Hacker News Reader

Comment by heyitsnick | Hacker News Reader

A 4x factor sure sounds very high, though maybe the costs in SF (or in the US in general) are different to my own;from my experience over the last 6 years, living in a variety of setups in different cities in Europe, I spend 50-60% of my monthly outgoing on rent (then about 10% on bills, 10% on transport, leaving ~20% on misc and recreation). A 2x factor seems much more reasonable.

View on HN

You won't find an apartment in SF with a 2x ratio, landlords will run screaming away from you. This is a city where you line up with other prospective tenants to see apartments, and deals are sealed frequently on the spot - and where bidding wars are not unheard of.

If you come to SF intending to rent an apartment on a 2x factor, you will be homeless.

The insane rents in SF is an express of the extremely constricted supply - which has other effects beyond merely just rent. It's a landlord's market and they can afford to be extremely choosy about who they rent to.

I've found NYC almost as bad. Just being able to afford the rent isn't enough. Here, yearly income 40x rent is standard, and sometimes even that's not enough.

Since I'm doing contract work and don't have a regular salary, one landlord told me outright that even though I had demonstrated I could pay, he wouldn't rent to me because he "wanted a more stable tenant".

It feels terribly insulting to be told that, and makes me long for a humbler city like Chicago or Minneapolis, where if you have money, a landlord will take it without nearly this level of nonsense.

Or Berlin. I looked at apartment prices there and began to feel quite jealous of the Germans :)

Thanks, that clarifies a lot. Different worlds.

Are you including food in there somewhere?

Good point :) Grocery shopping is such a small part, maybe 5%; going out to eat once or twice a week would be part of recreation budget.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com