4 ms·

Yeah there is something fishy in this analysis if Russian Hill appears more affordable than DC suburbs.

• socialist_coder 12y ago
  Yeah, I don't get that either. Something seems broken.
• scythe 12y ago
  He used median income. Rich people in the DC suburbs tend to live in mansions, because they live in the suburbs. [Nouveau-]Rich people in the Mission live in 1-bedroom apartments because they're hipsters. The DC suburbs include some of the richest neighborhoods in the country, yes, richer than San Francisco (where do you think $2T annually in government spending goes?). Mill Valley also probably has a higher median income than the Mission, despite cheaper 1-br apartments.
  • Bahamut 12y ago
    DC suburbs themselves aren't more expensive than SF or the Valley though in general, speaking as a recent DC transplant to the Valley. You can find a 1000 sqft 1 bedroom apartment just outside of DC and a few inside DC for about $2000 a month. Go a little further to even Fairfax and you can get a 2 bedroom one for even $1600 if you look carefully. While I haven't lived in the Valley long enough, I'm currently paying about $2100 a month for just 700 sqft, and other places are even worse around here. And income may be higher in some respects, but that is pretty much exclusively in the government sector or law.
  • rayiner 12y ago
    The DC suburbs aren't rich so much as they're segregated and uniformly upper middle class. E.g. Fairfax County is one of the wealthiest counties in the country, but almost nobody here is "rich." Its a bunch of older dual income couples making $200k combined, with very few people lower in the income spectrum.