In all fairness, plenty of people leaving the trappings of Big Tech are pretty capable of uprooting and doing business elsewhere; California offers relatively little other than what it has from existing inertia.
Agglomeration effects are real. Research has constantly shown that people working in high productivity area generate more wealth than the same people working outside high productivity areas.
The real problem, IMO, is that workers in the tech industry have voluntarily destroyed these agglomeration benefits by using the short period of power workers had during/after the pandemic to insist on work from home instead of better worker protections.
As a result, it’s very possible that high productivity areas in the U.S. are no longer that, and remote work has reduced all Americana’s productivity, making it impossible to justify the higher cost of living and salaries in big cities.
I dunno. I wish I could find places outside California like Iowa City or St Louis appealing, a simple million will get you a mansion with like fountains, a guest house, pool, tennis courts... In SF that's a two bedroom condo
Except climate. I was on a road trip this summer and stayed in Iowa City while driving East and then St Louis driving West. Downtown Iowa City was appealing. I had a good hotel at a bargain price near the St Louis airport although the area was not the best.
But it was hot. My time back in coastal California has been mostly in the 70s. Camping in Marin County this week, the high was in the 60s. Refreshing after heat warnings in Nebraska, Illinois and Ontario.
The majority of “SF” tech works in the South Bay that has plenty of 100f days. Also almost all the condos there have thin walls and no AC. So that means 80f all night in your $3000/mo 3rd floor crap box.
I do agree there is no winter in the SF bay though. That’s pretty nice.
Agreed about jobs in the South Bay. I commuted from Midpeninsula southward for 30 years.
100 degrees is unusual although it happens. I never lived in the South Bay so can't speak about AC. My house, built in 1947, didn't have it. It was a pain, maybe 2 weeks of the year, at most. It was in the 50s, most days of the year. Low at night in the summer, high in the winter.
I had early guidance that the climate was mild and I would live in a smaller house than I was used to but I would be outside all year. Check.
I didn't understand that there are only two seasons: spring when it rained sometimes and summer when it didn't rain but might be foggy in the morning.
My first year, I craved the rain after six months without. I've adjusted although the first seasonal rain is enjoyable like the first snow in the Midwest. But I don't miss the next 6 months of Midwest winter.
