4 ms·

> California has been working very hard to kill it's golden goose for a long time. Reasonable people are going to other states. People have been saying that so

> California has been working very hard to kill it's golden goose for a long time. Reasonable people are going to other states. People have been saying that sort of thing since the '90s, if not earlier. If California has been working so hard for so long to ruin things, why are we still talking about places being the next Silicon Valley, and not the next Austin or the next Research Triangle?

alexnewman 6y ago
Silicon valley was built over 80 years. Obviously it's going to take more than 20 years for it's decline to be visible but it's clear to me that it's very far along
austincheney 6y ago
Well perhaps it helps to think of it in terms of raw numbers. California is bleeding about 60,000 people per year just to Texas. My city in Texas is averaging a growth rate of about 22% decade over decade having doubled since 1990 to surpass San Francisco in population and will likely surpass San Jose in about 15 years. On pace with the population growth is growth in diversity and average household income. That means that as the population increases the wealth distribution and access to purchasing and property increases for more people than naught. It’s not all peaches and cream in this fast growing city though. The tremendous growth results in colossal strain on traffic and infrastructure, but ownership of a large house with a yard is available to most people. That’s not such a big deal when you’re single, but it’s huge when you have kids. The demand for increased economic security likewise dramatically increases when you have kids. California is growing in population though, but very slowly and without equivalent growth in wealth per capita. That is largely a result in personal wealth primarily tied to home ownership and home ownership declining generationally in California. I take from your comment that you are less concerned with raw numbers and more concerned with vanity labels and trends. If you are a well funded founder perhaps California remains the place to be, but the numbers indicate it’s no longer the epicenter of economic growth that it certainly was in prior decades.
- no_wizard 6y ago
  If there is anything I would say is going to hurt California Even more (frankly it already is), it’s available affordable housing and the ability to build it. I understand that Prop 13 (I believe it to be 13) was passed for reasons that felt very real at the time, but it’s created a system that devalues heavily the otherwise natural churn of home ownership. I don’t personally think it’s taxes, or any particular brand of politics (per se, as I know this is a political issue, I just mean relative to this), but that, in essence, that is destroying California slowly from the inside. Both Oregon and Washington are similar politically and Oregon is very close in taxes but they aren’t seeing any population outflows like this. I firmly believe it’s due to the issue of housing before any other factor. I’m trying to gather more data to back my assertion but all personal experiences of people I know and others I’ve met who have moved have cited this as one of the major or the single biggest reason for having moved
  - shoxty 6y ago
    I believe you are correct. You may find the work "Progress and Poverty" by Henry George of interest and what has come to be known as the Land Value Tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax Prop 13 is killing California, repealing it and replacing it with a Land Value Tax, in my opinion, would fix it.
- 0xcde4c3db 6y ago
  > I take from your comment that you are less concerned with raw numbers and more concerned with vanity labels and trends. In this context, I care about trends that happen over the course of decades and labels that become popular in recognition of those trends. I don't know why you're bringing up "vanity".
  - austincheney 6y ago
    I bring up vanity because when it comes to things like growth or value people are either talking about actual numbers or decoration.
- 6y ago
adventured 6y ago
> People have been saying that sort of thing since the '90s, if not earlier. And it's happening: people are fleeing the state. "California likely to lose congressional seat for first time in history after 2020 Census. Californians moving out lead to cut in Golden State’s political clout." "other states like Texas are expected to gain as many as three new seats" https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/01/03/california-lose-congressional-seat-reapportionment-2020-census/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/01/03/california-lose-congr...
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > And it's happening: people are fleeing the state. Poor people are leaving to other parts of the USA slower than rich people are moving in from other parts of the world; California has net in-migration despite net domestic out-migration. This is bad in terms of domestic political power, of course, but it's directly a consequence of economic success. It has lower net growth than many other parts of the country, but that is not just a matter of migration but also the lower natural growth rate that usually accompanies greater wealth. And it's not one of the places actually shrinking because people are actually fleeing, not being displaced by richer people—there are a number of states where that is true, but CA isn't one of them.
  - alexnewman 6y ago
    Check again. I left. many of my buddies at Google left. People are going back to where they came from
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > Check again. I left. many of my buddies at Google left. I'm familiar with the statistics, the issue gets raised here every couple months or so. You and your friends from. Google aren’t the whole universe. Sure, some well-off people leave and some less well-off people move in, but that's not what is dominating the aggregate statistics.

