San Francisco is insanely expensive, and despite SF having a minimum wage that's $3 higher than the federal minimum, minimum wage isn't meant to pay for a two bedroom apartment in any major city. It never has been, and unfortunately can't ever be.
Studio apartments, roommates, spouse, living outside the city limits, living in a smaller apartment, aid (for single/low income parents), etc -- there's a lot of options, and it's disingenuous to frame it like this.
Even if we did raise minimum wage to $30 (and for the record, I'm for raising minimum wage to keep pace with inflation.. just not to $30), what does that solve? Techies will just get a raise, too (why be a programmer when you can make the same at a dead end job?), and we'll be back where we started.
there's a lot of options, and it's disingenuous to frame it like this.
I do not think it's a disingenuous way to frame the challenge facing people who live in the area. Two-bedroom apartments should not be the privilege of those in a certain stratum of society and above. They should be something that is within reach of nearly everyone. Nor should housing in the San Jose area become the domain of a privileged minority.
They are available. However, much like how your average Googler can't afford a two bedroom apartment on 5th Avenue in NYC, most people can't afford a two bedroom apartment in the city of San Francisco.
You unfortunately have to find a balance between location and luxury.
5th Avenue in NYC is a lot smaller than San Francisco, though. There are also a great number of apartments within commutable distances of 5th Ave. I have never been to SF, but my knowledge of American culture leads me to believe that there must be a Walmart somewhere in SF.
There are actually no Walmarts in San Francisco. However that doesn't answer the root of your question; there are similar jobs (target, dishwashers, supermarkets, etc). Most would live in the east bay, sunset or South Bay -- about 25 minutes east, west or south of SF, respectively.
As to your first point, 5th Ave is smaller, but also more expensive. SF is bigger, but relatively cheaper. It's a sliding scale; both driven by scarcity of land compared to desirability.
Wow, I didn't know that. Being from Europe and having only visited the US once (East Coast), I had the impression they were everywhere.
New York has a working mass transit system, though. For poor people this makes the world of a difference. I remember that, when I lived in Madrid a few years back, I was impressed by how fast you could go _everywhere_ in that city with the subway alone. A cross-town morning commute in that 3Mil Juggernaut took about as long as the cross-town car-commute in a less developed 130K city I had lived in before.
Walmart has some office space in San Bruno (engineers). I think the nearest Walmart is about 17.5 miles from SF (specifically, 101 meeting 80) in the outskirts of Oakland.
And actually there are more affordable rooms in commuting distance (BART or car) than it appears from popular opinion online.
Yes and a Target too. And the rent at the apartment towers next to it are $4000+. So, being next to a Walmart even isn't exactly a means of 'living cheaply'
Well said. I often get downvotes on comments that go against the "more women in tech" feminist agenda. You just have to ignore the hive mind and give your honest opinion, no matter what the votes.
Hear, hear! I propose we keep raising minimum wage until everyone's living conditions are comfortably above average!
Edit: In retrospect, I made a critical error; I can't tell if the downvoters understood I was loosely referencing Lake Wobegon, or if they thought I was just dumb
I pay $1750 for a 1br in San Mateo, and I feel like I have a great deal, rent is insane out here. let me frame it like this my mortgage, including taxes and insurance for a 4br house near the beach in Florida is $600/mo.
I had a stable job that paid enough to live a decent lifestyle that I could have worked at for who knows? 20 or 30 years, there were employees that had worked there for 50 - 60 years. When faced with the prospect of living the same life doing the same thing for the rest of my days, I woke up and set out to live with a purpose. I'm 29, my dad died at 49, keeping that in mind lights a fire under my ass every day.
It's equidistant from SF and Palo Alto, with rent way cheaper than both. The downtown area is well developed with lots of restaurants. San Mateo also has good transport links with easy freeway access to the 101, 92 and 280, and most of the caltrains stop here.
Old Town Sushi FTW, seriously though San Mateo is a great location I'm right next to downtown, Half Moon Bay is only 15min away. I need to stop, I don't want the secret to get out and my rent to go up. :P
why be a programmer when you can make the same at a dead end job?
But all I ever read around here on gushing webpages are smugsters talking about how they can't believe they get paid for doing it and how they're doing what they love. :)
Studio apartments, roommates, spouse, living outside the city limits, living in a smaller apartment, aid (for single/low income parents), etc -- there's a lot of options, and it's disingenuous to frame it like this.
Even if we did raise minimum wage to $30 (and for the record, I'm for raising minimum wage to keep pace with inflation.. just not to $30), what does that solve? Techies will just get a raise, too (why be a programmer when you can make the same at a dead end job?), and we'll be back where we started.