This is a problem that solves itself, isn’t it?October 20, 2019 Tim WorstallEconomics16 CommentsSan Francisco is losing residents because it’s too expensive for nearly everyone previousInsanenextSeriously, no, corporate law doesn’t work that way 16 thoughts on “This is a problem that solves itself, isn’t it?” rhoda klapp October 20, 2019 at 1:28 pm Californians coming in to other states with their cash and political ideology are not universally welcome. They bring with them what they are escaping. Some Texans I knew would far rather a Hispanic of uncertain origin than a Californian refugee. Bloke on M4 October 20, 2019 at 1:37 pm Why does someone writing a lifestyle blog need to be in San Francisco? Why would you even want to be? “Oh, Golden Gate Bridge”. It’s a fucking suspension bridge. Buy a place near Chepstow or Hull and get to see one when you like. Everything is everywhere now. You get foie gras, Korean movies delivered on the internet. Gamecock October 20, 2019 at 2:11 pm They could do what the rest of ‘Merica does: commute. Oakland is 6 miles away. There is no need to LIVE in San Fran to work there. Gamecock October 20, 2019 at 2:15 pm Yes, rhoda. Californians are worse than Yankees. The pod has burst, and the seeds are spreading across the country. Entitled elites who demand fascist control of the people. MC October 20, 2019 at 2:49 pm I fail to see a problem. Couple with earnings of X and location requirements of Y realise, albeit belatedly, that San Francisco was the wrong place for them. And now they have a nice big house to raise their family in and no-one shitting on the pavement outside it. Sounds like the American Dream is ticking over nicely. philip October 20, 2019 at 3:07 pm SF is ground zero of modern hypocrisy. So to catch the zeitgeist, a blogger just has to be there. Bernie G. October 20, 2019 at 3:35 pm @RK… We must know the same Texans. Spike October 20, 2019 at 3:51 pm San Francisco is my fellow Yanks using land-use planning to close the door once they have got inside. (Also known as “pull up the drawbridge.”) Don’t discount doings in the state capital for driving residents out: phasing out fur, phasing out oil drilling, mandates for renewable energy and solar cells on every new home, voter registration with your driver’s license (you are supposed to opt out if you are a border-jumper and it would be illegal, but you know no one is checking), legal collection and delivery of votes (“harvesting”) of said illegals by activists, and a November ballot that often offers you your choice of two Democrats. Gamecock: There is indeed no need to live in SF. But there is a real need not to live in Oakland! M4: Everything, and every cuisine, is indeed everywhere now. And you can get a Walmart cellphone with an SF phone number. TD October 20, 2019 at 4:02 pm I think Spike has about summarized it. As a long term, and therefore reprehensible Californian (even if I wasn’t born here), I have to say that I’ve benefited by the old pulling up the drawbridge. As an older person who owns my home outright in a nice Bay Area community, life is still pretty good. The weather is nice. Time to go to the mountains. The coast is nearby. My kids will also inherit pretty well one day and might be able to afford a place of their own once we’ve shuffled off the earth. They’ll have to wait until they are quite a bit older than we were, but they should inherit enough. Their Hispanic friends won’t be so fortunate, but hey, progressives want them confined to high density affordable complexes or encouraged to move to Texas. One thing about the Democrats, people moving away from areas they control (especially blacks and Hispanics) is secretly considered a feature not a bug. Gamecock October 20, 2019 at 4:54 pm “I fail to see a problem. Couple with earnings of X and location requirements of Y realise, albeit belatedly, that San Francisco was the wrong place for them. And now they have a nice big house to raise their family in and no-one shitting on the pavement outside it.” The problem is they are in my neighborhood. Gamecock October 20, 2019 at 4:57 pm “One thing about the Democrats, people moving away from areas they control (especially blacks and Hispanics) is secretly considered a feature not a bug.” Cause the Democrats get to cast their vote for them after they are gone. No mistakes. No ‘splainin’ to them what to do and hope they do it right. dearieme October 20, 2019 at 6:00 pm It’s so crowded that no one lives there any more. dearieme October 20, 2019 at 6:02 pm I’m so old that I remember when SF was an unusually attractive spot. I can also remember being the only white face in an SF Chinese restaurant. Different world, eh? TD October 20, 2019 at 6:15 pm Ya know, there are still parts of SF that are pretty nice. The tenderloin and past 6th are bad, and even the financial district seems grungier than it once did. But North Beach and the Marina districts are nice. Many other areas are basically unchanged but much more expensive. Some areas that were once not so nice have improved quite a bit, notably the Mission and even the Excelsior districts. Dogpatch is no longer for the dogs. However, where I once used to love going into SF I’ve found that it’s not usually worth the effort any more. Age I suppose. Still, the kids don’t believe me that when I was first starting out on an entry level salary I could still afford an SF apartment to myself, make my students loan and car payments, and still have money left over. Gamecock October 20, 2019 at 10:30 pm Point Lobos area, around the USS San Francisco monument, is one of the top 10 greatest places on earth. San Francisco, like many places in America, is a great place to visit, but I wouldn’t want to live there. Bloke in North Dorset October 21, 2019 at 10:37 am Point Reyes is also a fascinating place to visit. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.