Tech Companies > New Types of Community

It is well-known that  big tech companies are the cause of insane levels of rent, with the many flow-on effects that creates (homelessness, crime).

But it also is a disservice to those employees. Purely because of the location of their employer, much of their high rewards for their tech skills disappears into living costs. It seems that landlords are the only true winners, versus these tech giants existing elsewhere.

The ideal solution is for each major tech company to inhabit their own city, spreading the wealth and inequality across the USA. But this discounts why Silicon Valley grew to start with, because having such businesses in close proximity was helpful for mutual growth.

A solution that can work looks like this:

Identify which workers benefit the most (for the themselves and their employers) by being in a major tech city, with synergy and competition.

Move everyone else to somewhere else. Possibly multiple places.

The new places can be extremely innovative. I wouldn’t advocate for isolated cities built from scratch – these would tend to fail, while organic evolution is preferable.

Key selection criteria for a new place would include:

  • ease of transport to HQ (small cities where getting to an airport is easy + direct routes)
  • tax incentives from local authorities, where the balance actually helps the new city
  • exisiting culture, leisure or weather that inspires people to make the shift
  • room for agricultural development

I imagine a small city where upper management exist, and major corporate meetings are held. Probably an existing “destination” that is not too populated, but might not be cheap, with existing infrastructure that would please corporate types. But nothing too excessive.

The existing staff who stay in San Francisco, perhaps 30-50% of the staff, are people who are young and hungry, quite mobile between companies, but also not (yet) critical to the business.

Support staff who need little or no integration with the rest of the business – these could be currently outsourced overseas – could be placed in a brand new community that is progressive but not necessarily easy to reach from the other business centres.

And finally, the key to all of this. The indispensable, non-corporate staff. They might be 20% of the business. They get a brand new community on the outskirts of an existing city. There is an organic, rural aspect to life there, for those who want it. With fraternal socialising and even shared housing. Optionally, you can just live in the existing city, with a small commute. These people are very dynamic. They travel to the other business locations regularly, perhaps with a company-owned small airline. But where they live is highly desirable and affordable. Every other employee who is not corporate will crave to work there.

A promotion is not just a higher role and more pay, but a better place to live. It will be a mini smart city, with shared electric cars, eco-housing and so on. And cheaper living costs, substantially cheaper. Possibly the option to live on a working farm – a real farm where employees contribute and share. It can be occasional instead of permanent. Possibly childcare and schooling is provided, also optional.

The benefits of this model:

  • San Francisco becomes more affordable, and has the right people to make it more interesting and dynamic again
  • Multiple regional cities get an economic boost
  • Improved benefits for all employees (lower rent, nicer environments)
  • An incentive to perform better and move somewhere nicer

Location ideas:

Salt Lake City / Park City UT
Las Vegas NV
Denver CO
San Diego CA
Albuquerque  NM
Sacramento CA
Portland OR

Work out for yourself which employee types would go where. I can see the corporates in Sacramento or Park City.

I’d put the Indispensables in rural locations near Denver or Portland.

Denver is 90 minutes to Salt Lake City. Portland is 105 minutes to San Fransisco.

Sacramento to San Francisco is around 1 hour.

UPDATE / SEP 2022: Denver has been growing, in terms of tech workers, up 23% in 5 years. But Salt Lake City is up 29%
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/biggest-tech-talent-hubs-in-us-and-canada/ 

Sacramento might take more time for people to work it out.

50/50 Co-Working

  • A business decides that hiring some entrepreneurial types would be a smart move – young people with bright ideas.
  • Entrepreneurial types often can’t work on their own ideas if they have full-time employment as well.
  • Some entrepreneurs choose co-working spaces for networking, energy and affordability

    The idea is for a co-working space to be combined with part-time employment. You work for a tech company in the mornings, and do your own thing in the afternoon, from the same desk (just swap laptops and put a sign above you). You get enough pay to survive and enough time to work on your idea. You get to network with like-minded people.

    It would work best for a large company, with job-sharing. The whole first floor could be morning employees, and the second floor could be afternoon employees.

    The secret sauce: the company includes mentor-ship, and will invest in ideas it likes, so it is also an incubator.

    Keep in mind that this type of thinking worked well at Google with their “20% time”, giving us Google News, Gmail and AdSense.

Uber Eats etc will die and come back

Here in Australia restaurant meal deliveries are a big hit, and just like Uber’s taxi service, it is only the consumers that win.

The delivery drivers suffer very low wages because they are not actually employees and not subject to a minimum wage. They also have high pressure to perform or else lose the gig.

Restaurants are paying large fees to get their food delivered, and suffering less table service, which is definitely more profitable for them.

