Places Where the Silicon Valley Bubble Could Pop 107
waderoush writes: "If Silicon Valley is in a bubble — which it is – how will it finally burst? Where is the bubble's membrane being stretched so thin that it's in danger of tearing open and letting the real world rush in? This commentary from Xconomy picks real places around the San Francisco Bay Area embodying tensions, imbalances, injustices, or dangers that could escalate into a show-stopping crisis for the technology economy. One is Bank of America's former headquarters in the heart of San Francisco's Financial District; another is an elementary school in Oakland that happens to sit on the Hayward Fault. 'If we can identify the fractures that threaten to destroy the innovation machine, we might be able to patch them up and keep the system going for a while longer — and maybe even point it in a smarter direction,' the piece argues."
I Read TFA... (Score:5, Informative)
It was disjointed and didn't really seem to have any sort of point or theme. Now I can't get that time back. :(
Re:I Read TFA... (Score:4, Funny)
Good thing most of the crowd comes here after only reading the summary and may heed your warning
Re: (Score:2)
I have the feeling that most of the crowd don't even bother to read the summary.
And it appears to me, that some don't even bother to read the post that they are responding to.
Re: (Score:2)
Some don't even seem to read the headline.
Re: (Score:2)
It's worse than that, half the posters don't even read the post they're replying to, they just want to say their bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Half the posters don't even read their own reply.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really sure how San Francisco or Oakland have anything to do with Silicon Valley either.
Re:I Read TFA... (Score:5, Insightful)
Read the linked TechCrunch article...it's really a great explanation of everything that's going on. One good example was Mountain View working on a commercial development that would bring 42,550 jobs to the city while only creating additional housing for 7000 people. This in a city where already far more people work than live. To Mountain View, it's simple...residents require more services like schools, fire departments and police than do office complexes. But those workers have to live somewhere and cities like Mountain View that are acting selfishly are pushing rents up in nearby cities.
Two of those cities are San Francisco and Oakland. Both cities have a lot of housing when you ignore one minor detail...the current residents that would need to be displaced. But since all those jobs in Mountain View pay way more than the current residents make, developers and landlords are only too happy profiteer off the well-compensated tech workers by pricing the current residents out of the market.
But, as the piece lays out, it's not tech workers that are to blame and, for the most part, not tech companies either. It's mostly local and state government's 30+ years of stupidity that's led to this. Starting with prop 13 in 1978 and the backlash that led to rent control laws, government created an environment where homeowners fight tooth and nail against new housing and rent control drives rent up by distorting the market. The ensuing difference between controlled and uncontrolled rents causes conflict between tenants and landlords who see how much money they're losing each month. So the city adds even more idiotic regulations that ensure a certain amount of housing is sold/rented below market rates, which has income restrictions that just about guarantee that poor people won't be able to afford them...but zero-income children of parents willing to cosign qualify quite easily.
Meanwhile, companies keep growing/starting up and more and more high-paying jobs keep coming to the area. But thanks to all those "I got mine, screw the rest of you" homeowners who keep new developments from being built, those jobs come without the corresponding increase in necessary housing. So what are current landlords to do...every form of meddling is forcing prices through the roof to the point where only highly-paid professionals can afford them? You could either sit by and allow your tenant to pay you a small fraction of what the place is worth (and sometimes rent it out for full price on AirBnB...no rent control there) or you could use some sleazy tactic to evict the long-time tenant and let the boom dollars roll in. Also, notice I didn't say tech professionals...we make up less than a quarter of the well-to-do SF population...there's more finance than tech.
As per usual, the ones most hurt by this are the working poor. The abject poor are doing the same as ever...when you make zero and live off city-provided social programs, rent prices really don't affect you all that much. But the people trying to be productive members of society are basically forced to move away and commute back to the city. And this has some really nasty side effects...like police officers who have no real attachment to the community they serve because they've been priced out of living there.
Protesting the Google bus makes for a great shot on the 11pm news, but is otherwise counter-productive. If we want to fix the issue, we should:
a) Repeal prop 13, rent control, the below-market-rate program and all the other government meddling.
b) Tell homeowners to go fuck themselves and start building new housing as fast as we can.
c) Add significant tax incentives for people who live close to work. This would have the dual effect of being "green" by reducing commutes and making it unattractive to work in cities that do not provide enough housing to support the businesses there.
