2 ms·

Thomas, I disagree with your proxy statement, but we can do that over IM. Also, why stipulate? We can look at the data to see if that's true (and I will). Ag

Thomas, I disagree with your proxy statement, but we can do that over IM. Also, why stipulate? We can look at the data to see if that's true (and I will). Again, I do believe the per-capita data is the correct metric, as that accounts for differences in population. While no one would be surprised that California gets the most money, the per-capita figures might be of interest. I'd love it if you wouldn't mind copy/pasting your comment to the post (even with the first graf). It is being passed around political circles in Springfield, and it'd be good for them to see it. The post is only looking at the data (which proves that the leadership has failed); it is deliberately silent on "why" and "how to fix". I want others to suggest those things before I take a swing.

tptacek 17y ago
If per-capita dollars was the right metric, the Greater Los Angeles combined statistical area would pull VC investments down to Southern California, which is more than twice as large as the valley. Similarly, New York startup investments would dwarf Boston investments. Money goes to San Francisco because of a feedback loop set in motion and sustained by a network effect. Fighting it is like fighting the tides. Illinois doesn't have the will or the wherewithal to compete with the valley on the valley's terms, and shouldn't bother trying.