5 ms·

There's no way left to win. All the "nice" places to live have been taken over by either corrupt foreign actors using illegal money (buying $50 million condos

by seiji 12y ago

There's no way left to win. All the "nice" places to live have been taken over by either corrupt foreign actors using illegal money (buying $50 million condos with literal duffel bags full of untraceable cash) or by bubbleheads cashing out funny money and living ego filled nouveau riche lifestyles. Step in to my own pity party for a moment. Last year my apartment lease went up by $300/month. I have no reason to believe the same won't happen again this year. The employer "yearly raise" last year increased my income by $70/month. Now, it's not my employer's fault I work from home and need space to both sleep _and_ work (in a lavish 700 square foot apartment that's half a mile away from any subway entrance). Forget about trying to move up either. Larger place? An extra $1k-$2k per month. Nicer area? Extra $2k per month for a smaller apartment. Uncontrollable rage starts bleeding from my eyeballs when apartment costs get within horseshoe distance of $50k/year. What's left? Seattle? Full of Amholes. Chicago? Too cold. San Francisco? Too poor, dirty, and it'll take them at least another 50 years to build out modern-day infrastructure (high density housing + transit). And that's only if current levels of local government corruption don't increase. There's nothing quite like arriving at SFO and being greeted by a BART car from the 1970s then riding into the city past tract house slums cluttering the hills of South San Francisco. But, in rage, I digress. One can always just give up and move to Austin. It's okay. All the other people who failed out of life and moved to Austin seem to like it just fine. Also see https://medium.com/@ryanpbroderick/why-im-leaving-new-york-5629bf28e05e https://medium.com/@ryanpbroderick/why-im-leaving-new-york-5...

api 12y ago
Agree with the sentiment if not the particulars. Real estate hyperinflation is the devil and must be destroyed.
rayiner 12y ago
Buy some Merino wool underwear and move to Chicago. Enough rich people and old money to have many of the amenities of NYC, with fewer hipsters and much more reasonable housing prices.
- Slartibreakfast 12y ago
  I thought Chicago was hilarious - it's the only place I've lived where two people can walk in opposite directions and both still have the wind blowing directly in their faces.
  - rayiner 12y ago
    My perception is that it's sunnier and brighter than NYC, even though its colder.
michaelochurch 12y ago
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. That said, I think you're overstating the negatives of many cities. Seattle? Full of Amholes. I worked at Google, which is similar to Amazon. Most people weren't assholes. A company can have a really negative culture (most large tech companies do, and I'd include Google insofar as it has stack-ranking, the 18-month rule, and internal-mobility issues) and still have 60-70% of the people be decent, admirable, even fun to be around. Trust me on this. Stop stereotyping people by their company; these "change the world" startups really aren't superior to Google or Amazon or even Goldman Sachs. New York isn't ruined by Goldman Sachs and Seattle isn't going to be ruined by Amazon. Chicago? Too cold. Overstated. Today, it's beautiful. Actually, the average winter day is quite nice: slightly below freezing (great for cross-country skiing, winter running, etc.) but not unpleasantly cold. The coldest winter days require long johns. It really isn't bad if you know how to dress for it. I won't claim that the climate here is as agreeable as San Diego's, but for a climate north of 40 degrees, it's fine. The coldest days are very cold, but the winter is not as cloudy as Seattle's, not as long as Europe's (mid-late March is actually spring), and not as stormy (in winter) as New York's. North of 40 degrees, you're going to pay one way or another in winter, whether it's the clouds of Seattle (or Europe) or the cold/snow of Chicago or the 35-degree rain of the East Coast. Personally, I'd pick dry cold and semi-frequent sun. San Francisco? Too poor, dirty, and it'll take them at least another 50 years to build out modern-day infrastructure (high density housing + transit). And that's only if current levels of local government corruption don't increase. I'm not going to defend SF. It's a nice place to visit and its topography is incredible. The weather isn't bad. However, it's not a great place to live, and it's already been compromised by foreign money laundering. And, unlike in NYC, that has spread out to the suburbs (Silicon Valley) as well. There's a lot of scumbag money propping up Palo Alto. All the other people who failed out of life and moved to Austin seem to like it just fine. That's a crappy characterization of a place, if I've ever heard one. I found Austin to be alright. Remember that 50 years ago, California had the stigma of being where "people who failed out of life" ended up. Then they took over entertainment, technology, and agriculture.
- seiji 12y ago
  That's a crappy characterization of a place, if I've ever heard one. It's a fine place, but nobody thinks "You know, I'm going to become a tech billionaire then live in Austin for the rest of my life." It's a fallback city. When you realize you can't make it in SF or NYC or other collapsing-under-wealth locales, Austin looks like a safer alternative.
dba7dba 12y ago
IF you have $50 million in cash to spend on a piece of property, you are laundering the money. There's no other explanation.
CyberDildonics 12y ago
If you think there is no way left to 'win' it sounds like you've already failed out of life. You aren't entitled to live in Manhattan.

by seiji 12y ago

api 12y ago

Agree with the sentiment if not the particulars. Real estate hyperinflation is the devil and must be destroyed.

rayiner 12y ago

Buy some Merino wool underwear and move to Chicago. Enough rich people and old money to have many of the amenities of NYC, with fewer hipsters and much more reasonable housing prices.

Slartibreakfast 12y ago
I thought Chicago was hilarious - it's the only place I've lived where two people can walk in opposite directions and both still have the wind blowing directly in their faces.
- rayiner 12y ago
  My perception is that it's sunnier and brighter than NYC, even though its colder.

michaelochurch 12y ago

I agree with a lot of what you're saying. That said, I think you're overstating the negatives of many cities. Seattle? Full of Amholes. I worked at Google, which is similar to Amazon. Most people weren't assholes. A company can have a really negative culture (most large tech companies do, and I'd include Google insofar as it has stack-ranking, the 18-month rule, and internal-mobility issues) and still have 60-70% of the people be decent, admirable, even fun to be around. Trust me on this. Stop stereotyping people by their company; these "change the world" startups really aren't superior to Google or Amazon or even Goldman Sachs. New York isn't ruined by Goldman Sachs and Seattle isn't going to be ruined by Amazon. Chicago? Too cold. Overstated. Today, it's beautiful. Actually, the average winter day is quite nice: slightly below freezing (great for cross-country skiing, winter running, etc.) but not unpleasantly cold. The coldest winter days require long johns. It really isn't bad if you know how to dress for it. I won't claim that the climate here is as agreeable as San Diego's, but for a climate north of 40 degrees, it's fine. The coldest days are very cold, but the winter is not as cloudy as Seattle's, not as long as Europe's (mid-late March is actually spring), and not as stormy (in winter) as New York's. North of 40 degrees, you're going to pay one way or another in winter, whether it's the clouds of Seattle (or Europe) or the cold/snow of Chicago or the 35-degree rain of the East Coast. Personally, I'd pick dry cold and semi-frequent sun. San Francisco? Too poor, dirty, and it'll take them at least another 50 years to build out modern-day infrastructure (high density housing + transit). And that's only if current levels of local government corruption don't increase. I'm not going to defend SF. It's a nice place to visit and its topography is incredible. The weather isn't bad. However, it's not a great place to live, and it's already been compromised by foreign money laundering. And, unlike in NYC, that has spread out to the suburbs (Silicon Valley) as well. There's a lot of scumbag money propping up Palo Alto. All the other people who failed out of life and moved to Austin seem to like it just fine. That's a crappy characterization of a place, if I've ever heard one. I found Austin to be alright. Remember that 50 years ago, California had the stigma of being where "people who failed out of life" ended up. Then they took over entertainment, technology, and agriculture.

seiji 12y ago
That's a crappy characterization of a place, if I've ever heard one. It's a fine place, but nobody thinks "You know, I'm going to become a tech billionaire then live in Austin for the rest of my life." It's a fallback city. When you realize you can't make it in SF or NYC or other collapsing-under-wealth locales, Austin looks like a safer alternative.

dba7dba 12y ago

IF you have $50 million in cash to spend on a piece of property, you are laundering the money. There's no other explanation.

CyberDildonics 12y ago

If you think there is no way left to 'win' it sounds like you've already failed out of life. You aren't entitled to live in Manhattan.