3 ms·

I'm worried that the census data is too stale. Capitol Hill has been seeing rents skyrocket in the past few years. I think the same is true in Graduate Hospital

by rattray 12y ago

I'm worried that the census data is too stale. Capitol Hill has been seeing rents skyrocket in the past few years. I think the same is true in Graduate Hospital, Philly. (I have lived in both Seattle & Philadelphia). I can't speak to the other areas, but running big numbers doesn't necessarily give you better information than people who were already living near "the good areas". And they've been rushing in to them, driving up rents, since before the census took its data. It's a frustrating phenomenon.

timfrietas 12y ago
I have a feeling you're right considering the Mission district is also in his results, and at ~2800 for a one bedroom it is one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the US.
- _delirium 12y ago
  I think part of the problem is that he's using median income for the census tract, not a measure of housing cost. The assumption seems to be that a census tract with a median income similar to his will be affordable for him. But there are many reasons that might not be the case. Some off the top of my head: presence of asset-rich but income-poor retirees with paid-off mortgages; longer-term residents grandfathered in to a gentrified area via rent control or other stabilization measures; presence of university students, who tend to both have spending power out of line with their actual income (due to family, loans, etc.) and access to dorm housing; bimodal distributions where a moderate median hides a neighborhood that's half unaffordable and half a ghetto; people with employer-subsidized housing (faculty housing, military housing); etc. Other income-based measures might give a better idea, though. Median income of working-age adults who've lived there <5 yrs could give an idea of what people who've recently made a similar move make.

3 ms·

I'm worried that the census data is too stale. Capitol Hill has been seeing rents skyrocket in the past few years. I think the same is true in Graduate Hospital

by rattray 12y ago

timfrietas 12y ago
I have a feeling you're right considering the Mission district is also in his results, and at ~2800 for a one bedroom it is one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the US.
- _delirium 12y ago
  I think part of the problem is that he's using median income for the census tract, not a measure of housing cost. The assumption seems to be that a census tract with a median income similar to his will be affordable for him. But there are many reasons that might not be the case. Some off the top of my head: presence of asset-rich but income-poor retirees with paid-off mortgages; longer-term residents grandfathered in to a gentrified area via rent control or other stabilization measures; presence of university students, who tend to both have spending power out of line with their actual income (due to family, loans, etc.) and access to dorm housing; bimodal distributions where a moderate median hides a neighborhood that's half unaffordable and half a ghetto; people with employer-subsidized housing (faculty housing, military housing); etc. Other income-based measures might give a better idea, though. Median income of working-age adults who've lived there <5 yrs could give an idea of what people who've recently made a similar move make.