I'm one of those in the 1/3rd, currently in the process of moving to the Denver/Boulder area.<p>I knew on paper the housing would be cheaper, but what's stood out to me is how much less crowded it is:<p>You can go to stores and find parking, and not wait 15 minutes at the cashier.<p>You can go to restaurants and actually get a table.<p>You can make unprotected left turns.<p>Things are busy during rush hour, but outside of that it's really not bad, and overall it doesn't perpetually feel like the infrastructure is about to collapse under the weight of being so far over-capacity.<p>There are some things I will miss, but I keep reminding myself that I can fly back to SF cheaply (or anywhere in the US from DEN, really) and hit all of my favorite spots. I am a little afraid I won't be able to find the same quality fruits and vegetables.<p>When I moved out to the bay area, I thought it would be great to have so many job opportunities and career flexibility. But now as I'm leaving I feel like that wasn't all it's built up to be. Having some options if your employment situation goes south is important, but I don't really need to change jobs every 18 months, or have 5 cold calls from recruiters in my inbox every week. I'd truly rather find a company where I am a good fit and just stay put for a few years.<p>I also think that is in some ways healthier too: having a bit higher switching cost forces you to learn how to work out some disagreements with your employer and boss, instead of just leaving at the drop of a hat.
I'm sure the fact that there's an increasing trend of empty Chinese investment properties isn't helping. I grew up in Cupertino, and when I visit my parents there, I'm rather shocked at how downhill the neighborhood has gone in parts. It's crazy that these old 70's tract homes go for 1.5 million. Even more insane is that they're bought and then left empty to go downhill. Literally broken windows and paint falling off. I never used to see that.<p>Part of the problem with building more housing (outside of SF where transit is decent) is that it means even more people. Lack of effective mass transit means those additional people need to drive everywhere, and there's no space for more roads/freeways. So the roads will just get even more clogged.<p>Cupertino recently had a developer proposal for 4 large high-density housing developments (condos & some apartments), and of course they were to go into areas that already had ridiculous traffic, and there was no way to facilitate even more drivers.<p>Until the South Bay gets serious about mass transit, merely adding more housing is only going to make the traffic pain worse.
Makes sense. I wrote a piece called "Do millennials have a future in Seattle? Do millennials have a future in any superstar cities?" (<a href="http://jakeseliger.com/2015/09/24/do-millennials-have-a-future-in-seattle-do-millennials-have-a-future-in-any-superstar-cities/" rel="nofollow">http://jakeseliger.com/2015/09/24/do-millennials-have-a-futu...</a>) that focuses on Seattle, but the problems in SF are even worse.<p>We're seeing decades of parochial land use policies turn into affordability crises in SF and similar cities. Which is why so many people are moving to Texas: <a href="http://time.com/80005/why-texas-is-our-future" rel="nofollow">http://time.com/80005/why-texas-is-our-future</a>, despite some of Texas's other challenges (like travel and inadequate mass transit).
After living in the SF Bay Area for 5 years, (1 in a crappy apt in Belmont, 4 in a modest home in Hayward), I have very mixed views of the place. I love the progressive politics, diversity, high concentration of smart and interesting people. I hate the traffic, over-crowded trains and the vast wealth inequality--especially since I feel that a large portion of the wealth has been retained due to tax loop holes and that if it were taxed fairly, we could solve a lot of the referenced infrastructure problems.
I wonder what the percentage is in other areas around the country. It would be nice to know to have a better sense of how much is a reasonable baseline and how much is Bay Area specific.
Please don't come to Austin. I moved from SF to Austin a little over two years ago, and I want to make it clear that it's terrible. The food is bad, the people are lame, and all the musicians are out of tune. I hear Chicago is where it's at, so please go there. Or New York. Or anywhere else, really. Just don't come to Austin.
The results of that poll reminded me of this:<p><a href="http://www.theonion.com/article/report-98-percent-of-us-commuters-favor-public-tra-1434" rel="nofollow">http://www.theonion.com/article/report-98-percent-of-us-comm...</a><p>Stated intent is different than actual intent. I think it's interesting to note that employment is going up, while people state that they will leave in a few years. What does a few years mean - 2 years? 5 years? Wouldn't ones actual move correlate more with economic outlook than stated intent to move?
