Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#131

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:12 AM UTC

maxsilver wrote: post #128

closeparen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Manhattan considered a mistake? I ask because, despite being one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to replicate it elsewhere. Am I missing an unspoken “never again” moment? Is everyone who travels to New York doing it to revel in their hatred of the place? There’s not nearly enough Manhattan to mee…

> Is Manhattan considered a mistake It's not so much a 'mistake' as it is an instant feeling of "no living thing could ever afford Manhattan". It's like a physical manifestation of the saying, "no one ever goes there anymore, it's too crowded". > (Manhattan is) one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to…

[deleted]

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#132

Post by _virtu » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:13 AM UTC

jarsin wrote: post #45

StudentStuff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What companies are there, and with what kind of pay range/job roles?

Micron - One of the worst places you could ever work. The amount of people coming out of there with PTSD was very high when I was in boise. Clearwater - Old and boring T-Sheets - sold to behemoth that will mess it all up Blackbox VR - some guy who got lucky with a body building forum blowing money Kount - ya scammy payment processing for the win HP - reorg and layoffs never ending. Tons of pretentious digital marketi…

Oh Jason.

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#133

Post by francisofascii » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:18 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #123

What I don't get about this is: why Boise? Are people just moving there for the scenery? There are major US metros with affordable housing and much better job markets. There's a sort of implied dichotomy in this article: major metros are too expensive, so people will move into a succession of mid-sized towns. But, no: a couple major metros are too expensive. Others, like Miami, Chicago, Cleveland, Atlanta, DFW, and H…

You are right. Guessing they picked Boise because it is fast growing.

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#134

Post by jellicle » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:18 AM UTC

Idaho's entire population fits comfortably in a small segment of any of the nation's larger cities.

When three people walk into the state, it leads in percentage growth. It's extremely silly to draw some conclusion from the fact that a tiny state managed 2.2% population growth while dozens of larger states managed 2.1%.

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#135

Post by mcguire » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:20 AM UTC

nshelly wrote: post #106

closeparen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Manhattan considered a mistake? I ask because, despite being one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to replicate it elsewhere. Am I missing an unspoken “never again” moment? Is everyone who travels to New York doing it to revel in their hatred of the place? There’s not nearly enough Manhattan to mee…

It's just that many of the stakeholders in these areas such as long-time property owners in the westside of San Francisco and residents with rent control fearing gentrification would not benefit directly from new development. Their incentives simply aren't aligned with younger generations who want to live and raise families in a city with reasonable housing costs. To break this quandary we simply to need intervention…

Pardon me for appearing to be the spokes-person for market economics, but if "congestion, long commutes and sprawl is hurting the U.S. (and Californian) economy", wouldn't they be self-healing problems?

Do "younger generations ... want to live and raise families in a city with reasonable housing costs" or do they want to accumulate as much of the easily-available money there a fast as possible? (The former is available almost anywhere.)

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#136

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:22 AM UTC

maxsilver wrote: post #128

closeparen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Manhattan considered a mistake? I ask because, despite being one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to replicate it elsewhere. Am I missing an unspoken “never again” moment? Is everyone who travels to New York doing it to revel in their hatred of the place? There’s not nearly enough Manhattan to mee…

> Is Manhattan considered a mistake It's not so much a 'mistake' as it is an instant feeling of "no living thing could ever afford Manhattan". It's like a physical manifestation of the saying, "no one ever goes there anymore, it's too crowded". > (Manhattan is) one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to…

[deleted]

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#137

Post by mcguire » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:24 AM UTC

ryanworl wrote: post #86

aclimatt wrote: post #32

Not the crux of the article, but: > This doesn't mean that they, or the even higher-cost, more congested coastal metros, will adopt Manhattan or Tokyo-style density and transit patterns. Instead, Austin and San Antonio might be the new Houston and Dallas. My goodness, can we /please/ stop this false dichotomy that a city either has to be a Tokyo megalopolis or a suburban sprawlfest? I don't think any reasonable perso…

People who are worried about turning San Francisco into Manhattan also don't know what Manhattan is even like! The Upper West & Upper East Side as well as Harlem do not look anything like e.g. the Financial District. Even within Manhattan there is a huge variety of building heights. I used to live in Yorkville in a six story building in an area filled with other six story (and smaller) buildings. We had a nice park w…

Out of curiosity, how much is rent per square foot?

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#138

Post by Larrikin » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:24 AM UTC

elefanten wrote: post #120

anabis wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people commute by train. We are improving, but the morning commute is something foreigners consider particularly wacky, and not something that they want to repeat everyday. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7kor5nHtZQ

I've seen these clips before and always wonder where these examples are on the scale of "average experience". Is this the worst of the worst? ie- only the few most congested stations experience this during peak hours on a particularly bad day? Or is it relatively expected? ie- most major stations will experience this during peak hours on an average day?

Station attendants pushing people in isn't that common, most lines in Tokyo have a train coming every minute or two during the morning and that would just make everyone late. However can't move your arms crowded is the morning commute everyday unless you live far from work at the end of the line and can snake a seat. Even then it's not guaranteed (another compounding addition to your stress) and often times you'll be just as miserable as everyone else but with the added misery of the longest commute.

It's interesting to experience once on vacation because you planned to go to the airport during the morning. It's something else entirely to do it everyday in a stuffy suit until you retire.

However that level of travel only happens in the morning. Overtime culture spreads out the number of people leaving after work, even though technically everyone should get off around the same time.

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#139

Post by mcguire » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:28 AM UTC

baron816 wrote: post #84

The sad thing is that trying to increase density in places like SV isn’t just about taming housing inflation, denser places are also better places to live. I think there are lot of people out there who would like living in a place like Brooklyn Heights, where you have 3-5 story row houses (small enough for a single family) that are connected together along a tree lined block, with shops, restaurants, and bars within…

Yes and no.

I can recognize the advantages of such a neighborhood, but about 25 years ago, I decided I can't handle listening to my neighbor's stereo at 2:30 in the morning.

Re: Why Invest in Cities? There's Always Another Boise

#140

Post by closeparen » Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 1:32 AM UTC

maxsilver wrote: post #128

closeparen wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Manhattan considered a mistake? I ask because, despite being one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to replicate it elsewhere. Am I missing an unspoken “never again” moment? Is everyone who travels to New York doing it to revel in their hatred of the place? There’s not nearly enough Manhattan to mee…

> Is Manhattan considered a mistake It's not so much a 'mistake' as it is an instant feeling of "no living thing could ever afford Manhattan". It's like a physical manifestation of the saying, "no one ever goes there anymore, it's too crowded". > (Manhattan is) one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to…

I think we can all agree that there's a relationship between expensive real-estate markets and high-density structures. But are the buildings a cause, or an effect?

And if the reason to restrict density is cost, 1) how do we explain the participation of homeowners, and 2) how do we square this with the other ways people invest in their neighborhoods?