4 ms·

Comparing salaries to all of California is an irrelevant data point. Most Californians don’t live in the Bay Area, where basic housing costs $1.5M Can a famil

Comparing salaries to all of California is an irrelevant data point. Most Californians don’t live in the Bay Area, where basic housing costs $1.5M Can a family of 4 live on $250k in the Bay Area? Of course. But you’ll never own a home. And working for the wealthiest companies in the world doing the most in-demand job in the world, yet never being able to own a home, that’s a bizarre situation to be in. We want to incentivize more people to work in tech. Not less. Whatever you get paid in Europe is irrelevant since it’s a completely different system (from healthcare and education down to public transport and housing). And if Europe wants to be at all competitive with the US or China in tech (right now, it’s not), maybe you should be getting paid more than a mid-level accountant?

snewman 5y ago
The problem here is not taxation, it's the artificially constrained housing supply in the Bay Area. Too many people are chasing too few houses; they would remain unaffordable to most even if the tax rate were zero, because prices would rise to match income.
- pembrook 5y ago
  Fully agree, it's a housing supply issue. But raising taxes while not addressing the supply problem will make it worse for those who have not already "cashed out" their capital gains into tax-advantaged real estate.
  - delusional 5y ago
    "We can't solve the issue because that would be unfair to the people who haven't gotten to make use of it yet" isn't a compelling argument.
eertami 5y ago
>And if Europe wants to be at all competitive with the US or China in tech (right now, it’s not), maybe you should be getting paid more than a mid-level accountant? I have 10 weeks vacation and a <20 hour workweek. I'd really rather _not_ be competitive with the US or China.
- bko 5y ago
  Congrats, but you can't opt out of competition indefinitely. If someone is willing to do the same job except better or for less, it'll eventually happen. Or do you think you're entitled to that job due to historical reasons?
hyperbovine 5y ago
Give me a break, there are tons of home owning families in the Bay who make less than that. The Bay Area is a lot more than Palo Alto, SF, Mountain View and Berkeley.
- xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
  Can't give you a break, unfortunately. They already had homes before costs got to their current point. I made more than 250k and could not afford any home within an hour's commute to SF in the years my income was that high. I might've been able to buy a condo at one point, but that's about it.
  - hyperbovine 5y ago
    https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/14233/CA/Oakland/West-Oakland https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/14233/CA/Oakland/West-Oa... Most of these are well within reach, even moreso before the current bubble, if you make that kind of money. And an 8 minute BART ride from the city. Your not wanting to live there does not imply that somebody does not live there.
    - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
      You're right, I forgot about the 0.8% of homes in the Bay Area smaller than most condos in an area where your chances of being involved in a crime are 1 in 6.
      - hyperbovine 5y ago
        Your made up 0.8% statistic perfectly conveys the point I was trying to make above.
        xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
        It's not made up. The US Census data is public to all. Number of households in West Oakland divided by the number of households in the entire Bay Area. If you look at just houses, the number is even worse. Your example is beyond cherry-picked. The population of that region is only 21k. It is not remotely representative of the reality the vast majority of residents face.
UncleMeat 5y ago
A small change in tax policy isn't going to make the difference in owning a home in the bay area. The problem there is the price of housing. Yes, somebody making 400k in Palo Alto isn't rolling in stacks of cash (though you are certainly doing a lot better than the grad students making 30k). But this sort of "hey but in this extreme edge case the policy is sort of frustrating" argument is consistently overused to prevent reasonable policies (see estate taxes and farms for a classic example).

snewman 5y ago

The problem here is not taxation, it's the artificially constrained housing supply in the Bay Area. Too many people are chasing too few houses; they would remain unaffordable to most even if the tax rate were zero, because prices would rise to match income.

pembrook 5y ago
Fully agree, it's a housing supply issue. But raising taxes while not addressing the supply problem will make it worse for those who have not already "cashed out" their capital gains into tax-advantaged real estate.
- delusional 5y ago
  "We can't solve the issue because that would be unfair to the people who haven't gotten to make use of it yet" isn't a compelling argument.

eertami 5y ago

>And if Europe wants to be at all competitive with the US or China in tech (right now, it’s not), maybe you should be getting paid more than a mid-level accountant? I have 10 weeks vacation and a <20 hour workweek. I'd really rather _not_ be competitive with the US or China.

bko 5y ago
Congrats, but you can't opt out of competition indefinitely. If someone is willing to do the same job except better or for less, it'll eventually happen. Or do you think you're entitled to that job due to historical reasons?

hyperbovine 5y ago

Give me a break, there are tons of home owning families in the Bay who make less than that. The Bay Area is a lot more than Palo Alto, SF, Mountain View and Berkeley.

xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
Can't give you a break, unfortunately. They already had homes before costs got to their current point. I made more than 250k and could not afford any home within an hour's commute to SF in the years my income was that high. I might've been able to buy a condo at one point, but that's about it.
- hyperbovine 5y ago
  https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/14233/CA/Oakland/West-Oakland https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/14233/CA/Oakland/West-Oa... Most of these are well within reach, even moreso before the current bubble, if you make that kind of money. And an 8 minute BART ride from the city. Your not wanting to live there does not imply that somebody does not live there.
  - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
    You're right, I forgot about the 0.8% of homes in the Bay Area smaller than most condos in an area where your chances of being involved in a crime are 1 in 6.
    - hyperbovine 5y ago
      Your made up 0.8% statistic perfectly conveys the point I was trying to make above.
      - xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
        It's not made up. The US Census data is public to all. Number of households in West Oakland divided by the number of households in the entire Bay Area. If you look at just houses, the number is even worse. Your example is beyond cherry-picked. The population of that region is only 21k. It is not remotely representative of the reality the vast majority of residents face.

UncleMeat 5y ago

A small change in tax policy isn't going to make the difference in owning a home in the bay area. The problem there is the price of housing. Yes, somebody making 400k in Palo Alto isn't rolling in stacks of cash (though you are certainly doing a lot better than the grad students making 30k). But this sort of "hey but in this extreme edge case the policy is sort of frustrating" argument is consistently overused to prevent reasonable policies (see estate taxes and farms for a classic example).