Is the Bay Area no longer a good place to start a career? I'm close to finishing up my PhD, and my original plan was to apply to work at the tech companies that I find most interesting. For the most part, these are located in the Bay Area — although some are in New York, Austin, Boston, Seattle, Raleigh, and Atlanta.<p>I figured I would stay there 2-4 years tops though, since my family and girlfriend live in the southeast. I don't mind living in a box-sized apartment for a while, but if there's no longer a career benefit to doing this, then perhaps I should focus my job search efforts on other cities?
Among the people who voted, this is the number for Taxable household income for 2016<p>More than $150,000 16%
Prefer not to respond 11%
Rest of the % are all under $150,000.<p>Good senior engineer/product people make way more than that. I don't think any of those people are leaving. They are the critical-mass who will make/break good technical companies and power the innovation cycle. SV is in no trouble. There is no real scare of brain-drain.
I may be missing some nuance here, but wouldn't increasing sales tax (as the Silicon Valley Leadership Group is advocating) further disproportionately punish lower-income residents? The article doesn't make clear whether moving towards a "Manhattan-like megalopolis" would be a positive or negative trend, but this would push it further down that road.
Anyone wondering where to move? <a href="https://teleport.org/cities" rel="nofollow">https://teleport.org/cities</a>
Compare life quality data, costs of living, salaries...
The "hope" part discourages me. It means that despite the wishes to leave, the jobs elsewhere (or telecommuting opportunities) may simply not be there.
Errr, so now i'm wondering why everyone stopped caring about cost of living in 2015?
:)<p>It looks like they may have been super-concerned about water running out instead?
I moved to the area a few months ago for my career, and while I wouldn't say I hope to leave soon, I don't plan on putting down roots. My hope is to save up some money and buy a cheap house in cash where the cost of real estate and living is cheap, then move there. I suspect that there are a lot of other people that are looking to do the same.
12,000 people moved to SF in 2014. 4,000 new homes were added. I think we need more homes.
<a href="https://medium.com/@TomPJacobs/what-housing-crisis-3c0568a5dd44" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@TomPJacobs/what-housing-crisis-3c0568a5d...</a>
I never thought I would say that LA is cheaper than San Francisco. The average one bedroom apartment is around $3k. I'm not sure how people can afford to live here anymore. I live in Marin and commute to Silicon Valley...
I already left! In Boston currently, but looking to go back to SoCal soon! (Really wonder why there isn't a bigger startup scene in LA/SD than in the Bay Area, it's such a sweet location..)
I'm pretty sure that the tech kids didn't plan to stay there for more than a few years anyway. They're making big salaries, but the rent is so high that they can't save any money. What they can do is drag that fancy resume back to the Indiana suburb they came from, and buy a nice house with a 20 minute commute to the industrial park that they work in. Or a nice condo in downtown Boise, a five-minute bike ride from their CTO job at some newspaper, or the gas company.<p>Not necessarily a bad outcome...
I've been saying that for about 15 years now, yet I'm still here. I've certainly looked around, visited a few places, went on some job interviews out of the area, but haven't been able to find anyplace that I felt I could call "home".
What is the telos of man? (ultimate goal, end)
The best thing for you is impossible, and that's for you to have never been (here)
The next best thing is to die soon (or leave)<p>The wisdom of Silenus applies to life in the San Francisco
My advice: find a nice town with really good Internet and lots of people you think you would enjoy being around. Programmers can work from anywhere. Take advantage of that fact (if you are a programmer).
Has this number gone up or down compared to other years ? It is completely conceivable though that people would want to move, given the difficulty in procuring homes.
The question is will people use this signal to change course (better transit, sane housing density, walkability, etc) or to perpetuate the wrong course (more tract housing in Antioch, wider freeways, etc).
Please don't come to New York. I moved from Amherst to New York a little over four years ago, and I want to make it clear that it's terrible. The food is bad, the people are lame, and all the musicians are out of tune. I hear Chicago is where it's at, so please go there. Or Seattle. Or anywhere else, really. Just don't come to New York.