7 ms·
It’s not as dire in NYC unless you’re exclusively considering Manhattan. And even in Manhattan it’s relatively “affordable” if you’re willing to live in the 160
by parkingrift 4y ago
It’s not as dire in NYC unless you’re exclusively considering Manhattan. And even in Manhattan it’s relatively “affordable” if you’re willing to live in the 160s+. Significantly less than people think, at least.
- caskstrength 4y agoOP wrote about owning a "home" as opposed to his coworkers who live in "condos" which makes me think he meant single-family house. Are you saying that SFH in Manhattan is relatively affordable for average FAANG developer?
- g_sch 4y agoI mean, SHFs barely exist in Manhattan so it's kind of a moot comparison. But the thrust of GP is correct - you can buy a townhome in much of Brooklyn and Queens for less than $1m.
- caskstrength 4y agoWell, it is like saying that in order to live in SF you can just buy a house in Oakland for less than $1m.
- g_sch 4y agoI suppose, although perhaps this analogy would be more apt if there were few to no single family homes in SF (as is the case with Manhattan).