Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

Post by heavyset_go » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

eikenberry wrote: post #434

ericmay wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, mostly. The bottom is still decently high even in Midwest cities. But if you’re making $140,000 + RSU/Bonus/Etc., someone from somewhere else will do that job remotely for $100,000 easy. But I would characterize this as a wealth distribution, and overall net positive for the country. People who don’t have the opportunities to work at the top companies in the Bay Area or NYC or Boston now have better access.…

The one thing people seem to keep forgetting about when talking about this race to the bottom is how hard it is to find good software authors. My company is fully remote and global and it is still really hard to find good people. I really don't see much of a change given the current unmet, and rising, demand.

Post by ghaff » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

chris11 wrote: post #458

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…

Yeah, that's my concern. It would be different if I was wanting to buy a house. I actually like my apartment in the bay area, but when the office did shut down I looked at what it would cost. I wouldn't save much money because I wanted to stay in California. My employer is becoming more WFH friendly. But they are explicitly saying post-covid fulltime remote will require an adjustment for base salary and future equity…

Post by rpearl » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:27 PM UTC

Post by somethoughts » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:29 PM UTC

pvarangot wrote: post #97

ghaff wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot to like about many areas of California. Which ones may depend on your weather, cultural, etc. preferences. But Silicon Valley proper I find not particularly appealing; housing costs are only part of the reason. (SF itself has well-documented pluses and minuses.) I don't live or work in CA/SV. But if I were in SV but no longer needed to commute, I might well stay in CA but I'd probably move somewhere out…

I think SVs appeal is that you can leave in a quiet suburb close to a lot of easily accessible nature, while still having Amazon 2-day shipping, ridesharing, Uber Eats, and luxury retail. There's not many places in the US like this. Europe has a lot but there's not much tech jobs in them. You are also close to SF if you like the madness of the city every once in a while. Other suburby places with nature easily access…

Post by dmode » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:30 PM UTC

gonehome wrote: post #235

TomVDB wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That $5M is hyperbole, right? Nobody will deny that Bay Area housing is expensive, but even today, $1.5M will get you a decent single family house with a garden in Santa Clara. That’s a ridiculous amount of money for most, but it’s not in $5M exit territory, and something that’s relatively easy to manage for a 2 tech income family: $1.25M loan is $5600/m mortgage, $1500/m in real estate taxes.

$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.