Alternatively, we could just accept that poor people will need to move and let it happen. It's heartless, but given how bungling government is, it's pretty much inevitable. The unfortunate part is that what's considered poor is almost ridiculous. Someone making $100k/yr will basically never be able to afford to buy a home in SF.
See...SF and Oakland have a lot to do with Silicon Valley :-)
Re:I Read TFA... (Score:5, Informative)
Thank you. You should have written the article. :)
The housing issues are nothing new. I don't live in the bay area now, but back in 2000 I did live in Santa Clara for about six months. I recall reading an article in the San Jose Mercury News back then about full-time public school teachers in San Jose who were living in homeless shelters because they couldn't afford to rent or buy in the area. I also recall at least a couple of colleagues commuted 2.5-3 hours each way because they couldn't afford to house their families any closer to the bay area.
Re: (Score:3)
Or tech companies can just start or move to somewhere else. This isn't the 19th or early 20th century where everyone in one industry has to be close to one another. Even the auto industry is spread out all over the World now. And with something like software, there is absolutely no reason to be in SV - I can't think of any other industry that is more portable than software.
And don't tell me that nonsense of "it's where the skilled people are".
Well there is a great debating technique; just call their rebuttal nonsense before they even say it. Although it works much better when you actually give reasons why the predominant theory is nonsense instead of just throwing it out there without backing it up.
While people may want to believe that technology has progressed far enough that it doesn't matter where you live, reality does not seem to back that up. Humans still seem to be far more social. I know I work better with the coworkers that come to the
Re: (Score:1)
But there are plenty of large cities out there that arent silicon valley that companies can move to that are much more affordable, I think thats more his point. I definitely agree you cant telecommute everyone, especially in engineering that just doesnt work at all. But there is absolutely no reason for all these companies to have to be within the same 60mi radius of each other anymore when there are plenty of places out there that offer all the same amenities with a cost of living thats half as much.
Thats
Weather & Skilled tech workers. (Score:2)
The cities with tech presence in other states (from SF Bay and Denver) generally include LA, Austin, Pittsburgh, Seattle, and some I know less about (Chicago? DC? Raleigh? Massachusetts?).
Few of those have preferential weather and enough tech jobs that to allow failed startup employee reabsorbtion like SF &Denver. The result is huge SF Bay growth and decent Denver growth.
I tried Austin for a few years and yeah you get a nice house, but you'd better enjoy it because you won't step outside with the heat,
Re: (Score:2)
Thats why I never interview with offers from places in the valley. They would have to double my salary just to maintain the same standard of living, let alone add on more on top of it to even make it enticing to move.
There. You just answered why businesses show up where they are. It's because most people decide where they want to live first, move there, and then look for a job. Deal is that the people working in tech companies aren't living in SF because that's where the jobs are, but the jobs are there because that's where the people are. Lots of colleges, lots of night life, lots of things that attract 20 somethings looking for jobs. In the first .com boom, Nashville tried very hard to get those tech companies to loca
Re: (Score:2)
You've got a fair grasp of what's going on, but this is crap:
You'd think in this day and age people would think two or three times before going with laissez-faire free market "solutions", but there's a lot of you guys around at this point...
The trouble with these ideas is that whatever they say, people don't really *want* to leave issues like the character of their neighborhoods up to the whims of The
Me too. I should have stopped at the "which it is" (Score:2)
Me too. I should have stopped at the "which it is".
It's a total jingoistic piece that's more or less written as a rant about how much nicer things used to be, before the (presumed) current tech bubble.
Why do we care if large "funny money" transactions are happening? It's not like an all stock purchase of supposedly valueless companies by a supposedly valueless company matters to anyone, in an economic sense.
I have no idea why he brings up BofA, which has little to do with tech funding, why he brings up "Go
Re:Me too. I should have stopped at the "which it (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know if I'd call it a tech bubble, it's more of a froth- lots of little bubbles. During the original tech bubble that started in the late '90s, pretty much everything was massively overvalued, and pretty much every shitty startup would go public and see its stock rocket up, even (especially) if they didn't make a profit and didn't have a business plan. It was widespread financial insanity, collective economic madness. The average stock on the S&P 500 traded at 40 times earnings, versus about 18.8 today. In other words, the average company costs about twice as much (relative to its earning potential) then as now.
