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

Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 394 posts

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#301

Post by timr »

Alex3917 wrote: post #295
TulliusCicero wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The rest of the country desperately needs real industry and good paying jobs - and will go to huge lengths to try to get them No they don't. Tax breaks aren't enough. One of the big reasons a lot of people really like NYC is that it's one of the few cities in the US that actually feels like a city. NYC is urbanist in a way that relatively few American cities are (and most of the other cities in this category are al…

NYC literally has an app where anyone can press a button if they're standing somewhere where they feel like a tree should be planted, and if you press the button a couple hours later a group of guys will show up and start digging a hole and plant the tree. For all of its problems, it's the only city that works at least somewhat like a city should.

That's kind of a twee, brooklyn-artisinal-pickle example, but the greater point is true: having lived in a number of big cities around the US (including San Francisco), New York is simply functional in a unique way for a US city. Even San Francisco is a backwater by comparison.

For example: I was issued a ticket in SF for moving (and I hired professionals to do it). That kind of crap simply doesn't happen in New York, but it happened routinely in SF.

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#302

Post by chaosbutters »

redblacktree wrote: post #236
tootie wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't want 5000 sq ft anymore. I looked at suburban houses as an option and was thinking I hope I never have enough crap to fill this much space. I think I can comfortably fit my family of 4 in 1200 sq ft indefinitely and never own a car.

Do you have kids yet? Genuinely curious.

exactly, I don't even have kids but I thought this too. If you have kids or pets, I want a lot of space for them to play and for me to play with them

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#303

Post by chaosbutters »

ArtWomb wrote: post #32

It's exciting. Google has been talking about expanding its presence forever. At least since purchasing the Chelsea Market complex. The Youtube studio is an amazing space. As is the AWS Loft downtown. Cornell Tech will have a new campus on Roosevelt Island. And Brooklyn has its New Lab / Navy Yards that is almost a tech city unto itself. It feels like there's community. And a multitude of events every day and night. W…

when it doesn't smell like urine and I don't see dead homeless people next to millionaire bankers, I'll consider it

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#304

Post by spongepoc »

Bucephalus355 wrote: post #2

I wonder how much goodwill Google could have generated by locating this hub in say Orlando or Des Moines. Even if they spent 150k per engineer in relocation costs (1 time fee), it’s hard to imagine they wouldn’t make that up in terms of cheaper real estate and lower salaries. There were obviously some benefits in choosing New York City (and I realize it’s an expansion technically), but still, it’s so......unimaginati…

High quality talent are attracted to elite cities because other high quality talent is already there. It's easier to hire and retain the top 1% of engineers in an elite city because they're already working for other top companies. Also New York is closer to research centres of the universities compares to Orlando. This means access to students and academics.

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#305

Post by TulliusCicero »

todd8 wrote: post #259
rizzom5000 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It appears that you assume more sq. ft. implies higher quality of life. Are you aware of any studies that indicate that's true? I would think that most New Yorkers would consider the traffic mess in a place like Dallas to be an indication of a lower quality of life. I believe there are studies that indicate this is true.

It's not easy to imagine what other people place value on. I like peace and quiet, so suburban living suits me. Others value nice restaurants, good weather, close skiing, professional sports, access to first class health care, good jobs, inexpensive housing, low crime, etc. How can we judge the desirability of different cities with such different styles? It seems there is exactly one reliable way to make this assessm…

> It seems there is exactly one reliable way to make this assessment. Look at where people move to.

Not necessarily. Many cities strictly limit how much housing they have, such that there is a hard limit on the number of people who could feasibly live there. SF is a good example of this, since it's also small and geographically constrained. Saying "well, the net increase in people was small, so therefore it must be that not so many people want to live there" is not necessarily true if physically the city cannot accommodate many more people due to regulations.

Looking at where people move to is useful, yes, but high housing prices are themselves often a marker of desirability, particularly in supply-constrained markets.

