2 ms·
Do you think someone earning 100,000 and who chooses to live in SF should be considered poor?
by andsoitis 1y ago
Do you think someone earning 100,000 and who chooses to live in SF should be considered poor?
- fragmede 1y agoWhat word do you want to use? The word poor has a lot of emotional baggage. What does it mean to you for someone to be considered poor?
- em-bee 1y agodon't they choose to live in SF because that's where they got the job? if they would move they would lose the job, because you generally can't take your job with you. (remote work being the exception) if life in a place is expensive, and jobs in the same area do not pay enough to cover those expenses, then a person with that job in that area is poor.
- andsoitis 1y agoI don't know whether you've been to San Francisco, but most (about all?) people who can get a 100k job in SF has quite a bit of mobility w.r.t. where they could live or who they work for. I would love to see a sample of a handful of cases of these 100k earners who we should consider poor and in need of assistance to make ends meet.
- em-bee 1y agohow long would the commute be though. if you have to spend more than two hours commuting each day in order to afford living with the money you earn in SF then i'd see that as a problem.
- andsoitis 1y agoWithin 1 hour commute that you could live comfortably on 100k: - East Bay (El Cerrito, Richmond, Concord, Walnut Creek, Martinez) - North Bay (Petaluma, Novato, Vallejo, Santa Rosa) Within 90mins: - South Bay (Milpitas, South San Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy)
- array_key_first 1y ago> who chooses to live in SF This one throwaway is basically holding up your entire argument. This is just an assumption, and one you won't be able to substantiate.