Today, there are definitely some overvalued tech stocks. Facebook has a P/E of 76, Netflix has a P/E of 128, Amazon has a P/E of 428. Which means that at current earnings levels, a dollar invested in Facebook will pay off in 76 years, that same dollar invested in Netflix will pay off in 128 years, and Amazon stock will pay for itself in a little over four centuries. You're speculating (i.e. gambling) if you buy any of those companies. But other tech stocks are more reasonably priced. Google has a P/E of 28, Microsoft's P/E ratio is 15, Apple's is only 14. We are seeing bubble-like behavior in certain companies and in certain industries (social media, for example) but it's going a little far to say that the entire industry is in a bubble.
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily the summary lost me at "If Silicon Valley is in a bubble — which it is – how will it finally burst?"
Ok, pretend to ask a question and answer it in the SAME sentence... yeah, it's bound to be a well thought out impartial article...
Re: (Score:2)
u took the silicon valley bashing bait. u hurt bro?
Buying alphabets on the installment plan there champ?
Facebook. (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is WAY over valued.
If you are so much smarter than the market, then you should be able use your superior intellect to make a fortune by taking a perfectly timed and highly leveraged short position. After you cash out, come back and post a picture of your yacht.
Re: (Score:1)
It is WAY over valued.
If you are so much smarter than the market, then you should be able use your superior intellect to make a fortune by taking a perfectly timed and highly leveraged short position. After you cash out, come back and post a picture of your yacht.
Your conceptualization is turned around the wrong way.
It doesn't take a smart person to see Facebook is overvalued. It takes a lot of really dumb investors to overvalue social media, hence the bubble.
Re:Facebook. (Score:5, Insightful)
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent
- Keynes
Re: (Score:2)
Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent
- Keynes
Eventually, the bubble pops, the collective delusion ends, and gravity and other natural laws reassert themselves, the whole thing comes crashing down. The key word being "eventually". Bubbles are self-sustaining, there's a feedback loop. People buy in because the price goes up, as more people buy in, the price goes up more, and so on. Sober, rational people look at fools making money and eventually decide they've made a mistake and start jumping in even as the whole thing starts racing towards disaster and
Re: (Score:2)
This only works with rational actors. Problem is 100 billion flies simply CANT BE WRONG!!1 So eat that shit up.
Re: (Score:2)
"Problem is 100 billion flies simply CANT BE WRONG!!1 So eat that shit up."
100 billion flies are NOT wrong. It is the one thinking that what's good for a fly is good for people the one being wrong.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember London? That city burned to the ground, I think, 3 times in the middle ages? I was there a week before I went to Rome and yeah, still there.
Those were HUGE events in history that, by all means, should have destroyed them, but they carried on. I am sure we will be saying that about Detroit in a few decades.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are basically saying that Silicon Valley will still exist and humans will still live there, but it will having nothing to do with its former glory? I think that is pretty much what the article said as well.
Re:When will silicon valley fall apart.... (Score:4, Interesting)
He's still dead. Or are you looking for the Humanities at MIT article from yesterday?
If people still remember the current era of Silicon Valley over 3000 years from now, it would be a miracle. If people care about it so much they restore some of the monuments, it would be a greater miracle.
Yes, the statue of Ozymandias -- Ramses II -- that Shelley referred to has been restored and re-erected. Not bad for a king dead for millenia. And that's not the only surviving statue.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a short list of random bad stuff that might.. (Score:2)
This is a complete waste of time. Don't even bother to read it.
It's a random list of stuff that's not quite right or might go wrong... nothing to do with Silicon Valley, really.
Re: (Score:2)
What about the other economic worries (Score:4, Interesting)
Honestly, I don't even take these kind of posts seriously anymore. At least the tech industry in general puts out products(as meaningless as some of them are). How about the real estate market, where houses are overvalued tremendously in most cities and real estate agents are making a living from something that can be done more efficiently by yourself online?
How about the stock market in general, where it's basically reduced to trying to make money from micro trades instead of long term investment? How about when that bubble pops?
How about any number of other sections of our economy(the over-regulated medical industry, the government protected entertainment industry, etc) that are propped up by things that are seemingly fragile and unstable?
