6 ms·

Job growth is booming across the U.S. but not in California. Here's why

37 points by valiant-comma 3y ago

bugglebeetle 3y ago
> “The reason why Texas and Florida are doing well and California isn’t, it’s the cost of housing and high taxes,” said Sung Won Sohn, an economist at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. “We have lost a lot of small businesses.” This former is the crux of the problem: California entered into a suicide pact with real estate speculators in the 70s, from which it seems entirely unwilling to extricate itself. It’s an incredibly destructive drag on the state’s entire economy that prevents new business formation and labor mobility.
- 7thaccount 3y ago
  I've had several offers to work in startups in California that don't do remote. Instead of just saying no outright I ask the HR person where the office is or look it up. It's usually near Silicon Valley and I have to explain that they'd have to pay me CEO pay to make up for the increase in living/home expenses. I mean...$1.5M to get a home similar to what I paid $150k for not that long ago is hard to justify.
  - ohples 3y ago
    If high payed tech workers are being priced out, imagine how it is for people in other roles.
  - ivalm 3y ago
    Tbf, startup ceo pay is not that great. Except for maybe very late stage engineers often get paid more in base comp. And at late stage your startup should pay you enough to live in Bay Area.
    - 7thaccount 3y ago
      True, but I was just trying to point out that they'd have to pay me a lot higher than they would ever do, to make it not a loss to me. Either you make it remote, or you maybe relocate to some place cheaper.
  - Jcampuzano2 3y ago
    I was born in California and moved away because I wanted to experience other things after college. It's now 15 years later and plenty of offers have been given for me to move back, but not a single one would make up for my quality of life/cost of living hit I'd make moving back. I'd have to make like 3x more than I do now to keep the same quality of life and nowhere comes close to that at the moment. My whole family still lives there but I'd rather them move closer to me than me move there.
  - jjtheblunt 3y ago
    Yep. I had for years a fantastic job in one of the inner engineering groups at Apple, loved it, loved the coworkers, the culture, and earned and saved very well, which is the point in mentioning this. but I quit to move far away eventually because I obstinately refused to pay exorbitant real estate prices to get a non shitty home. Sadly I could understand how folks from outside the US have less perspective on what a shitty ripoff it is, but if you're from a well off suburbia in different parts of the US, it was clearly nonsense to buy there.
    - newZWhoDis 3y ago
      Exactly, and it’s not just the prices it’s the taxes. Sure you make more but you lose a huge % of that and what’s left over goes to insane prices, cost of labor, etc.
  - newZWhoDis 3y ago
    Exactly. Most of California is a huge QoL downgrade so the pay needs to be bonkers to compensate.
- SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
  This doesn’t quite ring true for me in Florida at least. Most recently, floridas cost of housing is raising ridiculously due to home insurance, with several homes refusing to be insured by anyone for any price. On top of that, assessments on condos and other buildings are raising the costs of high rises as well due to government regulations them to get inspected and implement necessary repairs (after HOAs and condos associations have been skimping on necessary maintenance for decades…)
  - bugglebeetle 3y ago
    The problem of the parasitic drag of real estate speculation is spreading to every major market in the U.S. We’re quickly on track to things getting as bad as they are in Canada. But California has been leading the pack for some time because of some especially stupid laws it passed decades ago.
  - marcinzm 3y ago
    This should be all accounted for in rent. California rent seems to be 50% higher than Florida.
  - jajko 3y ago
    Isn't Florida often hammered by hurricanes? On top of rising sea levels. Compare it to more desert-like California (which has earthquakes but maybe once a century, which then gets some vague misrepresentation in insurance risk calculations). Insurances generally want your money unless stuff is just too risky. But some folks are eager to build real estate literally on top of dynamite factory if that land would be cheap enough. So, why are those houses un-insurable is a good question for a start. Also, OP writes their observation specifically about California.
    - jandrewrogers 3y ago
      California has a substantial wildfire and flooding risk, in addition to its large seismic risk.
      - 3y ago
- nostrademons 3y ago
  Sort of? California's economy is shaped like a pyramid scheme in many regards, and land speculation is one of them. It also filters down into local tax revenue (housing prices must continually increase for municipalities to balance their budget, because of Prop 13), the type of industries that can be located there (only the most high-margin can survive the cost of living), the sort of folks who live there (who generally want to get rich quick or admit defeat and move home), and the public discourse (which is always hyping up the next big thing). But in general the bottom of the pyramid lies outside California. All that money that eventually ends up in the pocket of California real estate speculators? Most of it comes from the pension funds and 401(k)s of ordinary workers in the rest of America, which invest in the darling companies of the day not realizing that everything is temporary. Those $2M ranch houses in Silicon Valley are bought by folks bringing in $500K in stock options per year, which is all fueled by their employers being worth $2T. California's problem today is that we're between pyramid schemes. Most of the old-line web/mobile/marketplace schemes have reached maturity and are nearing collapse, but new pyramid schemes like crypto and AI are just getting started. Until the dollars start flowing in earnest California will likely teeter and stagnate at the top.
