6 ms·

Why isn't Albuquerque a tech capital when it has everything else going for it? It's not a cool place to be. Young whippersnappers taking on the world want to

Why isn't Albuquerque a tech capital when it has everything else going for it? It's not a cool place to be. Young whippersnappers taking on the world want to be around like-minded (read: young and educated) people, who congregate in big, cool cities like Boston, NYC, Seattle. Not Albuquerque.

michaelochurch 14y ago
Right, but young and educated people only like New York, Boston, and Seattle because other young and educated people live there. There are multiple equilibria. Major investment could break that cycle. There's actually one very easy exploit: young, educated people hate forking over a third or half of their earnings in rent. The problem is that there's no location (that I know of) where: (a) it's easy to start a product-focused business, which requires funding, and (b) rents are reasonable. You have to choose (a) or (b). Most young people are willing to bleed on the altar of real estate because they believe it will help their career in the long run (and that's probably true). New York is going to be the world's capital for, at least, the next 50 years. Boston has some of the top universities. So these will always be important locations. There's no reason, though, that another one couldn't be created. It would just take a lot of concerted investment. If I were going to pick a place, I'd probably choose Minneapolis: it has a lot of smart people and undervalued talent (engineer salaries are about 60% of what they are in NYC) but the cost of living is low and the only negative is the winter cold, which is not nearly as bad as it's made out to be. (If the 3 worst things about a place are December, January, and February, that's a good location.) If there was an easy way to get funding in Albuquerque or Minneapolis, you'd see a lot of sharp, young people moving there. If you make a decent salary, aren't getting robbed on rent, and have a reasonable (4+ weeks) vacation allotment, you're pretty much location-agnostic as long as the place has smart people and decent hangouts. With 4 weeks vacation and money for hotels and flights, you can make more use of New York's amenities than most New Yorkers do, and more cheaply than it costs to pay the city's exorbitant rent.
- xal 14y ago
  There is always one place where A and B are near ideal. Usually as A gets better B gets worse. Currently this place is Berlin.
- protomyth 14y ago
  I wouldn't bet on Minneapolis. The local tax laws are pretty harsh, the weather has some extremes, rent and housing are higher than they should be, and it is not a young person friendly area. Plus, the UoM isn't really a tech school and the tech scene isn't going to recover from out sourcing and Medtronics / Fingerhut's problems. I believe one of the states in the upper plains could become a tech capital if they worked at it, but MN is problematic and everyone else sees oil coming.

michaelochurch 14y ago

Right, but young and educated people only like New York, Boston, and Seattle because other young and educated people live there. There are multiple equilibria. Major investment could break that cycle. There's actually one very easy exploit: young, educated people hate forking over a third or half of their earnings in rent. The problem is that there's no location (that I know of) where: (a) it's easy to start a product-focused business, which requires funding, and (b) rents are reasonable. You have to choose (a) or (b). Most young people are willing to bleed on the altar of real estate because they believe it will help their career in the long run (and that's probably true). New York is going to be the world's capital for, at least, the next 50 years. Boston has some of the top universities. So these will always be important locations. There's no reason, though, that another one couldn't be created. It would just take a lot of concerted investment. If I were going to pick a place, I'd probably choose Minneapolis: it has a lot of smart people and undervalued talent (engineer salaries are about 60% of what they are in NYC) but the cost of living is low and the only negative is the winter cold, which is not nearly as bad as it's made out to be. (If the 3 worst things about a place are December, January, and February, that's a good location.) If there was an easy way to get funding in Albuquerque or Minneapolis, you'd see a lot of sharp, young people moving there. If you make a decent salary, aren't getting robbed on rent, and have a reasonable (4+ weeks) vacation allotment, you're pretty much location-agnostic as long as the place has smart people and decent hangouts. With 4 weeks vacation and money for hotels and flights, you can make more use of New York's amenities than most New Yorkers do, and more cheaply than it costs to pay the city's exorbitant rent.

xal 14y ago
There is always one place where A and B are near ideal. Usually as A gets better B gets worse. Currently this place is Berlin.
protomyth 14y ago
I wouldn't bet on Minneapolis. The local tax laws are pretty harsh, the weather has some extremes, rent and housing are higher than they should be, and it is not a young person friendly area. Plus, the UoM isn't really a tech school and the tech scene isn't going to recover from out sourcing and Medtronics / Fingerhut's problems. I believe one of the states in the upper plains could become a tech capital if they worked at it, but MN is problematic and everyone else sees oil coming.