Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 189

Thread: Off topic:Why dont the tech companies move to more friendly states?

  1. #1

    Off topic:Why dont the tech companies move to more friendly states?

    Seems they could operate just as well in a different place. Maybe cheaper housing and less traffic and lower taxes.

    I continue to be alarmed at the rampant construction of more condos and more commercial buildings with total disregard for the fact that the infostructure (roads) can not handle more people. SF is the4th worst city in the world for taffic and city managers keep proposing removing roads. Sometimes for beautification and some times for ill conceived transit projects.

    Lets make Van Ness one lane in each direction in San Francisco, make El Camino in San Mateo 2 lanes and put in a bus lane. Lets tear down the 280 extension and the 980 freeway. Surely all the high income people living here won't mind riding public transporation. Mind Bogling.
    Last edited by oskidunker; 02-21-2017 at 03:59 PM.

  2. #2
    True Blue Golden Bear sycasey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Oakland
    Posts
    15,760
    Tech companies need educated workers. You find those here.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by sycasey View Post
    Tech companies need educated workers. You find those here.
    This. With the proliferation of remote working, you do have people moving to other parts of the country and just doing their work here. That doesn't necessarily solve the problem though as the most talented (aka the most well-paid) still generally live in the same area near HQ or whatever office closet they're renting out.

  4. #4
    SF is still one of those cities everyone and their mother want to live in. Until that changes, expect it to remain a boomtown.

    Much of the country may hate the Bay Area's political orientation and may try to pretend the high cost of living and traffic are the devil's work, but they secretly envy the bay area's economy. And most bay area tech industry people I know say, "that's OK, I wouldn't trade living here for your big house in the suburbs of some bland southern or midwestern city where the Cheesecake Factory passes for a good restaurant."

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by sycasey View Post
    Tech companies need educated workers. You find those here.
    Apparently in India for cheap as well. The research triangle in North Carolina has an impressive cadre of researchers. Pretty silly to think we have a monopoly on smart people. That said, some great entrepreneurs were born here.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Ncsf View Post
    Apparently in India for cheap as well. The research triangle in North Carolina has an impressive cadre of researchers. Pretty silly to think we have a monopoly on smart people. That said, some great entrepreneurs were born here.
    Where did anybody say we have a monopoly on smart people?

  7. #7
    The Bay has two of the top 3 engineering schools in the country. Those same two schools combine for a massive % of all tech related entrepreneurship. This is home base.

    Manhattan's proximity to HBS, Wharton, Tuck, Stern, Sloan, Columbia, Yale, make it the banking center of America. Traffic and COL are also terrible. Just makes sense.


    Furthermore, a bunch of grads from all of these same schools and a bunch of other really great schools continue moving to both regions, year after year.

    Boston and the NC triangle are also highly concentrated elite academic hubs, and they too have a similar deal going on.
    Last edited by socaliganbear; 02-21-2017 at 04:45 PM.

  8. #8
    It's true that some cities have been building up tech scenes and attracting tech companies on the basis of less traffic, cheap housing, and lower taxes. Austin, TX is a great example. But San Francisco (and to a lesser degree, Seattle, Los Angeles, and New York City) will remain tech centers because of the other reasons mentioned here: they are desirable locations to live for software engineers, who have the disposable income to tolerate traffic, expensive housing, and high taxes, and prefer liberal urban environments. There's also a bit of inertia specifically for the Bay Area with the congregation of startups, VC, and big tech firms, that you won't find elsewhere and attracts a lot of talent.

  9. #9
    Many start ups generate huge operating losses so no income tax to pay...once they use those up you may see proliferation and more corporate structures oversees and elsewhere...

  10. #10
    How dare they inconvenience oskidunker and his ability to drive solo at any time throughout the Bay Area! Bulldoze it all so this guy can get around unimpeded.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliforniaEternal View Post
    How dare they inconvenience oskidunker and his ability to drive solo at any time throughout the Bay Area! Bulldoze it all so this guy can get around unimpeded.
    Yes, I second this motion. And let's throw in free parking right next to Memorial Stadium during football season while we're at it. Enough of those highway clogging troglodytes.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by oskidunker View Post
    Seems they could operate just as well in a different place. Maybe cheaper housing and less traffic and lower taxes.

    I continue to be alarmed at the rampant construction of more condos and more commercial buildings with total disregard for the fact that the infostructure (roads) can not handle more people. SF is the4th worst city in the world for taffic and city managers keep proposing removing roads. Sometimes for beautification and some times for ill conceived transit projects.

    Lets make Van Ness one lane in each direction in San Francisco, make El Camino in San Mateo 2 lanes and put in a bus lane. Lets tear down the 280 extension and the 980 freeway. Surely all the high income people living here won't mind riding public transporation. Mind Bogling.
    Why don't you move to a more friendly state? Seems like you could operate just as well in a different place. Maybe cheaper housing and less traffic and lower taxes.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by oskidunker View Post
    Seems they could operate just as well in a different place. Maybe cheaper housing and less traffic and lower taxes. I continue to be alarmed at the rampant construction of more condos and more commercial buildings with total disregard for the fact that the infostructure (roads) can not handle more people. SF is the4th worst city in the world for taffic and city managers keep proposing removing roads. Sometimes for beautification and some times for ill conceived transit projects. Lets make Van Ness one lane in each direction in San Francisco, make El Camino in San Mateo 2 lanes and put in a bus lane. Lets tear down the 280 extension and the 980 freeway. Surely all the high income people living here won't mind riding public transporation. Mind Bogling.
    Have you thought about moving to a more get off my lawn state like Florida?

  14. #14
    4th worst in the world?

    Wow. I have been in at least four cities overseas that are far worse than SF with Moscow being the worst.

    Within the US, I would rate LA worse and SF second although the traffic in Manhattan is getting tougher to negotiate. Thank God for Uber.......

  15. #15
    Maybe TX or AZ would also be good choices for the OP: cheaper houses, lower taxes, and the automobile is king.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •