Slashdot Mirror
San Francisco's Rent Hits a New Peak of $3,690, Highest in the US (cnet.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The median rent for a one bedroom apartment in San Francisco has reached a new peak of $3,690, according to survey data from Zumper, a home and apartment rental app. That's also a rise of nearly 9 percent from the same time last year, the survey found. Not only are those figures high enough to make your bank account cringe, but they're also nearly 30 percent higher than New York City and more than double the prices in Miami. Seattle, home to Amazon and Microsoft, rang in at $1,970 and Washington, DC, hit $2,150.
Oh, and by the way, while San Francisco's prices rose, the median price of one bedroom apartments across the US dropped nearly half a percent during this same time. That means while San Francisco's prices climbed, the country's prices fell. "Though there may be a ton of cash flowing through the city and surrounding areas soon, many of these workers will not immediately invest in a home and may, instead, take their money to both travel and upgrade their rental situation," Zumper wrote in a blog post Thursday.
Oh, and by the way, while San Francisco's prices rose, the median price of one bedroom apartments across the US dropped nearly half a percent during this same time. That means while San Francisco's prices climbed, the country's prices fell. "Though there may be a ton of cash flowing through the city and surrounding areas soon, many of these workers will not immediately invest in a home and may, instead, take their money to both travel and upgrade their rental situation," Zumper wrote in a blog post Thursday.
Nobody is being forced to live in 'that', good for the landlords. This is how it's _supposed_ to work.
Sucks to be a grey haired trust funder who's trust no longer covers rent, but fuck them. They can live in Benicia or Gilroy, or get their first job.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
$3,690 USD? As in three thousand, six hundred and ninety U.S. dollars in *rent*, *per month*?!
Numbers like these are a signal; they are the way the market signals the fact that society has a problem with housing, and that there is profit in solving this particular issue.
The demand for housing needs to be decreased, or the supply of housing needs to be increased (or some new technological innovation or cultural shift needs to occur in order to effectively achieve at least one of those changes).
Yet, San Francisco is full of left-wing folks who are ideologically incapable of taking such signals seriously; the government in San Francisco actively thwarts solutions—the market is being censored, and thus people are being forced to live in an increasingly dire situation.
CAPTCHA: logician
Real estate prices zooming.
The stock market zooming.
Companies are making more money than ever.
I asked for $300k after my last interview and they looked at me funny.
Time to pay up, people.
NIMBY means there's not a free market; governments are preventing the market from operating.
As the rent goes up, it becomes a lucrative business deal to buy up properties, demolish what's there, and build housing. That's what a free market would lead to, but that's not allowed to happen.
Quit blaming capitalism for the problems. The problems are authoritarianism; the problems are government; the problem is the LACK of capitalism.
Can we get some english editors in here.
This is not a case of free market failure. This is a case of local government putting restrictions on building affordable housing. You got the NIMBY part correct, though.
Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
If your tech company cannot support remote work in the year 2019, then you're working for the wrong damn tech company.
There's only one way you're going to get prices to revert to semi-reasonable levels in the Bay area; stop feeding that fucking stupidity.
I suspect a bubble or two will pop and rents will be almost normal again. For example, the revenue received by AI companies does not justify the investment money pouring into them compared to other industry returns. Either they will start spewing forth great products soon, or investors will get a clue and pop the bubble. We are overdue for a general market and economy correction anyhow, AI aside.
Table-ized A.I.
Get a haircut and get a real job, AC.
If you live in California and pay rent you know what I mean. If I seriously have to consider downgrading my standard of living and look for a sublet somewhere and live out of a single room in someone else's house, then things have gone horribly wrong around here.
I love this little nugget from the article:
>>Add in the fact that there isn't enough housing to go around, and prices have naturally skyrocketed. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development said last year that a family of four earning up to $117,400 qualified as "low income" in the city.
You got to be kidding me!! That town needs to slide into the ocean. That is nuts! SMH
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
Remember the guy who ran for NYC mayor on the sole platform of "The rent is too damn high!" Perhaps he should move San Francisco?
