6 ms·

I realize that the housing market isn't the only thing keeping startups and talented, ambitious people out of the Bay Area, but it's probably the biggest one.

I realize that the housing market isn't the only thing keeping startups and talented, ambitious people out of the Bay Area, but it's probably the biggest one. If the Bay Area can't get its act together and start permitting new housing in proportion with its economic and population growth, it will go down in the books as one of the largest and most obviously foreseeable squandered opportunities in modern history.

Finnucane 9y ago
Right, clearly the Bay Area has to accommodate every startup, and no one else should have any.
- techsupporter 9y ago
  I don't think kcorbitt meant that at all. I read it as that if the Bay Area wants to remain (regain?) competitiveness with other, lower-cost areas, it must adapt, not that the Bay Area is entitled to hoard every startup. Other areas are competing on the basis of cost or livability so the Bay Area has to navigate that competitive landscape if the people there wish it to remain a destination.
  - Finnucane 9y ago
    Why do they need to be competitive? Is it a zero-sum game? Will people suddenly decide they don't want to live there any more? The only way the Bay Area/Silicon Valley is going to suffer from this is if the entire tech industry collapses.
- kcorbitt 9y ago
  I knew I'd get this objection. :) It's true that to some degree Silicon Valley's loss is the rest of the world's gain, and I'm totally cool with that. But I worry that to a perhaps larger degree companies that would have been successful will simply never be formed, because the founders that could have made them happen won't be in an environment with the critical concentration of capital, mentorship and skilled employees. That outcome would be a tragedy for all of us.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  Startups are not a bag of marbles that you want to spread out in a way everyone gets one. They are businesses driven by people with objectives, financial or otherwise. For better or worse, San Francisco attracts talent in a way the mid-west doesnt. By not cleaning up its act,its turning away people that would otherwise go there. California loses, so California has a huge incentive to change things for that. The mid-west can do their own policies to compete for the interests of businesses and people.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
rm_-rf_slash 9y ago
Please read Henry George’s 1868 essay about the Bay Area and the completion of the transcontinental railroad[1]. It was required reading in California schools for decades, but generations of attacks by successive capitalists who hated his “Single Tax” proposal has rendered him an unknown figure in the 21st century. An excerpt: >And as California becomes populous rich, let us not forget that the character of a people counts for more than their numbers; that the distribution of wealth is even a more important matter than its production. Let us not imagine ourselves in a fools' paradise, where the golden apples will drop into our mouths; let us not think that after the stormy seas and head gales of all the ages, our ship has at last struck the trade winds of time. The future of our State, of our nation, of our race, looks fair and bright; perhaps the future looked so to the philosophers who once sat in the porches of Athens-to the unremembered men who-raised the cities whose ruins lie south of us. Our modern civilization strikes broad and deep and looks high. So did the tower which men once built almost unto heaven. [1] http://www.grundskyld.dk/1-railway.html http://www.grundskyld.dk/1-railway.html
- conanbatt 9y ago
  I'm in the middle of progress and proverty, looking forward to this! It should be made clear that Milton Friedman was georgist in taxes. A practical understanding of whats going on in California is that the incredible gains of the tech sector, that above the median worker gains, are all going to the landlords and to the State.
  - rm_-rf_slash 9y ago
    A similar complaint was registered towards the bankers and (real estate) developers who came to the Bay following the completion of the TcR. To roughly paraphrase another section of the essay, robbery was less highway and more high-interest.
conanbatt 9y ago
Calfornia and San Francisco economists have made official reports saying exactly this. The supply elasticity of buildings in San Francisco is 0.1, which is almost nothing. If you built 3,000 units today, rents would only go down 30U$S in average. And the elasticity of demand is 0.7 in comparison. That means that lower rents will attract lots more people. San Francisco could triple its population in a few years if it could tear down the mission to build huge appt buildings.
- dolessdrugs 9y ago
  But who wants to live in huge apartment buildings?
  - koube 9y ago
    People who don't have 4-6k per month to spend on a house. Lots of people live in apartment buildings.
    - dolessdrugs 9y ago
      There are much better, much cheaper housing options than the huge luxury apartment buildings that they would build after demolishing the mission. I don't think the emphasis in my original comment came through, it's the "huge" I had the biggest problem with. There are more options than just 'buy a house' and 'rent in a huge apartment building'.
      - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
        > There are much better, much cheaper housing options than the huge luxury apartment buildings If land is expensive, the only route to cheap housing is to (a) increase density or (b) limit immigration (e.g. Beijing's hukou [1]). > There are more options than just 'buy a house' and 'rent in a huge apartment building' This is a false dichotomy. Nobody is arguing for buying versus renting. The debate is about density. Apartment buildings are tremendously more land efficient than the two- and three-story condos San Francisco seems to prefer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system
jcadam 9y ago
If not for for the crazy COL, I would probably be in the Bay Area. Instead I'm in Florida, which I love (near the beach and affordable housing), but there isn't a whole lot of interesting work out here, just aerospace/defense stuff. I'm working on a little side project (a SaaS - there's a link in my profile), started as more of a creative outlet, but it would be cool if it turned into a second income stream for me. One obstacle is a complete lack of any sort of dev/tech culture around here, much less a 'startup' scene.
- godot 9y ago
  What exactly makes a complete lack of any sort of dev/tech culture around where you live, an obstacle? Wouldn't you do most of your marketing online?
  - jcadam 9y ago
    Yes, while most of my marketing would be online, there's definitely a dearth of potential local customers. Other factors: Finding potential co-founders (I've met very few software engineers around here I would consider good enough, and I haven't met a single person who knows anything about bizdev and/or sales for a B2B SaaS), and of course no possibility of getting any funding around here (not that I'm wasting any energy thinking about it as noone would invest in a 37-year old first-timer in any case :) )
mmanfrin 9y ago
"squandered opportunities" -- tech has lived here for 50+ years. Silicon Valley is not a new thing.
urda 9y ago
It kind of already is. Talent is up and moving to other tech hubs out of SF. Might be a bit too late.
Balgair 9y ago
Look at Prop 13 and you'll understand the housing issues a lot better. Also, many commenters are decrying the cost of living and housing. But the BA also has a vibrant job market and a comparatively 'liberal' culture against homophobia/racism/sexism. Places like Omaha do not (largely, though exceptions very much exist), and so finding a first/new job is difficult and 'fitting in' may also be hard for some 'less-traditional' people. It's not just the money, it's the value people are chasing.
- deadmetheny 9y ago
  Have you ever actually lived in Omaha?
- bigredhdl 9y ago
  I think you need to be careful just calling Omaha out. Omaha is not as liberal as SF, but your comment implies it is homophobic/racist/sexist breeding ground. I have not found that to be the case.
  - Balgair 9y ago
    > (largely, though exceptions very much exist)
    - bigredhdl 9y ago
      Yes, but you specifically called out Omaha, implying it is not the exception.
  - adjkant 9y ago
    Not to say it is correct, but stereotypes alone could work against the Midwest pulling at tech from the coasts. I think Chicago would be a great fit for Amazon HQ2 but I'm confident that Amazon doesn't view it as liberal enough, and that's Chicago, the biggest city in the Midwest. Of course, there are other factors in HQ2, I'm not proclaiming it is the only or even primary. I do think it's a big enough one to disqualify it though. If Amazon does choose Chicago, I think it could really cause a bigger shift in the industry.

