https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=A_Decade_of_Displace...
I left San Francisco in the early 00s... this was well underway by then, and the most recent boom was the nail in the coffin.
I left San Francisco in the early 00s... this was well underway by then, and the most recent boom was the nail in the coffin.
An entire generation of San Franciscans have been born and become adults since that article was published. Even if you accept the premise that there was significant displacement in San Francisco in 2004 that doesn't say anything about whether there is today.
I do not believe there is a large amount of displacement happening in San Francisco today because I have not yet seen any evidence.
https://sfstandard.com/research-data/san-francisco-bay-area-... From 2020-2022 SF (city) -65,522 SF Bay Area -249,389
Its also worth noting the SF (city) decrease was -7.5% or number 1 amongst all US counties with more than 100k residents.
Pretty hard to argue there is no displacement happening when it leads the country.
After all, why stay in a city when everything is closed when you can get the same experience cheaper somewhere else?
Any time window that includes 2020 is going to include very strong pandemic-related effects.
If someone is moving due to cost that is displacement in my eyes. If there was not a cost, they would stay.
You claimed there was no evidence, I offered evidence now you say oh no that evidence doesn't count because it doesn't fit my narrative.
Proof of displacement requires demonstration that people left SF because they could not afford to live there anymore. It's really that simple.
Techies with six-figure incomes leaving town to move back in with their parents during the pandemic doesn't count as displacement.