While the unemployment rate in San Francisco jumped from 2.9 percent in May to 3.5 percent in June, there are actually 400 more people living in the city with a job. But with school year seasonally in play, the labor force increased by 4,000 and drove the unemployment rate up.
And there are still 67,700 more people living in San Francisco with paychecks than there were at the end of 2000 and 7,100 more over the past year, an increase of 96,500 since January 2010.
That being said, the number of people now living in San Francisco with a job (533,200) has dropped by 3,200 since the end of 2015, versus gaining 5,600 from the end of 2014 to the same time last year.
The unemployment rate in Alameda County, which includes Oakland, jumped in June as well, to 4.7 percent from 3.8 percent in May, primarily driven by a seasonal increase in the labor force which was up by 6,900. But employment in Alameda also dropped by 800 in June.
That being said, the number of people living in Alameda County with a job remains 4,900 higher over the past year, and has increased by 99,700 since January 2010, but the growth rate has been slipping since the beginning of the year.
The unemployment rates to the north (Marin) and south (San Mateo) both ticked up 0.7 percent in June, to 3.5 and 3.3 percent respectively.
maybe we will finally get a purge of the less useful techbros we so desperately need
What have you contributed to the world?
Bart, 3.5 percent is a SUPER LOW unemployment rate. And, if you bothered to read the article, you would realize that the increase in unemployment is largely related to the normal seasonal fluctuation caused by the schools being out, which means more young people (i.e. teenagers and college students) looking for summer work. I am sure someone looking for a minimum wage job really appreciates that you are taking joy in their unemployment.
Why silly people like you have a pathological obsession with a very small percent of the SF population is beyond me (hint, hint, most people in SF do not work in tech, and SF would still be a super-expensive city without tech workers)/ What SF really needs is a purge of the sort of stupidity shown in your remarks. I know, you probably moved here from Omaha 10 years ago and you think you know the “real San Francisco,” but you don’t.
Yeah, but… it’s just EASIER to blame tech companies. All of the complexities of the world’s 6th largest economy can be fixed by pinning all of it’s problems on the tech industry.
Tech and property owners. They’re the root of all that’s evil in ess eff.
in general, people who dont expect handouts from others are to blame for everything
Blame the Fed and the VCs. The former took the risk out of capital, the latter took the funny money straight to the casino. The techies are just the bishops and pawns, you shouldn’t blame them for milking the system.
do you think next time you could try to fit three more mixed metaphors in there? thanks in advance
Quit spouting the truth, Sabbie. Supply shortage, rent control, and tech buses are easier to blame; getting people to understand the Fed involves flexing that muscle in between the ears…and there’s too many facebook posts to respond to to invest that sort of time
Tech and high end RE have always had boom/bust cycles. But ultra low interest rates magnify the effect. People might get irrationally exuberant every once in a while, but they can’t set market prices unless they can bring or borrow money to the table.
It’s about time. We all knew this was coming.
the bizjournal has an article today about Facebook making a major expansion into SF to attract workers.
Yuppers, it’ll happen. And be a big boom to SF landlords. Sweet.
Dave can’t be happy about that.
Yeah, I saw that. It would/will be terrific for the city.
there is a theory that this is related to the constant pressure against the tech shuttles. apparently more tech workers are now driving since some of the tech shuttle stops got moved. the people prpotesting tech buses are clearly not smart enough to understand repercussions. 1) more people will drive and screw environment and increase congestion 2) big companies will actually shift jobs to the city, putting more pressure on real estate.
i hope they move tons of jobs to SF
Even if you take the shuttle, that’s a hell of a long time that you’re spending in a bus every day. Better than time spent in a car, but still, a lot of time.
whats differnent about sitting on a comfortable air conditioned bus with wifi than sitting in a cubicle?