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

Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 195 posts

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#31

Post by compiler-guy »

wrsh07 wrote: post #13
xivzgrev wrote: post #6

Sure. If I rented, my job was secure, and all of my friends are packing, of course I would take a free $10k to move somewhere else for a year. The pandemic is probably going to take at least that long to wind out. I can always just move back if SF picks up again.

I would love for Tulsa to succeed at creating a "new silicon valley" It could be great for the area, great for the people who are early movers, etc I don't think it will be, but I think ideas like this are good experiments. You need a certain amount of gravity before you have a good tech scene, and I am interested in knowing "what does that gravity look like? How can such friction to becoming a tech hub be erased?" H…

There are literally dozens of places around the world trying to be the next Silicon Valley, and they have been trying for years.

Silicon Bayou (Louisiana) Silicon prairie (Des Moines) Silicon Slopes (Salt Lake) Silicon Alley (New York) Silicon Beach (LA) Silicon Forest (Portland)

It takes much more than some tax breaks and a $10,000 moving credit.

I hope Oklahoma figures something out, but this is hardly a differentiator.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#32

Post by HarryHirsch »

meekrohprocess wrote: post #7
burnthrow wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tulsa's pretty rad. The Ozarks are in Oklahoma too, actually. Sorry you got a ticket: Pay attention and slow down.

Oh, I only got warnings. Including some for going under the speed limit. The state is full of small-town cops who want to throw their weight around, but they're harmless if you play their game and (sadly) if you're the right color. That's another important consideration for potential applicants.

if you're the right color. That's another important consideration for potential applicants

God, yes. I have colleagues who will not leave the interstate when driving through certain states.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#33

Post by ketamine__ »

nostrademons wrote: post #24
throwawaygh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This won't happen, and Oklahoma/Tulsa needs to fess up to that reality and make a real plan for their economic future. If we're honest, DC/AZ/OR are the "third tech hubs" after SF and then Seattle/Boston/NYC. The ambition for a midwest tech hub to join those ranks is not insane in general. Pittsburgh could make a reasonable play because, unlike Tulsa, in Carnegie Mellon it actually does have a continuous pipeline of…

DC/AZ/OR seems like an odd choice for third-tier tech hubs. If I had to rank U.S. metro areas in terms of favorability for tech, I would do: Tier 1: Bay Area Tier 2: NYC, Seattle, Boston Tier 3: Research Triangle, Pittsburg, Chicago Tier 4: Austin, Boulder, Portland, LA/Santa Monica, Ann Arbor Tier 5: Everywhere else. There's some industry-specific tech support in various other cities (eg. oil in Houston, automotive…

How can Chicago be below Austin? Chicago has Groupon, 1871, and Lightbank. Austin's downtown doesn't even compare to Chicago's downtown. It's horrible.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#34

Post by ketamine__ »

burnthrow wrote: post #4
meekrohprocess wrote: post #2

Hehehe, Tulsa Oklahoma. I wonder how many of them visited before applying. I don't mean to knock the city, but it is a very different place, and SF residents might chafe at the lack of interesting nature in the surrounding area. Probably the closest large park-ish area would be the Ozarks over in Arkansas. It's a lovely forest, but still about a 2.5-hour drive away. And OK's state highways are absolutely littered wit…

Tulsa's pretty rad. The Ozarks are in Oklahoma too, actually. Sorry you got a ticket: Pay attention and slow down.

Or buy a radar detector. I actually got a warning instead of a ticket from a cop in Texas while I was going through a construction zone. Great times.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#35

Post by symlinkk »

junkrat002 wrote: post #21
symlinkk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re delusional if you think California is the only place that has good weather and isn’t racist

(S)He didn't say anything about California.

The article is titled “Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10,000 to leave California”

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#36

Post by nostrademons »

ketamine__ wrote: post #33
nostrademons wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DC/AZ/OR seems like an odd choice for third-tier tech hubs. If I had to rank U.S. metro areas in terms of favorability for tech, I would do: Tier 1: Bay Area Tier 2: NYC, Seattle, Boston Tier 3: Research Triangle, Pittsburg, Chicago Tier 4: Austin, Boulder, Portland, LA/Santa Monica, Ann Arbor Tier 5: Everywhere else. There's some industry-specific tech support in various other cities (eg. oil in Houston, automotive…

How can Chicago be below Austin? Chicago has Groupon, 1871, and Lightbank. Austin's downtown doesn't even compare to Chicago's downtown. It's horrible.

You're right; Chicago should be Tier 3. Editing the list a bit. There's a bit of a per-capita effect, though, where Chicago has a much larger population and many more other industries than say Austin, Boulder, or Portland, which makes them seem more tech-based even though the absolute number of firms & VC dollars is less.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#37

Post by chokeartist »

blhack wrote: post #14
wrsh07 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love for Tulsa to succeed at creating a "new silicon valley" It could be great for the area, great for the people who are early movers, etc I don't think it will be, but I think ideas like this are good experiments. You need a certain amount of gravity before you have a good tech scene, and I am interested in knowing "what does that gravity look like? How can such friction to becoming a tech hub be erased?" H…

The "new silicon valley" is already Phoenix, AZ.

Based on what? Not disputing you, legitimately curious. I am considering moving to Phoenix. Thanks!

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#38

Post by paxys »

01100011 wrote: post #11
xivzgrev wrote: post #6

Sure. If I rented, my job was secure, and all of my friends are packing, of course I would take a free $10k to move somewhere else for a year. The pandemic is probably going to take at least that long to wind out. I can always just move back if SF picks up again.

Yeah I just found out that we're not expected back in the office until 𝟤̶𝟢̶𝟤̶𝟣̶ 2022 at least. I wish they had communicated that earlier. We would have left the bay area already. Edit: Sorry, 2022, not 2021.

2021 is a month and a half away.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#39

Post by stouset »

symlinkk wrote: post #35
junkrat002 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(S)He didn't say anything about California.

The article is titled “Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10,000 to leave California”

… and is about a program that pays people to relocate to Tulsa.

Re: Bay Area applicants flood program that pays them $10k to move to Tulsa

#40

Post by guyzero »

The article says there were over a thousand applicants but not how many were approved to get the money. Anyway, with an average income of just over $27K per year in Tulsa, a handful of tech people relocating there probably makes a bigger difference to them than it does to California.
Post reply on HN