6 ms·

Your post seems to contradict itself. If it's not possible to have a middle class existence in SF, then surely it's even less possible to have a working class o

Your post seems to contradict itself. If it's not possible to have a middle class existence in SF, then surely it's even less possible to have a working class or poor existence in SF. Therefore, since the city is now exclusively populated by rich people, wouldn't the average person be rich, and therefore have a better quality of life than the average middle class person ~30 years ago?

keiferski 6y ago
Is this a serious reply? The real world isn’t a logic problem. SF today is mostly inhabited by two groups: the rich and the working poor. The rich can afford to live wherever they like and take Ubers or corporate shuttles. The working poor commute in on decaying, often dangerous public transit from an hour or more away.
- iaabtpbtpnn 6y ago
  Of course it's serious, and you just confirmed it: SF is not "inhabited" by the working poor at all, who are forced to live elsewhere. Unless you're talking about the tent cities, I guess. If you can actually afford to live in SF proper, I bet your quality of life is excellent.
  - keiferski 6y ago
    You are conflating “average person in the country”, aka middle class, with “average person that lives in a specific area.” This is not particularly complicated.
    - iaabtpbtpnn 6y ago
      What? I'm not conflating anything. I'm talking about "the average person in SF", exactly as you described in your OP. You can talk about the average person in the country all you want, but this person does not live in SF. I'll stop replying since it seems like we are talking past each other, and I'm attempting to read your posts charitably but I just don't get it.
  - shuckles 6y ago
    Tell that to the recent college graduates splitting a dilapidated Victorian with 4 roommates for $1800/mo.
lhorie 6y ago
> If it's not possible to have a middle class existence in SF, then surely it's even less possible to have a working class or poor existence in SF That's a fallacious conclusion. It is very much possible to have a poor existence if there's no reasonable path to middle class. For example, you don't pay rent if you live in a tent city, and tent cities are very much a reality in SF.
username90 6y ago
Lots of people live in cheap rent controlled housing though. They can take low paying jobs and still make ends meet so they drive wages down.
kwillets 6y ago
The city requires housing producers to sell a percentage of their output to low-income buyers at a government-set price. So middle-class housing buyers pay significantly more to cover that cost.

keiferski 6y ago

Is this a serious reply? The real world isn’t a logic problem. SF today is mostly inhabited by two groups: the rich and the working poor. The rich can afford to live wherever they like and take Ubers or corporate shuttles. The working poor commute in on decaying, often dangerous public transit from an hour or more away.

iaabtpbtpnn 6y ago
Of course it's serious, and you just confirmed it: SF is not "inhabited" by the working poor at all, who are forced to live elsewhere. Unless you're talking about the tent cities, I guess. If you can actually afford to live in SF proper, I bet your quality of life is excellent.
- keiferski 6y ago
  You are conflating “average person in the country”, aka middle class, with “average person that lives in a specific area.” This is not particularly complicated.
  - iaabtpbtpnn 6y ago
    What? I'm not conflating anything. I'm talking about "the average person in SF", exactly as you described in your OP. You can talk about the average person in the country all you want, but this person does not live in SF. I'll stop replying since it seems like we are talking past each other, and I'm attempting to read your posts charitably but I just don't get it.
- shuckles 6y ago
  Tell that to the recent college graduates splitting a dilapidated Victorian with 4 roommates for $1800/mo.

lhorie 6y ago

> If it's not possible to have a middle class existence in SF, then surely it's even less possible to have a working class or poor existence in SF That's a fallacious conclusion. It is very much possible to have a poor existence if there's no reasonable path to middle class. For example, you don't pay rent if you live in a tent city, and tent cities are very much a reality in SF.

username90 6y ago

Lots of people live in cheap rent controlled housing though. They can take low paying jobs and still make ends meet so they drive wages down.

kwillets 6y ago

The city requires housing producers to sell a percentage of their output to low-income buyers at a government-set price. So middle-class housing buyers pay significantly more to cover that cost.