Facebook Pledges $1 Billion to Ease Housing Crisis Inflamed by Big Tech

All those “free loaders, losers and people who refuse to work” have created the world’s fifth largest economy and pay way more money into the Federal Treasury than they get back in federal assistance.

@Bodyman 5th largest economy that has many features of a developing one (massive inequality, one party political rule, tent cities, begging, homeless). But, dude, the waves are always tasty off San Gregorio.

@Dave What difference is it going to make. This is going to be rental not condo housing. Why? Let's say a 2 BR unit costs, including land acquisition, cost about $250,000 to construct - this doesn't include other infrastructure costs like parking, access and internal roads, playgrounds, etc. Most private ownership property require purchases require the buyer to come up cash, typically 20% of the purchase price. This is because to protect its mortgage outlay, the lender will pay 80% of the purchase price and the buyer the balance. Example: Builders costs for unit is $250,000 as noted (and that low is not likely), and assuming that some combination of corporate and public agencies pays for land acquisition, or donates it, it is theoretically possible for the builder to sell it for $250,000. Thus, with an 80% mortgage, the buyer is going to need to come up $50,000 cash. If by some miracle, the bank would accept an insured 10% mortgage, the buyer would have to come up with $25,000. Do you know any cops, teachers, nurses, firefighters who can save that range enough to buy the unit. One advantage of rental housing is that it requires, at most, the equivalent of two months of rent for security. The disadvantage - the renter is not gaining equity as the properties value increases. There are also many options in between (e.g., rent with an option to buy, etc). My advice, start with what the middle income and blue collar worker can afford - say 25% to 35% of income - and ask them!

Absolutely!!!!

@Joe FB just bought a whole neighborhood in SF to secure land for office bldgs., parking privileges, and some employee housing. That would make J.P. Morgan envious. Perhaps Zuckerberg will endow a museum with fine art and original manuscripts, as did Frick. Perhaps he will endow well staffed libraries with major collections, as did Mellon. I doubt it. Zuckerberg is no Warren Buffet; he will not give away his billions to help the poor who suffer pollution and corruption in poor third world countries. He can't, or won't even exert standards to prevent hate speech and foreign malign influence on our electoral process. His testimony in front of Congress was disgraceful, as bad as J. Diemens.

@Matt The answer is not simply money, but more specifically who controls the money supply. Secret of Oz.

What are you talking about? Humans are gradually taking over habitats everywhere, including in the Bay Area. Any attempts at preservation are our last hope for keeping at least some semblance of biodiversity intact before we all plunge into the abyss.

@Will Maybe you're being contrarian for the heck of it? Whatever your motives, they're dangerous. We're dealing with increasing fires from climate change- the answer is NOT to increase sprawl. It says you're from NYC, the city with the greatest density in the US, which is exactly what the Bay Area needs- DENSITY. In the form of height and infill. Right now, even downtown San Francisco developments are stymied by zoning regulations. Multiple buildings went up in my mid-market neighborhood that were only 6 stories tall- they should have been at least double that. All that said, I agree with your statement that CalTrans should extend to Santa Rosa. Sadly, the constituents up there, who are now stuck in nightmare traffic, don't seem willing to approve it.

@Will You live in a crowded, expensive East Coast city; you depend on low wage workers to commute in for janitorial services, dishwashing in back kitchens, low pay service job. No one who is not rich can afford to live in Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn, or parts of the Bronx. I lived in CT for 22 years, worked in NYC and commuted on Metro North for two years. Finally, I was able to secure a very good job with a multi-State home heating corporation, one of the last to offer health care, pensions and matching 401K savings. Those benefits were frozen in 1989 due to the Recession and failing returns on investments. Perhaps GM still offers benefits, unless it has outsourced all production to Mexico et al. If the U.S. remains a consumer based economy, this is not sustainable. If we devolve into the very rich, and the poor, we will lose the middle class which built this country after WWII.

@Tes After moving from SF in 2011, I went back last month for a visit to see friends. Having a meal with a friend on Fillmore, in a place with good soul food, now an expensive foofy place, and the widespread gentrification there alone was enough to depress me. The whole bohemia vibe is melting away, leaving basically Denver.

@Tes Too bad FB didn't just go bankrupt. All those workers getting high salaries, paying taxes, giving to charity is awful compared to the goodness of a business failure.