Finnucane 9y ago

Right, clearly the Bay Area has to accommodate every startup, and no one else should have any.

techsupporter 9y ago
I don't think kcorbitt meant that at all. I read it as that if the Bay Area wants to remain (regain?) competitiveness with other, lower-cost areas, it must adapt, not that the Bay Area is entitled to hoard every startup. Other areas are competing on the basis of cost or livability so the Bay Area has to navigate that competitive landscape if the people there wish it to remain a destination.
- Finnucane 9y ago
  Why do they need to be competitive? Is it a zero-sum game? Will people suddenly decide they don't want to live there any more? The only way the Bay Area/Silicon Valley is going to suffer from this is if the entire tech industry collapses.
kcorbitt 9y ago
I knew I'd get this objection. :) It's true that to some degree Silicon Valley's loss is the rest of the world's gain, and I'm totally cool with that. But I worry that to a perhaps larger degree companies that would have been successful will simply never be formed, because the founders that could have made them happen won't be in an environment with the critical concentration of capital, mentorship and skilled employees. That outcome would be a tragedy for all of us.
conanbatt 9y ago
Startups are not a bag of marbles that you want to spread out in a way everyone gets one. They are businesses driven by people with objectives, financial or otherwise. For better or worse, San Francisco attracts talent in a way the mid-west doesnt. By not cleaning up its act,its turning away people that would otherwise go there. California loses, so California has a huge incentive to change things for that. The mid-west can do their own policies to compete for the interests of businesses and people.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

rm_-rf_slash 9y ago

Please read Henry George’s 1868 essay about the Bay Area and the completion of the transcontinental railroad[1]. It was required reading in California schools for decades, but generations of attacks by successive capitalists who hated his “Single Tax” proposal has rendered him an unknown figure in the 21st century. An excerpt: >And as California becomes populous rich, let us not forget that the character of a people counts for more than their numbers; that the distribution of wealth is even a more important matter than its production. Let us not imagine ourselves in a fools' paradise, where the golden apples will drop into our mouths; let us not think that after the stormy seas and head gales of all the ages, our ship has at last struck the trade winds of time. The future of our State, of our nation, of our race, looks fair and bright; perhaps the future looked so to the philosophers who once sat in the porches of Athens-to the unremembered men who-raised the cities whose ruins lie south of us. Our modern civilization strikes broad and deep and looks high. So did the tower which men once built almost unto heaven. [1] http://www.grundskyld.dk/1-railway.html http://www.grundskyld.dk/1-railway.html

