The California Budget Project* today released a report that "examines how the Bay Area’s workers and their families have fared before, during, and since the boom and subsequent bust."

Their findings (beware, PDF) are a pretty huge "no duh", as the big point seems to be that the gap between the haves and have nots continues to grow in the Bay Area, even in light of the boom and subsequent bust. This is due, in large part, to the fact that even when the beneficiaries of the boom (primarily those in tech jobs) were making their big bucks, those in lower-wage positions did not see their earnings take a similar leap. We needed a report to tell us this?

This Reuters piece points out one of the report's most interesting statistics, stating "A single worker earning minimum wage in the San Francisco Bay area would need to work 106.3 hours a week to afford a studio apartment renting at the region's average fair market value of $932 a month."

(A quick jaunt over to craigslist showed us that there are some pretty nice studios out there for $932, even in San Francisco proper. In fact, there are even some pretty nice 1 bedrooms! We're getting screwed! Are plentiful $932 and below studio apartments a good sign, or an indicator that all the people willing to settle for studio apartments have already been priced out of San Francisco?)

Are things financially better or worse for you now than they were in 1998? In 2001? We'd love to hear your perspective in the comments.

*a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization which describes itself as "a resource to the media, policymakers, and state and local constituency groups seeking accurate information and analysis of a range of state policy issues....we work to improve public policies affecting the economic and social well-being of low- and middle-income Californians."