Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
The National Association of Housebuilders released their Housing Affordability rankings.
I’ve been seeing a lot of bragging among the weblogs about how affordable certain webloggers home towns are. Opine Bovine points out that Kansas City is second in the larger cities, and 16th overall. Sharon (who has been sick, send her get well wishes) mentions that her town, Greenville, has an affordability rate of 75.9%, meaning that 75 percent of the people making the average income can afford to buy homes in the area.
Look waaaaaaay down at the bottom, boys and girls, and you’ll see my home, San Francisco. Right down there with all the other cities in this area. According to the statistics, only about 8% of people who work here can afford to live here.
My question then is: if people who work here can’t afford to live here, then where are they living? Secondly, if the people who live here don’t work here, then who are they, why are they here, and what have they done with the workers?
San Francisco also has the highest number of homeless in the country per capita. Hmm. Do you think there’s a connection?
(Hey, that guy living under that box — I think he makes my coffee at Starbucks in the morning.)