2 ms·

Maybe I am mistaken, but it seems to me that California's private sector is strong despite its backward government, not as a result of it. California is an extr

by dhbanes 16y ago

Maybe I am mistaken, but it seems to me that California's private sector is strong despite its backward government, not as a result of it. California is an extremely desirable place to live. This attracts business owners and highly qualified employees alike. I would be interested to hear which of California's policies you believe play a significant role in the success of its resident businesses.

_delirium 16y ago
> I would be interested to hear which of California's policies you believe play a significant role in the success of its resident businesses. Its large subsidies for higher education played a significant role imo, especially during the era (up through the early 1990s or so) when they were larger. The state used to fund the UC and Cal State systems with a larger subsidy than today's (much larger if you account for population growth), and also indirectly supported the state's private universities, by providing very generous scholarships to CA high-school students with good grades, if they chose to attend any in-state university, public or private (the old CalGrants program, which still exists in name, but with much reduced scope). The "ton of taxpayer money spent on higher education" policy doesn't fully account for the highly qualified employee base and large number of university-research spinoffs and collaborations, but I think it probably accounts for some of it. Interestingly, Texas is another example, despite otherwise being more small-government than California: it imposed an oil-and-gas extraction tax in the early 20th century, with a significant portion of the revenues legally required to go to the state-university trust fund, which in part accounts for the strength of the UT and Texas A&M systems, and the high-tech concentration in Austin.
hga 16y ago
You didn't ask this question of me, but I would add the unenforceablity of non-competes. E.g. it's hard to see how Shockley -> Fairchild -> A Hundred Flowers would have happened in another state.

by dhbanes 16y ago

_delirium 16y ago

> I would be interested to hear which of California's policies you believe play a significant role in the success of its resident businesses. Its large subsidies for higher education played a significant role imo, especially during the era (up through the early 1990s or so) when they were larger. The state used to fund the UC and Cal State systems with a larger subsidy than today's (much larger if you account for population growth), and also indirectly supported the state's private universities, by providing very generous scholarships to CA high-school students with good grades, if they chose to attend any in-state university, public or private (the old CalGrants program, which still exists in name, but with much reduced scope). The "ton of taxpayer money spent on higher education" policy doesn't fully account for the highly qualified employee base and large number of university-research spinoffs and collaborations, but I think it probably accounts for some of it. Interestingly, Texas is another example, despite otherwise being more small-government than California: it imposed an oil-and-gas extraction tax in the early 20th century, with a significant portion of the revenues legally required to go to the state-university trust fund, which in part accounts for the strength of the UT and Texas A&M systems, and the high-tech concentration in Austin.

hga 16y ago

You didn't ask this question of me, but I would add the unenforceablity of non-competes. E.g. it's hard to see how Shockley -> Fairchild -> A Hundred Flowers would have happened in another state.