Skip to main content

View Diary: What's the matter with "The Google Bus?" (130 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  why would they want to hide this? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG, citisven, Simplify

    The Board of Supervisors wants to encourage tech growth in San Francisco. For example the tax benefits in mid-market for Twitter. Rising property values and rents are generally seen as good things.

    •  I get the incentives for Twitter (10+ / 0-)

      because they're actually located in SF. But I don't see what the benefits are of helping out all the tech companies who locate themselves in the suburbs to avoid city taxes in the first place. They say it's because of their very stringent goal of reducing car trips, but it's obviously not working. My street has never been as busy and congested as it has been in the last 2 years. I think by making it so easy for employees to commute such long distances they ultimately just encouraging people to live far from their workplace, which I think is the real crux of the problem.

      I was thinking one solution would be for Google to open an SF campus, perhaps right next to Twitter. That way they would eliminate the need for those buses and also become invested in the community they profess to love so much.

      Ecology is the new Economy

      by citisven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 10:48:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  google has a SF office (11+ / 0-)

        It is swamped with people on Fridays when they can work at home (here in SF) to go for free lunch or something......

        Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

        by kimoconnor on Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 10:58:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The tech companies are not locating in the burbs (0+ / 0-)

        "to avoid city taxes."  That's a rather SF-centric view that's, I'm sorry, laughable.  The tech companies are located in a particular part of the burbs, Silicon Valley, because that's where the critical mass of people with the right skills are.  That's where the venture capital is, that's where Stanford is, that's where all the software geeks are.  The twentysomethings in SF who work there tend to be more social-media and graphic/video design oriented than tech-heavy.

        Google's first office was in Palo Alto, which makes complete sense when you note the founders came from Stanford.  Same with Yahoo.  Lots of these tech firms are started by people who left other firms in the 5-10 mile radius around Stanford.  And it isn't just Stanford.  There's the Venture Capital Corridor along Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, and those people with the money want to be able to check up on their investments. There's the hundreds of start ups featuring people from established firms trying the Next New Thing.

        And have you checked real estate prices down here?  Gentrification?  Sven, Noe Valley is just Palo Alto North. Most of the homes around here blew past peak pricing at the end of 2012.  Palo Alto blew past it last summer.

        The idea that "all the tech companies ... locate themselves in the suburbs to avoid city taxes in the first place" is not just wrong, it demonstrates a mind-boggling ignorance of the history of Silicon Valley.  Your diary itself is excellent, and the concerns of these monster buses dominating neighborhood streets in SF is an important topic that ought to lead to deeper discussion than you found at SPUR.

        But I have to jump in at this notion of yours that Google and Facebook are 40 miles south to avoid SF city taxes.  They aren't avoiding taxes. They're located exactly where they need to be to attract the people they want to find them.

    •  I meant they wouldn't like to see it as a problem, (0+ / 0-)

      so not dealing with it and letting it just continue would be their approach.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site