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

The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 81 posts

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#31

Post by seizethecheese »

squokko wrote: post #8
josephjrobison wrote: post #4

As a resident who was born here and left and then came back, I’ve had this idea kicking around in my head of “California is a luxury product”. If you look at the entire US, and assume you have the ability to move and live in any state, there are lots of options for everyone at every income level. (Disclaimer that this doesn’t address poverty, DEI, and other limitations to a good chunk of citizens). From the Gold Rush…

It's a terrible luxury product though because 1) Prop 13 means that people from 50 years ago are still in the luxury neighborhoods 2) Crime is not sufficiently eradicated even from expensive areas

Nah, many luxury products (like an Ivy League education) involve lower class people. It adds flavor.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#32

Post by groby_b »

Xcelerate wrote: post #6

I loved living in the Bay Area, but I always thought it would be funny if a new company that was on track to reach FANG-level status required investors to move elsewhere to a mid-size or smaller city (as their primary residence) as a condition to invest in them. This is mandated all the time for employees, particularly with the RTO effort, and I would be quite interested to see which wins out among the psychology of…

A company that is on track to reach even remotely close to FANG status has already taken on significant investments. From, by necessity, many investors in the Bay Area.

That means the board wouldn't put requirements on investors, and they'd reign in any attempt by the CEO to do so. Even if the idea of restricting investors by location wasn't incredibly bad business in the first place.

You're also forgetting that money makes residence meaningless. If you are indeed in the "ultra wealthy" class, you have a residence in wherever is most advantageous to you, and other pads to hang in. Your investments will happen through companies located wherever is most advantageous to you as well. Need a new location, spin up an extra company.

It's an interesting thought experiment, but it seriously misjudges the balance of power between folks having money and those possibly generating money at a later point.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#33

Post by jandrewrogers »

ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #10

I have always been convinced that the general numbers on how many rich people (> 10M networth and > 50M networth) there are is a total lie. Maybe its the bubble that I live in, but there are ALOT of very wealthy people on the coasts. The government numbers dont match my anecdata, I think they are missing a ton of income/capital gains, and thus our wealth distribution charts dont match reality

A significant fraction of wealth is difficult to track because asset value isn't "real" until there is a transaction that places a value on it, which the government does track. Until those transactions happen, any estimates of asset value are notional and may not be remotely realizable in a real market.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#34

Post by 71a54xd »

game_the0ry wrote: post #7

I grew in upper middle class southern California. I work in tech for the last 7 years. My parents house went from $500K when they bought in 1995 to +$3M today. If my math is right, that would mean the all-in payment (principal, interest, taxes) would be around $20,000/month at today's rate. Assume you do not want to spend more than 1/3 of your income on housing, your household would need to make $720,000/year. Nomina…

Same thing is happening in Austin. It's sad.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#35

Post by ChuckMcM »

ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #10

I have always been convinced that the general numbers on how many rich people (> 10M networth and > 50M networth) there are is a total lie. Maybe its the bubble that I live in, but there are ALOT of very wealthy people on the coasts. The government numbers dont match my anecdata, I think they are missing a ton of income/capital gains, and thus our wealth distribution charts dont match reality

If you feel it's a "total lie" (this suggests both false, and exaggerated was that your meaning?) have you thought about ways to figure this out through primary sources? In my experience the numbers are reasonably accurate. The dynamics of interacting with people who recognize that wealth levels in the group vary dramatically are a pretty Silicon Valley thing AFAICT.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#36

Post by groby_b »

hospitalJail wrote: post #9

When I visited Cali, I was hoping I'd be surrounded by ambitious people who wanted to work hard and make a lot of money. I was disappointed, everyone seemed normal. Maybe a bit Epicurean hedonist. Since my local friends are this work hard and make a lot of money type, and it took a half decade to meet and cultivate those friends, I decided to stay local. Me and the wife have the resume for Cali, but we decided that p…

"I was disappointed, everyone seemed normal"

In a total plot twist, you can make a lot of money without constantly obsessing about it. You can even be "a bit Epicurean hedonist", enjoy your money, and still make more.

(Also, seriously, if you want people obsessed with "work hard, make lots of money" to the exclusion of anything else, there's no shortage of them. If you can't find any, may I gently suggest that the problem may lie with your search?)

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#37

Post by detourdog »

josephjrobison wrote: post #4

As a resident who was born here and left and then came back, I’ve had this idea kicking around in my head of “California is a luxury product”. If you look at the entire US, and assume you have the ability to move and live in any state, there are lots of options for everyone at every income level. (Disclaimer that this doesn’t address poverty, DEI, and other limitations to a good chunk of citizens). From the Gold Rush…

I refer to this idea as making our own inflation. We such stratified groups of spending so that if you want to spend $100 1980 dollars on a pair a jeans you can find that price range. If you never want to spend more than $20 on pants that is possible also.

For all but the most constrained the same product category(inherent quality differences may or maynot exist) is available at any price point.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#38

Post by dekhn »

hospitalJail wrote: post #9

When I visited Cali, I was hoping I'd be surrounded by ambitious people who wanted to work hard and make a lot of money. I was disappointed, everyone seemed normal. Maybe a bit Epicurean hedonist. Since my local friends are this work hard and make a lot of money type, and it took a half decade to meet and cultivate those friends, I decided to stay local. Me and the wife have the resume for Cali, but we decided that p…

The ideal californian is a combination of intensely ambitious (internally), while also seeming like an epicurean hedonist (externally). Like, you have to show how hard you are not trying, to be an unbelievable successful person.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#39

Post by ldjkfkdsjnv »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #33
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #10

I have always been convinced that the general numbers on how many rich people (> 10M networth and > 50M networth) there are is a total lie. Maybe its the bubble that I live in, but there are ALOT of very wealthy people on the coasts. The government numbers dont match my anecdata, I think they are missing a ton of income/capital gains, and thus our wealth distribution charts dont match reality

A significant fraction of wealth is difficult to track because asset value isn't "real" until there is a transaction that places a value on it, which the government does track. Until those transactions happen, any estimates of asset value are notional and may not be remotely realizable in a real market.

Exactly, people underestimate how high those asset values are. The owners of said asset are borrowing against them, not selling.

Re: The Ultra-Rich Are Flourishing and Sticking Around in California

#40

Post by pookha »

esotericimpl wrote: post #11
squokko wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a terrible luxury product though because 1) Prop 13 means that people from 50 years ago are still in the luxury neighborhoods 2) Crime is not sufficiently eradicated even from expensive areas

California is in the top quartile of safest states in the US. Your complaint is that rich people wont have their property taxes jacked up and they haven't "eradicated" crime. As a response to the fact that California is as close to the French Riviera as we have in the US.

I've never seen this insanity anywhere in world except for California:

https://nypost.com/2023/07/18/san-francisco-stores-lock-up-f...

Post reply on HN