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

641–650 of 1001 posts

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

#641

Post by rcpt »

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…

> appeal is that you can leave in a quiet suburb

People I know dislike the fact that most of SV is a typical suburb indistinguishable from what you see in any random Florida city. And consider how many busses bring workers from their apartments in SF down to the office in the burbs.

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

#642

Post by geodel »

BurningFrog wrote: post #408
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…

I've seen a lot of predictions for "races for the bottom" over the years, and yet it's hard to remember one that actually happened. Economies usually don't work like that. Even if some version of that happens, it will still pay off to move out of SF. I think one of the big problems in the US is that growth and wealth are concentrated to a few hyper rich coastal cities, where most people can't afford to move. While la…

It has already happened for manufacturing. Now US still is home to lot of high end manufacturing. But the point it no longer offers middle class living to millions of Americans.

Now I do understand that of software people believe that programing is somehow special and can't be done in effective manner remotely or third world site at far lower cost.

I have few observations here:

1) With massive proliferation of frameworks the creative/ intellectual input is increasing minimal for most of commercial work. And that's where most of the software devs are employed.

2) A lot of work is low quality that companies do not care because same mentality of cheap use and throw stuff is prevailing now for enterprise apps as it is for consumer stuff.

3) Looking at lot of software produced by top valley companies is buggy, bloated and feels generally crappy. I do not believe all of it is just due to companies' strategy of being first to market. A lot of it seems because of same low quality CRUD peddlers who fill office floors of fortune 500 companies.

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

#643

Post by throwaway201103 »

Raidion wrote: post #471
dpoochieni wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not maybe, it is supply and demand. IF the supply of remote labor does increase then the share of economic profit going to capital also increases. (i.e. Employers keep more of the profits as opposed to sharing)

This is true both ways though. If you're getting paid 140k, but your rent is 5k a month, you're only capturing 80k of wages, and the landlords are capturing 60k in rent. If you're working remotely for 100k, and paying 1.7k a month in rent, you're capturing ~80k as well. That means more capital is going to the employers(who saves 40k) at the expense of the landlords (who lose out on that 40k). I honestly think I'd rat…

Until the employer is forced to cut their own prices to stay competitive, and then they aren't making the extra $40K on you anymore.

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

#644

Post by mturmon »

rayiner wrote: post #611
rpearl wrote: post #555

Nobody really brings up that the bay area is one of few places in the US where you can live without a car. Really, even compared to other "walkable" cities beyond a select few, similarly expensive places. Nobody really brings up that the bay area has better LGBT and other minority protections than anywhere in the US, either. Every time someone mentions cheap midwest cities I have to pull up https://crossingenres.com/…

> Every time someone mentions cheap midwest cities I have to pull up https://crossingenres.com/out-in-the-united-states-where-can ... and see if anything's changed since I last checked. This analysis is shallow and has a thumb on the scale in favor of California. The author says of same-sex marriage: “There is much talk at the federal level by the presumed GOP candidate of creating legislation that would remove this…

> California, by contrast, reacted to an identical court ruling in 2008 by banning same-sex marriage until all such laws were overturned in 2015.

This is a cherry-picked example and a bad-faith argument.

You're trying to portray the CA Prop 8 battle as demonstrating that CA was/is regressive. It does not show that. It's more accurate to say that there was a national debate going on at the time, and the open-ness of the CA initiative process allowed it to play out here for a brief period of time. Prop 8 was immediately challenged and was never implemented.

I don't like arguing with bad-faith actors, so I won't go further than saying you're taking all context away from this to get to a conclusion you want.

> Folks in California might be surprised about what the rest of the country is really like.

I visit the urban midwest frequently, and it's simply not as socially progressive as urban California is. There are progressive pockets! There are progressive and kind people! (And in CA, there are socially regressive places.)

But the support for LGBTQ rights in urban CA goes much, much deeper than it does in Midwest cities. Arguing the point is laughable, ridiculous, and out of touch. Come on, we're talking San Francisco and West Hollywood here!

