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

Elon Musk moves to Texas

ktvu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#941

Post by jariel »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #930
jariel wrote: post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just the opposite, every community has a right to decide their future. If a community says 'we'd rather be homes and don't want to turn everything in to high-rises' then that's entirely their discretion. It's definitely not any individual townships moral or civic responsibility to change their community to accommodate either state/national strategic planning, especially for the benefit of people who do not even live…

> There's plenty of physical space in Cali, if anything, the opportunity might be in Sacramento and in-between. It’s the places that everyone want to live in that are crowded, and there are good reasons apartment blocks aren’t going up in farmland (this isn’t China where people are told to live outside the fifth or sixth ring road just because).

"It’s the places that everyone want to live in that are crowded"

So if SF goes 'Hong Kong' style i.e. tears down all those homes and puts full on sky-scrapers everywhere, will the 'current' residents be happy, and will future residents want to be there as much?

'Everyone wants to live there' - which is why it's so expensive - this is an inevitability of a good culture whereupon the physicality is usually critical.

If SF went Hong Kong it simply wouldn't be SF.

Pay the price or live elsewhere - California is vast and beautiful.

Also - if some areas on the peninsula put their minds to it, they could be as cool and fun as SF.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#942

Post by jariel »

SllX wrote: post #842
jariel wrote: post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just the opposite, every community has a right to decide their future. If a community says 'we'd rather be homes and don't want to turn everything in to high-rises' then that's entirely their discretion. It's definitely not any individual townships moral or civic responsibility to change their community to accommodate either state/national strategic planning, especially for the benefit of people who do not even live…

Abusing police powers to curtail private property rights isn’t the high ground.

"Abusing police powers to curtail private property rights isn’t the high ground."

It has nothing to do with police powers, it's called zoning and it's absolutely a legitimate part of our governing structure.

If the residents of SF wanted to go Hong Kong style full on skyscrapers everywhere, they would have.

Bulldozing communities to create utopian/dystopian hyper density is one of the most short-sighted urban concepts going.

There's plenty of space, go elsewhere.

Also, I'll be even a hyper fast public transport system that connected the Bay Area with surrounding regions: imagine the Bart/Caltrain being 'one thing' running in a really fast loop around the bay, with quick buses LTRs as spokes - and then fast communter trains connecting them out to Sac, Modesta, Santa Rosa, that might work.

Especially if they build smartly around slight more dense centres instead of just pure suburban homes.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#943

Post by pas »

parineum wrote: post #761
blntechie wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s simply amazing how allowing to build 50 high rise condos would bring the entire bubble down but the CA (or most American) cities or the state won’t. It will obviously fail on the ballot due to NIMBYism but I’m not sure why would that even need to be on ballot.

> It will obviously fail on the ballot due to NIMBYism but I’m not sure why would that even need to be on ballot. Translation: The people who live there won't vote for a thing they don't want.

So allll the people who sit hours and hours each day in traffic, pay a fortune for a shack don't outweigh those that just want to preserve the neighborhood's character?

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#944

Post by somuchlan »

tenpies wrote: post #381
egsmi wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Fremont factory and Palo Alto headquarters will still be in California... for now. I imagine they will open up some Texas sites, which everyone is doing, but I think Tesla will have a CA presence for some time. It's difficult to move these things. On the other hand, Elon has a "damned the torpedoes" attitude, so who knows.

More importantly, CA still has more subsidies, tax breaks, and other funding for everyone's favourite truffle hound to dig up.

Don’t forget talent. I personally would never move to Texas as there’s not nearly enough job opportunities

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#946

Post by mcntsh »

woah wrote: post #572
techsupporter wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My birth certificate says "Texas" across the top and people have been "fleeing California" to Texas for as long as I've been alive. There's nothing special about Musk; he just happens to be high-profile about it and managed to extract more from California before decamping to a "cheap" state than several of those who came before him. I disagree with your assessment that Texas has wide acceptance for opposing viewpoint…

It's been a massive windfall to people who have been homeowners for 40 years in California. High rents due to the fact that you're not allowed to build new housing, high property taxes paid by new residents, while old residents pay nothing, high income and sales taxes to paper over the gap in the budget left by the lack of property tax paid by longtime residents. The whole system has been optimized to milk as much mo…

> The people in power in California even scapegoated the newcomers for a long time, and pretended that they were unwanted.

