Resentment at techies might not be fair, but it's the future


#1

[Permalink]


#2

To be fair, Jack Halprin isn't a techie. He's a lawyer.


#3

Not so much resentment at techies, as resentment at wealthy tech workers. There are plenty of poorer techies who aren't generally disliked (unless they are a BOFH), it's the money and even more the entitled behaviors that go with that money that draw the most resentment.


#4

It'll be a BOGO world, buy one give one. You want one of your own you'll have to buy an equivalent to rent at the controlled below market rate for your current occupants that you are displacing.

Conapts and flapples for everyone.


#5

The problem is not techies.

The bay area has a housing shortage because: 1) its a nice place to live, 2) there are relatively good jobs near by and 3) zoning and building laws limit the amount of housing that can be built in the area. Items 1) and 2) are good things we would not want to change and 3) is a policy choice that can be changed.

The bay area is huge and only a few parts of it are dense. If the region as a whole were just a bit less suburban and a bit less restrictively zoned, it could accommodate a lot more people without sending rents sky high.


#6

I say!
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Flapples


#7

Very few people in tech firms knew what the firms have been up to regarding private-public cooperation in spying, and considering it seems most tech firms were involved, it doesn't seem reasonable to expect all of the workers to just up and quit.

I also really don't like how there are now protesters outside the homes of tech employees. What a tremendous misdirection of attention.

We live in a society that has many problems, on a planet with many problems. So I'm frustrated by so many people who are aware of these facts, that seem utterly clueless about how to affect positive change.

The only currency is POWER. That is it. Money is a form of power, but not the only form.

If people got off their asses and put people-power to work, they could get tech firms to make positive investments in the communities in which their employees live. They could get the rich to pay their fair share of taxes, including on capital gains. But it takes a movement, and sadly, it seems people would rather post snark and whine on the internet, than embrace the actual power that they have, when in coordinated groups.


#8

If only there were source to cite...


#9

ZOMG, that was not the intended meaning of my use of flapple.
Proof: http://downlode.org/Etext/pkdicktionary.html#f


#10

Maybe they can build a city on the golden gate bridge


#11

Just based on what was on boing, too busy today to TFA and it's probably tl;dr anyway, but the argument presented - that teachers are worthless because people can google that info for "free" is idiotic, but it speaks to the larger problem.

One of the detriments of becoming wealthy, or even just "well off" in America is the delusion that you achieve that all on your own. A delusion that is well supported by most around you - specifically politicians who like to tell you that poverty is your fault.

What these people forget is, if it wasn't for public services - and the people who staff them and work for peanuts by comparison - there wouldn't be a civilization upon which they could stand and build things like google. All things are interrelated and just because you get paid well, doesn't mean that you - as a human being - are worth more than the person next to you, typically it means the opposite in my experience as the only way to get a larger share of the economic pie is to take pie from someone else as there is always only so much pie to go around.

If people like this want to be seen as "successful" then a better way than using the 0's in your bank account for keeping score would be the number of other people whom you can provide a meaningful existence and a living wage for. Companies should be graded on how many employees they have on a living wage - not on how much money they can transfer from the already impoverished to the already over rich.

Late stage capitalism only leads to one, unfortunate, destination - eventually there will be so little "pie" left for the rest of us that we'll be left with no choice but to take some back. That won't be pleasant for anyone involved.


#12

To the author: What's the origin of that painting of a dystopian SF? It's terrific.


#13

From the chrome browser, right click on the image and choose "Search Google for this image"
First result states "Best guess for this image: billy meier san francisco earthquake"

Thanks again Google!


#14

I'd say living in a rent-controlled apartment, enjoying a desirable property at below market rates, is also an example of taking pie from someone else. Last I checked, the Constitution does not guarantee an apartment in S.F. at a price you can afford to pay.


#15

Thank you so much! It's from a German language magazine called Geo, apparently: http://www.helirods.net/apps/photos/photo?photoid=173261323


#16

Thanks for the reminder, I think it's high time I reread that trilogy. I'm actually kind of dissappointed that the future looks to be less BAMA and much more interstitial nodal point.


#17

I live in the Bay Area. You're making a distinction that most of the local rhetoric isn't making. The labeling is of all tech workers.


#18

Oh really? Citation please for "most."


#19

To be pedantic, it wasn't the Golden Gate Bridge. It was the Bay Bridge aka "The Bridge that actually goes to the East Bay over Treasure Island."


#20

If you can't afford to pay market rates and you can't afford to move, what do you do?

Good thing SF is a decent place to be homeless.