- amluto 3y ago
  There’s also the cost of utilities (which are entirely out of control in the investor-owned utilities regions in CA, and the CPUC seems to be asleep at the wheel). This obviously drives up the cost of everything else. And, for small businesses, there are the frankly rather silly taxes on small businesses. Want to be a small business doing business in the Great State of California? You will pay $800/year (minimum) for the privilege. Does the state get any value whatsoever from this? Want to employ anyone? Prepare for a whole pile of taxes, each of which is small, but you need to do an utterly absurd amount of paperwork. Would it kill the state of California to let a business employ someone and fill out one form and pay one tax?
- ChuckMcM 3y ago
  You may find this web site enlightening, I certainly did (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state-2022/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state...) This paragraph in particular for me Since we present tax burdens as a share of income as a relative ranking of the 50 states, slight changes in taxes or income can translate into seemingly dramatic shifts in rank. For example, Oklahoma (10th) and Ohio (24th) only differ in burden by just over one percentage point. Tax revenue growth during the pandemic, however, has not only increased overall tax burdens but also expanded variance among states. In our last pre-pandemic analysis, the 20 middle-ranked states differed by less than a percentage point on effective rate, but in 2022, the difference between New Hampshire (16th) and Maryland (35th) is 1.8 percentage points. While burdens are clustered in the center of the distribution, states at the top and bottom can have substantially different burden percentages: the state with the highest burden, New York, has a burden percentage of 15.9 percent, while the state with the lowest burden, Alaska, has a burden percentage of 4.6 percent.
  - TMWNN 3y ago
    What a great data resource. Thank you for sharing it. That spread between CA/NY and TX/FL really puts things into perspective. And before someone else rushes in with "Oh yeah, California subsidizes all the hillbillies in the red states!": No, that is not true. Only CT, NJ, and MA's citizens on average paid more federal taxes during 2015-2021 than they received back from Washington. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839499>
    - davoneus 3y ago
      Typical; someone with only half of a story pushing an agenda. You can look at the data yourself(*) No state pays more outright than California. Followed closely by NY, Mass, Ct, NJ. Look at per-capita income, and California is receives less than 44 other states. Lets see how does that compare some of those "red" states?MS(#8), Al(#7), La(#11), Ar(#15), Ky(#2), SC(#13), Tn(#16), Wv (#5), Oh(#21), Tx(#36), Mt(#19), NC(#20)? Don't know about you, but the data sure tells another story doesn't it? I damn well don't live in CA (midwest), but don't believe anything on the 'net until you verify it yourself. Too many people pushing an agenda. (*) https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-payments-portal/ https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...
- instagib 3y ago
  Housing non-eviction laws and policies also are rough. I tried to look for a home there once. I watched a homeowner break in with a ladder after being evicted then the realtor showed for the viewing then stole his ladder and left. Another said their house was for sale but the garage was occupied by people who broke in and they could not be evicted until summer was over and before it became winter. The home owner was unavailable to speak to due to health issues related to the struggles. Found a decent place then looked up the history of the property to find it had many owners and were re-sold due to a sober living halfway house next door. I have several other examples and many news stories similar including long commutes, higher prices/taxes, etc made moving there or owning a home to rent out a non-starter.
  - mistrial9 3y ago
    laws affecting this and other situations vary from county to county by a lot. It is a factually mistaken to say this is occurring in every place in California.
- shuckles 3y ago
  As much as I love California doomerism, the "suicide pact" is fraying and we should appreciate that. Split roll for commercial property tax assessments only lost by 2% on the ballot in 2020 which is a winnable margin. There are many statewide bills passed and proposed for loosening regulation. The legislature is working on reforming outdated insurance regulations that have precipitated the current crisis, etc. The state has problems but they are not as structural and intractable as most people want to be believe.
- freitzkriesler2 3y ago
  100%. That prop is killing the state. There's plenty of land and no will to develop it. California is dying because businesses can't pay their employees $75k and expect them to be able to afford a place to live.
ramesh31 3y ago
California is full, plain and simple. The people who live there and control the land have decided so, both implicitly and explicitly.
- api 3y ago
  I realized after a while of living there that California is run as a real estate cartel. Land owners who bought when the state was cheap own it, and everyone who bought later is beholden and locked in with golden handcuffs to the high price environment they created. I call it a cartel because the scarcity is 100% a policy choice. Density is not high, public transit is awful, and there is a ton of land left to develop on. Real estate in California is like diamonds from DeBeers. If you aren't rich, don't stay there. All your surplus will go to landlords. If you buy at these high prices >50% of your income will go to servicing the mortgage and if the property market there ever does crash you'll be ruined. You’ve basically bought into a cartel. I'd say for the Bay Area it's worthwhile to go to build out your career but if you aren't making at least $350k/year by age 35 leave. Personally I’m glad I left because I loathe this property cartel and what it does to people and wouldn’t want to put my money into it. IMHO the state has this totally fake reputation as a liberal “woke” place when in reality it’s a landlords kingdom. Texas is more progressive than California because a working class person can afford a home.