I feel like the average HN poster sits in a pretty air-tight STEM bubble and doesn't realise how bad life for most people in the Bay Area who are not in STEM. To them, tech workers can leave and the industry can tank and it would be a welcome change. The tax revenue the cities have made during this "boom" have not affected them at all. Building more houses just means more traffic, more crowded hiking trails and beaches, more crowded and trashed natural parks, and for what?

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#947

Post by SllX »

jariel wrote: post #942
SllX wrote: post #842

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abusing police powers to curtail private property rights isn’t the high ground.

"Abusing police powers to curtail private property rights isn’t the high ground." It has nothing to do with police powers, it's called zoning and it's absolutely a legitimate part of our governing structure. If the residents of SF wanted to go Hong Kong style full on skyscrapers everywhere, they would have. Bulldozing communities to create utopian/dystopian hyper density is one of the most short-sighted urban concept…

Zoning is a police power.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#948

Post by aptwebapps »

notsureaboutpg wrote: post #796
techsupporter wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My birth certificate says "Texas" across the top and people have been "fleeing California" to Texas for as long as I've been alive. There's nothing special about Musk; he just happens to be high-profile about it and managed to extract more from California before decamping to a "cheap" state than several of those who came before him. I disagree with your assessment that Texas has wide acceptance for opposing viewpoint…

>Only when I went to college in a college town did people largely seem to want to live and let live. It's odd because I grew up in a major metro, and going to college I found people in college to be very strict and severe about enforcing their morals on people. You had to use specific language, be nice and more forgiving and understanding to the right groups of people, and you were not supposed to disagree on specifi…

I think you are making some rather large assumptions. It's possible that you and 'techsupporter went to similar colleges in similar cities and around the same time, and the only difference is between your perspectives. But if those conditions aren't true, especially the last one, then your experiences may have been objectively very different.

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#949

Post by MagnumOpus »

mcntsh wrote: post #946
woah wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been a massive windfall to people who have been homeowners for 40 years in California. High rents due to the fact that you're not allowed to build new housing, high property taxes paid by new residents, while old residents pay nothing, high income and sales taxes to paper over the gap in the budget left by the lack of property tax paid by longtime residents. The whole system has been optimized to milk as much mo…

> The people in power in California even scapegoated the newcomers for a long time, and pretended that they were unwanted. I feel like the average HN poster sits in a pretty air-tight STEM bubble and doesn't realise how bad life for most people in the Bay Area who are not in STEM. To them, tech workers can leave and the industry can tank and it would be a welcome change. The tax revenue the cities have made during th…

> The tax revenue the cities have made during this "boom" have not affected them at all

They think it has not affected them, but if they stop, the house of cards that is underfunded ultra-generous defined benefit state/municipal pensions tumbles like a house of cards. When the munis start going bankrupt, only then will people notice...

Re: Elon Musk moves to Texas

#950

Post by mcntsh »

MagnumOpus wrote: post #949
mcntsh wrote: post #946

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people in power in California even scapegoated the newcomers for a long time, and pretended that they were unwanted. I feel like the average HN poster sits in a pretty air-tight STEM bubble and doesn't realise how bad life for most people in the Bay Area who are not in STEM. To them, tech workers can leave and the industry can tank and it would be a welcome change. The tax revenue the cities have made during th…

> The tax revenue the cities have made during this "boom" have not affected them at all They think it has not affected them, but if they stop, the house of cards that is underfunded ultra-generous defined benefit state/municipal pensions tumbles like a house of cards. When the munis start going bankrupt, only then will people notice...

> the house of cards that is underfunded ultra-generous defined benefit state/municipal pensions tumbles like a house of cards.

Who benefits from these exactly?

Tax revenue is up ten fold from where it was at in 2008 and yet the quality of life for most of my connections not working in tech in the bay area is much worse. Everything is more expensive, taxes are much higher, traffic is 10x as bad, homelessness is more severe... Who's this "house of cards" supporting?

The minimum wage is up, that's the only thing, but it doesn't matter. Since a couple making minimum wage could actually have an apartment in 2008, which is not the case now.

Post reply on HN