In San Francisco (and most CA cities) there’s aggressive rent control and other tenant protections. You’ll often see stories about people subleasing from some old lady to pay 1980-level rents or packing up three generations in a one-bedroom in the Mission. A high minimum wage sort of helps. Prop 13 severely curtails property taxes, and until two years ago you could incredibly pass on your tax rate with your estate. In other words, SF manages it through market-distorting policies that make then problem worse in the long term.
As to how working class people “do” it? I honestly don’t know - it doesn’t seem worth it to me, but I guess if it’s your home you just deal with it. You get used to paying more, and for homeowners you come to expect a rate of appreciation that justifies putting most of your wealth in your home. It’s that mentality transplanted to Austin that is fueling the craze, IMO.
In defense of Texas, I do think the property tax regime makes sense. Homeowners immediately feel the sting of a rising market, prompting frank discussions over what to do about it (like this thread). Compare that to California, where Prop 13 allows homeowners all of the upsides of appreciation and no downsides, leaving the homeowner class indifferent to housing policy.