Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 108 posts

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#51

Post by fleitz »

crux_ wrote: post #45
fleitz wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

public transportation? I live in Vancouver and recently flew in to SFO. Being from Vancouver I thought I know I'll save time and money and just take the subway in. BART is fucking disgusting and I couldn't sit down on the train for fear of picking up god knows what. In Vancouver if you start a startup and hire someone under 30 with a degree the gov't will pay you the first $15/hour of their salary, the rest you can a…

If you include the portion of your federal & provincial taxes that are then granted/budgeted to the city, I bet the tax you're paying "to the city" is a lot higher than you think it is, and per-capita are probably on par with SF. Also, unrelated question: How much harder is it for a 31-year-old to find work?

That question largely depends on your skill set and who you know. If you know lots of people in SF then it's going to be more difficult in Vancouver if you don't know anyone.

I'm not sure what age has to do with the question though? Either you have have marketable skills or you don't.

edit: After reading jackowood now I realize what the issue was, most places are up front about it and they look like really shitty places to work that are more concerned about saving $15/hour than figuring out how to make an extra $15/hour. They take a total labour mentality to programming instead of the view of code as a capital good with near-zero cost of reproduction. (aka, their idiots). I've never had a problem finding work in Vancouver and I'm 29 with no degree.

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#52

Post by pyre »

binspace wrote: post #44
kscaldef wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware of the wars or bailouts the city of San Francisco has run. Could you elaborate?

Nice straw man. The originating subject was on taxes (since it takes more than a city to provide all of those services), not only SF taxes :-) San Francisco residents live in the United States of America. The United States of America imposes federal taxes. Federal taxes have been used to fund wars and bailouts of various failed businesses. Of course, no real city has the authority to have a military. The city does ha…

You seem to be arguing against city-level taxes with examples of the ways that federal-level taxes are used...

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#53

Post by jackowayed »

fleitz wrote: post #51
crux_ wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you include the portion of your federal & provincial taxes that are then granted/budgeted to the city, I bet the tax you're paying "to the city" is a lot higher than you think it is, and per-capita are probably on par with SF. Also, unrelated question: How much harder is it for a 31-year-old to find work?

That question largely depends on your skill set and who you know. If you know lots of people in SF then it's going to be more difficult in Vancouver if you don't know anyone. I'm not sure what age has to do with the question though? Either you have have marketable skills or you don't. edit: After reading jackowood now I realize what the issue was, most places are up front about it and they look like really shitty pla…

I think his point was that if that subsidy exists for hiring people <30, once that subsidy stops applying, you'd expect companies to be less willing to hire you. The idea being that they could hire someone with basically the same experience and also get the subsidy.

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#54

Post by binspace »

egypturnash wrote: post #30

Why yes, because hoping to take this insane amount of money flowing into the city (and state!) and use it to make everyone else's lives that much more livable is a terrible, horrible, no good very bad thing. I'm sure nobody involved in the tech sector has ever benefited from any public monies; it's only right that they shouldn't have to pay any taxes!

And yes, giving extravagant monies to the government makes everybody lives better, cures cancer, and causes world peace too!

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#55

Post by [deleted] »

binspace wrote: post #44
kscaldef wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware of the wars or bailouts the city of San Francisco has run. Could you elaborate?

Nice straw man. The originating subject was on taxes (since it takes more than a city to provide all of those services), not only SF taxes :-) San Francisco residents live in the United States of America. The United States of America imposes federal taxes. Federal taxes have been used to fund wars and bailouts of various failed businesses. Of course, no real city has the authority to have a military. The city does ha…

[deleted]

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#56

Post by binspace »

pyre wrote: post #52
binspace wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice straw man. The originating subject was on taxes (since it takes more than a city to provide all of those services), not only SF taxes :-) San Francisco residents live in the United States of America. The United States of America imposes federal taxes. Federal taxes have been used to fund wars and bailouts of various failed businesses. Of course, no real city has the authority to have a military. The city does ha…

You seem to be arguing against city-level taxes with examples of the ways that federal-level taxes are used...

It's not like "public transportation, fire safety, paved roads, bridges, public schools, police officers, health inspectors, safety inspectors, public parks, libraries, clean air, (relatively) fair corporations, airports, hospitals, court systems, electricity, vehicle regulation, elections, veteran associations, child support, public television..." is entirely in the domain of the city government.

I just have a adverse reaction to arguments that claim I should appreciate a service provider that charges too much. Sorry, don't like getting ripped off.