I pay about $1000/month on a mortgage for a 4 bedroom house (I bought it brand new in Jan 2007) in central America.
I'm in IT, and work for a state University making a decent slaary for the area. I know I could make a lot more money "elsewhere", but based on all the math I've done, due to cost of living "elsewhere", it would effective be a pay cost even making a lot more money.
I ask why would anyone live in these how cost areas? So you can say on the Internet you are making tons on money, despite struggling with living expensives?
There is a difference. While the former can be just an indication of a healthy economy, the latter can be an indication of an imminent housing crisis.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It really depends on how you look at it. No locality is required to sell out to the highest bidder. In time the “free market” for labor will decide SF is too expensive and tech jobs will spread out of San Francisco, maybe even to the Midwest. Once that happens rents will reach an equilibrium in SF that matches the market value, plus whatever intangible value people see from living in SF.
... the true scarce resource.
Same thing here in Germany. Prices are rising and there seems no end to it. I expect this to get worse with climate change.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Why houses and apartments are so expensive? If one builds a house entirely from the TV panels it would still be less expensive than built from the low cost bricks, wood, and concrete.
This is not a case of free market failure. This is a case of local government putting restrictions on building affordable housing.
Which is a free market failure, isn't it? Seeing as it, among other things, requires low barriers to entry, which doesn't seem to be satisfied here.
Ezekiel 23:20
I live in Dallas, in a $3,500 square foot house that costs less than $2,000 / month.
As far as jobs go, there are a lot of big companies here. A lot of aerospace, technology, financial services ...
I'm not in management, I'm a techie, and earn well into six figures.
Of course, here in Dallas they build based on need. When prices went up for a few years 2014-2018, they built like crazy, which kept prices under control. You don't have local and state government saying nobody is allowed to build any housing.
No Ivan, getting your ideas from a book written by a drunkard in the 19th century who doesn't understand the capitalism he rails against isn't a valid argument.
IMHO, the general solution of all housing problems, everywhere in the world, is Shipping Container Architecture!!!
But, it needs to be done in full (industrial) scale!!!
How?
Imagine, a giant metal structure building that just provides slots for standard shipping container houses!!!
Imagine, one side of the building has an automated robotic system that, picks up a shipping container housing unit, from a truck waiting below the building & carries it & inserts it into any target slot in the building, or does the opposite, whenever needed!
(& imagine, the building itself (of any size) is also build from standard design parts, just like LEGO!)
We need to stop making homes an investment, but a place to live.
There are too many people who are worried about their homes resell value, because of something being built. Like Low cost housing, As well too many people buying multi-family homes and not living there, but only use them for investment purposes.
If not build more, at least fix the driving conditions so people can commute from cheaper areas easier, or California based companies, allows for more work from home options.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
No? If the government puts in barriers that make it impossible for the free market to provide affordable housing then it isn't a failing of the market. Capitalism isn't a charity, no developer is going to provide housing at a loss and its unreasonable to expect them to. The only ones who can do that and survive are the government. If SF wants affordable housing then they have two options, either repeal and replace bad policies that made it impossible for the market to provide them or build the housing themselves at a loss.
No, you have no idea what you're talking about.
You're an idiot... NIMBY and forced government oversight is what brought this nonsense about.
lololololol
Why rent when you can own 30 miles away?
At a loss? What kind of moron are you? You think houses cost $2 million in material to build? You're a fuckwit, developers make HUGE money in his market. You're too dumb to be in this conversation obviously, ridiculous GOP idiots.
Or perhaps the companies can pay a wage to their employees that covers the cost of living for the area they live? If they can't do that, then they don't really deserve to be in business.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Firstly you are probably speaking of rent control, but to my knowledge rent control does not hit building after the costa act end of 1995. No the problem is mostly that investing into cheap building for family without money does not offer as much return on investment as building expansive apartment, when there is a boom on rent price. This is a definitive failure on free market, NOT because of the restriction as you think, but because there is NO REASON whatsoever for the free market to invest in cheap condo for poor folk at a small ROI when they can have a huge ROI with expansive condo. And this is where the free market will always fail.
"This is how it's _supposed_ to work."
No it's not. How it is supposed to work is that when rental prices start to spike in a community developers see the increasing profit potential of an area and increase development. It's classic supply and demand economics and is literally how all of our major cities formed.
What is happening in San Francisco (and in many parts of California) is that supply isn't being allowed to increase or increase fast enough by local government. The biggest offender is the valley but their problem has become so severe (with a modest single family homes selling for over a million) that it's spilling over and exacerbating already existing problems in places like San Francisco and beyond.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Something is out of whack; there are empty houses in the Rust Belt, yet not enough housing in CA. Whenever an industry fades, we throw entire communities under the bus, to be burned at the Altar of Capitalism. We don't just punish individuals for picking the wrong industry at the wrong time, we punish entire regions. Is there no way to rebalance the Country? Should we "just accept" this silliness?
Table-ized A.I.
This is the danger of making cities overly attractive AND making it hard or expensive for builders to build. Quality of life is great but not planning for infrastructure and taking the people who currently live in these cities in account (as in how they won't be able to afford to live life if people start/keep moving in on them) is a disaster like this waiting to happen. Just like its happening where I am.
Then, people / companies from expensive cities start taking their money and buying up real estate in cheaper cities, jacking up prices there and messing up the infrastructure in those cities who are not prepared for the population growth... Where I am California is moving here to get away from their "expensive cities" jacking up prices here... locals are tired of it.. Now people who have lived in the cheaper cities can barely afford to rent, let alone get a home in the future. In my opinion the expensive cities are a plague on other cities receiving their refugees. It seems to cause a chain reaction.
People / cities do not think about the full consequences of their "I/we want(s)" that lead to this attractiveness. There should be a large infrastructure tax you are required to pay based on the offset of the cost of living from where you come from to where you are moving... When someone tries to move to a cheaper market that tax would go toward that cheaper market to help build infrastructure / housing.
Question remains, how do the cities like SF fix this problem? Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to further promote or allow population growth without making reasonable plans to make more structures for living?
What barriers? You don't know what you're talking about.
"SF is surrounded by water, Dallas is surrounded by shit. Shit is easier to build on."
Building "out" is hardly the only option for growth for a community. San Francisco has plenty of vertical space to build into. ...And before people claim "no" because of earthquakes, tall buildings can be safely built in earth quake zones. Japan and many other countries have a long, safe history of doing so.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Part of what is driving this is the anti work from home attitude of some weird guy still living in the 80's that also calls himself your boss.
The good news is that guy is frequently being replaced by sensible non weird boss types that understand that most of the people paying these astronomically high rent prices would also rather go to a local coffee shop to do todays meeting than try to stuff it in a cube or small office that we all hate.
The new guy is hailed an innovator and thinker and bringer of cool 'west coast style thinking' into the company culture. /barf
All of Texas is going blue, you're going to have to move back to Moscow, traitors. When Donald hangs you won't have anything left in this country.
Or perhaps the companies can pay a wage to their employees that covers the cost of living for the area they live?
That is exactly what *is* happening. The people complaining are not employees of companies paying that wage.
Typhus is alive and well on the streets and in the halls of City Hall in Los Angeles.
It's like we are regressing to third world status out west... I wonder why? Well, what do Venezuela and Los Angeles have in common? No, I'm not going to tell you because you should be able to figure it out for yourself.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Yes, something is out of whack. The economy is going strong but only at Wall St area and Silicon Valley. Everyone in between is declining. PBS documentary highlighted Dayton OH where population has dropped 50% what it used to be back in the days, manufacturing including NCR have offshored, downtown is modern but ***no traffic***, coroner's office getting overloaded with bodies from drug overdoses, people that are still there making much less and no benefits like they had before.
Yep, same place where Trump said in 2016 "don't sell your home and move" [I'll bring good jobs back] and Hillary completely ignored these areas on her campaign.
Getting back to Silicon Valley, it gets creepy seeing phenomenal wealth at same time increasing "development" of tent cities.
mfwright@batnet.com
" nearly 30 percent higher than New York City"
Only if you count the boroughs. 3700 is on the low side for a 1BR in Manhattan.
The Insane Battle To Sabotage a New Apartment Building Explains San Francisco's Housing Crisis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Bad Laws Cause Homeless Crisis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Theres so many more, that was just a quick search of history.
hehe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
NOBODY ASKED FAGGOT WHINER BOBBY BITCH
Nobody.
Asked.
Faggot.
Whiner.
Bobby.
You.
Bitch.
I don't see a problem. There are other places to live. I don't have urban problems because I refuse to live in a city. I planned my career to avoid them.
If you're smart enough to succeed, you're smart enough to succeed elsewhere. You cannot have affordable housing in many cities. Understand what you cannot have then focus on what you can accomplish.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
He's talking about the city requiring rents to be low.
Also a lot of gay men with Apple products
If they can afford to buy overpriser Apple rubber dogshit and iDildos
Then they can also afford to pay high rent prices
Maybe they can get an Apple iShitRoomba to clean the shit up from the bathroom
The median rent for a one bedroom apartment in San Francisco has reached a new peak of $3,690
San Francisco needs to immediately implement a rent control ordinance to stop the rent prices from shooting up so much.
Government is just an organization that tells people what to do—at the point of a gun, no less.
This issue could be solved by just letting people interact according to their own, personal, voluntary agreements among each other: There are a lot of people who want to develop great housing; there are a lot of people who want to sell their property to those developers. But, the government is pointing their guns at them and saying "NIMBY!"
Yup, both you and the parent are right. It IS out of whack. But in the US, we've collectively decided that we're a dog-eat-dog country, and we don't let the government intervene to help people (or even regions). It sucks, but wealth concentration is inevitable if you let capitalism go unchecked for long enough.
I think it's a terrible system (or lack of a system), so I vote to change it, and I'm going to continue to vote to change the system until I eventually leave the country for somewhere more civilized.
I don't respond to AC's.
And they don't! They have a low-income % of new construction LARGE projects that needs to be affordable, it's like 20%. The rest are market rate. Developers made money hand over fist, these morons have no clue.
You REALLY need to grow up. Also, it's apparent you know little about this. The house may cost $2 million, and the materials and labor only cost $400k, but that doesn't mean the the remainder was profit for the developer. There is a huge LAND COST in this area. Empty lots zoned for a single family home with a permit to build can cost $1m plus, just for an empty lot. The LANDOWNERS are raking in the money here, not the housing developers. Many developers are only modestly profitable, whereas many homeowners in outlying areas bought their home for 200k (in 2019 $) decades ago and sell it now for $1.4m. They are selling the LOT for $1.4m; the house sometimes has zero value and will be demolished and reconstructed.
Wasn't Google working on building a giant floating barge with office space in San Francisco's harbor in order to get around these insane housing prices? What ever happened to that idea?
Nah. We just need a mini-gun for when the hoards of malnourished communists come shuffling for other "free shit".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Supply and demand. A lot of people want to live here. If you come to California, you will understand.
The median rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Decatur, Alabama is $599. If you go there, you will understand. As with everything in life, you get what you pay for.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Today is a work day, you're blathering on the internet.
Today is a work day, you're blathering on the internet.
Prices are rising and there seems no end to it. I expect this to get worse with climate change.
If the Earth is getting warming it would mean a lot of Northern areas that are currently more undesirable to live in would have a better climate.
What that means is vastly more livable land areas than the relatively tiny amount of coast lost fo rising oceans.
If you really think the world is warming the smart move is to buy real estate somewhere overly cold now and reap the benefits later.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If you're smart enough to succeed, you're smart enough to succeed elsewhere.
I don't think that's in doubt. Highly educated people generally can succeed anywhere. The question is, do you want to succeed in the middle of nowhere? Personally, I don't. I like great universities and great museums and great restaurants. All of those things are generally concentrated in and near large cities or metro areas.
I don't respond to AC's.
Silly rabbits, you can't afford to live in a real city.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The fundamental belief of the secularist capitalism religion the US is that the "free market" solves all these issues. Those who disagree are often called socialists.