  - readyman 3y ago
    >California is run as a real estate cartel Literally the political power that got Tesla off the ground (with fed funding) to save real estate prices in the San Bernadino Valley, LA, etc.
    - shuckles 3y ago
      Tesla's primary R&D and manufacturing operations are in the San Francisco Bay Area. How does that impact land values in Southern California?
      - readyman 3y ago
unquietwiki 3y ago
Living in SoCal still offers distinct advantages in terms of civil rights, a social safety net, and access to a vast number of small and large businesses (for both work and services). The entry-level job thing is compounded by requirements for degrees and experience that fully expect folks to down-skill to lower-wage roles. One factor that looms large is the gig economy: Uber/Lyft/DoorDash/etc. They've become a lynchpin in providing delivery services that restaurants have come to rely on, while hitting both them and consumers with large fees. Pizza delivery is being shifted from actual drivers to gig workers, to avoid a recent law change requiring more pay; this has become an act of cost-externalization, and further increases the dependency on the gig workers. And overall the gig workers aren't necessarily seeing gains from this change, since their employers fight tooth and nail on efforts to increase their pay. This doesn't even begin to cover what's happening in the agricultural and creative industries; the latter of which I believe has been covered writ-large in this space.
- readyman 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - screenobobeano 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - gotoeleven 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - readyman 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - sunshowers 3y ago
        The probability of an HIV+ person on antivirals, with undetectable levels of the virus, transmitting it to you, is lower than the probability of someone who thinks they're HIV- transmitting it to you. It is correct for the law to reflect this reality. We all know that the way the world works is that unintentional actions from stigmatized minorities are treated as intentional. I'd recommend this article from Lambda Legal, which outlines exactly what was wrong with the old law in practice while making the extremely reasonable point that treating HIV differently from every other communicable disease is terrible public policy. https://legacy.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publications/downloads/faq_for_new_ca_law_sb_239.pdf https://legacy.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publicati...
ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago
Correction, over 90% of job growth is going to foreign born workers
- readyman 3y ago
  Gotta keep the wages down somehow! Now if we could only find a way to keep people from losing their homes due to laziness!
- bdcravens 3y ago
  Source?
_8j50 3y ago
California as a whole is a great place to live but I have no idea how people manage. My biggest hangup isn't jobs but housing. You have to be a millionaire to afford a small house far away from any city. And if you decide to rent instead, then even making 200k+ you are unlikely to afford a house at all. By the time you save up a million, housing prices increasing and inflation will push you back to square one. If you go through the debt route, interest and monthly payments will drain you dry for the rest of your life (unless your plan is to start your real life at 55+). I feel like high speed railways to desirable places like cali to affordable states will sove a lot of issues.
- carom 3y ago
  This is a little exaggerated. You can own a $1m home on 180k/yr at old interest rates. I am not a millionaire and bought a $1.2m property in the heart of LA.
  - _8j50 3y ago
    When was this and how is it not renting but with more steps? Can you pay it off in 10-20yrs?
VirusNewbie 3y ago
Prop 13 is just a huge handout to real estate investors. There’s also the fact that mortgages are no recourse, so people have even more reason to engage in RE speculation. I’m not exaggerating when I say many of my close friends own a handful of properties as their main investment choice. How can you have anything close to a free market when speculation is rewarded so much? I’m not saying prop 13 shouldn’t apply to primary residence, but it’s insane investors can just sit on land and use that as leverage.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  a retired attorney in California said this recently.. (he is close to 80 so he recalls a lot of the context of Prop 13) "Prop 13 is the worst thing to happen to California in a long time. It has lasting effects today. At the time, the press was full of 'tax fighter' stories about saving the poor old retirees from having their homes taken away sourced from Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association among others. This is not the real story. The real story is that big corporations in California own land and do not sell it in practice. Prop 13 froze the property tax that Corporations pay at the same time as the homeowners."
freitzkriesler2 3y ago
Until California breaks the back of its landed gentry class (real estate investors and NIMBYs), job growth will remain nill. You can't pay 75k and expect people to live hand to mouth.
ShaylaRaegan 3y ago
[dead]
racheljaneville 3y ago
[dead]

