8 ms·

>there are two distinct groups of people here, and these trends can/will counteract eachother: the ones that are in the city for work, and the ones that are in

by jasode 6y ago

>there are two distinct groups of people here, and these trends can/will counteract eachother: the ones that are in the city for work, and the ones that are in the city because they love cities. COVID creates an exodus of one, but people in the latter category are also moving into cities as well as prices drop and they are no longer priced out. I don't think it's as simple as one group replacing another so it's a wash. I don't know if the WSJ article dives into it but cities seem to care what type of workers they attract because higher-salaried employees (e.g. tech workers) provide a higher tax base. This was demonstrated by various cities falling over themselves trying to attract Amazon's HQ2 with the promise of high tech jobs. Cities aren't on a public campaign to attract more bohemian artists. It's the high tech workers that are currently more desirable. If tech workers exodus of San Francisco is a real sustained phenomenon, are the replacement workers' taxable income higher/lower/same? Since you envisioned lower prices for housing, doesn't that mean it would be caused by lower income workers?

adjkant 6y ago
I don't think it's going to be a wash, or prices wouldn't fall. You're right that this will decrease tax bases, so I guess the real question is "by how much?". Only time will tell what that looks like, but I think that will lead more to rebudgeting/allocating than just objective negative losses. Your specific examples are interesting though, as NYC's population explicitly rejected Amazon's HQ2 with public backlash. NYC has always been defined by being a city of many industries, both white collar and creative. The day that's not true is the day NYC is no longer NYC. I think SF is a great example of what that looks like if you even compare SF of 2000 to 2020. I was between the two cities when I graduated college, and the diversity of industries is one of the main reasons I chose NYC. I don't want to be socially surrounded by my day job. NYC has gotten along just fine without having a large tech worker population (in terms of percentages), and there are also plenty of tech workers like me that are staying. While some of my coworkers have moved since pandemic, most have not and are still contributing to NYC taxes you're concerned with. These are all open questions that we need to answer, but the reason I look at this as a good thing still is that as a lover of cities, I'd much rather have these new issues. The mass influx of tech and wealth that cities have struggled with in the past 5+ years were/are eroding many of the things that define the actual cores of said cities, and when that's complete, you end up with more unhappy people on all sides. SF is certainly the closest to that point, and this exodus, if real, just might give it a chance to be saved.
- zepto 6y ago
  It’s also worth noting that this has happened before in SF multiple times, to varying degrees, and the result has generally been an invigoration of culture in one way or another.
  - adjkant 6y ago
    Can you elaborate on that? I can't say I'm an SF history expert, but I've never heard of those shifts so I'm truly curious what you're referring to.
    - zepto 6y ago
      See the other answer - captures what I was referring to.
  - tlb 6y ago
    I was in the Bay Area for the 2001 and 2008 tech crashes. Cheap space made all kinds of things possible: performances, art projects, experimental living arrangements, bootstrapped startups, maker spaces, high-concept restaurants, ... When people can start things without institutional funding, they can build interesting, speculative things. Some of those speculative things end up making lots of money, while most go bust, but either way it's an interesting environment to be part of.
- jpochtar 6y ago
  NYC's population did not reject HQ2— a very small, vocal group killed it, angering quite a few of the rest of us. Even then, the controversy was over 1) tax breaks to Amazon being an unnecessary handout (turns out they weren't), and 2) which neighborhood to be in.
  - adjkant 6y ago
    I've yet to encounter someone in my NYC circle who isn't glad HQ2 was killed. Activists may be a small portion, but that doesn't represent the entirety of local support. None of the people I know were directly involved in said activism. By this poll [1], 36% opposed it. While it may not be a majority, over a third of people is notable. I'm not looking to rehash this in gruesome detail, but I think your qualm is with much more nuance than "a very small, vocal group killed it". [1] https://files.constantcontact.com/9c83fb30501/c25e9a3a-d06b-4448-963e-9a711d27b98a.pdf https://files.constantcontact.com/9c83fb30501/c25e9a3a-d06b-...
klipt 6y ago
Why would the city care about income taxes? Those go to the state, not the city (with the exception of NYC).
- gnopgnip 6y ago
  SF has a gross receipts payroll tax, and an additional payroll tax on workers earning $320k+. Additionally higher earners spend more money on everything else that is taxed. The bigger issue is that the media overestimates how much money SF gets from "tech". SF has a very diverse economy.

