If SF was attractive, then people would want to remotely work from SF. But it isn't. So, they're leaving. On the other hand San Diego seems to be blowing up.
Even people that don't have high paying tech jobs are lining up to pay these kinds of insane prices. They don't want to pay the prices, but it's worth it to live in an area like SF.
One of the only places on the planet in human history that people put this much energy and money into just living somewhere.
But the factor really driving up rent and real estate prices is the massive resistance in SF and the Bay Area in general to building new housing.
> For example, from 2012 to 2016, the San Francisco metropolitan area added 373,000 new jobs, but permitted only 58,000 new housing units.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_housing_shortage
I’m not sure how big of a factor that is/was though. I know plenty of people in their 20s who worked in the peninsula or east bay but deliberately took on the high costs (and long commutes!) of living in SF for the usual reasons related to SF being a cultural center.
I think it would be fairer to apply your claim to the reason many people live in the entire Bay Area, but not specifically in SF.
It's even more likely that part of that 6 percent had family obligations, and some just realized they wouldn't buy a house even if they loved the city, and some just hated it.
The influx of techies, however, changed the city. And SF soon became what it is today.
Sf became techietown in 2000.
Instead of primarily being an alt culture capital.
It became "a place to work".
Prior to 2010 and a little after it was more than a place to work. It was a place where all techies wanted to live; but not because of work. Because they loved the city. That's why those shuttles from SF to mountain view google exist. Too many googlers wanted to live in SF and work in MTV.