37 points by valiant-comma 3y ago

> “The reason why Texas and Florida are doing well and California isn’t, it’s the cost of housing and high taxes,” said Sung Won Sohn, an economist at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. “We have lost a lot of small businesses.” This former is the crux of the problem: California entered into a suicide pact with real estate speculators in the 70s, from which it seems entirely unwilling to extricate itself. It’s an incredibly destructive drag on the state’s entire economy that prevents new business formation and labor mobility.

7thaccount 3y ago
I've had several offers to work in startups in California that don't do remote. Instead of just saying no outright I ask the HR person where the office is or look it up. It's usually near Silicon Valley and I have to explain that they'd have to pay me CEO pay to make up for the increase in living/home expenses. I mean...$1.5M to get a home similar to what I paid $150k for not that long ago is hard to justify.
- ohples 3y ago
  If high payed tech workers are being priced out, imagine how it is for people in other roles.
- ivalm 3y ago
  Tbf, startup ceo pay is not that great. Except for maybe very late stage engineers often get paid more in base comp. And at late stage your startup should pay you enough to live in Bay Area.
  - 7thaccount 3y ago
    True, but I was just trying to point out that they'd have to pay me a lot higher than they would ever do, to make it not a loss to me. Either you make it remote, or you maybe relocate to some place cheaper.
- Jcampuzano2 3y ago
  I was born in California and moved away because I wanted to experience other things after college. It's now 15 years later and plenty of offers have been given for me to move back, but not a single one would make up for my quality of life/cost of living hit I'd make moving back. I'd have to make like 3x more than I do now to keep the same quality of life and nowhere comes close to that at the moment. My whole family still lives there but I'd rather them move closer to me than me move there.
- jjtheblunt 3y ago
  Yep. I had for years a fantastic job in one of the inner engineering groups at Apple, loved it, loved the coworkers, the culture, and earned and saved very well, which is the point in mentioning this. but I quit to move far away eventually because I obstinately refused to pay exorbitant real estate prices to get a non shitty home. Sadly I could understand how folks from outside the US have less perspective on what a shitty ripoff it is, but if you're from a well off suburbia in different parts of the US, it was clearly nonsense to buy there.
  - newZWhoDis 3y ago
    Exactly, and it’s not just the prices it’s the taxes. Sure you make more but you lose a huge % of that and what’s left over goes to insane prices, cost of labor, etc.
- newZWhoDis 3y ago
  Exactly. Most of California is a huge QoL downgrade so the pay needs to be bonkers to compensate.
SamoyedFurFluff 3y ago
This doesn’t quite ring true for me in Florida at least. Most recently, floridas cost of housing is raising ridiculously due to home insurance, with several homes refusing to be insured by anyone for any price. On top of that, assessments on condos and other buildings are raising the costs of high rises as well due to government regulations them to get inspected and implement necessary repairs (after HOAs and condos associations have been skimping on necessary maintenance for decades…)
- bugglebeetle 3y ago
  The problem of the parasitic drag of real estate speculation is spreading to every major market in the U.S. We’re quickly on track to things getting as bad as they are in Canada. But California has been leading the pack for some time because of some especially stupid laws it passed decades ago.
- marcinzm 3y ago
  This should be all accounted for in rent. California rent seems to be 50% higher than Florida.
- jajko 3y ago
  Isn't Florida often hammered by hurricanes? On top of rising sea levels. Compare it to more desert-like California (which has earthquakes but maybe once a century, which then gets some vague misrepresentation in insurance risk calculations). Insurances generally want your money unless stuff is just too risky. But some folks are eager to build real estate literally on top of dynamite factory if that land would be cheap enough. So, why are those houses un-insurable is a good question for a start. Also, OP writes their observation specifically about California.
  - jandrewrogers 3y ago
    California has a substantial wildfire and flooding risk, in addition to its large seismic risk.
    - 3y ago
nostrademons 3y ago
Sort of? California's economy is shaped like a pyramid scheme in many regards, and land speculation is one of them. It also filters down into local tax revenue (housing prices must continually increase for municipalities to balance their budget, because of Prop 13), the type of industries that can be located there (only the most high-margin can survive the cost of living), the sort of folks who live there (who generally want to get rich quick or admit defeat and move home), and the public discourse (which is always hyping up the next big thing). But in general the bottom of the pyramid lies outside California. All that money that eventually ends up in the pocket of California real estate speculators? Most of it comes from the pension funds and 401(k)s of ordinary workers in the rest of America, which invest in the darling companies of the day not realizing that everything is temporary. Those $2M ranch houses in Silicon Valley are bought by folks bringing in $500K in stock options per year, which is all fueled by their employers being worth $2T. California's problem today is that we're between pyramid schemes. Most of the old-line web/mobile/marketplace schemes have reached maturity and are nearing collapse, but new pyramid schemes like crypto and AI are just getting started. Until the dollars start flowing in earnest California will likely teeter and stagnate at the top.
