Re:New York’s Wealthiest Cut Losses as Manhattan Real Estate...
by rukittenme on Thursday November 29, 2018 @05:14PM
(#18564633)
Tax and land use policies. Who would have thought...
Median salary for Houston: $61,708. Median salary for SF: $77,734. Does a 26% increase in salary explain a 250% increase in rents?
Re:New York’s Wealthiest Cut Losses as Manhattan Real Estate...
by ummonk on Thursday November 29, 2018 @05:23PM
(#18564697)
Market-rate rents are driven by young, above-median workers - a young software engineer in SF probably earns significantly more than a young professional in the energy industry in Houston.
Re:New York’s Wealthiest Cut Losses as Manhattan Real Estate...
by true_tuna on Thursday November 29, 2018 @06:54PM
(#18565339)
You have the causal chain backwards.
Market rate rents are driven by high demand low supply. If you add 30,000 people to an area and only 7,000 new units, the price of existing units rise. The employers hiring new workers have to pay higher wages due to higher cost of living. Normal people like cashiers and teachers can’t afford it and have to commute from cheaper areas.
It’s supply and demand.
Additionally, I don't have numbers but Houston does seem to have much lower income inequality for the bulk of the population. The SF Bay Area is really good at churning a lot of moderately wealthy people through the tech industry, who far outearn anyone else, and end up bidding against each other for the available housing. I imagine Houston's energy industry creates far fewer moderately wealthy people who outstrip everyone else in income to this extent.
Finally, one big thing that Texas does very right is having strong property taxes instead of state income taxes. You don't have early homeowners holding on to their feudal properties while new workers struggle to make ends meet, as you do in California.