alexnewman 6y ago

Silicon valley was built over 80 years. Obviously it's going to take more than 20 years for it's decline to be visible but it's clear to me that it's very far along

austincheney 6y ago

Well perhaps it helps to think of it in terms of raw numbers. California is bleeding about 60,000 people per year just to Texas. My city in Texas is averaging a growth rate of about 22% decade over decade having doubled since 1990 to surpass San Francisco in population and will likely surpass San Jose in about 15 years. On pace with the population growth is growth in diversity and average household income. That means that as the population increases the wealth distribution and access to purchasing and property increases for more people than naught. It’s not all peaches and cream in this fast growing city though. The tremendous growth results in colossal strain on traffic and infrastructure, but ownership of a large house with a yard is available to most people. That’s not such a big deal when you’re single, but it’s huge when you have kids. The demand for increased economic security likewise dramatically increases when you have kids. California is growing in population though, but very slowly and without equivalent growth in wealth per capita. That is largely a result in personal wealth primarily tied to home ownership and home ownership declining generationally in California. I take from your comment that you are less concerned with raw numbers and more concerned with vanity labels and trends. If you are a well funded founder perhaps California remains the place to be, but the numbers indicate it’s no longer the epicenter of economic growth that it certainly was in prior decades.

no_wizard 6y ago
If there is anything I would say is going to hurt California Even more (frankly it already is), it’s available affordable housing and the ability to build it. I understand that Prop 13 (I believe it to be 13) was passed for reasons that felt very real at the time, but it’s created a system that devalues heavily the otherwise natural churn of home ownership. I don’t personally think it’s taxes, or any particular brand of politics (per se, as I know this is a political issue, I just mean relative to this), but that, in essence, that is destroying California slowly from the inside. Both Oregon and Washington are similar politically and Oregon is very close in taxes but they aren’t seeing any population outflows like this. I firmly believe it’s due to the issue of housing before any other factor. I’m trying to gather more data to back my assertion but all personal experiences of people I know and others I’ve met who have moved have cited this as one of the major or the single biggest reason for having moved
- shoxty 6y ago
  I believe you are correct. You may find the work "Progress and Poverty" by Henry George of interest and what has come to be known as the Land Value Tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax Prop 13 is killing California, repealing it and replacing it with a Land Value Tax, in my opinion, would fix it.
0xcde4c3db 6y ago
> I take from your comment that you are less concerned with raw numbers and more concerned with vanity labels and trends. In this context, I care about trends that happen over the course of decades and labels that become popular in recognition of those trends. I don't know why you're bringing up "vanity".
- austincheney 6y ago
  I bring up vanity because when it comes to things like growth or value people are either talking about actual numbers or decoration.
6y ago

adventured 6y ago

> People have been saying that sort of thing since the '90s, if not earlier. And it's happening: people are fleeing the state. "California likely to lose congressional seat for first time in history after 2020 Census. Californians moving out lead to cut in Golden State’s political clout." "other states like Texas are expected to gain as many as three new seats" https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/01/03/california-lose-congressional-seat-reapportionment-2020-census/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/01/03/california-lose-congr...

dragonwriter 6y ago
> And it's happening: people are fleeing the state. Poor people are leaving to other parts of the USA slower than rich people are moving in from other parts of the world; California has net in-migration despite net domestic out-migration. This is bad in terms of domestic political power, of course, but it's directly a consequence of economic success. It has lower net growth than many other parts of the country, but that is not just a matter of migration but also the lower natural growth rate that usually accompanies greater wealth. And it's not one of the places actually shrinking because people are actually fleeing, not being displaced by richer people—there are a number of states where that is true, but CA isn't one of them.
- alexnewman 6y ago
  Check again. I left. many of my buddies at Google left. People are going back to where they came from
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Check again. I left. many of my buddies at Google left. I'm familiar with the statistics, the issue gets raised here every couple months or so. You and your friends from. Google aren’t the whole universe. Sure, some well-off people leave and some less well-off people move in, but that's not what is dominating the aggregate statistics.