I will point out that Texas has one of the country's HIGHEST unemployment rates:
https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm
Only 5 states have higher unemployment.
It's 2023, I don't think COVID is relevant to any business decision anymore.
If we are going to make up hypotheses on what drives employers to relocate to Texas, I will submit the idea that Texas' poor workers' rights are attractive to business owners: https://www.keranews.org/news/2022-09-13/texas-is-one-of-the...
I find that hard to believe.
You'd have to dig into the state by state presentations on unemployment to get a proper picture and comparison. It's quite a time consuming task.
I don’t mean it’ll become Detroit —a one trick pony, and collapse but it could mimic 1980s NYC when biz moved across the river.
Dallas and Houston have higher total violent crime rates than Los Angeles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...
Speaking of regulation, could it be that businesses prefer Texas due to poor workers' rights? https://www.keranews.org/news/2022-09-13/texas-is-one-of-the...
I'm also unsure what California business climate is stifling businesses there, considering it is the #1 GDP economy in the country, 5th highest state in GDP per capita, and only 5 or 6 entire countries in the world have larger economies. Is there a specific regulation that is stopping your business idea from working in California?
What, specifically, is bad about the business climate in California? And I'm talking about things that can't be easily refuted with basic facts.
A lot of the downsides that people like to complain about California like regulatory burden, bureaucracy, and high taxes are mostly true, but until housing cost skyrocketed in the last decade none of that mattered to most people. The vast majority of California’s problems stem from unbalanced supply and demand across a number of goods and services.
Ever since the budgetary woes of the 2000s, the state government has really turned it around and with all the laws tackling the housing problem passed in the last few years, California is going to keep on trucking just like haters gonna keep on hating (which they should, we’re overpopulated enough as it is).
California is just a political target by a certain party that fumbled their previous dominance of elections in the state and remains butthurt about it, and they can make the entire state into a scapegoat because they know they’ll never control the state again anyway. https://www.ocregister.com/2019/12/02/the-decline-and-fall-o...
California is the state of Schwarzenegger, Regan, and proposition 8. Like every other state, it's an archipelago of blue cities in a sea of red. Democrats are in power today; do not mistake that for forever. I don't think Republican party's current strategy of badmouthing California at every turn is going to earn them votes needed to flip the state; but their strategy in the US House of Representatives is an even more spectacular failure. Rather, the party's lack of coherent strategy seems to be the source of its manifold failures today. I do wonder what a post-Trump Republican party will look like, but it will come, and I wouldn't presume to predict its future.
Trump improved among Hispanic voters by roughly 10 points between 2016 and 2020 [0] - and in some areas his improvement was a lot bigger than that - e.g. some heavily Hispanic border regions of Texas saw Trump improve his vote by over 20 points
(Of course, much of the increase of support among Texan Hispanics is strictly speaking not immigrants, rather people who have lived in the area since back when it was still part of Mexico-but I’m not sure if that’s a significant factor or just a quibble.)
Similarly, there is evidence that the GOP may have significantly improved their share of the Muslim vote over the last few years [2]
[0] https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/30/new-trump-poll-wome...
[1] https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/democrats-losing-...
[2] https://www.newsweek.com/2023/10/20/culture-wars-are-giving-...
Other notable examples: Oracle moved their HQ to Austin; HPE moved theirs to the Houston metro area
Speculating on effectiveness of the DA and how much crime goes unreported would have to benchmark other cities to be meaningful. We can’t just assume that crime is more frequently reported and prosecuted elsewhere based on a joke headline.
Ironically, SF’s property crime problem is likely heavily impacted by the high demand to live there in the first place and the resulting high cost of housing. SF can alleviate crime by building housing, but I’m not sure how Peoria, IL, Steubenville, OH, or Bridgeport, CT solve their crime and drug issues long term. At least SF has a clear path out.
The law only works as a deterrence for crime when there is a reasonably high chance of being caught, and the consequences work as a significant deterrent. To their credit the San Francisco Police Department have a pretty nice page on this exact issue here. [1] Not so much to their credit, the clearance rate (cases solved) for theft is at 3.4%. Then those get sent over to the DA who may or may not even choose to prosecute it. There's also things like community courts [2] that can help ensure you get the most gentle slap on the wrist if caught.
Pair these systems alongside the surplus of high value targets, and it just seems like you're creating an extremely enticing area for thieves. I also imagine this all has to be extremely demoralizing for police, which one could expect would lead to something of a downward spiral. It's just generally not a great situation.
[1] - https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/stay-safe/crime-data/clea...
[2] - https://www.sfdistrictattorney.org/policy/restorative-justic...
So I think it’s pretty common for property crime to have a low clearance rate especially in larger municipalities.
I think you’re also downplaying the fairness of misdemeanors for property crime under $950. Why should stealing a candy bar or a DVD be a felony? Do you realize how life-ending a felony conviction can be? You basically can’t get a decent quality job ever again, which isn’t going to lower the property crime rate by making desperate people more desperate.
And also, misdemeanors can be upgraded to felonies via repeat offenses and surrounding circumstances (e.g., armed robbery is always felony).
Here’s an example of the San Francisco DA seeking life sentences for violent robberies: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/sf-mission-distric...
I think San Francisco has a perception of being a liberal haven for criminals with lax enforcement, but the more likely reality is that it operates similarly to most other large cities. The DA isn’t twiddling their thumbs and allowing violent robbers to get off with misdemeanors. That perception of San Francisco law enforcement is pushed by political opponents.
You're talking about a city with the 2nd highest theft rate, the overall 4th highest property crime rate, and comparing it against cities that not only have much lower crime rates, but ones where the clearance rate is at least twice as high for the crimes that are committed. Then there are other probable issues, but ones seemingly neither of us has been able to dig up data on, like prosecution rates vs dismissal/reclassification. To claim these differences amount to nothing, or only exist due to bias in others, is just not really reasonable.
You can accept San Francisco having a high crime rate, but think that the other niceties you enjoy about the city more than compensate for it. Every city, every state, every country has its own set of pros and cons. It's only balance that the 'big picture' really comes out, and that's also going to be extremely subjective.
Point is NextDoor can provide some insight into crime as often what is mentioned in that medium is unreported to authorities though often you will have members recommend the victim report the crime to police.