You can see why the first-home buyers, the students and those who will become tomorrow's arts, cultural and sporting leaders may be squeezed out.
Unlike Auckland, San Francisco had the great good sense to build their port (at Oakland) across the Bay - not right on the most picturesque parts of the harbour, as Auckland has painfully and perhaps irredeemably done.
The growing drift from San Francisco is benefitting Oakland. Originally a port town, with a high percentage of ethnic inhabitants, it had a reputation for being a little on the wild side. Even in July, rioting following the freeing of George Zimmerman produced some rather patrician tsk-tsking from San Francisco.
But Oakland has grown up a lot. It has a better climate than San Francisco, Mediterranean-style weather (warm and dry in summer; mild and not too wet in winter) and has a growing reputation in arts, culture and sport.
In the last census, it turned out San Francisco had about 8000 fewer school-age kids in 2010 than in 2000. Of the city's 800,000 population, only 13 per cent are under 18, the lowest percentage of any major US city. Including Manhattan.
A San Francisco populated mostly by the rich, the elderly, businesspeople and accountants, with all the artists living in Oakland? Maybe, maybe not.
But there are certainly lessons for Auckland there, even though Auckland doesn't have an Oakland.