10 ms·

Why do you think it is temporary? You don't seem to understand how much is $700 to a minimum wage worker. Even in SF, that is nearly 1/3 of their income. If we

Why do you think it is temporary? You don't seem to understand how much is $700 to a minimum wage worker. Even in SF, that is nearly 1/3 of their income. If we take the common requirement of 3x the rent then this is basically the most a minimum wage worker can afford. Sometimes, people can't do any better than that. Are you saying that even if a person work full time, they don't deserve a better living condition than a box? This is eye opening to me how the housing situation is viewed by the SF upper class. I have always considered it a dystopian nightmare when the workers have to sleep in a coffin and work full time. It seems not many people in SF share my view.

skybrian 3y ago
I think it's temporary because in the article, he is quoted as saying he's "living in a $700/mo pod at Mint Plaza for the next 30 days." That seems pretty temporary to me? As to what he deserves, I think he deserves to decide for himself without other people second-guessing it, and also to be able to change his mind and do something else if it gets old. It seems like you're going off-topic, since the article isn't about minimum wage workers in general. But to address that, yes, rents are very high in San Francisco and it's no place to try to live solely on a minimum wage.
- tomohelix 3y ago
  The article to me is about the cost of a box to sleep in SF. The person they interviewed was just one of the renters. There are all sorts of people living in that place. Most I would wager are the people who cannot afford anything better. Why do you think minimum wage workers should not be allowed to live in SF? If everyone is writing code, who would make the food? Who would deliver the packages? Who would clean the workspace in your office? They don't deserve a place to live near you even though they are providing you with all kind of services? Genuinely asking here because I can't fathom what you were saying when you said SF is not for minimum wage workers.
  - skybrian 3y ago
    The article is about one renter in one building that offers some rather unusual accommodations that aren't typical for SF. It's not about SF housing issues in general. That's what you decided to talk about.
    - tomohelix 3y ago
      Have you seen this entire thread? The housing situation in SF in general is what everyone else is talking about. Look to me you are of the few trying to keep it specifically about the experience of just this one individual in the article. Why is that I wonder? And this is from the article to which I quote: >I need quite a jump, really, in all honesty, in order to be able to afford the traditional apartment here. So yes, it is not the typical housing in SF, because it is born out of the dysfunctional "typical" ones and many people have no choice but to take it. I criticize the system that let the situation get to this point and the people who are so apathetic and disconnected they saw no problem with this "atypical" condition even when they acknowledge that it is not typical.
      - skybrian 3y ago
        The journalist only talked to one person. We don’t know anything about anyone else who lives in that building or what other choices they had. This person had the choice to go home and chose not to, because they liked the AI scene in SF I guess? None of us know what their true situation is since they’re a stranger. What I’m doing here is refusing to speculate. Yes, other people go off-topic and speculate all the time, but that doesn’t mean it’s useful. It’s not particularly useful to speculate about other strangers who write comments on Hacker News, either. Are they apathetic or disconnected? Maybe, maybe not? I don’t know them.

skybrian 3y ago

I think it's temporary because in the article, he is quoted as saying he's "living in a $700/mo pod at Mint Plaza for the next 30 days." That seems pretty temporary to me? As to what he deserves, I think he deserves to decide for himself without other people second-guessing it, and also to be able to change his mind and do something else if it gets old. It seems like you're going off-topic, since the article isn't about minimum wage workers in general. But to address that, yes, rents are very high in San Francisco and it's no place to try to live solely on a minimum wage.

tomohelix 3y ago
The article to me is about the cost of a box to sleep in SF. The person they interviewed was just one of the renters. There are all sorts of people living in that place. Most I would wager are the people who cannot afford anything better. Why do you think minimum wage workers should not be allowed to live in SF? If everyone is writing code, who would make the food? Who would deliver the packages? Who would clean the workspace in your office? They don't deserve a place to live near you even though they are providing you with all kind of services? Genuinely asking here because I can't fathom what you were saying when you said SF is not for minimum wage workers.
- skybrian 3y ago
  The article is about one renter in one building that offers some rather unusual accommodations that aren't typical for SF. It's not about SF housing issues in general. That's what you decided to talk about.
  - tomohelix 3y ago
    Have you seen this entire thread? The housing situation in SF in general is what everyone else is talking about. Look to me you are of the few trying to keep it specifically about the experience of just this one individual in the article. Why is that I wonder? And this is from the article to which I quote: >I need quite a jump, really, in all honesty, in order to be able to afford the traditional apartment here. So yes, it is not the typical housing in SF, because it is born out of the dysfunctional "typical" ones and many people have no choice but to take it. I criticize the system that let the situation get to this point and the people who are so apathetic and disconnected they saw no problem with this "atypical" condition even when they acknowledge that it is not typical.
    - skybrian 3y ago
      The journalist only talked to one person. We don’t know anything about anyone else who lives in that building or what other choices they had. This person had the choice to go home and chose not to, because they liked the AI scene in SF I guess? None of us know what their true situation is since they’re a stranger. What I’m doing here is refusing to speculate. Yes, other people go off-topic and speculate all the time, but that doesn’t mean it’s useful. It’s not particularly useful to speculate about other strangers who write comments on Hacker News, either. Are they apathetic or disconnected? Maybe, maybe not? I don’t know them.