Uber Eats etc are running at losses to gain market share.

Prediction: In Australia and maybe other countries like the USA, new laws will forbid single purpose gig companies from using contract labour. Such companies will struggle to fight this, because they would have to admit they don’t provide a minimum wage. And when the law comes in, Uber Eats etc will quit the game.

Then, because people have become so used to restaurant food, they will return to eating out, and levels of restaurant patronage will be higher than ever.

Then, when robots start doing deliveries everywhere, we will return to eating at home, and the deliveries will be substantially cheaper to provide, benefiting all…

…except we need to find jobs for the delivery drivers who are typically unskilled or recent immigrants.

A Social Platform Based on Trust

With the rise of fake news and deep fake videos, Verified Accounts are the future.

Add to this a layer where verified people/companies can acknowledge news stories as being factual.

While also allowing unverified stories to be shared. Every post will be tagged one of these:

  • fun
  • factual
  • verified
  • opinion
  • unsure

Accounts that get repeatedly reported for hate or lies will be investigated. They will be offered their own parallel channel to exist in.

But – What About The Other Thing?

It is one thing to offer up official information, but how can you disprove content that depicts you unofficially?

For example, well-known Australian gameshow host Andrew O’Keefe:

Now I’ve done the same thing in the same place… but I’m not famous.

If that was faked, there is only one way to refute it –  a drone that constantly films you when you are in public, time-stamped and verified by a trusted 3rd party. 

Open Source Uber

uber

Parts of the Uber software can be replicated and provided as a open-source product. Uber consists of

  • Location mapping
  • Payment processing
  • Pricing based on complex demand algorithms

What if an app had only the first two components? And the third was replaced with manual bidding by drivers?

Here’s how it would work:

  1. User tells the app they want a ride, just like in Uber
  2. The 15 closest available drivers are alerted and respond with a fare they will work for
  3. The quickest 5 offers appear in the app, and the user gets to see where they are, estimated times, and the rating of each driver
  4. The rest works just like Uber

Such an app would give all power to the drivers, who would operate the app as a collective. The overheads would be substantially less than the commission charged by Uber, meaning cheaper fares for riders and higher income for drivers.

Because Uber drivers famously aren’t employees, they would be able to use the co-op app at the same time as Uber, meaning it is low risk to try.

Note Libre Taxi seem to be partway there…

The Fall and Rise of Experience$

Here are some things I know:

We spend less money on things these days. A microwave is $29. A kettle is $9. An excellent TV (based on my lifetime of watching it) is just a few hundred dollars. Even cars are getting a little bit cheaper.

So instead, futurists tell us, we are spending money on experiences. Especially if you consider fashion an experience, as people spend more on fashion than ever, for less actual quality and far lower counts of wearing each item.

Instead of things, we are paying for contrived gym classes, life coaches, volunteer tourism, escape rooms and adventure sports.

But here’s the thing – we are also spending less on experiences.

Chemists / Pharmacies – not too long ago you would go to a chemist and ask for help. Now, in Australia, traditional chemists are being replaced with chemist supermarkets like Chemist Warehouse.

Restaurants used to be an experience, and typically a shared experience. Home delivery has skyrocketed. Same food, sans experience.

Trams/trains used to have conductors who you could get advice from.

Clothing and electronic stores used to have many more sales people who gave you advice on what to buy.

We used to trust banks and financial advisors.

What Has Changed?

Collectively we have become more cost-efficient and smarter. We self-diagnose, research our travel plans, read product reviews, and have decided that takeout and Netflix is a better experience than eating in a restaurant. We invest our money and receive loans online.

On top of that, it is clear to me that experiences are a fad or fashion. The moment we have young adults whose parents went bungie jumping, that will be less appealing to their generation.

  • We no longer need help
  • We no longer trust “professional” advice
  • Experiences are fashionable.

What Will Prosper?

Travel. The available experiences are only limited by human experience itself. And transportation keeps getting cheaper.

Shopping Experiences for the Rich. People still want to be fussed over, if they can afford it.

Bars, Cinemas and Restaurants. Competition from home delivery and in-home entertainment will continue, but cinemas are still strong despite the rise of TV, and social venues will always be a thing. Mediocre will no longer cut it (see Gold Class cinemas in Australia, and restaurants with degustation menus).

Supermarkets for fresh goods. People still want to judge the quality, and supermarkets will make it more of an experience. The baker will be in front of you, not behind a wall. Supermarkets will be a food court of fresh food artisans and advisors. Eating in-store will be a big trend.