Don't get me wrong, I'm worried about the tech industry(and silicon valley at it's heart), but not nearly as much as the many sections of our economy which are less productive.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish extra apostrophes would pop. Jesus Christ, it's not quantum mechanics! it's means it is!
It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs.
-Oxford University Press, Edpress News
This is a public service announcement. With apostrophes.
Re: (Score:1)
You (or perhaps Oxford) should have put quotation marks around the invalid words.
Re: (Score:2)
You (or perhaps Oxford) should have put quotation marks around the invalid words.
Since I was quoting, I feel it would be inappropriate for me to modify the text. Please contact the source [oup.com] with your comment. Thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
The link you provided was of very little use. If you want to refer to a specific article, give an explicit link, not just a link to their home page.
In other words, I couldn't find the quote you referenced. But I suspect that it uses italics for words that are the object of discussion. If you don't have italics, the standard is to use quotes around the words.
For example, the word "facetious" has all 5 vowels, in alphabetical order. The contractions "it's" is short for "it is," while the work "its" is the possessive form of the word "it".
Next time take a little more care, especially when discussing language. It can be confusing if you aren't careful to differentiate between the words that are the object of discourse, and the words used in that discourse.
I'd give you an F in 8th-grade English, based on oyur submission.
Man you are dumb. Assuming you're the same AC who complained about quoting the incorrect usage, I gave you that link to blow you off. The quote, while I'm sure it was originally from "Edpress News," is, not actually on that site. I originally (probably when you were still crapping your diaper) saw this as a Unix fortune. If you don't like how and what I post, note my login and don't read what I write.
I don't need instructions on how to write in English, and certainly not on in my comments on the Internet
Re: (Score:2)
The link you provided was of very little use. If you want to refer to a specific article, give an explicit link, not just a link to their home page.
In other words, I couldn't find the quote you referenced. But I suspect that it uses italics for words that are the object of discussion. If you don't have italics, the standard is to use quotes around the words.
For example, the word "facetious" has all 5 vowels, in alphabetical order. The contractions "it's" is short for "it is," while the work "its" is the possessive form of the word "it".
Next time take a little more care, especially when discussing language. It can be confusing if you aren't careful to differentiate between the words that are the object of discourse, and the words used in that discourse.
I'd give you an F in 8th-grade English, based on oyur submission.
Oh and despite the fact that you're being rather obnoxious, I'm big on cites myself so here [wikipedia.org] you [j0zf.com] go [anvari.org]. Perhaps you should lay off the coffee?
Nonsense Essay Generator strikes again? (Score:2)
In other news, solar energy will never be viable as long as innovation bubble engines continue to run on coal and oil.
What does he mean by his stated premise? (Score:3)
I did not read the article because the summary made me think that the author never defined what he meant by that statement. Without that meaning being defined there is no way to evaluate the soundness of his arguments about it (well, actually, there is. One concludes that the reason it is left poorly defined is to hide how unsound his arguments are).
Re:What does he mean by his stated premise? (Score:5, Funny)
The author states that Silicon Valley is a bubble. What does he mean by that? Does he mean that real estate prices in Silicon Valley are over-valued? Does he mean that the tech companies in Silicon Valley are over-valued? Does he mean that the advantages for a tech company, or a technology professional to be located in Silicon Valley are over-valued? Or does he mean something else? I did not read the article because the summary made me think that the author never defined what he meant by that statement. Without that meaning being defined there is no way to evaluate the soundness of his arguments about it (well, actually, there is. One concludes that the reason it is left poorly defined is to hide how unsound his arguments are).
He means, "please visit my site. I want more ad revenue. I don't have anything approaching interesting, coherent, relevant or even moderately useful to say, so I'll just string a bunch of random crap about the SF bay area together and see if I can get slashdotted.
Re: (Score:2)
oh yeah, everythings a BIG CONSPIRACY to by everyone to gain a WHOLE TWO CENTS from google.
Fuckin tard.
I generally apply Hanlon's Razor [wikipedia.org]. I'm thinking it applies in spades to you. Unless, of course that's you Wade Roush. In which case, I guess the truth hurts.
If it's not you, then I wonder what happened to your sense of humor. Sigh.
oh I know! (Score:1)
The tech industry needs duct tape! Duct tape will keep anything from fracturing.
