And no, it's not obnoxious or self centered to say that if the NY government doesn't fix it's massive number of problems that bad things are going to happen. It seems pretty clear that's the case.
What he means is that the people who remain will be those who are too poor to leave. Whom will be slowly replaced by wealthier and wealthier transients. Which is sad, by far the worst kind of gentrification.
You're starting to see this in bits and pieces already. New rental space is primarily going to chain restaurants and box stores because the rent is too damn high for anyone not corporate to get started. _The Atlantic_ was talking about the issue of lots going vacant for months at a time because the owners are holding out for insane lease prices...in part because they need to pay insane taxes on the property.
I love New York (in small doses) but it's not tenable as it exists right now.
If they rent out something for a discount, it will read to a reevaluation of their entire property, which would then lead to them being underwater and impossible for them to borrow more money.
This is true not just in New York but all of the US where property owners are heavily indebted and rely on debt to both grown and maintain their businesses.
Having to default means that they basically can’t borrow anymore and can’t continue their businesses.
It has nothing to do with taxes, which would drop if they rented out their property for less.
You don't need any kind of net migration to do this, gentrification has already done it over the last 20 years. People who move there now don't care about that, though. They care about the city being Disneyland for rich people.
It’s better to say what you mean than expect others to figure it out.
Sure, I will concede that it is the listener's responsibility to seek clarification when responding to an ambiguous statement or claim. But here, there was no ambiguity, just hyperbole.
Hyperbole is used far more often here (and on the Internet in general) than it ought to be. We can, and should, have nuanced discourse here. Let's keep the bar high.
This "too big to fail" argument is BS - they are failing and once cities start to go into death spirals they can accelerate in astonishing ways.
And just to make things extra spicy, thanks to COVID job mobility has never been greater. This isn't your fathers economy. Any of these cities taking anyone for granted do so at their own peril. San Francisco's insane policy of supporting shoplifting up to $900 has caused Wallgreens to pull out entirely, Target closes at 6PM now - what do small businesses do where their only locations are in areas afflicted with these sane policies? When losses exceed revenue they go out of business. As if COVID wasn't bad enough :p
They will each lose a seat in the house because they grew less than the U.S. as a whole (7.35%) and due to rounding.
Do you have the data for this? I just saw a story showing that CA flight is largely a talking point more than an actual phenomenon. Would love to see the numbers here.
> 2020 Migration Trends: U-Haul Ranks 50 States by Migration Growth
...
Growth states are calculated by the net gain of one-way U-Haul trucks entering a state versus leaving that state in a calendar year. Migration trends data is compiled from more than 2 million one-way U-Haul truck customer transactions that occur annually.
...
California ranks last by a wide margin, supplanting Illinois as the state with the greatest net loss of U-Haul trucks. California has ranked 48th or lower since 2016...
There might be other factors. Maybe people leave CA with more belongings than they arrive with. Maybe new CA jobs pay for relocation, then people eventually do a self-serve move out of CA.
Still, I found it to be an interesting data point. The UHaul outflow date starting in 2016 corresponds to the SALT deduction reforms and the worsening annual fire conditions. Both seem like plausible “tipping point” factors to kick off an exodus, among other commonly cited issues.
Yes, SF is having serious, self-inflicted issues. But SF/tech is actually a tiny portion of the CA GDP (since most tech revenue a la Apple doesn't actually get booked to CA). CA either leads the nation or is in the top 5 (states) for the following industries: movies, video games, manufacturing, agriculture, tourism, aerospace, biotech, government contracting, and energy.