Maybe time to for tech companies to pause trying to squeeze every possible human into their SV castles?
-
-
Replying to @obrien
I don't think you get how the cities are complicit in this. All of the Bay Area cities keep approving *just* office space but not sufficient housing bc they want the tax revenue but don't want to have to pay for residents.
2 replies 6 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
I get that perfectly, thx. Yes, they should stop approving tech expansion plans, absolutely. You can approve 10,000 homes, but if let Facebook build space for 10,000 employees, you're still making zero progress on housing issues.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @obrien @kimmaicutler
You can approve 1 million new housing units, but then Google will just keep hiring in SV. You can turn SV into Manhattan, but housing prices will still suck. These cities need to rethink economic development in a way that is not driven by the endless lust for growth.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @obrien
much of New York City is significantly cheaper than the peninsula/South Bay bc they keep building in line with population and economic growth. If you have lack of growth, there is no way to pay for the city/state's long-term liabilities which are already cannibalizing services.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @obrien
if property owners on the peninsula/South Bay actually paid a sufficient amount of property tax, such that their governments didn't have to rely on tech to pay for infrastructure/services, I would be like OK, you can be left alone. But that's not actually what happens.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @obrien
Palo Alto, one of the richest suburbs in America, is facing a $1 billion unfunded pension liability. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2017/10/13/behind-the-headlines-transcript-palo-altos-pension-problem …https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/05/18/alarmed-by-pension-costs-city-seeks-to-slash-4m …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
As for unfunded pensions, well , taxpayers were suckered on that long ago. Nothing to do now but pay what was agreed.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @obrien
But that is partially what is driving the "attract tech companies but build no housing" behavior. If people want to honor what they promised, they have to *grow*. That's the lust for growth.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
I think that's a false tradeoff. One could lift the commercial property part of Prop 13, use that money to pay obligations like pensions, and get back in balance. I don't think letting Apple build a castle in the middle of Cupertino is going to solve that city's pension issues.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Removing the commercial cap would make it even more attractive for cities to build office instead of housing.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.