Started By
Message

re: $3k a month in San Fran gets you a 282 sq ft apartment

Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:46 am to
Posted by Gaston
Dirty Coast
Member since Aug 2008
39021 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:46 am to
We lived on the ocean Beach side of SF where you got a bit more for your money, but we lost the luxuries of downtown. We stuck to Geary and the Marina district generally. It's fun to visit the city now and stay in the more populated areas.
Posted by jennBN
Member since Jun 2010
3151 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:53 am to
Big Lego- where can I buy a place in the bay for 500k? Even the shittiest ghetto runs you close to that.

Ace-tell me about NYCs tech boom and influx of new jobs....
This post was edited on 10/10/15 at 9:56 am
Posted by recruitnik
Campus
Member since Jul 2012
1223 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:57 am to
quote:

Liberalism is a mental disorder


I guess that means you are equating san francisco's housing costs to liberalism, which in the sense of classic liberalism you'd be right considering this is market forces at work.

San Francisco is the heart of the tech world right now. Therefore people really want to live there (because if you haven't noticed, technology is everything right now), well that and the almost non existent crime compared to places like say, anywhere in Louisiana. San Francisco also has a finite area - about 7x7 square miles. For your pea brain, that's about the total area of Lafayette, LA. Yet, it has roughly 5 times the population of Lafayette.

So because of high demand for housing, due to the above factors plus perfect weather, great food, etc.; the limited availability of housing causes prices to go up. This is called supply and demand. This is capitalism at its finest.

To help you visualize it, here's the chart I was shown in 7th grade.



You frickin moron.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89551 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:59 am to
quote:

Ace-tell me about NYCs tech boom and influx of new jobs....


That's got nothing to do with it. NYC's economy is fairly diverse though - and it is a very old city, but San Fran cannot claim youth anymore.

You don't deny that they could fill up those greenspaces (if it were allowed) with housing and you could have $1.50 per square foot (maybe $2) apartments within 3 or 4 years?
This post was edited on 10/10/15 at 10:00 am
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
20897 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 9:59 am to
Posted by Nado Jenkins83
Land of the Free
Member since Nov 2012
59673 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:02 am to
Specially in the north with snow
Posted by retired trucker
midwest
Member since Feb 2015
5093 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:04 am to
sodomites don't need much room to do the deed...
Posted by CunningLinguist
Dallas, TX
Member since Mar 2006
18773 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:04 am to
quote:

City dwellers amaze me. As if getting up and trudging to the coffee shop is an adventure.


I would hate to live in the country in the middle of nowhere. I live in the suburbs Suburban life is not great at times for my liking but it is necessary for being able to afford to raise kids and have a family. Über is great for when the wife and I want a night on the town by ourself.
Posted by jennBN
Member since Jun 2010
3151 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:06 am to
Is that a typo or do you really think anything anywhere in the Bay Area would go for 2 bucks a square foot. Tech has everything to do with it. If you don't get that you aren't paying attention. Not bitching about tech, irs just the leading cause. Raw commodities aren't driving jobs here. Start ups are bringing people out in droves. I don't know where you get your info but a google bus picks up at my front door. And I am a good distance from silicone valley. You are just wrong. Building a high rise in a city park ain't fixing this problem.
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
20897 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:07 am to
quote:

Of course, but prices would normalize really fast if places like San Fran dropped most of its housing restrictions. This is a government created problem.


That might work in San Fran, but would create a housing crisis in NYC if enacted.

There is a much higher demand for high end housing than there is supply. Only thing keeping it back is the current tenants and rent control laws. If it was totally up to the landlords in NYC a good portion of the city would boot out current tenants in lieu of upscale deveopers who would create a less dense living space, thereby displacing a lot of people.

It would just accelerate the cycle of people moving out of the city to find cheaper housing.
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69106 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:08 am to
quote:

You don't deny that they could fill up those greenspaces

So you are saying destroy the parks around San Fran to make more housing?

Yeah F that.



Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89551 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:09 am to
quote:

Building a high rise in a city park ain't fixing this problem.


Except it would increase the supply of housing. You do understand how all this works, don't you?
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69106 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:10 am to
If only New York would get rid of Central Park, then you may have affordable upper east side living.

Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89551 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:12 am to
quote:

So you are saying destroy the parks around San Fran to make more housing?

Yeah F that.


So, what if housing goes to $12 a square foot? $15? $30? Just suck it up and pay it then. I don't have any relocation to San Francisco plans. Good luck with it.
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
20897 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:13 am to
quote:

If only New York would get rid of Central Park, then you would have more space for billionaire's row.
FIFY
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89551 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:13 am to
quote:

If only New York would get rid of Central Park, then you may have affordable upper east side living.



I don't think I've seen stories about New Yorkers paying $11 a square foot for microhousing, though.
Posted by jennBN
Member since Jun 2010
3151 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:26 am to
Do you grasp that we are hundreds of thousands of units short? There isn't that much city green space. It is 7x7 miles. I think you are talking out of your arse. If the nations greatest housing crisis could be solved by a simpleton on the OT I think someone might have tried it by now.
Posted by ILikeLSUToo
Central, LA
Member since Jan 2008
18018 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:26 am to
So, would y'all rather live in that box alone for $3k a month, or in a house with 25 people for $1200 a month (share a room) or $1700 a month (private bedroom)

LINK
Posted by Bestbank Tiger
Premium Member
Member since Jan 2005
71151 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:27 am to
quote:


So, what if housing goes to $12 a square foot? $15? $30?


Even better. It keeps the poors out.
Posted by LateArrivalforLSU
Ascension Parish
Member since Sep 2012
3512 posts
Posted on 10/10/15 at 10:30 am to
quote:

282 sq ft?

My 3 year olds closet is bigger than that

first pageprev pagePage 3 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram