[jmaha]

It's not exactly that straight forward...

As mentioned in the article, many who work full time in SF can't afford to live in the city. "Affordable places" generally means far east or south of their workplace, meaning that they have to spend an enormous amount of money and time commuting to their jobs. With time and money being a finite resource [for most], the commute time comes at the cost of family time and the cost of transportation comes out of their meager earnings (a fact that, if you live in SF or work at a company that provides a private bus, take for granted). Living outside of the city is still unaffordable for many people because of these costs.

The real problem is the scarcity of overall housing resources. With the boom in tech drawing more and more people into SF, it's only going to become more of an issue unless building picks up significantly. This is also true of salaries, which will have to increase in order for companies to hire people who can afford to live here, further driving a wedge between those who can and those who cannot live here.