First of all, why not build the walls to the top of the ceiling? Seems like so much vertical space could be used!
Second of all, how long can this last? People criticize the tech economy for causing displacement and surely that's happening. But even people making extraordinarily good livings can't afford to live alone. Eventually, people will be unwilling to spend more than 50% of income on rent isn't sustainable. It seems to already be happening:
Building walls to the ceiling would require a building permit. Which the county wouldn't grant because it would be hazardous and violate the building code.
Building codes in the US typically require minimum dimensions for habitable spaces. These minimums reflect experience developed over the millenia and the requirement that laws and regulations have objective criteria and that governments generally apply them uniformly.
More power to him! Saving money when you're young is a great attitude to have. When I hear that 50% of Americans have less than $1000 in their savings accounts, I can only shake my head in despair.
Japan has capsule hotels that reduce costs through better space efficiency and the weird hotel that reduces costs through automation. If someone were to make a startup that combines the two, they could solve San Francisco's problem of high rent.
San Franciscos problem is building restrictions not high rent. Most of that is from the investor who owns a high % of property in san fran and his weight in the city.
With building regs like other cities we'd have skyscrapers to accomodate everyone who wants to live here at reasonable cost.
I'm kind of surprised people haven't built more dorm-like apartment buildings with more shared spaces, especially in NYC where people spend a lot of time out of their apartments.
In the US there are typically legal limits on how many people can be crammed into buildings and rooms. Those limits are based on experience in general and those of fire and rescue personnel in particular.
Unlike many laws and regulations, those governing buildings tend to be more data driven than is common. The trigger for technical and empirically driven building and land development regulations in the US was the Triangle Shirtwaist fire. Much of the data on human safety in buildings was drawn from the insurance industry's actuarial and claims data. Many of the improvements in life safety driven by that industry, e.g. UL is "underwriters laboratories" and the National Fire Protection Association [NFPA] is funded by the insurance industry but it's technical documents are based on consensus with professional fire fighters.
Second of all, how long can this last? People criticize the tech economy for causing displacement and surely that's happening. But even people making extraordinarily good livings can't afford to live alone. Eventually, people will be unwilling to spend more than 50% of income on rent isn't sustainable. It seems to already be happening:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11196718
I wonder if this is just the peak and soon there will be some form of return to rationality.