Competitive Sport. Think Ten Pin Bowling, except there is a never-ending number of social sports than could be invented. Men will be dedicated, women will have the occasional fu night out. Just like bowling.

What Will Wither?

Car Sales Yards. You will research online, test drives will come to you. You will order online.

Middle-class Department Stores. Already very obvious. The most expensive department stores, and dollar stores, will continue to do okay.

Multi-brand fashion stores. Think shoe stores. People will go to a Nike store because that is their preferred brand, be dazzled, and order in-store for at-home delivery. Instead of going to a multi-brand shoe store, asking if they have Nike, trying it on, then ordering from home via Amazon.

Amazon. It will be seen as the dollar shop equivalent. Buying direct from the manufacturer will be just as cheap. And non-brand products will lose appeal as people realise they are (generally) inferior.

Supermarkets for dry goods. Staple, repeated purchases will be delivered.

 

Natural v Sheeple

sheeple

The whole automated home thing bugs me. It seems to be the dividing line, it separates the sheeple from those who can think for themselves, and feel for themselves.

No free-thinking, spiritual/artistic being wants a fridge that orders the thing you just ran out of.

No soulful individual wants a world that is 19.0 degrees Celsius permanently.

Nobody with a heart desires an algorithm that spews out music that will always please you pleasantly.

And I’ve yet to see a dating system that comes vaguely close to matching me with someone suitable.

Shun easy. Revert to old ways. Fight the demise of the beating pulse of humanity.

Are you a natural? Do you dare walk into a warm room, turn on the aircon, and then after 10 seconds of extremely mild discomfort feel the change of temperature and smile?

 

Universal Basic Income and Reparation for Slavery in the USA

There has been a lot of talk about Universal Basic Income recently, the pros and cons of it. Some of the good aspects are:

  • Replaces welfare payments without the costs of bureaucracy
  • Typically inspires people to do more with their life, not less
  • In the USA especially, will save people from working 2 full-time jobs
  • Helps address the growing divide between poor and rich

And if the USA wants to keep selling us the idea that they are the greatest and richest democracy of all time, giving a UBI to help their poorest seems like the least they can do.

Negatives include failed experiments that weren’t as well run or run long enough to be meaningful. And the obvious cost, which must be met by increased taxation.

But here is an additional benefit – reparation for slavery. This is a hugely complicated argument, and one of the hardest parts is actually identifying who gets paid, and of course how much.

Given that actual reparation will never occur, and black people in the USA are worse off in general – regardless of the reasons – then a UBI is a way of effectively providing reparation without specifically doing so.

It is a fuzzy solution, and that is OK. Because fuzzy, with all of its faults, is better than nothing.

  • All disadvantaged people will see an improvement in their lives
  • Including black people as a form of reparation
  • Some people will choose to be lazy. They probably would anyway
  • Most people will use the cash to improve their life
  • The economy will get a boost. Politicians who believe in “trickle down” will struggle to disagree with “trickle up”
  • It won’t be available to people outside of the tax system – illegal immigrants

 

Compulsory Charitable Donations

The majority of charities do work that should be directly supported by the government. But governments, rightly or wrongly, make sure that donations from citizens are also required to support charities.

Any compulsory giving to charities benefits all of society, as well as the emotional well-being of those who give.

Profits – it has been suggested that a way for some businesses (for example, insurance companies) to operate would be to cap their profits at a certain amount – say 5% of capital, and that any excess be given to charity. That would let businesses be successful, but at the same time limit the motivation of profit.

Fines – governments fining businesses who do wrong could also be seen to have a more genuine motivation if those fines were donated to charity.

Taxes – meanwhile, one of the world’s richest people, Michael Dell, says the super-rich shouldn’t be taxed at higher rates because they tend to very philanthropic people, and money is better going to the causes they support, than to the government. Perhaps their charitable donations could be 100% tax deductible, and their income taxes rate rise at the same time.

For this to occur, the regulation and oversight of charities would need to increase significantly, as well as laws requiring complete separation from the charities you give to – perhaps even two or three degrees of separation. Any organisation that receives funding or support from a charity would need to publicly disclose this. 

Obvious Fakes

puma

I predict a backlash against major fashion brands…

The most famous brands have fake equivalents, buy them in Asia.

Apparently they are made in the same factory, after hours, with inferior materials.

When you come back with designer goods. from Asia, everyone knows it is a fake, and you will admit as much.

So why not make it a blanket statement?

The fakers deliberately misspell the brand name, or incorporate the word “fake” into the design.

The consumers deliberately use those goods, that are clearly fake, A statement.

We can own brands by belittling them.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/hilariously-bad-chinese-knock-offs-of-famous-american-and-european-brands-2012-8