News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mistake. Parent comment

Re:Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mi... by kaashif on Monday March 06, 2023 @06:23PM (#35049303)
If you consider the relatively low density, mostly restrictively zoned Bay Area to be "packed in", I'd hate to hear what you think of e.g. New York.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mi... by khazhoux on Monday March 06, 2023 @07:07PM (#35049728)
New York has much higher density, but I’m not sure how that’s relevant or interesting.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mi... by edgyquant on Monday March 06, 2023 @10:25PM (#35051169)
As posted above the Bay Area is second in density only to NYC.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mi... by jacob171714 on Monday March 06, 2023 @11:29PM (#35051564)
They said sf which is strictly different than the bay area as it only has about 1/10th the total population and a significantly smaller fraction of the land. If you want to go from the silicon valley to sf its 45-50 miles.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Maybe Treating Housing as an Investment Was a Colossal Mi... by kaashif on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @08:49PM (#35064134)
Not correct, that post was about San Francisco only. The Bay Area is much, much larger, and has a density of ~1000 per sq mi. If the entire Bay Area were as dense as SF (not even close), that would be a megacity dwarfing NYC and Tokyo several times over.
[ Parent | on HN ]