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

Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

ktvu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 622 posts

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#301

Post by joubert »

SmokeyHamster wrote: post #289
Hypx wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. They're companies trying to avoid taxes or regulation. Only companies on the downslide really consider that as an relevant option.

To be fair, here's the complete list of companies in the known universe that don't try to avoid taxes or regulation: [error data not found] There's a cost of moving. California's taxes and regulations are bad, bad enough to force many out, but not all. If things continue on their present course, even Google and Amazon, who personally like the political climate there, will have to start looking elsewhere.

> Amazon

Headquartered in Seattle, Washington. Not California.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#302

Post by ajmurmann »

millstone wrote: post #37

I am curious if anyone agrees with my take: HP Enterprise and Oracle did not move because Texas is "more tech friendly." Instead they moved because HPE and Oracle are no longer primarily tech companies. While they do substantial technical work, most of that will remain in SV. It's sort of the mirror of Apple, which also has a substantial presence in Austin (finance, etc) but is headquartered in SV because it is prima…

Also brings the question of what's actually moving. Are any of the workers/jobs moving or is this just the corporate address? My suspicion is that the company is really moving to remote-first and changing it's mail and tax address.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#303

Post by sct202 »

ryneandal wrote: post #287
dkobran wrote: post #16

HP and Oracle don’t exactly represent the heart of Silicon Valley today and what makes it special/unique. I actually think zombie corporations like Oracle, companies that haven’t innovated in decades and instead rely on an army of sales people to sell legacy software, are somewhat the antithesis of Silicon Valley which is really about real technological innovation and disruption at it’s core. I know there are lots of…

HP ate Compaq, whose HQ was in TX right? That move is unsurprising to say the least.

Yeah they kept the Compaq HQ as a giant HP office in Houston, but it flooded like 2 years ago so HPE was building a replacement office anyways.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#304

Post by bronson »

fortran77 wrote: post #269
pb7 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that the people moving are responsible for the bad policies? Something tells me the NIMBYs that bought their homes decades ago and pay $3.50 in annual property taxes aren't going anywhere.

I bought my Sunnyvale CA house in 1991. I pay $6,000 in property tax. The tax goes up 2%/year. I do not pay $3.50 in taxes. You are, quite frankly, a liar. The median property tax paid by homeowners in NY State -- a state with no "Prop 13" is $5,865 (according to facts I just googled). What, exactly, am I getting away with? How will increasing property taxes in a state with the highest income and sales tax solve the…

Your Sunnyvale house is worth significantly more than the median house price in NY State. Your post confirms that Prop 13 is very good for long-term homeowners.

What are you getting away with? Paying less for schools and common infrastructure than your neighbors who bought in the last decade. They're probably paying 3X more tax than you are, right?

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#305

Post by barnesto »

type_enthusiast wrote: post #230
jbay808 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proposition 13, mentioned by a sibling comment.

Two counterpoints: - Direct your discontent toward the corporations and landlords who are exploiting Prop 13 when it wasn't intended for them. It was intended to protect homeowners (often on retirement income) from skyrocketing property values that is out of their control. It's done great at that, but unfortunately (like any regulation) has also been exploited by the greedy. - That aside, don't presume to be entitled…

Spot on

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#306

Post by pb7 »

type_enthusiast wrote: post #204
pb7 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that the people moving are responsible for the bad policies? Something tells me the NIMBYs that bought their homes decades ago and pay $3.50 in annual property taxes aren't going anywhere.

I guess you're implying that old people are the reason for high housing prices in SV. Respectfully, what are the bad policies my parents are responsible for, besides pioneering the technology that makes you want to live in SV? And buying a house for 85k in a nice neighborhood in order to do so, without forseeing that Facebook and friends were going to move in and make their house unaffordable were it not for the prot…

What gives your parents more right to live there than anyone else? Just because they were born first? What about the people that will pioneer the next generation of technology? You’re not entitled to live where you want just because you set up shop there first. This is one of the fundamental reasons property taxes exist. Otherwise, most of the land in the US would be squatted on by powerful families of centuries past. If your parents don’t want to be priced out of the market, maybe they should vote for more and denser housing that would drive property prices down. You don’t get to have a farm in midtown Manhattan. Things change.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#307

Post by jcranmer »

aerosmile wrote: post #270
kibwen wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 50 square miles of SF has perfect weather, if you're not put off by cold and clingy fog. The other 160,000 square miles is as much of a mixed bag as any other state (with the exception of Hawaii, which actually has perfect weather).