I get it. (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean, I've been seeing a lot of columns/op-eds/blogs lately about how California and/or SF & Silicon Valley sucks. This article is tame, but it hits on every single political talking point -- much like a back-handed compliment. When you have to bring up employer-sponsored shuttle buses (remember vanpools?) and a hypothetical future earthquake, you've got nothing.
California just raised $18 billion surplus in tax revenue from a booming economy and from raising taxes -- and they're arguing about how much debt to pay off. OTOH Kansas cut taxes and is getting close to $500 million in the hole with high unemployment -- and they're arguing about how much more taxes to cut. Missouri's governor just vetoed a plan similar to Kansas' basically saying KS is crazy -- now the legislature wants to impeach him.
Unemployment is down nationwide and 288,000 jobs were gained this month. If your state is still in a recession, it's your own state's leaders.
I guess there's a narrative that people have to tell themselves while watching success from the viewpoint of the bottom of the pit they dug themselves.
It's also campaign season.
California has spending problem, not revenue prob (Score:5, Insightful)
Gov Gray Davis saw revenue increase by about 10% but he and the legislature increased spending by about 30%. Things were so out of control Davis was recalled and Schwarzenegger was voted in.
So seeing a budget surplus in California may simply be a precursor to the next budget disaster.
Re: (Score:1)
Unemployment is down nationwide and 288,000 jobs were gained this month. If your state is still in a recession, it's your own state's leaders.
I guess there's a narrative that people have to tell themselves while watching success from the viewpoint of the bottom of the pit they dug themselves.
It's also campaign season.
You apparently didn't recognize that 800,000 (plus) people dropped out of the labor force (meaning gave up looking for a job or their unemployment ran out). Those are simply government unemployment CLAIM numbers. The real statistic is rather concerning.
The only thing that will stop SV... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
> H1-B
Unless you are a company like Infosys that has a huge influence with the US government, you can’t depend on being able to hire even a single H1-B developer. I call BS.
> low five digits/year.
That part is also BS. I’ve offered six figures to developers that don’t even have a college degree. To be fair, my company is based in San Mateo in a dated building just over a half of a mile walk from a Caltrain station and 23 miles from the center of SF so that doesn’t help. If w
Re: (Score:2)
Uhm, it does in fact cost money to post job ads on Craigslist. See http://www.craigslist.org/abou... [craigslist.org] . It's one of their major sources of money, along with hooker ads (oops, "therapeutic services", my bad).
Why you would do so, however, eludes me. As with the poster above, at multiple employers that have tested the Craigslist waters we've never had anybody remotely qualified respond to one of our Craigslist ads. They're just pocket change compared to Dice.com or compared to paying a recruiter's fee, so it
Re: (Score:1)
Why do you piece of shit Republicans lie like that? It costs a lot money to post on craigslist. Why does your kind lie about that? You and your racist kind are disgusting. Just because a lot of you white people are disgusting racists doesn’t mean that that the eliteists that run that site are also racist. They do charge for posts. WHY THE FUCK DO YOU REPUBLICANS LIE ABOUT THAT?
There simply are not enough developers in the Bay Area to meet demand. That fact is killing businesses here.
Useless article, fun though exercise (Score:3)
The article had no thesis, and really was just mindless rambling.
Why is there no similar rant about New York, Malibu, or many other very expensive places? New york may be more expensive yet.
Re: (Score:3)
The article had no thesis, and really was just mindless rambling.
Agreed. The ad-driven tech bubble will burst at some point, but not for any of those reasons.
Bank of America was bought by North Carolina National Bank in 1998. So that issue was 16 years ago. SF has a sizable homeless population because SF isn't that homeless-hostile. Compare San Diego [sandiego.gov].
Earthquakes are a real worry. SF prepares for them. All new buildings get serious reinforcement, and most of the old ones have been retrofitted. All through SF, you see huge diagonal steel braces in buildings. (In some r
Re: (Score:2)
SF has a sizable homeless population because SF isn't that homeless-hostile. Compare San Diego [sandiego.gov].
As I recall, SF actually provides better than most places for the homeless. I'm reminded of a news article I read a number of years ago about a city in Florida (sorry, no cite) that, since SF was so homeless friendly, decided to devote their minimal allocation of funds for the homeless to pay for bus tickets to SF for their homeless population.
And people say Republicans are dumb. Bus tickets, FTW!
