https://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2015/03/wealth-...
https://medium.com/the-ferenstein-wire/a-26-year-old-mit-gra...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/19/meet-...
https://www.mercatus.org/publication/how-land-use-regulation...
* A snapshot of more recent U.S. Census migration numbers shows that nearly three-quarters of those who have left California for other states since 2007 earn less than $50k a year.
* San Francisco's African American population has declined from 13.4% of the population in 1970 to 6.1%
* 41 percent of San Franciscans spend 30 to 50 percent on rent, despite a lot of rent control for longer-tenure residents and a population average income being $104k as well as median $77k
* low skilled entry level jobs are moved elsewhere https://www.google.com.tw/amp/s/www.wired.com/2016/03/those-....
I understand that this might not be the intended consequence for all people fighting for the current zoning rules, but due to its effects on African Americans and latinos as well as the poor I find the effects immoral.
The current situation makes it almost impossible to grow up with lower middle class parents or work in a low-pay low-skilled position, and mingling with the tech crowd to work your way up.
Anyone supporting these policies knowing this has the right to do so, but not while at the same time claiming they fight for diversity and the dispossessed.
According to http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov, the AA population was increasing throughout the 80s - 2000s in all 8 other bay area counties. They could very well left SF to get better opportunities elsewhere.
* Large urban school districts are experiencing the greatest numerical decrease in Black enrollment. These districts include Oakland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Inglewood, Lynwood, and Compton.
* The largest percentage increase in the Black population occurred in smaller, rural communities (Susanville, Tehachapi, Calipatria, and Elk Grove). Before 1980, these communities had a very small number of African Americans.
According to the cal budget center http://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/californians-parts-stat...
* More than 2 our of 3 Californias with unaffordable housing costs are people of color
And there are a few more interesting facts in both links, so you are correct that it is a complex problem. That said I don't think you can access the best opportunities in California from where the largest percentage increase in the black population is, but it might be that they also moved to neighborhood populous counties in which case percentage increase is not interesting.
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/shoag/files/why_has_region...
Why Has Regional Income Convergence in the U.S. Declined?
>The past thirty years have seen a dramatic decline in the rate of income convergence across states and in population flows to wealthy places. These changes coincide with (1) an increase in housing prices in productive areas, (2) a divergence in the skill-specific returns to living in those places, and (3) a redirection of unskilled migration away from productive places. We develop a model in which rising housing prices in wealthy areas deter unskilled migration and slow income convergence. Using a new panel measure of housing supply regulations, we demonstrate the importance of this channel in the data. Income convergence continues in less-regulated places, while it has mostly stopped in places with more regulation.
I live in Amsterdam and the city is developing a serious problem with housing and income distribution. There’s a huge portion of the housing stock owned by social housing and a red-hot debate on how does it affect - contributes or mitigates - the problem.
My theory is that unit size is the greatest mitigator, whereby more affluent buyers move out to the countryside to buy larger properties. If larger apartments were allowed in the city — lower tax or land lease prices — it would trigger a price war among Oil Barons over that penthouse on the canals.
Opinions?