amluto 3y ago
There’s also the cost of utilities (which are entirely out of control in the investor-owned utilities regions in CA, and the CPUC seems to be asleep at the wheel). This obviously drives up the cost of everything else. And, for small businesses, there are the frankly rather silly taxes on small businesses. Want to be a small business doing business in the Great State of California? You will pay $800/year (minimum) for the privilege. Does the state get any value whatsoever from this? Want to employ anyone? Prepare for a whole pile of taxes, each of which is small, but you need to do an utterly absurd amount of paperwork. Would it kill the state of California to let a business employ someone and fill out one form and pay one tax?
ChuckMcM 3y ago
You may find this web site enlightening, I certainly did (https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state-2022/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/state/tax-burden-by-state...) This paragraph in particular for me Since we present tax burdens as a share of income as a relative ranking of the 50 states, slight changes in taxes or income can translate into seemingly dramatic shifts in rank. For example, Oklahoma (10th) and Ohio (24th) only differ in burden by just over one percentage point. Tax revenue growth during the pandemic, however, has not only increased overall tax burdens but also expanded variance among states. In our last pre-pandemic analysis, the 20 middle-ranked states differed by less than a percentage point on effective rate, but in 2022, the difference between New Hampshire (16th) and Maryland (35th) is 1.8 percentage points. While burdens are clustered in the center of the distribution, states at the top and bottom can have substantially different burden percentages: the state with the highest burden, New York, has a burden percentage of 15.9 percent, while the state with the lowest burden, Alaska, has a burden percentage of 4.6 percent.
- TMWNN 3y ago
  What a great data resource. Thank you for sharing it. That spread between CA/NY and TX/FL really puts things into perspective. And before someone else rushes in with "Oh yeah, California subsidizes all the hillbillies in the red states!": No, that is not true. Only CT, NJ, and MA's citizens on average paid more federal taxes during 2015-2021 than they received back from Washington. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839499>
  - davoneus 3y ago
    Typical; someone with only half of a story pushing an agenda. You can look at the data yourself(*) No state pays more outright than California. Followed closely by NY, Mass, Ct, NJ. Look at per-capita income, and California is receives less than 44 other states. Lets see how does that compare some of those "red" states?MS(#8), Al(#7), La(#11), Ar(#15), Ky(#2), SC(#13), Tn(#16), Wv (#5), Oh(#21), Tx(#36), Mt(#19), NC(#20)? Don't know about you, but the data sure tells another story doesn't it? I damn well don't live in CA (midwest), but don't believe anything on the 'net until you verify it yourself. Too many people pushing an agenda. (*) https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-payments-portal/ https://rockinst.org/issue-areas/fiscal-analysis/balance-of-...
instagib 3y ago
Housing non-eviction laws and policies also are rough. I tried to look for a home there once. I watched a homeowner break in with a ladder after being evicted then the realtor showed for the viewing then stole his ladder and left. Another said their house was for sale but the garage was occupied by people who broke in and they could not be evicted until summer was over and before it became winter. The home owner was unavailable to speak to due to health issues related to the struggles. Found a decent place then looked up the history of the property to find it had many owners and were re-sold due to a sober living halfway house next door. I have several other examples and many news stories similar including long commutes, higher prices/taxes, etc made moving there or owning a home to rent out a non-starter.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  laws affecting this and other situations vary from county to county by a lot. It is a factually mistaken to say this is occurring in every place in California.
shuckles 3y ago
As much as I love California doomerism, the "suicide pact" is fraying and we should appreciate that. Split roll for commercial property tax assessments only lost by 2% on the ballot in 2020 which is a winnable margin. There are many statewide bills passed and proposed for loosening regulation. The legislature is working on reforming outdated insurance regulations that have precipitated the current crisis, etc. The state has problems but they are not as structural and intractable as most people want to be believe.
freitzkriesler2 3y ago
100%. That prop is killing the state. There's plenty of land and no will to develop it. California is dying because businesses can't pay their employees $75k and expect them to be able to afford a place to live.

