5 ms·

You have a distorted picture. I moved to the bay area in 85, stayed 20 years, then left. If you moved there and were already well established, sure, real estate

You have a distorted picture. I moved to the bay area in 85, stayed 20 years, then left. If you moved there and were already well established, sure, real estate would have been more affordable then than now. But as a young engineer, things were still pretty expensive. My starting salary as a BSEE working for a minicomputer company was $30,000. Two weeks after arriving they had layoffs. They were nice to the new hires and said we'll keep you on for a bit, but you should start looking for new jobs, plus there is a 10% pay cut, so $27K/year ($65.3K in 2020 dollars). My shared apartment was off Maude and Mathilda was nothing special. It was 700 sq ft and was $750/month, which works out to $1800/month in 2020 dollars. Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills, and Atherton were all expensive addresses, even then.

OkGoDoIt 6y ago
Now that is perspective I’d like to hear more about, considering how much my peers whine about how things would’ve been better if they moved to the bay area long ago and it’s all crappy nowadays. That’s not nearly as much change as I would’ve expected in inflation-adjusted dollars. I do wonder how typical your case is though. I would love to hear more data points from others in similar situations. With all the old rent controlled apartment in San Francisco, it certainly feels like people who moved here a decade or two ago are locked into to paying basically nothing by modern standards. I personally know a couple people who still live with their exes because their rent-controlled apartment is too good a deal to give up.
- shuckles 6y ago
  San Francisco rent control is below inflation, so it gets cheaper every year you stay.
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    If you stay in downtown SF in a "YIMBY"/new construction building, there's no rent control and the prices are astronomical. $3900ish for the cheapest studio in some buildings.
    - shuckles 6y ago
      What does the location or construction date have anything to do with YIMBYism? In fact, YIMBYs probably believe that San Francisco's least desirable neighborhoods shouldn't be where all housing growth occurs.
Cherian 6y ago
Would you be open to doing an interview? If yes, how do I reach out?
ghaff 6y ago
I started as a product manager (with engineering degrees and an MBA) for a minicomputer company at almost exactly the same time getting paid $42K as I recall. This was one of the Route 128 companies. But, based on some recruiting conversations I had over time, the Bay Area salaries weren't really a lot higher and housing was more expensive. That's one reason I never moved out West. I think I was paying similar in rent initially but it was a bigger 2BR townhouse. Housing has gotten relatively more expensive but it hasn't been cheap in much of the Bay Area for a very long time and tech salaries didn't used to be anything special.
lliamander 6y ago
> $27K/year ($65.3K in 2020 dollars) Side bar: that is a breathtaking amount of inflation in just 35 years. Even if wages kept up with inflation, the impact this would have on cash savings is just devastating.
- ChrisLomont 6y ago
  > that is a breathtaking amount of inflation in just 35 years. That's under 3% inflation which is a not breathtaking. The Fed targets 2%, which helps avoid deflationary spirals and helps both stability and lowers unemployment, two of their mandates. >Even if wages kept up with inflation, Wages have surpassed inflation in just about every income bracket for the past 100 years. And when you factor in total remuneration, returns to workers are even higher. Here's 50+ years of data [1] >the impact this would have on cash savings is just devastating. No one in their right mind holds cash savings for 35 years. It's a ludicrously long time to simply hold your savings in a cash pile. [1] https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44705.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44705.pdf
  - lliamander 6y ago
    > That's under 3% inflation which is a not breathtaking. Perhaps it is better to say that I am caught off-guard by the power of compound interest. > The Fed targets 2%, which helps avoid deflationary spirals and helps both stability and lowers unemployment, two of their mandates. I am generally skeptical of the Fed, but that's an entirely different discussion, so I'll just nod my head and move along. > Wages have surpassed inflation in just about every income bracket for the past 100 years. And when you factor in total remuneration, returns to workers are even higher. Here's 50+ years of data [1] That is good to see, thanks! > No one in their right mind holds cash savings for 35 years. It's a ludicrously long time to simply hold your savings in a cash pile. True, but people do usually place their money in a savings account. And while in theory the interest from the savings account should exceed inflation, it seems to me the mere fact of inflation means that people who have primarily cash savings are needlessly penalized. But while it is absurd to store you money in a coffee can in the shed for 30+ years, I'm not sure it should be.
anonAndOn 6y ago
Sure 280 was known as the Billionaire's Highway and 101 was the Millionaire's Highway even back in the late 80's but there were still lots of affordable tract homes in the south bay. Nobody knew the industrial park across from Vallco Fashion Park would become the mothership for the world's most valuable company.