Re: (Score:1)
Not the real New York, where we keep the cows, grass, and mountains. The cost of living is incredibly lower.
OK, I'll play. (Score:2)
Nothing of true value will be lost. Stupid people and money will be parted.
Assuming that there is a bubble in the first place.
Which I am told there is, but that might be BS.
Slashdot is like that.
Beta still sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing of true value will be lost. Stupid people and money will be parted.
Not necessariry. When all those people lose their jobs, the folks who used to sell them coffee and rent them apartments, those who sold them cars and hotel reservations for their travel, their grocers and pharmacists, all will suffer. They are not "stupid people". They are businesses who sell to the folks employed by your "stupid people". The knock-on effects are often larger than the crash itself, if you hadn't remembered that from
Re: (Score:2)
I am disappointed (Score:2)
Neither 1 Infinite Loop nor 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway nor 1 Hacker Way were on the list.
Delaying the pop.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Don't blame Al Gore. He is only an effect, a hanger-on. The guys you should be looking at are harder to find and examine. Might I suggest that the guys you should be looking at are the economists in the Stanford University School or Economics and School of Business who proposed in about 2004 how to monetize web-site click counts into a market and began to persuade investors to spend good money after bad in companies like Facebook and Google. Before that Silicon Valley might have had a legitimate claim to f
555Cal?! (Score:2)
If you want to pick a Bank of America symbol, go for 1455 Market, not 555 California! Nothing "important" was in 555; 1455 was carefully guarded by 1 South Van Ness which actually had a BofA sign, but no real operations.
1455 is now the home of Square, among others, and the abandoned buildings adjacent were rebuilt as domiciles for the tech elite... That building is the quintessential icon of the Silicon Valley bubble burst (in SF), helipad and all!
(OT 555is Ha Ha Ha in Thai...)
Re: (Score:1)
You don't know WTF you are talking about. 1455 Market was one of the three data centers. All the executive, marketing, financial accounting and planning, and securities trading offices were at 555 California.
ideas? innovation? (Score:2)
The really puzzling bits are where he talks about how it'd be a shame if the bubble popped because of all the cool innovative stuff those guys are working on... that's news to me, I thought it was all mobile-phone versions of sweatsox.com.
"Our knew app automatically counts sidewalk cracks, and allows you to post the total to your facebook page!"
Remember, the idea doesn't matter, it's only the execution that counts!
Re: (Score:1)
Do you really believe that stock prices and investment in today's economy is really connected to anything of value? I have my doubts. I also doubt that monitory policy is real important, it is a right-wing red herring used to cover up the speculation going on by international investment that is based on HFT and little else. The bubble that will burst is a global economic one, and we will get more guys like Putin as a result. We have been down this road before, like 75 years ago, The causes are the same, an
The Link from the OP makes the point. (Score:2)
But not in the way the website intended. When I navigate to the link using Chrome with Ubuntu 12.04 a popup appears and stays on the screen making it had to read the text of the article. I might save the page to see if I can defeat the advertising, and that is why Silicon Valley Tech is a bursting bubble. The greed-driven intrusions companies are creating on their web pages is driving people away. There is only so bang for the buck that can be squeezed out of the real estate of a web page without getting d
I got to read the article, I agree with it. (Score:1)
I had trouble with a popup when I first loaded the linked page, but going back to it the popup wasn't there and I got to read the article, and I agree with it mostly. I have said many of the same things it does in my posts here. I live in SV and am pretty critical of what it has become especially after 2000. I am critical of investment, the amount of capital companies with dubious business plans have been able to raise. That and the banking situation and the face that the problems that caused the Bubble of
BART and Hayward Fault (Score:2)
I live in Silicon Valley. Yesterday, the news media reported with some hoopla that BART has bored a nice tunnel under Lake Elizabeth in Fremont for its extension to Warm Springs and Silicon Valley. Nice, now tech workers can live in the East Bay and get to work in San Jose faster. What they didn't tell you, and I should know because I have my degrees in Geology and studied the geology of the Bay Area, is that Lake Elizabeth is probably a sag pond associated with if not in the Hayward Fault. The OP link to
Until it breaks elsewhere... (Score:2)
It's in the nature of materials or systems under stress that they'll break somewhere else, if you apply a patch to one identified weak point.
cyclic economy: will be down cycles (Score:2)