This doesn't seem to fill in the gap of where people are living if most of the housing is above median income. They did imply that the median income was calcul

This doesn't seem to fill in the gap of where people are living if most of the housing is above median income. They did imply that the median income was calculated per city so that rules out any wealth concentrations. This seems more of a market/response problem than a 1%er debate. EDIT: Now that I think about it, I would bet that the SF numbers were heavily influenced by the <2000 DOTCOM bubble