OkGoDoIt 6y ago

Now that is perspective I’d like to hear more about, considering how much my peers whine about how things would’ve been better if they moved to the bay area long ago and it’s all crappy nowadays. That’s not nearly as much change as I would’ve expected in inflation-adjusted dollars. I do wonder how typical your case is though. I would love to hear more data points from others in similar situations. With all the old rent controlled apartment in San Francisco, it certainly feels like people who moved here a decade or two ago are locked into to paying basically nothing by modern standards. I personally know a couple people who still live with their exes because their rent-controlled apartment is too good a deal to give up.

shuckles 6y ago
San Francisco rent control is below inflation, so it gets cheaper every year you stay.
- nitrogen 6y ago
  If you stay in downtown SF in a "YIMBY"/new construction building, there's no rent control and the prices are astronomical. $3900ish for the cheapest studio in some buildings.
  - shuckles 6y ago
    What does the location or construction date have anything to do with YIMBYism? In fact, YIMBYs probably believe that San Francisco's least desirable neighborhoods shouldn't be where all housing growth occurs.

Cherian 6y ago

Would you be open to doing an interview? If yes, how do I reach out?

ghaff 6y ago

I started as a product manager (with engineering degrees and an MBA) for a minicomputer company at almost exactly the same time getting paid $42K as I recall. This was one of the Route 128 companies. But, based on some recruiting conversations I had over time, the Bay Area salaries weren't really a lot higher and housing was more expensive. That's one reason I never moved out West. I think I was paying similar in rent initially but it was a bigger 2BR townhouse. Housing has gotten relatively more expensive but it hasn't been cheap in much of the Bay Area for a very long time and tech salaries didn't used to be anything special.

lliamander 6y ago

> $27K/year ($65.3K in 2020 dollars) Side bar: that is a breathtaking amount of inflation in just 35 years. Even if wages kept up with inflation, the impact this would have on cash savings is just devastating.

ChrisLomont 6y ago
> that is a breathtaking amount of inflation in just 35 years. That's under 3% inflation which is a not breathtaking. The Fed targets 2%, which helps avoid deflationary spirals and helps both stability and lowers unemployment, two of their mandates. >Even if wages kept up with inflation, Wages have surpassed inflation in just about every income bracket for the past 100 years. And when you factor in total remuneration, returns to workers are even higher. Here's 50+ years of data [1] >the impact this would have on cash savings is just devastating. No one in their right mind holds cash savings for 35 years. It's a ludicrously long time to simply hold your savings in a cash pile. [1] https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44705.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44705.pdf
- lliamander 6y ago
  > That's under 3% inflation which is a not breathtaking. Perhaps it is better to say that I am caught off-guard by the power of compound interest. > The Fed targets 2%, which helps avoid deflationary spirals and helps both stability and lowers unemployment, two of their mandates. I am generally skeptical of the Fed, but that's an entirely different discussion, so I'll just nod my head and move along. > Wages have surpassed inflation in just about every income bracket for the past 100 years. And when you factor in total remuneration, returns to workers are even higher. Here's 50+ years of data [1] That is good to see, thanks! > No one in their right mind holds cash savings for 35 years. It's a ludicrously long time to simply hold your savings in a cash pile. True, but people do usually place their money in a savings account. And while in theory the interest from the savings account should exceed inflation, it seems to me the mere fact of inflation means that people who have primarily cash savings are needlessly penalized. But while it is absurd to store you money in a coffee can in the shed for 30+ years, I'm not sure it should be.

anonAndOn 6y ago

Sure 280 was known as the Billionaire's Highway and 101 was the Millionaire's Highway even back in the late 80's but there were still lots of affordable tract homes in the south bay. Nobody knew the industrial park across from Vallco Fashion Park would become the mothership for the world's most valuable company.