> The clear implication here is that California’s relative backwardness is evidenced by the shabbiness of local buildings. But that’s entirely the wrong conclus

> The clear implication here is that California’s relative backwardness is evidenced by the shabbiness of local buildings. But that’s entirely the wrong conclusion to draw! The story here is that rich people don’t like new construction near where they live, and a lot of wealth has been created on the Peninsula in the last few decades. Eh. What you are seemingly saying is that rich people prioritize living like how they grew up over developing the city for the future. I mean, I get it. Surely that is why many people moved to the bay area instead of say NYC. But I don't see how you can think that it isn't backwards.