A couple of people poked fun at my stray dollar sign.
Yours was the funniest, imho.
California is 18th for poverty rate. Beating Oregon, Texas and every Southern state and most of the Southwest.
For education, California is ranked 26th. Making it pretty typical of the US as a whole.
When I first started reading the summary I thought "$3,690" isn't so bad. That's actually a little less than what I pay. Then I realized that, while there doesn't seem to be a "per unit of time" in the summary, the author means that amount "per month", not (as I had originally assumed) "per year".
I also live in a one bedroom place. So, with this in mind, I estime rent in SF is about nine times higher than mine. That is a pretty massive difference.
Some European countries seemed to have found a decent balance. Too much either direction seems the real problem. Goldilocks.
Which deity told you that? I wanna talk to her.
Table-ized A.I.
The question is, do you want to succeed in the middle of nowhere? Personally, I don't. I like great universities and great museums and great restaurants. All of those things are generally concentrated in and near large cities or metro areas.
Same. Besides, some parts of the country are not capable of supporting certain industries. For instance, reliable internet is not available in many rural areas. It would be hard to find certain jobs in the first place.
Social mobility is a big promise of the American Dream. For some that's the Great Plains and for others it's the Big Apple. I wouldn't mind moving to Manhattan - allegedly a recruiter promises me I could get a job tomorrow if I made the move up there. However, by the time I could afford to move to Manhattan, I'll have saved up enough money to make a great down payment on a house down South.
Of course, I really want to move somewhere the laws are a little bit *cough* greener.
And do you visit those places daily? You'd still be ahead if you moved else where then flew into the city every other month.
Is there no way to rebalance the Country?
Occasionally a region is hit hard by a decline in the industry that supported them (coal mining, automobile manufacturing, etc.), but despite the headlines, those are rare events and are solved by people moving away and finding work elsewhere. And sometimes the region recovers by finding another industry (e.g. Pittsburgh after the steel mills closed). Life goes on.
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Slums 20 years ago are being turned into multi-billion dollar megaprojects in SF, as we speak. You're fucking retarded.
I'm playing devil's advocate here, so don't jump down my throat.
I've never heard a compelling argument against gentrification. People are displaced, the neighborhood changes... this is what happens when you allow property to be rented.
And it's such a big country, do we really need to pack more and more people into the same places?
Imagine how much it would be if it wasn't covered in feces.
You're not wrong, you just missed the obvious connection between the government and the people who are the real estate market, in that they're not different people. Is that pure capitalism? Of course not. But then again- that's the fucking problem with capitalism.
Those who disagree are often called socialists.
and nowadays, labeling someone with the S word can be pretty bad. There was a story about a professor who wrote a book titled "Social Action" or something like that and many students refused to read it because it involves socialism. So does that mean there are people who will not learn social studies or social skills because it may lead to ***gasp*** socialism?
mfwright@batnet.com
It's all the fault of local governance that the fed has no jurisdiction over. They zoned themselves into a nightmare of not having enough living space to support all the business space. At this point a significant number of buildings would need to be torn down and replaced with high density apartments to solve the housing crisis, and good luck swinging that politically. It only got this bad because the CA government is absolutely famous for applying band-aids to symptoms instead of attacking problems at the root, and succumbing to the sunk costs fallacy by doubling down on policies that clearly don't work. In theory the people could stop this, but in practice the average Californian seems to be as ignorant as the leadership is.
What the hell are you complaining about? That's ridiculously cheap. No wonder you guys have such a low minimum wage.
It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
Haha that's funny.
On a more serious note, Texas is 800 miles North to South, so you can live where it stays warm or in a cooler climate. Texans live on the coast, and 600 miles from the coast.
The Texas panhandle to Brownsville is as far as Death Valley to Oregon, with nearly as much difference in weather.
That reminds me of when we were kids and my brother got in a huge argument with our cousins. My brother, from Denver, knew for certain the mountains are in the West. My cousins, from New Mexico, knew darn well the mountains are East.