also to be clear i don't have a settled opinion on whether this would be good or bad, just surprised i haven't heard of anyone trying anything like this
Show this thread
hey serious question why isn't more VC funding going towards taking over the governance of san francisco?
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Google itself couldn't even get a bridge built in Mountain View. property owners control everything and have no interest in giving up control. imo, not even tech money can compete with real estate money.
-
could instead try backing or even just creating technocrat candidates for mayor or whatever, any thoughts on the feasibility of that? i imagine that competes with a different pool of entrenched interests but not sure what
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
not nearly as silly as Tim Draper pushing for Calexit.
-
calexit i guess is the closest thing i've heard of to this
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Guess I now believe: even though the tech money *could* fight the real estate folk and win if it had the will, it's not really willing to do that while leaving SF would be cheaper and easier.
-
and leaving SF is still too hard to coordinate?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
figuring out the profit incentives/business model seems like a big challenge. fixing governance in SF would benefit everyone immensely but it’s a tragedy of the commons because no individual organization can capture the value
-
a combo of VC money towards lobbying for a contract, say to decrease homelessness with specific milestones and incentives, to be given to a VC startup could be an interesting way to tackle this
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.