Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

>> "Will SF still be as appealing when the talent can’t afford to be here?"

If you're living responsibly, and saving like you should be, then I'd argue we're already at a point where talent can't afford to be there.

>> "Transportation is a major factor around where buildings are being built. It has to be unprecedented with how many more people are coming downtown and we basically have the same transportation system from 50 years ago, and similar levels of parking."

Call me cynical, but my faith that this city will, let alone state, will ever pull their shit together and build public infrastructure, is nonexistent.




I wonder what it would take to really kill the golden goose, so to speak - to really drive away the startups. Every year I hear how place X is the new startup mecca and it's so much cheaper and has all these advantages, and it doesn't happen.

Some people would argue it's basically impossible for the city to kill the industry (if they are even vaguely reasonable); others argue it's already dead.

I don't know, myself.


I think there'd be overwhelming support among the voters of San Francisco, Palo Alto, Mountain View, etc. to establish border controls, with "proof of residency before 19XX" and "proof that you are not employed in tech" as conditions of entry.

As far as tactics that might survive Supreme Court challenge, I could see SF's affordable housing program ramping up to 100% of units. The city could then apply those tests for eligibility in the program, in addition to the income ceiling it already uses. The city is already a command economy; state allocation of apartments according to the community's values (i.e. make life hell for tech workers at all costs) is a natural next step.

Seattle, Portland, Boulder, and New York might just do the same.

I will not be surprised to see the end of freedom of movement in the United States within my lifetime. The cities that are attracting migration do not want more people. There is widespread support, both among the greedy (who don't want their views and neighorhood character ruined) and bleeding hearts (who don't want the urban poor to suffer from gentrification) that urbanization needs to be stopped.

Maybe someone with a ton of money to spare (Apple?) will start a new city. Or maybe somewhere which is not so attached to its current state (Detroit?) will let us in.


Seattle, Portland, and Boulder maybe, but I absolutely guarantee New York will never do this.


To paraphrase an author I read recently ... it will happen slowly, and then all at once.


So long as the investors are here (and often times require you to move to get funded), the startups will be here.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: