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

Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 451 posts

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#321

Post by cromwellian »

peder wrote: post #272
cromwellian wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well your political fantasy happens to be wrong. California experiences a net influx of highly skilled workers draining them from the rest of the US ( https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/2019... ) and red states mostly lose their brightest people or absorb California residents from older failing industries who can’t afford the rents. The majority of this is about cost of living not taxes. Corporat…

There's a chicken and egg situation. Companies do choose to locate in California because of talent, but talent also chooses California because of great companies. If enough great companies leave, the talent will leave, too.

But is Oracle a great company? :) [I'm a former employee, and my opinion is, it is not]

SpaceX and Tesla leaving CA are bigger loses, but they haven't left yet, and it's unclear he'll move them, other than opening up more plants elsewhere. Boca Chica/Austin might eventually become the new locus of new hiring for example, but the Dragon/Falcon business might remain in CA for example.

HP leaving is basically a zombie company leaving on life support, it would be like IBM or Kodak leaving.

The real power of the Bay Area is the startup economy, and I think it will be hard to dislodge that, just like it's hard to dislodge Shenzhen, because of the "nexus" effect, or chicken and egg as you mentioned. If all of your customers and workers, and supply chain, and investors are in one spot, as an entrepreneur, you're going to gravitate there, even if the costs are high.

I mean, you get can Silicon Hills, and Silicon Alleys elsewhere, but I don't think they'll overtake the Bay Area.

However, I could see Texas, Arizona, Nevada, becoming the "Mars Plateau" in the future. Realistically, Musk needs a coastal port for logistics, ability to mine resources, and a state that would be complicit in dealing with angry laborers or neighbors who don't like Sonic Booms going off all the time.

CA's just not going to let him run as roughshod as he wants, e.g. the worker safety and labor issues at his plants, the environmental impacts of what he's doing in Boca Chica, etc. That slows down his time schedule a lot, I don't blame him, he wants to get to Mars quick, but then again, if I were living near a Starship test area, I'd also be annoyed by all of the traffic, tourists, and explosions, so I don't object to him trying to get as far away from regulated residential areas as possible.

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#322

Post by throwawaygulf »

the-rc wrote: post #306
throwawaygulf wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is categorically false. If you're a Texas resident, working for a California based company, but doing your work remotely in Texas, you absolutely do not owe taxes in California. The concept of "work done for California" does not exist. If the work is done in Texas (at your house), you pay Texas taxes (no income tax).

He's right when he says that your desk location (your main office, not necessarily HQ) according to HR is what matters. That's where your withholdings go. You could maybe fight with the State of California for the refund next year, but in the meantime you'll pay taxes in the state if your paycheck says so. If your desk is in NYC, but live in CT or NJ, you'll pay taxes in two states, even if you haven't set foot in yo…

>He's right when he says that your desk location (your main office, not necessarily HQ) according to HR is what matters.

Incorrect, you kind of have this backwards. If you're a resident in another state (Texas), and are conducting work in that state (Texas, home office), then HR has to make sure they're conforming to the labor laws of that state (Texas), not the state of the office where you used to work (California).

>You could maybe fight with the State of California for the refund next year, but in the meantime you'll pay taxes in the state if your paycheck says so.

That's why it's pertinent to change your residency as soon as you move, and then update HR the same day. Else you're fighting an uphill battle for no reason.

>If your desk is in NYC, but live in CT or NJ, you'll pay taxes in two states, even if you haven't set foot in your office for months.

No longer true if you no longer actually work there.

>You can try changing your residency to e.g. Texas as you say, getting assigned by HR to a new office or marked as remote, but you can bet that the original state will try everything in their book to keep some of your money.

And you can give them the middle finger because they're wrong. Spending $300 to get your taxes prepped by a CPA will stop 99% of this shenanigans.

>Although you're right in general, there is actually a history of CA going aggressively after the money of residents of other states, like the screenwriter in AZ that did a lot of work for a California customer

That's because he was deriving his income as a unitary business from entirely California sources: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2019/10/22/now-calif...

Again, a lot of states have similar laws on the books (VA, NY, etc.).

Source: I used to be a paralegal, and have worked remotely for a long time in various states.

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#323

Post by chihuahua »

cghendrix wrote: post #285
chrisseaton wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oracle was a fantastic place to work for me. I had a private locking office with a mountain view as an intern - many people on here say they'd kill for that kind of respect and working environment! And they paid me a full senior salary while I did my PhD. Really can't argue with that.

I also had that experience at apple. For two weeks. Then was moved into a shitty shared cubicle. Don’t miss working there.

Before WFH I would have been envious of a shared cubicle (assuming it means a cubicle with 4 walls that is shared by 2 people)

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#326

Post by chrisseaton »

chihuahua wrote: post #323
cghendrix wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also had that experience at apple. For two weeks. Then was moved into a shitty shared cubicle. Don’t miss working there.

Before WFH I would have been envious of a shared cubicle (assuming it means a cubicle with 4 walls that is shared by 2 people)

You mean you'd be envious of the getting to share a cubicle with someone, or you'd be envious of only having to share with only one person and nobody else? Can't tell :)

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#327

Post by nemo44x »

briandear wrote: post #298
nemo44x wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too. In my opinion the Bay Area has nearly nothing going for it except the abundance of high paying jobs and all the effects of that line networking, visibility to early stage investors, etc. The weather is nice. Which is a lot. A whole lot. But if it becomes apparent you don’t need to be there to start a technology company (or rather there aren’t as many advantages) or to reliably find the best jobs due to the op…

> The weather is nice. Which is a lot. A whole lot. Except when the annual wildfires make the air unbreathable for days or weeks at a time.

Not just the weather - the money part too. Especially that.

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#328

Post by austincheney »

vzaliva wrote: post #97
dragonwriter wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drawing experienced personnel from established firms has, as I understand it, long been a big driver for startups in the region. While some established firms leaving isn’t a problem, if it becomes too common, its a problem for entrepreneurship. OTOH, a few established firms with large campuses leaving also means a lot of space without the usual problems involved available for other established firms that get into lot…

Have you ever tried to "draw" somebody who spent last 20 years working for HP into startup? In most cases these people are not flexible enough, stuck in a ways things have been done at their previous job and having difficulty adjusting. I recall hiring one such engineer for then 5 person startup and he asked who will be the IT guy to set up his computer! Disclaimer: of course there are exceptions.

Start up or large corporate I see that same behavior in certain technology segments. The difference is more a factor of leadership than size or establishment.

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#329

Post by davidw »

selimthegrim wrote: post #304
davidw wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious about how it plays out... everywhere. I live in what's being called a "Zoom town", with lots of remote workers who seem to want a smaller town with more outdoor access (Bend, Oregon if you're curious). House prices are going through the roof. But Bend was already hot, and on people's radar. Yesterday I saw an article about housing heating up in Baker City Oregon. This is a small town of 10K people that is…

I hope Enterprise gets spared.

That place is so remote that I doubt it'll see many people moving in. I don't have a good handle on their economic situation, but there are a ton of these former mining/logging/ranching towns that could absolutely use an influx of money and people who are excited about living there.

Re: Oracle Moving HQ to Austin

#330

Post by atomi »

baggy_trough wrote: post #21
g42gregory wrote: post #12

I think this is a major news for Silicon Valley. Schwab, HPE, now Oracle. I hope that this would give somebody in California Legislature a pause.

Considering that one of the most prominent legislators literally told Elon Musk to get fucked on Twitter, I doubt anyone is listening.

California is absolutely prime real estate especially for the rich. And if you're a billionaire you're going to have to pay for the privilege.

We'd sooner install our own state digital currency before allowing dollar billionaires to bully us.

Post reply on HN