by jasode 6y ago

adjkant 6y ago

I don't think it's going to be a wash, or prices wouldn't fall. You're right that this will decrease tax bases, so I guess the real question is "by how much?". Only time will tell what that looks like, but I think that will lead more to rebudgeting/allocating than just objective negative losses. Your specific examples are interesting though, as NYC's population explicitly rejected Amazon's HQ2 with public backlash. NYC has always been defined by being a city of many industries, both white collar and creative. The day that's not true is the day NYC is no longer NYC. I think SF is a great example of what that looks like if you even compare SF of 2000 to 2020. I was between the two cities when I graduated college, and the diversity of industries is one of the main reasons I chose NYC. I don't want to be socially surrounded by my day job. NYC has gotten along just fine without having a large tech worker population (in terms of percentages), and there are also plenty of tech workers like me that are staying. While some of my coworkers have moved since pandemic, most have not and are still contributing to NYC taxes you're concerned with. These are all open questions that we need to answer, but the reason I look at this as a good thing still is that as a lover of cities, I'd much rather have these new issues. The mass influx of tech and wealth that cities have struggled with in the past 5+ years were/are eroding many of the things that define the actual cores of said cities, and when that's complete, you end up with more unhappy people on all sides. SF is certainly the closest to that point, and this exodus, if real, just might give it a chance to be saved.

zepto 6y ago
It’s also worth noting that this has happened before in SF multiple times, to varying degrees, and the result has generally been an invigoration of culture in one way or another.
- adjkant 6y ago
  Can you elaborate on that? I can't say I'm an SF history expert, but I've never heard of those shifts so I'm truly curious what you're referring to.
  - zepto 6y ago
    See the other answer - captures what I was referring to.
- tlb 6y ago
  I was in the Bay Area for the 2001 and 2008 tech crashes. Cheap space made all kinds of things possible: performances, art projects, experimental living arrangements, bootstrapped startups, maker spaces, high-concept restaurants, ... When people can start things without institutional funding, they can build interesting, speculative things. Some of those speculative things end up making lots of money, while most go bust, but either way it's an interesting environment to be part of.
jpochtar 6y ago
NYC's population did not reject HQ2— a very small, vocal group killed it, angering quite a few of the rest of us. Even then, the controversy was over 1) tax breaks to Amazon being an unnecessary handout (turns out they weren't), and 2) which neighborhood to be in.
- adjkant 6y ago
  I've yet to encounter someone in my NYC circle who isn't glad HQ2 was killed. Activists may be a small portion, but that doesn't represent the entirety of local support. None of the people I know were directly involved in said activism. By this poll [1], 36% opposed it. While it may not be a majority, over a third of people is notable. I'm not looking to rehash this in gruesome detail, but I think your qualm is with much more nuance than "a very small, vocal group killed it". [1] https://files.constantcontact.com/9c83fb30501/c25e9a3a-d06b-4448-963e-9a711d27b98a.pdf https://files.constantcontact.com/9c83fb30501/c25e9a3a-d06b-...

klipt 6y ago

Why would the city care about income taxes? Those go to the state, not the city (with the exception of NYC).

gnopgnip 6y ago
SF has a gross receipts payroll tax, and an additional payroll tax on workers earning $320k+. Additionally higher earners spend more money on everything else that is taxed. The bigger issue is that the media overestimates how much money SF gets from "tech". SF has a very diverse economy.