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

Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#391

Post by pbuzbee »

rmk wrote: post #285
pbuzbee wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of homeownership is a huge factor for me. When I started working in 2014, I figured I would need to save around $150k for a down payment because the median home price in Santa Clara county was around $800k. Now the median price is around $1.4M [1], so I'd need around $250k. The growth in home prices has roughly matched my ability to save for a home, so almost seven years later I'm not any closer than I was i…

Not only that, but also consider the fact that you are paying 1.4M for a house that was likely built in the 60s, is not up to date at all, and has a perpetual tax liability of at least 15-18k per year (further raises in taxes are much more likely than not). The mortgage would also not be sustainable if one earner lost their job (or if the high-earner lost theirs), and remember that this high mortgage payment needs to…

Yes, exactly. A $1M mortgage is about $5k/month. Paying that means sacrificing other uses of money like retirement, child's college savings, vacations, etc.

And, as you pointed out, we would be in deep trouble if our income took a hit, or if housing prices tumble. If you buy into the high housing costs, you really need them to continue. It's a bad cycle.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#392

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

scelerat wrote: post #332
sandworm101 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> and still come out ahead financially. Ya. Earning a SF wage but living elsewhere is great. But there is a flip side to this coin. As employees realize they can work from home, employers also realize they can have employees work from home. They will soon realize they don't need to pay SF wages. Those who convert their in-office jobs into work-from-home are a covid oddity. Those who will be hired in the future on th…

The SF-based company I work for has already announced wage adjustments for employees who relocate out of the region. They haven't happened yet, but the company has given everyone a "heads up; it's on the table."

Would be odd to expect otherwise. In general, companies are going to pay market rate a.k.a. what they must to attract talent. Someone who has a much lower cost of living may be willing to accept much lower compensation to work for the same company. If you expect the company to continue paying you that much despite a change in your situation you're doomed to disappointment.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#393

Post by devilduck »

ericmay wrote: post #240
arcturus17 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much equity would you need to hold to compensate for a 30-40% decrease in wages?

Who is experiencing the decrease in wages? For many Americans the distribution of these jobs to other locations would result in an increase in wages. Not to mention, the top companies would still hire top talent in a competitive market.

I don't know, maybe the millions of people who are currently out of work due to covid are experiencing a decrease in wages? Just a guess.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#394

Post by vkou »

alentist wrote: post #382
vkou wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopardize these resources. Wait, what? What exactly was local government supposed to do with this, ah gift? From the perspective of someone who doesn't live in the Bay area, it is a libertarian paradise for the haves, unlivable for the have-nots, and is the pinnacle of Americ…

> the Bay Area > libertarian paradise What a strange notion. San Francisco has some of the most paternalistic laws in the US, courtesy of its board of supervisors. Some of them even wanted to ban corporate cafeterias, an issue which returned last year: https://sfist.com/2019/07/22/watered-down-version-of-sfs-tec... To pin the blame for these problems on libertarians , of all people, is the height of absurdity: https:…

1. The SFBA does not begin and end with San Francisco. You're free to pick and choose among its many, many neighbouring municipalities, none of which happen to be governed by the San Francisco city council.

2. These are fantastic examples of measures that at worst, mildly inconvenience the most affluent members of its society, and at best are harmless social signaling of issues that don't matter.

It speaks more about your priorities when you point out things like happy meal toy bans, while ignoring the insanity of having an entire city that is completely unaffordable to the people working in that McDonalds, or a healthcare system that completely fails the most regular customers[1] to that McDonalds.

As for zoning laws, they are absolutely libertarian, in the sense that the people who have made it are using them to pull the ladder up behind them. What's the point of owning property, and having wealth and political influence if you then don't spend that influence to protect the value of your property?

Land, in large part, derives its value from how difficult it is to acquire. I could hardly think of a more land-owner friendly system than one with extremely onerous zoning and construction requirements. If you're feeling pressured by this, you are one of the have-nots (whose life in a libertarian-paradise-for-the-haves is not that great - see my original post on what being a have-not gets you in the SFBA.)

[1] I'm referring to, of course, poorer people.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#395

Post by jader201 »

I’ve told my wife and others this for a while, but my prediction is that we’re going to see two big changes in a post COVID world:

1) Many companies will realize that they can not only survive, but thrive with employees working from home.

2) Satellite internet will open up rural areas to be a viable place for people to live and WFH.

I speculate (and already see evidence) that there will be a shift for many office workers in congested cities to move to rural areas, for a simpler life, where it was not possible before due to both points above.

If this becomes true, I’m curious to see what becomes of both real estate scarcity and prices for large lots of land in rural areas, and the impacts of the economy in these originally less viable areas for people to live and work, as they’re currently only inhabited by people that can earn a living from things like farming.

I could be totally off, but this seems at least possible.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#396

Post by gonehome »

TomVDB wrote: post #347
gonehome wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$5M is a little hyperbolic, but $4M is not. $1.5M will get you a shack - really old maybe a little bigger than 1000sqft in Santa Clara if you can find one at that price at all. $4M gets you a nice, newer 2900sqft house (comparable to what you'd get in the other regions I mentioned). $1.5M would have been enough in 2012, but it's gotten worse since then.

