You need $6 million to be 'wealthy' in the Bay Area

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I find it funny that Conservatives are so dismissive of Capitalism and the laws of supply and demand.

The reason why the Bay Area is so expensive is because demand is higher than supply.

More people want to live here than want to live in Montana or Alabama.

I don't think anyone is begrudging them their wealth. It's their hypocrisy that is the issue.

 

[jasonnfree]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

1965 - 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line

2016 - Trillions of dollars later spent on the Great Society Welfare programs, 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line.

Keep up the good work!

Trillions of dollars spent on great society welfare programs and several wars you forgot to add.

 

[Weatherman2020]

SF is a worldwide popular city, but it has its cost.

Charles Schwab study concludes that you need $6 million to be 'wealthy' in the Bay Area

A new Charles Schwab survey says that in order to be considered "wealthy" in the Bay Area, you need a net worth of at least $6 million. A net worth of $1 million is the baseline for being "comfortable."
<more>

It's what leftism does - rewards the 0.1% and screws the rest.

 

[jasonnfree]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

Sure. Like in Flint, Detroit, Chicago and Baltimore

Thannnnnnnnnnk you for all your help

Shipping manufacturing to low wage countries didn't help those cities either. Maybe that's why the stock market is near 18000, when back before Nafta it was around 2000.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

. Ha ha ha ha ha ha
So after 50 years of The Great Society the poor is no better off thanks to the Democrats.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

$6 million isn't wealthy.

$600 million is wealthy.

I'll happily take $6 million

I'd happily take your $6 million too.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

1965 - 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line

2016 - Trillions of dollars later spent on the Great Society Welfare programs, 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line.

The poverty level is considerably higher today than in 1965.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

1965 - 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line

2016 - Trillions of dollars later spent on the Great Society Welfare programs, 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line.

Keep up the good work!

Are you one of those people that think that welfare programs are supposed to get rid of poor people?

Same token, do you think safety nets are supposed to stop falls?

They clearly haven't helped

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I find it funny that Conservatives are so dismissive of Capitalism and the laws of supply and demand.

The reason why the Bay Area is so expensive is because demand is higher than supply.

More people want to live here than want to live in Montana or Alabama.

That's one factor, but governments also inflate the cost of living with rules, regulations, and taxation.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

1965 - 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line

2016 - Trillions of dollars later spent on the Great Society Welfare programs, 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line.

Keep up the good work!

Trillions of dollars spent on great society welfare programs and several wars you forgot to add.

Which is not relevant to the conversation at hand.

 

[bucs90]

The more welfare we give to people who refuse to work and make irresponsible choices....the more comfortable they get living like that. And that's not good.

Hey folks....it's a safety net....NOT a hammock that you can lay in all day.

 

[bucs90]

And that's the difference.

Some of us want to provide a safety net for those who fall and then they get back up.

Some others want to make it a huge hammock they can just sleep in forever.

Safety nets vs Hammocks. That's the basic debate.

 

[Syriusly]

I find it funny that Conservatives are so dismissive of Capitalism and the laws of supply and demand.

The reason why the Bay Area is so expensive is because demand is higher than supply.

More people want to live here than want to live in Montana or Alabama.

That's one factor, but governments also inflate the cost of living with rules, regulations, and taxation.

The differential between the cost of living in say San Mateo and Fresno is not because of regulation but because demand exceeding supply.

Sure regulation comes at a cost, but the essential reason the Bay Area is becoming unaffordable is the price of housing- and that is radiating out in an arc from San Francisco and Silicon Valley because there are people coming to the Bay Area that are being paid very well and can afford to bid up the price of housing- pushing everyone else further out.

Simple supply and demand.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The differential between the cost of living in say San Mateo and Fresno is not because of regulation but because demand exceeding supply.

Sure regulation comes at a cost, but the essential reason the Bay Area is becoming unaffordable is the price of housing- and that is radiating out in an arc from San Francisco and Silicon Valley because there are people coming to the Bay Area that are being paid very well and can afford to bid up the price of housing- pushing everyone else further out.

Simple supply and demand.

I understand supply and demand. I have an MBA. Why aren't these limousine liberals in Silicon Valley giving more of their money to the government so the middle class and lower income people they've pushed out of these cities can continue to stay in their homes?

 

[Syriusly]

The differential between the cost of living in say San Mateo and Fresno is not because of regulation but because demand exceeding supply.

Sure regulation comes at a cost, but the essential reason the Bay Area is becoming unaffordable is the price of housing- and that is radiating out in an arc from San Francisco and Silicon Valley because there are people coming to the Bay Area that are being paid very well and can afford to bid up the price of housing- pushing everyone else further out.

Simple supply and demand.

I understand supply and demand. I have an MBA. Why aren't these limousine liberals in Silicon Valley giving more of their money to the government so the middle class and lower income people they've pushed out of these cities can continue to stay in their homes?

What makes you think that they are not? They are paying higher taxes than many in other parts of the country.

The issue- which you should understand if you have an MBA- is that government spending is a drop in the bucket compared to private spending when it comes to real estate.

When I hear housing activists in San Francisco and Oakland demanding more housing for the poor, I know that any such policies will be just a drop in the bucket. Capitalism in action- none of us have a right to live where we cannot afford to live.

 

[ClosedCaption]

What do leftists have against the poor?

Liberals are the only ones doing anything to help the poor.

1965 - 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line

2016 - Trillions of dollars later spent on the Great Society Welfare programs, 18% of Americans living below the "poverty" line.

Keep up the good work!

Are you one of those people that think that welfare programs are supposed to get rid of poor people?

Same token, do you think safety nets are supposed to stop falls?

They clearly haven't helped

Only according to people who don't understand the purpose of those plans. Those plans aren't meant to get rid of poverty. No plan can do that.