3 ms·

So basically you're saying that if a family has lived in an area for many years (possibly several generations), and are gradually being priced out of the abilit

So basically you're saying that if a family has lived in an area for many years (possibly several generations), and are gradually being priced out of the ability to exist and work, they should just move on somewhere else, breaking long established ties with friends and family? That's pretty harsh and selfish outlook about the lives and welfare of working families who will never see anywhere near the six figure salaries being earned by FB, Google et al engineers.

jmckib 12y ago
You're right, something like this could cause friends and family to have to separate. Creative destruction sucks, but I would argue that the benefits to society are worth it. I can't fault you for having a different opinion on the tradeoff though. Possible alternative to unionizing every low-wage job: lobby the city to remove barriers to building additional housing, so fewer people will need to move.
anon1385 12y ago
It's a common refrain from right wing commentators. It has always seemed to me a very anti-human position though. When people move they lose the support network of their friends and family and community. That network can be crucial to them in all sorts of ways - helping to find a job if they become unemployed, helping out in times of financial hardship, helping them during periods of illness or depression. In many ways it's just about the worst thing a person can do for their economic future.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  "It's a common refrain from right wing commentators." FWIW: I'm as left wing as they come. Really. I think you mistake my opinion that "folks should move to where they can afford to live" with a lack of empathy. I actually have very strong empathy for folks in this kind of situation (having had family members in it myself!) I just don't see a viable alternative here that actually works long term. Also "When people move they lose the support network of their friends and family and community." This is complete and utter bullshit in most cases. It's simply rhetoric with no support. Especially in this day and age of easily available instant communication and social media. (For reference: I have had severely depressed people in my family who i have supported through their depression, so i actually have some experience in this area. ) "In many ways it's just about the worst thing a person can do for their economic future." Really? You should probably tell this to all the people who don't end up living near their parents after college ... Seriously though, you do not offer any evidence of this assertion at all, and all available data i've seen points to the opposite. My ex-wife was the first of her many-generation family to leave the area they lived in. First to go to college. Family pushed her very hard to relocate back to the same area after college. But if she had, that would have been the worst thing she could have done for economic future. Instead she moved somewhere with a better job market for her skill set, and saved money. Meanwhile, other folks in her family who stayed behind where they couldn't afford to, and where good-paying jobs are hard to get, are now having serious trouble making ends meet. Family can only help you so much here.
beagle3 12y ago
So basically you're saying that asking someone to pay market prices for their house and food, and to accept market prices for the job they are doing is harsh and selfish? Because it seems to me that is what you are saying. If not, please explain better. And if so, please explain why I, having no family in SF, should be given less consideration than someone who grew up there (possibly several generations). There shouldn't be any interstate barriers (and even if there were - assume I grew up in San Diego. Now what?)
DannyBee 12y ago
"So basically you're saying that if a family has lived in an area for many years (possibly several generations), and are gradually being priced out of the ability to exist and work, they should just move on somewhere else, breaking long established ties with friends and family?" You do realize you live where you do solely because this has happened in the past, right? "That's pretty harsh and selfish outlook about the lives and welfare of working families who will never see anywhere near the six figure salaries being earned by FB, Google et al engineers." I do not consider it a harsh and selfish outlook that people should try to live where they can make ends meet. My parents did it. My great great grandparents did it too. I did it myself. People move over time. Some generation in your family moved for exactly this reason. Probably many. There is literally no way everyone in the world can afford to live in the same area. It is not an viable proposition. The fact that people before you lived somewhere gives you no more right than the next guy to live there.

jmckib 12y ago

You're right, something like this could cause friends and family to have to separate. Creative destruction sucks, but I would argue that the benefits to society are worth it. I can't fault you for having a different opinion on the tradeoff though. Possible alternative to unionizing every low-wage job: lobby the city to remove barriers to building additional housing, so fewer people will need to move.

anon1385 12y ago

It's a common refrain from right wing commentators. It has always seemed to me a very anti-human position though. When people move they lose the support network of their friends and family and community. That network can be crucial to them in all sorts of ways - helping to find a job if they become unemployed, helping out in times of financial hardship, helping them during periods of illness or depression. In many ways it's just about the worst thing a person can do for their economic future.

DannyBee 12y ago
"It's a common refrain from right wing commentators." FWIW: I'm as left wing as they come. Really. I think you mistake my opinion that "folks should move to where they can afford to live" with a lack of empathy. I actually have very strong empathy for folks in this kind of situation (having had family members in it myself!) I just don't see a viable alternative here that actually works long term. Also "When people move they lose the support network of their friends and family and community." This is complete and utter bullshit in most cases. It's simply rhetoric with no support. Especially in this day and age of easily available instant communication and social media. (For reference: I have had severely depressed people in my family who i have supported through their depression, so i actually have some experience in this area. ) "In many ways it's just about the worst thing a person can do for their economic future." Really? You should probably tell this to all the people who don't end up living near their parents after college ... Seriously though, you do not offer any evidence of this assertion at all, and all available data i've seen points to the opposite. My ex-wife was the first of her many-generation family to leave the area they lived in. First to go to college. Family pushed her very hard to relocate back to the same area after college. But if she had, that would have been the worst thing she could have done for economic future. Instead she moved somewhere with a better job market for her skill set, and saved money. Meanwhile, other folks in her family who stayed behind where they couldn't afford to, and where good-paying jobs are hard to get, are now having serious trouble making ends meet. Family can only help you so much here.

beagle3 12y ago

So basically you're saying that asking someone to pay market prices for their house and food, and to accept market prices for the job they are doing is harsh and selfish? Because it seems to me that is what you are saying. If not, please explain better. And if so, please explain why I, having no family in SF, should be given less consideration than someone who grew up there (possibly several generations). There shouldn't be any interstate barriers (and even if there were - assume I grew up in San Diego. Now what?)

DannyBee 12y ago

"So basically you're saying that if a family has lived in an area for many years (possibly several generations), and are gradually being priced out of the ability to exist and work, they should just move on somewhere else, breaking long established ties with friends and family?" You do realize you live where you do solely because this has happened in the past, right? "That's pretty harsh and selfish outlook about the lives and welfare of working families who will never see anywhere near the six figure salaries being earned by FB, Google et al engineers." I do not consider it a harsh and selfish outlook that people should try to live where they can make ends meet. My parents did it. My great great grandparents did it too. I did it myself. People move over time. Some generation in your family moved for exactly this reason. Probably many. There is literally no way everyone in the world can afford to live in the same area. It is not an viable proposition. The fact that people before you lived somewhere gives you no more right than the next guy to live there.