lol.
San Francisco is merely speedruning the unaffordability crisis, but moving somewhere else to make less money that is also becoming less affordable and with way less nice things (like high salaries) is also.. not the smart financial move that the ‘just move to a cheap place’ people believe.
2 bedrooms in the city is 4.5k in rent or double that in mortgage. Childcare is 4K. Yeah, take that nice big annual salary, shave off 33% in taxes, deduct rent or mortgage and childcare and see if that works.
(There are cheaper rent controlled 2BR apts. maybe 3.6? But they would be much older)
That’s why people aren’t having kids. At any salary range.
The very concept of writing "sub 250k" and not taking a step back to realize that a majority of the people attempting to live in that city are sub ~50k!
The staff at restaurants they likely love to visit.
The cleaning crews in their offices.
The parking attendants.
The food vendors.
The shops.
So many of the people that make SF great aren't even in the same ballpark as this guy.
They deserve to have kids if they want them.
@deirdrebeth they were responding to the childcare subsidy being offered to families making up to 250K and seeing this as a subsidy of rich people.
The solution is obv to make childcare free for everyone, not to get fixated on who gets what benefits
But also
https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/under-100k-low-income-san-francisco-18168899.php
Those people you’ve listed def do not live in the city. They commute hours to get there. They wouldn’t qualify to rent the cheapest apt
Yeah, that was the point I was clearly failing to make. 😀
The people that make that city into the place people want to live, can't even come close to affording it, let alone those who qualify for the subsidy.
I moved away from Palo Alto when my housing options were a 2k studio! It's a different world in the bay.
Adrianna Tan
DB Schwein