ramesh31 3y ago

California is full, plain and simple. The people who live there and control the land have decided so, both implicitly and explicitly.

api 3y ago
I realized after a while of living there that California is run as a real estate cartel. Land owners who bought when the state was cheap own it, and everyone who bought later is beholden and locked in with golden handcuffs to the high price environment they created. I call it a cartel because the scarcity is 100% a policy choice. Density is not high, public transit is awful, and there is a ton of land left to develop on. Real estate in California is like diamonds from DeBeers. If you aren't rich, don't stay there. All your surplus will go to landlords. If you buy at these high prices >50% of your income will go to servicing the mortgage and if the property market there ever does crash you'll be ruined. You’ve basically bought into a cartel. I'd say for the Bay Area it's worthwhile to go to build out your career but if you aren't making at least $350k/year by age 35 leave. Personally I’m glad I left because I loathe this property cartel and what it does to people and wouldn’t want to put my money into it. IMHO the state has this totally fake reputation as a liberal “woke” place when in reality it’s a landlords kingdom. Texas is more progressive than California because a working class person can afford a home.
- readyman 3y ago
  >California is run as a real estate cartel Literally the political power that got Tesla off the ground (with fed funding) to save real estate prices in the San Bernadino Valley, LA, etc.
  - shuckles 3y ago
    Tesla's primary R&D and manufacturing operations are in the San Francisco Bay Area. How does that impact land values in Southern California?
    - readyman 3y ago

unquietwiki 3y ago

Living in SoCal still offers distinct advantages in terms of civil rights, a social safety net, and access to a vast number of small and large businesses (for both work and services). The entry-level job thing is compounded by requirements for degrees and experience that fully expect folks to down-skill to lower-wage roles. One factor that looms large is the gig economy: Uber/Lyft/DoorDash/etc. They've become a lynchpin in providing delivery services that restaurants have come to rely on, while hitting both them and consumers with large fees. Pizza delivery is being shifted from actual drivers to gig workers, to avoid a recent law change requiring more pay; this has become an act of cost-externalization, and further increases the dependency on the gig workers. And overall the gig workers aren't necessarily seeing gains from this change, since their employers fight tooth and nail on efforts to increase their pay. This doesn't even begin to cover what's happening in the agricultural and creative industries; the latter of which I believe has been covered writ-large in this space.

readyman 3y ago
[flagged]
- screenobobeano 3y ago
  [flagged]
- gotoeleven 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - readyman 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - sunshowers 3y ago
      The probability of an HIV+ person on antivirals, with undetectable levels of the virus, transmitting it to you, is lower than the probability of someone who thinks they're HIV- transmitting it to you. It is correct for the law to reflect this reality. We all know that the way the world works is that unintentional actions from stigmatized minorities are treated as intentional. I'd recommend this article from Lambda Legal, which outlines exactly what was wrong with the old law in practice while making the extremely reasonable point that treating HIV differently from every other communicable disease is terrible public policy. https://legacy.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publications/downloads/faq_for_new_ca_law_sb_239.pdf https://legacy.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publicati...

ldjkfkdsjnv 3y ago

Correction, over 90% of job growth is going to foreign born workers

readyman 3y ago
Gotta keep the wages down somehow! Now if we could only find a way to keep people from losing their homes due to laziness!
bdcravens 3y ago
Source?

_8j50 3y ago

California as a whole is a great place to live but I have no idea how people manage. My biggest hangup isn't jobs but housing. You have to be a millionaire to afford a small house far away from any city. And if you decide to rent instead, then even making 200k+ you are unlikely to afford a house at all. By the time you save up a million, housing prices increasing and inflation will push you back to square one. If you go through the debt route, interest and monthly payments will drain you dry for the rest of your life (unless your plan is to start your real life at 55+). I feel like high speed railways to desirable places like cali to affordable states will sove a lot of issues.

carom 3y ago
This is a little exaggerated. You can own a $1m home on 180k/yr at old interest rates. I am not a millionaire and bought a $1.2m property in the heart of LA.
- _8j50 3y ago
  When was this and how is it not renting but with more steps? Can you pay it off in 10-20yrs?

VirusNewbie 3y ago

Prop 13 is just a huge handout to real estate investors. There’s also the fact that mortgages are no recourse, so people have even more reason to engage in RE speculation. I’m not exaggerating when I say many of my close friends own a handful of properties as their main investment choice. How can you have anything close to a free market when speculation is rewarded so much? I’m not saying prop 13 shouldn’t apply to primary residence, but it’s insane investors can just sit on land and use that as leverage.

mistrial9 3y ago
a retired attorney in California said this recently.. (he is close to 80 so he recalls a lot of the context of Prop 13) "Prop 13 is the worst thing to happen to California in a long time. It has lasting effects today. At the time, the press was full of 'tax fighter' stories about saving the poor old retirees from having their homes taken away sourced from Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association among others. This is not the real story. The real story is that big corporations in California own land and do not sell it in practice. Prop 13 froze the property tax that Corporations pay at the same time as the homeowners."

freitzkriesler2 3y ago

Until California breaks the back of its landed gentry class (real estate investors and NIMBYs), job growth will remain nill. You can't pay 75k and expect people to live hand to mouth.

ShaylaRaegan 3y ago

[dead]

racheljaneville 3y ago

[dead]