stretching your income, and you're still looking at ~6k+ in discretionary spending after paying the house note. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/717-Kirkham-St-San-Francisco-CA-94122/241586139_zpid/ https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/717-Kirkham-St-San-Franci... 3 bed, 3 bath condo. All the amenities. At 250k/yr, this condo would put you at slightly above the thirty percent rule which isn't wise depending on how much you want to be able to save for retirement, but still doable without worrying about money, and certainly still not even close to worrying about being "poor". And these are three that I picked off of Zillow in literally 10 minutes without any further research. With any actual effort and talking to an agent, the prices and options would likely be even better.
- perl4ever 6y agoI don't have firsthand experience, but craigslist seems to have what look like normal apartments to me in the bay area for around $2800/month. Something like 600 apartments below that if I filter by off street parking and washer/dryer in the apt, which is my idea of a nice place. Looking for ads that double that brings up furnished apartments and luxury high rises with "24 hour concierges". My reference point would be, for a young single person in a "normal" area of the country, $55K and $1250/month rent means you have $2K/month left over. A lot of people don't make this much. To have the same amount left over after taxes and rent of $2800/month, it appears you'd need to make about $78K. So anything above $80K seems on the face of it to be livable at least for one person. By the way, I noticed that total income taxes seem to actually be lower than in upstate NY.
- bradlys 6y agoDepending on the landlord, you wouldn't get the apartment. Some landlords require you to make 40x the monthly rent per year. I don't see many people renting $2800 apartments here at $80k/yr. If people are at 80k/yr, they're almost always renting a room. Btw, I wouldn't necessarily use the entire bay area as your reference - as we weren't talking about the entire bay area either. Specifically only nicer neighborhoods. The price varies wildly by region. Apartments in south San Jose are much less expensive than in Palo Alto - but both are part of the bay area. There are many places in the bay area where my coworkers wouldn't even want to walk on the street - let alone live there... but there are cheaper housing options there. You should be using ratios - not absolutes. If someone had $100,000/month rent then by your logic, they'd be just fine if they only had $2,000/month left over. That's very little buffer.
- perl4ever 6y ago>If someone had $100,000/month rent then by your logic, they'd be just fine if they only had $2,000/month left over. That's very little buffer. If you scale things up to that extent, then $2K becomes small compared to the possible variance in income or rent. But it's also small compared to the credit you'd have access to. Without visiting I can't tell for sure, but I can compare apartments to what I'm used to by amenities, square footage, and such. If I had an offer and needed to move there, I'd judge the neighborhood by the housing, not vice versa.