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#306

Post by eiaoa »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #291
ardy42 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are not wrong, but I'm not saying this is the sole factor in city attractiveness here. It's just one factor. Other things equal, I think it's easier to attract top talent to cities with halfway decent urbanism than to cities that are more like giant suburbs. I wonder if the real situation is that it's easier to attract young "top talent to cities with halfway decent urbanism than to cities that are more like gi…

People who with more settled lifestyles are often already settled, though. So even if you wanted them, you don't have as much access. > older "top talent." Older top talent often has the resources to actually buy houses even in expensive areas, anyway.

> Older top talent often has the resources to actually buy houses even in expensive areas, anyway.

Maybe at the toppest-top, but it's a struggle for anyone with even a high normal-range income to buy a home in the Bay Area.

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#307

Post by kentm »

redblacktree wrote: post #236
tootie wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People don't want 5000 sq ft anymore. I looked at suburban houses as an option and was thinking I hope I never have enough crap to fill this much space. I think I can comfortably fit my family of 4 in 1200 sq ft indefinitely and never own a car.

Do you have kids yet? Genuinely curious.

I have 2 kids and a 1200 sqft house. It’s a good size for many 4-person families

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#308

Post by ghaff »

ardy42 wrote: post #287
TulliusCicero wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not wrong, but I'm not saying this is the sole factor in city attractiveness here. It's just one factor. Other things equal, I think it's easier to attract top talent to cities with halfway decent urbanism than to cities that are more like giant suburbs. I focused on it in my original comment mostly just because it's an area I'm particularly familiar with, and it's an area where the cities that are supposedly…

> You are not wrong, but I'm not saying this is the sole factor in city attractiveness here. It's just one factor. Other things equal, I think it's easier to attract top talent to cities with halfway decent urbanism than to cities that are more like giant suburbs. I wonder if the real situation is that it's easier to attract young "top talent to cities with halfway decent urbanism than to cities that are more like gi…

Of course, there are also suburbs of major metros. Lots of people commute into Manhattan from Westchester every day. And, traditionally, most of the tech jobs in "Boston" were actually out in fairly far-flung suburbs and many still are (with the notable exception exception of biotech in Cambridge and the satellite offices of SV firms).

But you're absolutely right that a lot of new college grads want to live in the city and maybe not even buy a car.

The majority of the established workers already own houses in the suburbs, exurban areas, and even NH. For many of them, a location that's actually in the city is a bug, not a feature.

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#309

Post by [deleted] »

throwawaymath wrote: post #202
emddudley wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the idea of living in NYC is depressing. I think overall the US would have a better quality of life if industry was not so concentrated in major cities. Fewer people would need to make trade-offs between their jobs and lifestyle.

I live in NYC and I’m not going to try to change your mind, but out of curiosity what don’t you like about it? Winter? The smell? Too many people?

[deleted]

Re: Google Plans Large New York City Expansion

#310

Post by amish_gangster »

tjr225 wrote: post #275
TulliusCicero wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I mean by having lots of high-paying jobs. Speaking in the abstract, that means economic success. You're not wrong that high cost of living can often cancel much of that out at the individual level though. > quality of living is considerably lower. See my other nearby comment for why this is a "it depends" thing. A lot of people would consider living in Kansas City to have lower "quality of life" than NYC even i…

I have lived in West Michigan (Insanely Cheap), Kansas City (Kinda Cheap), and Seattle (Pretty Expensive). Thing is, renting a 900 sq foot apartment in any reasonably urban area has gotten pretty expensive anywhere. It was about 1000-1500$ in KC when I left. It's about 1600-2200 in Seattle. My salary jump from KC to Seattle more than makes up for the difference in rent. Other things may be slightly more expensive, bu…

Yeah, Grand Rapids is getting more and more expensive - currently I'm paying $875/mo for ~700sqft, 1br.
Post reply on HN