@David Paying taxes? Didn't they chase tax havens all over Europe? Finally they landed in Dublin, Ireland. We'll see how much Ireland really benefits from the "largesse" of an American billionaire. At least Bloomberg and Buffet have put their money where it might do some good for more people. FB is full of advertising, and very difficult to get rid of.

@George New Mexico, Colorado, midwest, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho...all still affordable and beautifully rural.

@George Did you notice there are no apartment buildings in Palo Alto? That’s the problem.

@Oaklander The Peninsula was originally orchards and farms. Palo Alto and Menlo Park were outliers. Then Lockheed established a presence and real estate in Sunnyvale became valuable. The home my family purchased for 35K in 1963 recently sold for 750K. The home we bid on and lost to a Chinese cartel from Chinatown is now worth 1M; it is near the GG bridge. SF will not be affordable for decades, maybe never.

@cl So Facebook helped create a housing shortage by *checks notes* creating thousands of jobs.

@AG You forgot subsidizing health insurance premiums in your example.

@Isaiah "The problem with SB 50 is that it exempts the wealthiest communities and puts the brunt of development around transit in communities of color" There is no exemption for wealthy communities. Wealthy cities with a lot of jobs and good schools are actually specifically targeted by SB50 even if they do not have good transit. Some of the most vocal opponents of SB50 are lawmakers from places like Beverly Hills and Cupertino (home of apple, median income $135k) Additionally, many historically low income neighborhoods of color, like the mission and the tenderloin in San Francisco have already been upzoned and will see almost no change under SB50. Other sensitive communities will be allowed to delay the implementation of SB50 and will be allowed to forumulate their own plan in the interim. Also, buildings with renters cannot be developed unless the building is held empty for 7-15 years, meaning many buildings in low income areas are effectively exempt. Because of these protection SB50 is supported by Habitat for Humanity, the Non-Profit Housing Assoc of northern california (co-sponsor), and Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California.

Sorry....but the only thing that has trickled down so far is yellow and smells funny and the only thing it creates is a long shower for those below...if they can find one. It most decidedly does NOT work...which has been proven over and over and over again.

@Will Or greed?

@Jennifer The tech companies are not responsible for nor able to change laws, regulations, zoning, building codes, etc. That's up to YOU the average citizen and your elected government officials.

@Jennifer Nowhere to build? Up? Is that not a direction? Oh, Bay area has earthquake, well so does Tokyo and Hongkong. Do you see the dilapidated dump that is downtown Mountain view? Our local Nimby.is fighting to preserve a "historic church" built with dry wall from 1955.

@Matt J. yes, the real answer is less people in California not more housing.

@Tes Why? That seems like an immoral stance to me.

@Peter Really? We have a shoreline to protect from off shore drilling for oil exploration. Remember the Gulf Spill which destroyed local communities, and the sea grass which protected New Orleans from flooding? There is nothing immoral in protecting the environment. We don't need more people; many are already moving to NV, ID, and AZ to find an affordable place to live. WA State has begun to impose zoning laws affecting developers, as has Oregon. Developers are smash and grab; then they take their profits and move on. There is nothing immoral in curbing them.

@mm or our politicians could close all the loopholes they created to specifically make it legal to avoid taxes. You know, or that.

@mm Yeah, but even if they're proudly proclaiming they're going to start a $1Billion fund, it's cheaper than paying their fair share of taxes, etc. Plus, this gives them more prestige and control over how their money is spent in the aid of housing affordability. And not to mention, it's a PR bonus to put out this headline grabbing press release!

@mm Your point even if true is a non sequitur. The housing crisis is not from a lack of tax revenue.

@Want to move Yeah, the incentive should be to get rid of Prop 13 which allows some people to have ridiculously low tax rates on their property. My in-laws were paying $1,200 on a $1.1 million property because of Prop 13. Anywhere else in the country and that would be about $11k-22k in property taxes. Amazing how homeowners are begging for another handout when they get a $10k-20k handout every year.

You hit the nail on the head! Prop13 has totally distorted housing in Calif and should be reformed!

@Want to move Good idea. Where I live, everyone 'ages in place' because the cost of a subsidized senior citizen rental nearby is more than the taxes on the McMansion, thanks to the senior property tax exemption. Subsidizing a move to a retiree area would mean a lot of housing freed up for families with working parents, reducing their commute substantially.