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#58

Post by idiopathic »

pg wrote: post #49
crux_ wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably because other companies either aren't in SF, or aren't winning the Startup Lottery. You yourself have long advocated that the former greatly increases your chances of the latter. Now, it's late, so correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking here: If twitter magically gained $3 billion in additional valuation, and all employees cashed in all their options, all at once, it would result in a "huge" tax bill…

Actually I've never said that startups do better in SF specifically, but rather the Bay Area. This problem is limited to the city. The difference between the two cases is that the employees are being taxed out of money they have (if they exercise and sell) whereas the company is being taxed based not on revenues but on the appreciation of its stock. So a company whose valuation shot up in advance of anticipated reven…

Ah, OK, now I understand a problem I can agree with - so it's not so much the damage from paying 1.5% on a profitable transaction (employees exercise options as part of winning start-up lottery) but rather the company has to pay cash for a gain it only realised in paper. So now I understand why they were saying a company going for IPO would have to pay most of the money raised as taxes, rather than just 1.5% of it.

Why is no one suggesting applying the 1.5% when cash exchanges hands? Everyone is either suggesting keeping the 1.5% as is, or scrapping it completely for stock options. But surely a middle ground allows cash for taxes as a small percentage of cash from profits?

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#59

Post by minddog »

timr wrote: post #6

Oh, give me a break. I live in the supposed "tax free hooker area", and there are probably more hookers in the lounge of the Ritz Carlton than there are near the SF Furniture Mart (where the city wants Twitter to move). It's not like they're proposing to move them into an abandoned Happy Donut at the corner of 6th and Market. City hall and the Asian Art Museum are one block north. The opera, symphony and ballet are t…

No, they don't even have a Taco Bell. You may ask what is Brisbane then? Its a residential area with a few industrial parks. The gasoline for the greater San Francisco area is pumped from the Brisbane junction.

For anyone who wants to move a company there, they don't have much amenities. They have a single chinese restaurant, una taqueuria, and have a stellar coffee shop, but its not open long enough for the hacker personality.

Brisbane is a small town that used to be lively during the days of Johnny Cash. Its not a substitute for a city like San Francisco or even a south bay area like Mountain View. Its that mountain town you see up in Tahoe, but 1 mile south of the city. I actually suggest making a daytrip to hike the abandoned railroads through it.

If they were to move into the open buildings in the area, this could make lives of people who use public transit annoyed. The Caltrain stations are 1 mile away on each side away from Brisbane, there is only a single SamTrans running along Bayshore and forget BART, its way too far. Biking is your best bet via caltrain.

Since Brisbane is an economical situation where they are talking about shutting down the elementary and highschools, this could be a very good thing for the city. As for Twitter and other companies alike, its a question about what type of culture they want to grow. As a resident of the area, I prefer living in Brisbane, rather than working.

Re: San Francisco Doing Everything It Can To Drive Zynga And Twitter Away

#60

Post by crux_ »

pg wrote: post #49
crux_ wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably because other companies either aren't in SF, or aren't winning the Startup Lottery. You yourself have long advocated that the former greatly increases your chances of the latter. Now, it's late, so correct me if I'm wrong in my thinking here: If twitter magically gained $3 billion in additional valuation, and all employees cashed in all their options, all at once, it would result in a "huge" tax bill…

Actually I've never said that startups do better in SF specifically, but rather the Bay Area. This problem is limited to the city. The difference between the two cases is that the employees are being taxed out of money they have (if they exercise and sell) whereas the company is being taxed based not on revenues but on the appreciation of its stock. So a company whose valuation shot up in advance of anticipated reven…

The tax bill your hypothetical company faces will be based on options that are actually exercised. Except for an incredibly fortunate few early employees, I'd wager the vast majority of options have a strike price something higher than 1.5% current valuation ... and, viola, there's your cash to pay the bill, perfectly timed. Crisis averted!

More generally, a company whose valuation shoots up but which is unable to find cash to meet shorter-term needs is Doing It Wrong and doesn't deserve the higher valuation.

Musing about this tax in general, without specifically debating:

I think payroll taxes of any form are one of the worst kinds of tax, so from that point of view we can agree. (Somehow I don't think you'd agree that significant increases on taxes for the wealthiest are a better alternative, though.)

But, if you're going to tax wage and salary compensation, then it's more than fair to tax options and other forms of compensation, too -- otherwise you end up with a regressive payroll tax, which punishes poorer workers & companies at the same time as being far less efficient at raising the needed revenue.

(edit: Part of my post was in response to something I hadn't noticed you'd edited out, so I snipped it belatedly.)

Post reply on HN