A map of SF's wealth -- and poverty

|
(19)

There's a cool interactive map that gives you a visual picture of wealth and poverty in San Francisco. Check it out here. Just type in "San Francisco, CA" and click "income."

What you see is a city full of green (wealth), with a few pockets of poverty. The data is at least two years old, so it's almost certain that, say, the inner Mission no longer has a median income of $36,000 and the median in Noe Valley is above $108,000. The median in Vis Valley is (or was) $17,000. Nobody at that level could buy a house in VV now, not even close.

The fun thing is to imagine the income map overlaid with this map to see where housing costs -- and thus median income -- is rising fast. Check out, for example, the tiny Duboce Triangle area, with median income of $84, 000 (certainly no more than middle class by San Francisco standards). There were at least 17 buildings in that one census tract cleared of tenants by Ellis Act evictions; I wonder how much the median income has gone up.

It's interesting to contrast SF to, say, Oakland and Berkeley, or to Los Angeles, where there are plenty of rich people (on the coast and in the hills) but also large swaths of more middle-income middle-class communities.

Just some thoughts for a Monday afternoon.

 

Comments

L.A. has very few middle class communities. Fewer than The City. I think you need to get back down south (and hopefully stay there for good)

Posted by Ex-Juggalo on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 1:38 pm

A better basis for comparison with SF would be the contiguous area of Venice Beach, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Bel Air and Brentwood.

You could then compare the East Bay with the San Fernando Valley or San Bernadino.

Maybe Malibu is Marin but you cannot take the comparison too far.

Other than that, I have no idea what Tim's point was here.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 1:58 pm

TIC'ed or Ellis'ed. Realtors have even coined a name for my nabe, "Mission Creek", which is a sure sign we are on the up and up.

At the same time, Flour and Water, Southern Pacific and American Cheese have opened close by, and various other high-end eateries and bars.

15 years ago there were hookers walking the block, drugs for sale on every street corner and the occasional sound of gunfire.

Which do you think is better, Tim?

Posted by anon on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 2:01 pm

Oakland for one. It's pretty pathetic that this is something people bitch about. Go live in Detroit for a while - it'll make you appreciate San Francisco.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 2:46 pm

recurring theme, and not just in Sf. Even Detroit is showing some green shoots downtown, while many cities have rejuvenated downtown living.

The new poverty is in the suburbs as empty nesters go back to the city, the young folks don't want the burbs either, and the high-paying jobs are all downtown again.

White flight is in reverse.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 3:17 pm

In a landscape that bleak any progress, no matter how incremental, is to be viewed with great optimism.

While here in SF people bitch if the per capita income grows or Twitter expands. High class problems.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 3:54 pm

about their success in the context of shame projected by political correctness must inevitably manifest itself in some form of self hatred.

We see it in Tim, Greg and many other hopelessly conflicted souls here.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 4:10 pm

Against hookers and drugs?

Posted by tim on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 4:38 pm

Americans would rather not live in a neighborhood riddled with hookers and pushers.

The 1% being inverted snobs like you who hate the successful and would rather see SF returned to the criminals and hustlers who are gradually being replaced by economic producers and honest citizens.

Admitting your prejudices is the first step to redemption.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 4:57 pm

Over the whores in Washington DC any day.

Posted by Johnny Venom on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 10:47 pm
Posted by Guest on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 5:25 am

the pimps who are here with the hookers are sub-human vermin, the Johns are suck and the drug trade bring violence and jabbering garbage.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 6:15 pm

all the petty crime and nuisance factors that come along with that.

Tim has young children, I believe, and so his claims that it's OK to have hookers and pushers in your neighbourhood rings hollow, since he chooses to live in a gentrified neighbourhood where that doesn't happen anyway.

Do as Tim says, not as Tim does.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 5:28 am

I'm still waiting for him to put his considerable real estate equity into buying a rent controlled property at risk of Ellis eviction.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 8:35 am

If you're raising a family under 'poverty' conditions (Tim's word, not mine) then maybe trying to live in San Francisco isn't the smartest move in the world.

Maybe it makes more sense to live in a place that isn't as expensive. Then maybe you can have more to invest in your kids.

Instead of using your limited resources to maintain a home in San Francisco.

Just a thought.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 10, 2013 @ 7:37 pm

pricey when there are places within easy commuting distance that are much cheaper?

Or, for that matter, they could relocate to much cheaper places further away?

It's really a bloated sense of entitlement to say "I cannot afford SF (or Aspen, or Monaco) but I like it there and so I should be subsidized so I can live in a place that's beyond my pay grade".

Posted by Guest on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 5:30 am

In my very green neighborhood, we report poors to the police when we see them. Same with blacks, hispanics, queers, hippies, commies, and weirdoes. Even allowing them to walk past our homes would depress property values.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 6:07 am

Once a neighbourhood becomes more than 70% gentrified, the minorities start to feel uncomfortable and withdraw into their shells. It's what I like to call the "accelerated convergence of optimality" (or ACO for short). It ensures that your home value appreciation will move up a gear.

When a prospective home purchaser walks down your block and sees only rosey-cheeked white children in designer strollers, and the corner store sells arugula and not canned beans, the sale is as good as made.

Neighborhood Watches help but, once you reach ACO, you don't even need them any more. The elements become neutralized.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 6:51 am
Ha!

Nice one, guest.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 11, 2013 @ 11:45 am

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Related articles

  • SF Board of Supervisors approves new tenant protections

  • Mantra from the Milk/Moscone memorial march: "Fight back!"

  • Barroom backchannel

    Can tech workers and progressive activists cooperate in the fight against displacement? Maybe, but don't tell their bosses.