4 ms·
I believe SF will thrive in the next wave. SF has decades of progressive exploration to continue, from the 1960's music scene, through hippies and psychonauts a
by jph 5y ago
I believe SF will thrive in the next wave. SF has decades of progressive exploration to continue, from the 1960's music scene, through hippies and psychonauts and LGBTQ+ culture, to the rise of open source and software, SF keeps thriving on new kinds of ideas. Then mix in the California outdoors, the ongoing health and wellness movements, and top research labs at Berkeley and Stanford.
My hope is we'll start seeing the next wave soon-- I'm seeing a lot of potential SFBA groundwork relating to CRISPR and genetics, neural links with AR+AI, and biopharma coupled with human potential advancements.
- wsinks 5y agoI've also been thinking that the next wave is IT+biology, especially with the rich history of the two in this area. I hope you're right!
- Google234 5y agoI think the next wave of companies will be smart and avoid SF. SF is completely dysfunctional and crime ridden. Housing is brutally expensive too.
- xvedejas 5y agoThese problems are not in spite of SF's success, they are largely due to SF's success. Anywhere else in the US which experiences the same level of success would end up having to deal with mostly the same problems. Henry George predicted this 142 years ago. > If there is less deep poverty in San Francisco than in New York, is it not because San Francisco is yet behind new York in all that both cities are striving for? When San Francisco reaches the point where New York now is, who can doubt that there will also be ragged and barefooted children on her streets? In our current system, poverty advances alongside progress. Landlords are the only beneficiaries in a system without Land Value Tax, everyone else is at best doomed to face the trade-offs of going to less productive cities.
- rcpt 5y agoAs long Prop 13 exists SF will stagnate and crumble.
- choeger 5y agoI am not familiar with the SF tax code, but doesn't Prop 13 essentially only limit property taxes for people actually living on their ground? Can you give any reason why someone should pay higher property taxes every year just because the surrounding prices skyrocket? Aren't you essentially demanding to disown people?
- comte7092 5y agoProperty taxes wouldn’t rise for no reason, those people get to watch their personal wealth benefit from the housing scarcity surrounding them. Now if they bought at an extremely high price and are highly leveraged, they might now feel that way, but the net effect either way is the same. The people who own homes lobby against pro growth policies that would bring down housing costs, while the people who don’t aren’t driven out and unable to vote to make the necessary changes.
- rcpt 5y agoProp 13 applies to all property. It's why we have private golf courses in the middle of Los Angeles and dilapidated shacks on Google's HQ. https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-gladwell-bf204294a1e8 https://blog.simonsays.ai/a-good-walk-spoiled-with-malcolm-g... https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/15/google-campus-silicon-valley-farm-martinellis https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/15/google-ca... On top of that it's passed down between generations so anyone who's bloodline has a landowning Native Son of the Golden West gets a cut. CA tax policy might as well be game of thrones. But what about "poor old grandma who's house is now worth 2M"? She has the CA Tax Postponment Program that will guarantee her stability until the day she dies. Prop 13 is wholly unnecessary.
- diggernet 5y agoEven if there is some benefit to grandma, that still doesn't justify Prop 13 covering anything other than the owner's primary residence.
- babaganoosh89 5y agoThose kind of movements don't happen when the people who live there are more focused on TC and rent payments.