3 ms·
I don't understand these arguments much. They sound more like sour grapes to some extent: If tech had not begun and become the powerhouse it did would the peo
by mc32 4y ago
I don't understand these arguments much. They sound more like sour grapes to some extent: If tech had not begun and become the powerhouse it did would the people who lived there have been better off in real terms? There is no reason that it couldn't have remained farmland like the Imperial valley. Ok, Oakland would still be a port and SF would be a financial hub. But most of the industry that thrived till the 70s, were slowly outcompeted by imports (bedding and furniture, is one example) and SF and SJ from the 80s were in decline before being girded by the burgeoning tech industry.
It also would mean we would not have attracted the foreign talent that also helped to drive the growth. Admittedly housing would be cheaper, and the population much lower, but I'm not sure I'd trade SJ and SF for Modesto and Sacramento, but to each their own.
- lapcat 4y ago> If tech had not begun and become the powerhouse it did would the people who lived there have been better off in real terms? > Admittedly housing would be cheaper Housing is the largest expense for most people, so yes, they would have been better off, because housing would be affordable. Even software engineers consider housing there to be absurdly expensive.
- mc32 4y agoWell, the Central valley and Imperial valley are there with cheap housing. But people want the benefits of both. Singapore is the same. It's expensive. Switzerland also, it's expensive.
- umeshunni 4y agoIf only there was a way to create new housing in California.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoOr if only there was housing outside of California.
- umeshunni 4y agoThere's plenty of housing outside California, that's why there's an exodus out of here.
- erik_seaberg 4y agoThere’s plenty in California, just not a reasonable commute to the Bay Area if you need a good job.
- mensetmanusman 4y agoWhat are the real terms of being better off?
- pcthrowaway 4y agoBefore big tech came in, San Francisco was the mecca for the disillusioned, adventure-seekers, protestors, hippies, artists, writers, and many more groups of people who wouldn't be able to afford SF at today's prices. I suspect they'd be doing just fine if not for the tech boom.
- mc32 4y agoFresno is there for the taking. Some of the above live in and around the Salton Sea. Yes, people can cling on for sure. The main point is there is give and take. You win on one side and you lose on the other. Sure, without tech it could be something like Galveston. But there are vastly more people benefitting from the boom than those who suffer from the boom. If you ask people, would you trade this economy for the previous economy where you you keep blue collar jobs and keep your creatives like writers and protesters, or you trade that opportunity for high technology jobs but lose creatives and protesters I think the majority of people will chose the latter.
- lapcat 4y ago> If you ask people, would you trade this economy for the previous economy where you you keep blue collar jobs and keep your creatives like writers and protesters, or you trade that opportunity for high technology jobs but lose creatives and protesters I think the majority of people will chose the latter. Poll citation needed. Also, who would you be polling? If you only poll the winners of neighborhood gentrification, then of course they'll say gentrification is great.