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

#645

Post by svachalek »

xienze wrote: post #225
pvarangot wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. Maybe there’s something you’re not explaining here but there’s plenty of places all over the country that fit this bill. Austin, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh, Denver, etc. And Amazon 2 day delivery is available all over the place..…

In some places “easily accessible nature” means you can drive just a few hours. But pull up a map of Cupertino or Mountain View and zoom out just a little. There are dozens and dozens of parks in biking distance. Austin and Atlanta are not like this. Haven’t been to Charlotte or Raleigh in ages but, maybe. It’s a nice climate for sure. Denver is really pretty but it depends how you feel about real winter.

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

#646

Post by throwaway201103 »

bcheung wrote: post #529
Raidion wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true both ways though. If you're getting paid 140k, but your rent is 5k a month, you're only capturing 80k of wages, and the landlords are capturing 60k in rent. If you're working remotely for 100k, and paying 1.7k a month in rent, you're capturing ~80k as well. That means more capital is going to the employers(who saves 40k) at the expense of the landlords (who lose out on that 40k). I honestly think I'd rat…

The bay area is one of the worse places to have rental properties in the country though in terms of ratio of rental income to mortgage costs. If it wasn't for appreciation most would sell instead of try to rent out homes. Landlords aren't making their money from the rents, they are making it from the appreciation.

Yes, in a competitive market, rent is your cash flow. It pays recurring property taxes, maintenance, and interest. It's a cliche but you really have two opportunities to make money in rental property: when you buy, and when you sell.

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

#647

Post by thorwasdfasdf »

rpearl wrote: post #555

Nobody really brings up that the bay area is one of few places in the US where you can live without a car. Really, even compared to other "walkable" cities beyond a select few, similarly expensive places. Nobody really brings up that the bay area has better LGBT and other minority protections than anywhere in the US, either. Every time someone mentions cheap midwest cities I have to pull up https://crossingenres.com/…

how is it walkable when the majority of people need to live over 50 miles away because nothing remotely close to SF costs low enough to afford?

CA prides itself on being green and yet, the oppressive housing policies force everyone to commute vast distances resulting in even worse global warming outcomes.

It wasn't until covid came along that we finally even allowed people to start telecommute on a wide scale

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

#648

Post by throwaway201103 »

gabereiser wrote: post #462
ericmay wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Exactly. This argument that cheaper workforce is out in the sticks, waiting for “remote work” is a lie corporate America has told to keep people in the office. The truth is, no matter where you are, talent knows what talent is worth. We price accordingly and in the end the market is stable at a certain price level. We’ve been seeing this over the last decade in major US cities competing for SF-level talent. Tech is o…

"talent knows what talent is worth"

This is a pipe dream and quite conceited. Talent is worth what the market will pay for it. No escaping supply and demand. If you no longer need to be in the office, the labor pool is immensely expanded. Unless you think that all the smart people in the world were already working for SF employers.

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

#649

Post by [deleted] »

rpearl wrote: post #555

Nobody really brings up that the bay area is one of few places in the US where you can live without a car. Really, even compared to other "walkable" cities beyond a select few, similarly expensive places. Nobody really brings up that the bay area has better LGBT and other minority protections than anywhere in the US, either. Every time someone mentions cheap midwest cities I have to pull up https://crossingenres.com/…

[deleted]

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

#650

Post by throwaway6734 »

nus07 wrote: post #582
rpearl wrote: post #555

Nobody really brings up that the bay area is one of few places in the US where you can live without a car. Really, even compared to other "walkable" cities beyond a select few, similarly expensive places. Nobody really brings up that the bay area has better LGBT and other minority protections than anywhere in the US, either. Every time someone mentions cheap midwest cities I have to pull up https://crossingenres.com/…

I agree on almost all of your points with a few caveats. - Cars : The Bay Area is very walkable but that’s mainly SF. The tech burbs of Palo Alto , Menlo Park are not super walkable and you are relying on the BART and other public transport . But Covid has destroyed public transport and cuts in funding threaten them further. LGBT : This is not really the 80s and 90s . Most big cities from DC, Atlanta, Austin ,Chicago…

Is there a general belief that San Francisco is a counter cultural place?
Post reply on HN