conanbatt 9y ago
I'm in the middle of progress and proverty, looking forward to this! It should be made clear that Milton Friedman was georgist in taxes. A practical understanding of whats going on in California is that the incredible gains of the tech sector, that above the median worker gains, are all going to the landlords and to the State.
- rm_-rf_slash 9y ago
  A similar complaint was registered towards the bankers and (real estate) developers who came to the Bay following the completion of the TcR. To roughly paraphrase another section of the essay, robbery was less highway and more high-interest.

conanbatt 9y ago

Calfornia and San Francisco economists have made official reports saying exactly this. The supply elasticity of buildings in San Francisco is 0.1, which is almost nothing. If you built 3,000 units today, rents would only go down 30U$S in average. And the elasticity of demand is 0.7 in comparison. That means that lower rents will attract lots more people. San Francisco could triple its population in a few years if it could tear down the mission to build huge appt buildings.

dolessdrugs 9y ago
But who wants to live in huge apartment buildings?
- koube 9y ago
  People who don't have 4-6k per month to spend on a house. Lots of people live in apartment buildings.
  - dolessdrugs 9y ago
    There are much better, much cheaper housing options than the huge luxury apartment buildings that they would build after demolishing the mission. I don't think the emphasis in my original comment came through, it's the "huge" I had the biggest problem with. There are more options than just 'buy a house' and 'rent in a huge apartment building'.
    - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
      > There are much better, much cheaper housing options than the huge luxury apartment buildings If land is expensive, the only route to cheap housing is to (a) increase density or (b) limit immigration (e.g. Beijing's hukou [1]). > There are more options than just 'buy a house' and 'rent in a huge apartment building' This is a false dichotomy. Nobody is arguing for buying versus renting. The debate is about density. Apartment buildings are tremendously more land efficient than the two- and three-story condos San Francisco seems to prefer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system

jcadam 9y ago

If not for for the crazy COL, I would probably be in the Bay Area. Instead I'm in Florida, which I love (near the beach and affordable housing), but there isn't a whole lot of interesting work out here, just aerospace/defense stuff. I'm working on a little side project (a SaaS - there's a link in my profile), started as more of a creative outlet, but it would be cool if it turned into a second income stream for me. One obstacle is a complete lack of any sort of dev/tech culture around here, much less a 'startup' scene.

godot 9y ago
What exactly makes a complete lack of any sort of dev/tech culture around where you live, an obstacle? Wouldn't you do most of your marketing online?
- jcadam 9y ago
  Yes, while most of my marketing would be online, there's definitely a dearth of potential local customers. Other factors: Finding potential co-founders (I've met very few software engineers around here I would consider good enough, and I haven't met a single person who knows anything about bizdev and/or sales for a B2B SaaS), and of course no possibility of getting any funding around here (not that I'm wasting any energy thinking about it as noone would invest in a 37-year old first-timer in any case :) )

mmanfrin 9y ago

"squandered opportunities" -- tech has lived here for 50+ years. Silicon Valley is not a new thing.

urda 9y ago

It kind of already is. Talent is up and moving to other tech hubs out of SF. Might be a bit too late.

Balgair 9y ago

Look at Prop 13 and you'll understand the housing issues a lot better. Also, many commenters are decrying the cost of living and housing. But the BA also has a vibrant job market and a comparatively 'liberal' culture against homophobia/racism/sexism. Places like Omaha do not (largely, though exceptions very much exist), and so finding a first/new job is difficult and 'fitting in' may also be hard for some 'less-traditional' people. It's not just the money, it's the value people are chasing.

deadmetheny 9y ago
Have you ever actually lived in Omaha?
bigredhdl 9y ago
I think you need to be careful just calling Omaha out. Omaha is not as liberal as SF, but your comment implies it is homophobic/racist/sexist breeding ground. I have not found that to be the case.
- Balgair 9y ago
  > (largely, though exceptions very much exist)
  - bigredhdl 9y ago
    Yes, but you specifically called out Omaha, implying it is not the exception.
- adjkant 9y ago
  Not to say it is correct, but stereotypes alone could work against the Midwest pulling at tech from the coasts. I think Chicago would be a great fit for Amazon HQ2 but I'm confident that Amazon doesn't view it as liberal enough, and that's Chicago, the biggest city in the Midwest. Of course, there are other factors in HQ2, I'm not proclaiming it is the only or even primary. I do think it's a big enough one to disqualify it though. If Amazon does choose Chicago, I think it could really cause a bigger shift in the industry.