> with the exception of Hawaii, which actually has perfect weather Hawaii gets 70 inches of rain per year, and LA gets 15. While there's no denying the natural beauty of Hawaii, saying that it has perfect weather is a matter of personal taste. > The 50 square miles of SF has perfect weather, if you're not put off by cold and clingy fog. What does this even mean? SF is 7 miles in diameter, and the various foggy microc…

> Hawaii gets 70 inches of rain per year, and LA gets 15.

That varies dramatically based on where you are in Hawaii. The prominent mountain ridges produce very sharp rain shadows; Hilo (on the windward side of the Big Island) gets 126" per year, but Kona (on the leeward side) is more like 19". Most people would live in the Honolulu region, which is on the windward (hence drier) side of Oahu.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#308

Post by scruple »

prawn wrote: post #248
dannyincolor wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re evergreen anywhere you find people who low-key wish they could live in CA but can’t. It’s weird; just enjoy your state and do the best to make it better. Truly don’t get why people who don’t live in CA have so many opinions about it. Most states have problems on par with their economic power and population size; not much more too it than that but “hurr liberal policies are gonna ruin the whole country!” get t…

Personally, as someone who doesn't even live in the US, I find these discussions alluring because related topics like homelessness and NIMBY-vs-whatever are so interesting. Other than that, the "don't bring CA to TX" angle is quite alien to an Australian as laws are fairly similar in each state here.

The United States is huge and you can easily divide it into multiple regions that have their own unique culture, their own distinct histories, and different ways of speaking, sometimes dramatically different.

Colin Woodard's book "American Nations" does a good job of explaining this [0], though at some point this book turns into a long rant about GWB and it's safe to put the book down at that point if you don't find that interesting.

[0]: https://www.businessinsider.com/the-11-nations-of-the-united...

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#309

Post by alsetmusic »

fortran77 wrote: post #269
pb7 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any evidence that the people moving are responsible for the bad policies? Something tells me the NIMBYs that bought their homes decades ago and pay $3.50 in annual property taxes aren't going anywhere.

I bought my Sunnyvale CA house in 1991. I pay $6,000 in property tax. The tax goes up 2%/year. I do not pay $3.50 in taxes. You are, quite frankly, a liar. The median property tax paid by homeowners in NY State -- a state with no "Prop 13" is $5,865 (according to facts I just googled). What, exactly, am I getting away with? How will increasing property taxes in a state with the highest income and sales tax solve the…

> in a state with the highest income and sales tax solve the housing crisis?

When I think of all the people living in their cars around Oakland, raising property taxes and pooling them into social services is something I favor. Highest income is misleading. Lots of people work retail or similar and will never own a home.

> I live in CA about 8 months/year, and spend the Feb-May in Tel Aviv.

I think this speaks to privilege. I’m not saying it’s unearned, I don’t know you. I do agree that more dense housing is badly needed.

Re: Silicon Valley exodus: Bay Area tech companies leaving for Texas

#310

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

killtimeatwork wrote: post #268
klipt wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most economists agree that a land value tax is economically the best kind of tax. Imagine property tax is 0. Why would anyone ever sell? All the land would effectively be owned by hereditary feudal lords. Texas has higher property taxes than California but more affordable housing. Makes you think.

> Imagine property tax is 0. Why would anyone ever sell? All the land would effectively be owned by hereditary feudal lords. You'd sell for the usual reason, i.e. you'd prefer having money rather than that particular piece of land? That money would be then spent on either consumption or an investment with higher yield than land-holding. In my home country Poland the land tax is negligible and yet the market for land…

Your home country Poland is primarily agricultural - at least compared to the BA - and has much lower demand for housing.

I suspect if you pick apart of the BA housing market you'll see some very large landlords with huge property portfolios. While they're not literally "feudal lords" they might as well be in terms of their self-serving influence on housing policy.

Perhaps not coincidentally, some of them are FAANGs.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/11/03/meet-silicon-valleys-...

Post reply on HN