4 ms·

Actually the real solution is not focusing on concentrating all technological development in the Bay Area or NYC or Boston but spreading it out across this grea

Actually the real solution is not focusing on concentrating all technological development in the Bay Area or NYC or Boston but spreading it out across this great wide country (and world) of ours so that everyone can take part in and benefit from the modern economy.

raldi 13y ago
Could you express that in concrete terms? For example, my suggestions would be: * Remove height restrictions near public transit * Make the building permit process more similar to that of a typical American city. Specifically, reform CEQA and the SF Discretionary Review process.
- wavefunction 13y ago
  I mean that instead of concentrating technology that the new economy depends on in places that have already reached their carrying capacity like SF, NYC, Boston, existing companies expand in smaller cities and towns, that telecommuting and the attendant improvements in management of distributed teams is encouraged, etc. There are plenty of smart and creative people that want to live in "flyover country" that have to move to the coasts for any sort of opportunity to work in cutting edge tech, and its mostly because of the biases of executives, management, venture capitalists, investment bankers, etc. This would take pressure off the unrealistic housing and cost-of-living in places like SF and the East Coast and would help lead to more prosperity in the rest of the country. You know, the part that gets continually glossed over by the media, government, and the "tech" industry in general.
- snogglethorpe 13y ago
  These are transit related, but good transit is intimately linked to urban structure. * Get rid of free parking and "parking minimums" (not sure if SF has those, but many American cities do, and they're hugely destructive). When possible, get rid of on-street parking entirely in favor of non-car uses for the space. * Stop widening roads (this mainly applies to more suburban areas). Start narrowing roads and widening sidewalks, adding separated bike lanes, etc. * Bike infrastructure. This is not just good bike routes, but bike parking (which is orders of magnitude denser than car parking, and far, far, more flexible and easy to integrate into the urban environment without damaging it) near popular destinations and transit. * Figure out why American infrastructure planning and construction is so dysfunctional (costs way, way, too high, planning often quite poor) and fix it. * Allow transit agencies more flexibility, e.g. let them take advantage of the synergy real-estate/retail has with transit, the way east-Asian transit operators do.
wavefunction 13y ago
Why am I getting downvoted? Nothing I said was offensive.
- roel_v 13y ago
  Because your 'proposal' isn't a proposal, it's just silly hand-waving. Explain, in concrete words (as the poster above asked from you but which you side-stepped), how to reach the outcome you propose. Otherwise, you might as well say 'yeah I think all cancer should be eliminated, that would reduce a lot of suffering'. No shit, Sherlock?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]

raldi 13y ago

Could you express that in concrete terms? For example, my suggestions would be: * Remove height restrictions near public transit * Make the building permit process more similar to that of a typical American city. Specifically, reform CEQA and the SF Discretionary Review process.

wavefunction 13y ago
I mean that instead of concentrating technology that the new economy depends on in places that have already reached their carrying capacity like SF, NYC, Boston, existing companies expand in smaller cities and towns, that telecommuting and the attendant improvements in management of distributed teams is encouraged, etc. There are plenty of smart and creative people that want to live in "flyover country" that have to move to the coasts for any sort of opportunity to work in cutting edge tech, and its mostly because of the biases of executives, management, venture capitalists, investment bankers, etc. This would take pressure off the unrealistic housing and cost-of-living in places like SF and the East Coast and would help lead to more prosperity in the rest of the country. You know, the part that gets continually glossed over by the media, government, and the "tech" industry in general.
snogglethorpe 13y ago
These are transit related, but good transit is intimately linked to urban structure. * Get rid of free parking and "parking minimums" (not sure if SF has those, but many American cities do, and they're hugely destructive). When possible, get rid of on-street parking entirely in favor of non-car uses for the space. * Stop widening roads (this mainly applies to more suburban areas). Start narrowing roads and widening sidewalks, adding separated bike lanes, etc. * Bike infrastructure. This is not just good bike routes, but bike parking (which is orders of magnitude denser than car parking, and far, far, more flexible and easy to integrate into the urban environment without damaging it) near popular destinations and transit. * Figure out why American infrastructure planning and construction is so dysfunctional (costs way, way, too high, planning often quite poor) and fix it. * Allow transit agencies more flexibility, e.g. let them take advantage of the synergy real-estate/retail has with transit, the way east-Asian transit operators do.

wavefunction 13y ago

Why am I getting downvoted? Nothing I said was offensive.

roel_v 13y ago
Because your 'proposal' isn't a proposal, it's just silly hand-waving. Explain, in concrete words (as the poster above asked from you but which you side-stepped), how to reach the outcome you propose. Otherwise, you might as well say 'yeah I think all cancer should be eliminated, that would reduce a lot of suffering'. No shit, Sherlock?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]