East Bay Times: Silicon Valley, East Bay gain wealthy households while middle-income dwindles

[TheseGoTo11]

And state policy will only ensure the inequality grows.

By taxing and regulating everything that moves, the state ensures that people who come here mostly do so for the high paying jobs. Localities add to this by limiting housing permits. In turn, companies have to pay more for the top talent, which in turn pushes up housing, attracts more high skilled out of staters who'd earn less anywhere else besides NY, and creates more income inequality.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by phantompilot

I can't quite grasp the logic behind the claim that the community isn't sustainable without poor people. Of all the things that imperil the success of a community, it's the poor.

The wealthy and middle class aren't the ones burdening otherwise sustainable communities. So I really don't understand the claim.

I think "sustainable" just is being improperly used as a synonym for some other word the speaker meant to convey. Maybe they WANT poor people around, so maybe they meant "desirable". I don't know. Guess you'd have to ask them.

Who is going to be your bartender, barista, server, waitresss, grocery store clerk, instacart/uber/lyft/postmates driver? There won't be any apps without contractors to work "for" them.

You can't have a community without people of all incomes. What is more important is having enough opportunity for everyone at living wages.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by phantompilot

I can't quite grasp the logic behind the claim that the community isn't sustainable without poor people. Of all the things that imperil the success of a community, it's the poor.

The wealthy and middle class aren't the ones burdening otherwise sustainable communities. So I really don't understand the claim.

I think "sustainable" just is being improperly used as a synonym for some other word the speaker meant to convey. Maybe they WANT poor people around, so maybe they meant "desirable". I don't know. Guess you'd have to ask them.

You need a few working poor and even more lower middle class people around if you want to avoid blue collar and lower white collar people commuting 100 miles. It's obvious.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by calicoastal

This study basically shows that people are making more money than before in the Bay Area. That's a good thing. People are moving up income brackets.

There is nothing in the study indicating displacement or anything like that.

No they are not. Those are new grads from Ivies and newbs from out of state / overseas.

[HockeyMac18]

Related to this discussion are a series of charts that plot "Bay Area income inequality" in 1999 vs. 2014.

From here Income Inequality, City by City (please click through for graphs)

The trend is rather clearly seen: Basically every single region/city in the Bay Area has lost residents making less than $100K and gained residents making more. Some in quite large ways, such as in the > $150K bracket (up 12% in the Bay Area as a whole).

[sav858]

Damn, even places like Vallejo the % of low or lower middle income are not increasing and all the gains are $100K+ categories. It would be interesting to see what the graphs are for cheaper, exurban locales like Antioch, Pittsburg, Tracy, Fairfield, etc.. But if Vallejo is gaining only $100K+ HH's then those might be similar too.

[Mordin]

Where's that earthquake? Lol.