2900ft houses is a good way to skew the argument in your favor, but it's a bit of a strawman: the vast majority of houses in the Bay Area aren't 2900ft to begin with, yet 2000ft house are plenty, with 4 bedroom, on, say, a 6000ft lot. You can easily find one of those for $2M, and they're not shacks. This is a $2M house, 2600 sqft, 5BD house on an 11000 sqft lot: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Santa-Clara/2602-Birchtree-Ln…

I don't know if I'd say plenty.

Redfin filters:

- Santa Clara

- Sqft Min: 2000

- Property Type: House

- Price Max: $2M

Results: 9

If you set a minimum year built to 2000 (so up to 20 years old)

Results: 0

You're right though that there are houses you can find in less desirable areas on the peninsula for around 2 million (and San Jose is cheaper, east bay is cheaper). Usually though there's some tradeoff (bad schools, long commute, house is really old). These tradeoffs don't exist in the other regions where for a a lot less you can live basically anywhere you'd want in a nicer place.

The places I've been looking (Palo Alto, Cupertino, Mountain View) don't really have anything in the price points you're talking about.

I will admit that my general statement about Santa Clara was wrong though (I was thinking mostly about the cities I mentioned as part of Santa Clara county, not the city of Santa Clara).

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#397

Post by jmnicolas »

sandworm101 wrote: post #89
bigyikes wrote: post #13

As it happens, tomorrow I’m putting in my 30-day notice to terminate my lease and leave the Bay. (And I’m paying 2 additional months rent in fees to do so) Not being tied to the office fundamentally changes the calculus of choosing where to live. There just aren’t good reasons to live here anymore for so many of us. Even if you enjoy the area, chances are you can get a better deal by moving just a bit further away. A…

>> and still come out ahead financially. Ya. Earning a SF wage but living elsewhere is great. But there is a flip side to this coin. As employees realize they can work from home, employers also realize they can have employees work from home. They will soon realize they don't need to pay SF wages. Those who convert their in-office jobs into work-from-home are a covid oddity. Those who will be hired in the future on th…

> employers also realize they can have employees work from home.

I think it's even worse than that. Once they realize that you're working from home, why wouldn't they hire someone much cheaper abroad?

I hope I'm wrong but I think in less than 5 years people will regret this WFH thing.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#398

Post by akhilcacharya »

elefanten wrote: post #190
akhilcacharya wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but my experience is that most parents say private schools do a better job This sounds more like classism to me.

This reads like a knee-jerk reaction to me. There are data and experiences available for making these judgments. There might be a class divide underlying it, but to walk away with the assessment that one type of school on average does better than another is not a classist sentiment.

I always went to schools that are considered "bad" (including community college and undergrad!), so I'm genuinely curious as to what goes into these judgements.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#399

Post by throwaway0a5e »

standardUser wrote: post #274

The tech industry has beaten the Bay Area to within inches of its life. The pandemic may have saved it. Political mismanagement probably deserves most of the blame, because how else do you explain a historically significant economic boom reducing the quality of life for a highly developed region? I tried for many years to view the tech boom optimistically, but I as wrong.

>because how else do you explain a historically significant economic boom reducing the quality of life for a highly developed region

The new world wealth basically funded a(nother) couple hundred years of war in Europe.

There's a big blurry zone between incompetence and ideological motivation when it comes to bad policy and squandering resources. If you and everyone around you have a moral compass the points toward invading Britain is it really incompetence to try and pull it off? If you and everyone around you have a moral compass that points towards banning apartment buildings and legalizing petty theft then is it really incompetence to try and pull it off? When you're competently trying to do stupid things it's not incompetence, it's just plain old bad values.

Re: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

#400

Post by danans »

alentist wrote: post #382
vkou wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems the local gov't have squandered an opportunity to truly capitalize on the gift they were given, and perhaps even done their best to jeopardize these resources. Wait, what? What exactly was local government supposed to do with this, ah gift? From the perspective of someone who doesn't live in the Bay area, it is a libertarian paradise for the haves, unlivable for the have-nots, and is the pinnacle of Americ…

> the Bay Area > libertarian paradise What a strange notion. San Francisco has some of the most paternalistic laws in the US, courtesy of its board of supervisors. Some of them even wanted to ban corporate cafeterias, an issue which returned last year: https://sfist.com/2019/07/22/watered-down-version-of-sfs-tec... To pin the blame for these problems on libertarians , of all people, is the height of absurdity: https:…

>> the Bay Area >> libertarian paradise

> What a strange notion. San Francisco has some of the most paternalistic laws in the US

Not sure if you are aware but the Bay area is much bigger than just San Francisco. San Francisco isn't even the biggest city.

There are very libertarian subcultures of the broader Bay Area, including in San Francisco, but most notably among the wealthy and business owners of Silicon Valley.

Post reply on HN